Page 5 | Could Mumsnet clarify the purpose of the sex and gender forum?

Lexibletheflexible · 2026-09-14T12:31:06+00:00

Can we get some clarification on the actual "purpose" of the sex and gender forum, please? Many members on there seem to allude to it being for GC people rather than to discuss issues related to gender and sex. They make posts like this [[https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5577863-reflections-on-trans-presence-at-a-dykes-who-hike-event?reply=154749734&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share one]]: "and the overall purpose of the sub forum." What is this "overall purpose" that some members seem to be privy to and isn't outlined in the group title? I can show various other posts by regular members who seem sure of the same thing. I think it would help all of us if we understood what the site/staff intended its purpose to be.

murasaki · 14/09/2026 18:24

There's also the let it stand so we can see the nastiness thing that does happen on FWR, operation let them speak. Hence the apartheid posts not being reported.

napody · 14/09/2026 17:57

Anarchy99 · 14/09/2026 17:48

What is your issue exactly? There are loads of boards on here. Everyone knows that the posters on there are incredibly erudite people who are vehement in their defence of women and children. It’s fine if that isn’t to your taste but running to HQ to whine complain about them (and presumably try to shut them up) rather illustrates the requirement of a specific board,

Show quote history

Well said. It's either to tell tales and try and shut FWR up, or try and figure out exactly how far they can go with attacks on GC views. Given that they compared such views to racial segregation (and wasn't deleted for it) I'd say you can go pretty far OP, if that's what you want.

Lougle · 14/09/2026 17:53

Anarchy99 · 14/09/2026 17:41

It was set up because of people whining about ‘transphobia’ (aka biological awareness) on the main board. I suspect you know that though

To be fair, I think it was set up because of the reason you state, and that some posters wanted an easy way to hide the discussion altogether but keep other aspects of feminism talk. I still can't quite fathom how people can discuss anything in feminism without agreeing on what a female is, though. It's baffling. If women are females but also the males that want to be female, there's nothing to discuss about women's rights, is there?

Anarchy99 · 14/09/2026 17:53

KittyWilkinson · 14/09/2026 17:51

Disruptive. The spirit of my convent school Head Nun and Chief Inquisitor returns to haunt us! Standing by for uniform inspection, checks for signs of mascara and awaiting ruler measurement of my skirt length. Also, no eating Tunnocks in the street and wear your school hat at all times you pesky GC wims!

Ooh Tunnocks! Tea cakes or caramel wafers though?

Anarchy99 · 14/09/2026 17:52

Also if there really are personal attacks, report them.

Personally I am reassured that there are people out there not drinking the KoolAid who genuinely care about feminism and the protection of the hard-fought rights of women and children.

KittyWilkinson · 14/09/2026 17:51

Disruptive. The spirit of my convent school Head Nun and Chief Inquisitor returns to haunt us! Standing by for uniform inspection, checks for signs of mascara and awaiting ruler measurement of my skirt length. Also, no eating Tunnocks in the street and wear your school hat at all times you pesky GC wims!

Lougle · 14/09/2026 17:49

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:22

"Which might be more fair if MN was an explicitly GC site, but it portrays itself as a space for all feminism.’"

This is part of what I want clarified. If it is a GC board, just say it.

Show quote history

It isn't. It is a board to discuss sex and gender issues. It happens to have a large number of posters who are well informed about sex and gender issues, and who engage in discussion about it.

If people want more balance on the board, they need to find a way of discussing gender that doesn't descend to 'you lot are meanies'.

The challenge is that the gender critical stance is centred on biological reality, which means that all gender critical people are starting from the same point. They may vary in their views on how that reality is advocated for in society (e.g. some may be happy to use pronouns that don't accord with biological sex but would not be happy to allow biological men in the female toilets. Others may not be happy to use pronouns in that way), but they have a common point of agreement.

Advocates for gender over sex tend to have a less cohesive rationale for their views, which can't easily be evidenced.

Anarchy99 · 14/09/2026 17:48

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 16:34

No WE do because members keep alluding to this "purpose".

Show quote history

What is your issue exactly? There are loads of boards on here. Everyone knows that the posters on there are incredibly erudite people who are vehement in their defence of women and children. It’s fine if that isn’t to your taste but running to HQ to whine complain about them (and presumably try to shut them up) rather illustrates the requirement of a specific board,

Ereshkigalangcleg · 14/09/2026 17:42

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:26

Yes it does matter because if it is to give GC people a home to have their views and not be challenged, then indeed people who do challenge them are intrusive. If it is a GC board, then that should be transparent. It would then make sense why some personal attacks against individuals and groups stand and other do not.

For instance, someone said that anti-GC views are an "illness". In a neutral board, I could then also refer to GC views as an illness and it not be deleted. It would just be my opinion.

Show quote history

Most people on MN lean more GC than TRA, whether they self define that way or not. This reflects the wider population. Other sites reflect a certain left leaning “progressive” right thinking bubble. It’s often a shock when those people encounter relatively free speech.

Anarchy99 · 14/09/2026 17:41

It was set up because of people whining about ‘transphobia’ (aka biological awareness) on the main board. I suspect you know that though

Ereshkigalangcleg · 14/09/2026 17:39

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:23

No I'm not. I linked one post talking about this purpose in my OP

Show quote history

Which was in response to you telling her she was “disruptive” as you admitted

murasaki · 14/09/2026 17:38

I can only imagine the level of eye rolling that is going on at HQ.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 14/09/2026 17:36

🍿

keepincool · 14/09/2026 17:34

BewaretheIckabog · 14/09/2026 16:34

I thought it was an advertising board for Tunnocks.

😂😂

Lins77 · 14/09/2026 17:34

Also, if someone did indeed refer to anti-GC views as an "illness", I don't find that acceptable. Can you point to the post where that was said? Either way, it's one person's opinion, not that of the board or the site as a whole.

Did you report the post?

plims · 14/09/2026 17:33

If is very clear that you are wilfully misunderstanding.

SirChenjins · 14/09/2026 17:29

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 16:34

No WE do because members keep alluding to this "purpose".

Show quote history

No - YOU do. It's literally the reason you started this thread.

What did the mean lady say to you on that thread that's got you so wound up?

Lins77 · 14/09/2026 17:29

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:26

Yes it does matter because if it is to give GC people a home to have their views and not be challenged, then indeed people who do challenge them are intrusive. If it is a GC board, then that should be transparent. It would then make sense why some personal attacks against individuals and groups stand and other do not.

For instance, someone said that anti-GC views are an "illness". In a neutral board, I could then also refer to GC views as an illness and it not be deleted. It would just be my opinion.

Show quote history

People challenge them constantly! They only get deleted if they are breaking MN guidelines.

Shedmistress · 14/09/2026 17:27

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:26

Yes it does matter because if it is to give GC people a home to have their views and not be challenged, then indeed people who do challenge them are intrusive. If it is a GC board, then that should be transparent. It would then make sense why some personal attacks against individuals and groups stand and other do not.

For instance, someone said that anti-GC views are an "illness". In a neutral board, I could then also refer to GC views as an illness and it not be deleted. It would just be my opinion.

Show quote history

Have you tried posting that 'sex reality views are an illness' and been deleted for it?

murasaki · 14/09/2026 17:27

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:26

Yes it does matter because if it is to give GC people a home to have their views and not be challenged, then indeed people who do challenge them are intrusive. If it is a GC board, then that should be transparent. It would then make sense why some personal attacks against individuals and groups stand and other do not.

For instance, someone said that anti-GC views are an "illness". In a neutral board, I could then also refer to GC views as an illness and it not be deleted. It would just be my opinion.

Show quote history

Have you tried doing that? Go for it, I bet it will stand. If the other post existed in the first place.

murasaki · 14/09/2026 17:26

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:22

"Which might be more fair if MN was an explicitly GC site, but it portrays itself as a space for all feminism.’"

This is part of what I want clarified. If it is a GC board, just say it.

Show quote history

You've missed the point. She was saying that MN as a whole is a broad church. Not that that forum necessarily is. There is another feminism board.

Hardly any traffic, mind.

Original poster

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:26

Lins77 · 14/09/2026 17:22

So what though? Does it matter if some people have different opinions on this? Nobody is stopping you posting.

Show quote history

Yes it does matter because if it is to give GC people a home to have their views and not be challenged, then indeed people who do challenge them are intrusive. If it is a GC board, then that should be transparent. It would then make sense why some personal attacks against individuals and groups stand and other do not.

For instance, someone said that anti-GC views are an "illness". In a neutral board, I could then also refer to GC views as an illness and it not be deleted. It would just be my opinion.

OP posts:

Original poster

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:23

TheBroonOneAndTheWhiteOne · 14/09/2026 17:22

No they don't. You're making things up.

Show quote history

No I'm not. I linked one post talking about this purpose in my OP

OP posts:

Original poster

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:22

Lougle · 14/09/2026 17:07

Justine posted on 15/06/2021 to explain what the purpose of this board is. I think it's fair to say that they underestimated the proportion of MNers who appreciate the content that has been diverted to this board, because this board has 1134 pages of threads, and the Feminism: Chat board has 51 pages of threads. I guess as much as you can own the forum, you can't own the minds of the posters.

Justine said:

"Is Mumsnet hiving gender-critical feminists off into a ghetto? Are we ashamed of them?

Just to be clear, there’s no hiving off of the debate - we intend to streamline the topics in the FWR category from five down to two: one ‘Sex/Gender debate’ topic, and one Feminism Chat topic. This doesn’t mean that every thread mentioning sex or biology will be moved to the ‘Sex/Gender debate’ topic, which would as many of you have pointed out be unworkable and odd. It’s not about pushing gender-critical feminists into a ghetto, but it is about clearly signposting where people can find conversations - between all kinds of feminists - of the ‘what does it mean to be a woman, are trans women women, is trans-inclusive feminism/activism/language impacting on women’ variety, and providing a separate topic without conversations of that kind.

It won’t be news to anyone here that there are feminists who are intersectional/fourth wave/transinclusive/liberal (however you wish to classify them) who say the passion and preponderance of the gender-critical viewpoint in the current Feminism Chat area means they simply don’t engage with the Feminism topic at all (thousands of Mumsnet users have hidden it altogether). To quote one email we received this morning, ‘There is definitely a sense that Feminism Chat is only a place to discuss gender critical feminism. Any posts which question GCism get flooded with hundreds of hostile responses. Which might be more fair if MN was an explicitly GC site, but it portrays itself as a space for all feminism.’"

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4267223-Any-chance-of-a-review-of-the-FWR-moderation-rules-in-light-of-Maya-Forstaters-success-in-court-please?page=7

"Which might be more fair if MN was an explicitly GC site, but it portrays itself as a space for all feminism.’"

This is part of what I want clarified. If it is a GC board, just say it.

OP posts:

TheBroonOneAndTheWhiteOne · 14/09/2026 17:22

Lexibletheflexible · 14/09/2026 17:20

Because some members seem to believe it was set up for GC people or allude to some purpose of the board that doesnt seem clear in the description.

Show quote history

No they don't. You're making things up.