Any chance of a review of the FWR moderation rules in light of Maya Forstater's success in court please?

I appreciate there are a few threads on this and that MNHQ might not be keeping up with them all.

So I thought I'd say, if you are taking any user feedback at this stage, I and others would be grateful if the new topic included the word Feminism.

There are now four or five threads on this with a clear majority not in favour of changes. Why do it and alienate long serving poster and lurkers?

What about Women feminism and sex based rights. And anything else relating to Feminism. Leave gender out as many of us do not believe there is such a thing.

@JustineMumsnet
As sex and gender are much wider than the trans issue and a core thread running through feminism it is inevitable that they will be a component part of many feminist discussions. It is also clear that active users of the board do not agree with your suggestion and are concerned it is an attempt by a vocal minority of posters to marginalise a discussion they would rather was not happening. My suggestion is that you leave feminism chat alone and create an intersectional / lib fem space for those who want it. I do not think it is fair that we will be jumping through mental hoops trying to work out what board to post on when a topic bridges across equality and sex and gender issues. FGM is a sex based issue but we also discussed the targeting of Hibo Wardere by trans activists. Where should that go? Surely FGM is a general feminist topic?

Please call our board "Womens Rights", if you need to make a change.
Feminism- Women's Rights.

We don't care what you call the other one, "Feminism- Other" if you like. Or "Feminism- Pink Fluffy Stuff".

Please please not Sex and Gender, it sounds like a discussion board for Positions. Or How Many Partners (at one time)

This is the exact opposite of what the majority of posters on this thread want.

Exactly, and those are the regular posters on the feminist chat board.

It's also not what the OP was asking, can we return to this please @mnhq?

The decision to split the board is effectively a derail.

I think Fallingirl is right

the new board would quite clearly signal the topics discussed, so we wouldn’t need special rules

So that would be an up-side of the generally rejected decision to split and sub-categorise. It would be good to have confirmation of this.

Honestly. Maya Forstater spent two bloody years to ensure gender critical beliefs were protected in law. Two years to make sure feminists could talk freely about the erasure of women's rights.

Maya Forstater has talked of how she was "radicalised on Mumsnet."
Its not a bad thing but refers to consciousness raising.

Creating a seperate space for sex and gender discussions will result in our words being monitored, questioned and policed.

I agree. Outside monitors make no secret of it.

If this segregation goes ahead, my voice and that of many others will be censored on the feminist board.

Honestly. Maya Forstater spent two bloody years to ensure gender critical beliefs were protected in law. Two years to make sure feminists could talk freely about the erasure of women's rights.

Two years. And now even the word feminist is to be censored from the entire board discussing them!

What was requested and what most posters on this and other threads is the ability to post freely on the topic of sex and gender and its consequences for feminism.

Creating a seperate space for sex and gender discussions will result in our words being monitored, questioned and policed.

Posters will make their own opinions on whether our words belong in feminism or not. We already know there is a strong and vocal opinion that feminism should include trans women. I personally do not agree with this. If this segregation goes ahead, my voice and that of many others will be censored on the feminist board. This is the exact opposite of what the majority of posters on this thread want.

in reality policing what you can post where is going to be a massive headache

It will be a massive headache for Mumsnet! I can't think they have thought this through, they're setting themselves up for a mammoth job, and for what?

If people want a feminist board without GC and radical feminism let them set it up elsewhere, not gouge out one of the most popular sections on the site.

Instead they're suggesting they set swim against the tide. For what?

Haven't they learnt yet, that they won't make the TRAs and MRAs happy until they have completely banned us from talking about women's rights on this site?

And I'm pretty sure that's not what MN want, else they wouldn't have put all this effort into trying to compromise all this time.

And just to add, the new board would quite clearly signal the topics discussed, so we wouldn’t need special rules. People who do not want to be exposed to a feminism radically focussed on females would have the other board to use. No one need feel offended.

If we can’t have the word “feminism” for the gulag board, could we have “Femalism”?

The Femalism board would be discussing everything sex and gender related, but with a clear focus on females.

The remaining board could, as OP suggests, be called Femininity Chat,
which could easily include feminine “gender identities”, for those who believe in the existence of these.

Splitting the boards this way would then very handily split us up both by topics and ideological perspective.

The proposed sections are
Feminism Chat
Sex and Gender discussion

What this conveniently does is segregate the largest women's rights battle happening currently. Not just physically but also linguistically by distancing it from the word feminism.

I think that's the crux of why most of us are unhappy.

What about
feminism (sex/gender) and
feminism (chat)

Because, yes, otherwise it looks as though the sex/gender topic is nothing to do with feminism, but chat is, which is wrong.

Before we are banished to the Mumsnet dungeon for naughty feminists who believe in the reality of sex can we have a guarantee from @JustineMumsnet that current and historical threads will be protected

This is so disappointing 😕

Not RTFT - just want to say I agree 100% with you OP.

What this conveniently does is segregate the largest women's rights battle happening currently. Not just physically but also linguistically by distancing it from the word feminism.

I think that's the crux of why most of us are unhappy.

I don't see how any of this is a solution to the problem of derailing. It's often not regular or GC posters that introduce gender issues into threads.

I said earlier in the thread I don't think new sections will work and I'm frankly pissed off that MN seem to listen to the minority or those who aren't even interested in the feminism topics or have certain motives, and base their decisions on that. Yes, people contact MN complaining and wanting change. That doesn't mean they are representative of all users. Do they expect to get an equal number of people contacting them on a daily base to congratulate them and tell them how happy they are? That's not how it works. You hear from dissatisfied customers, not satisfied customers.

And there's no doubt there are many people reading and reporting and contacting MN with a particular agenda.

So the guidelines won't be amended, the board will be split in a way that none of the board users want, and posts will be sanctioned if they are on the wrong board in the same way as the current opaque deletion rules.

This is just more of the same.