You don't have to be feminist to post here, but it helps...

SM delights in being contrary. All over the place.

Read my posts, SM. MN already has rules to make it a safe space. Makes it exactly the same as feminism, IMO.

You seem to think you can post all over MN with the same rude and nasty comments about 'words on a screen' and mickey-taking of vulnerable people. I've seen you being pulled up on AIBU/Chat for it and I'm pretty sure you've had comments deleted for it. All you seem to want to do here is pull this section down to the same level. The whole of MN has rules to make in a good, safe place to post. The fact you don't like them is really not my problem.

read the op,safe haven/space is mentioned a lot and nt just by op
this is clearly a shared perception.and imo a substantial reason for a lot of dischord. imo,there is a definitive you cant say that here vibe,maybe that taps into safe space idea. this often manifests as an idea being discounted as
anti feminist
what about men
apologist
etc

i think the op Genuine question - is this a feminist board, or a board about feminism? - is a good one

my pov is its an open discussion board,discussing feminism. it doesn't need to adhere to a particular orthodoxy or pre-reading to participate. nor am i going to desist posting because someone doesnt agree. you see i expect a certain amount of riposte

others have variously argued is feminist safe space and have some expectation of topics and content

Right one last go at this before I get on with something constructive.

The feminist board is no different to any of the other special interest boards on MN.

I'm an atheist so I don't go on the religion/spirituality boards. I respect their right to have a special interest section of this open public forum in which to explore their special interest. I also do not expect the religious members of MN to bring religion constantly onto the main boards ie chat/AIBU/etc saying as they have their own aptly named special interest board in which to explore their special interest.

I am not threatened by there being a special interest board on this open forum that is not about me, my values or my world view. I think it is normal that if I went on that special interest board and posted atheist views all the time that that would be considered a bit odd and not a little rude. I would expect to get short shift if I then insisted that my views be included and explored.

You perceive a difference, SM. I don't. It's probably up to you to work out why you think that, not me to read your mind.

telling me you're ignoring me?why not just ignore and get on with it
but given i dont recall the names im not likely to think oh no whathsename is ignoring me

and as i said it does intrigue me,this perceived differentness of fem board within mn.and certainly there has been wide discussion about it.

If you entered a conversation with an epidemiologist about the origins of germ theory, I am sure you would have a delightful discussion. If however you insist the miasma theory is correct, she will probably try to explain why you are wrong but if you continue banging on about it, would you (or any reasonably intelligent person) be surprised if you're cut out of the conversation?

I think not.

My analogy is fine. Your deliberate misunderstand and twisting is not.

Disclaimer: I am neither an epidemiologist not a well read feminist.

SM - There's something quite attention seeking about all your posting here. You're seeking to bait people and I'm not sure why. Since you seem to have a vast intelligence, I'm sure you can work out why feminist spaces are often viewed as being safe spaces too. However, you are boring me now, and I'm not going to engage you further.

Late to the party but keen to add my penn'orth.

I'm a long time lurker and occasional poster and LOVE the feminism section of MN. It's a bit upsetting/tedious to find us having this discussion, but I think some useful reflections are being posted.

My experience is that the tension most often arises on those threads that address some of the fundamentals of feminism and it happens because of a mismatch between what people regard as 'opinion'.

To take rape as an example - experienced posters and long-time feminists accept as fact that incidents of rape are not affected by what the victim is wearing - there is plenty of evidence for this. But someone who's new to the forum, or who hasn't really thought deeply about the issue or just doesn't KNOW, might believe that there is still room for shades of opinion about this. So they post their innocent opinion that women should be careful about what they wear. And typically the response to that is not 'I respectfully disagree with your opinion' but 'No, actually, you are WRONG, and here's the reason why'. The person who posted the 'opinion' then either realises their mistake and thinks more deeply about their position, or retreats into defending their position and blames the responder for being 'mean'. Other posters can then form the impression that there's no room for discussion on the feminist boards, or that only one opinion is allowed.

I agree with Beachcomber - that often people take the latter course because to acknowledge some of the 'facts' that feminists take for granted, is actually a deeply uncomfortable process, which you have to be open to. I always value dittany's (and others) contribution to debates, because they are so uncompromising. I've got to a place where I'm comfortable with exploring the logical conclusions of feminist thought and not being frightened by the implications, but I can really sympathise with those who find it threatening. Equally, it's not up to the feminist posters to make the message palatable to those who find it hard to accept.

But it could possibly help to recognise when different posters are treating fact as opinion and vice versa and tailor our responses accordingly.

BTW - wanted to acknowledge MRJhasleftthebuilding's post from earlier. Think it made some incredibly valuable points but got lost in the exchange.

or maybe your anaology miasma theory of infectious disease was inappropraite

You spectacularly missed the point. Probably deliberately but hey

start i genuinely am interested in this conceptualisation of fem board as diferent to rest of mn. safe space has come up a lot

How so?

its an open topic, open to all. ther is no compulsion to agree

I think you missed her point, SM. And twisted what she said. And I don't see how her analogy was pompous?

no.i responded to epidemiologists and the miasma theory of infectious disease.i did not initiate that -some one else came up with that particular pompous analogy

SM - that's already what I do, thanks. I really don't think I go around getting pissed off with newbies. If I have, I'm really sorry. The only people who really annoy me are people who are clearly, patently on the wind-up. Like RejectofAllah, who thought it was funny to post on a support thread with nasty comments, and was promptly banned.

I have never done what you do repeatedly, which is mocking people who get upset on MN by saying 'it's all words on a screen'. How you have the front to lecture me on how to interact with people when you do that, I don't know.

no i have not defined feminism.haven't done enough prior reading i fear

same as you are doing anne
words on a screen.bitty riposte.usual stuff everyone does
i dont need to justify my participation any more than you do

SM - What exactly do you want? What is your aim in this conversation?

You seem to be hoping for some big mea culpa or seeing of the light, but the general gist in response is that you can post if you want to, but your posts will be subject to criticism, the same as anyone else's.

For someone who claims not to care at all, there's an awful lot of namedropping of terms like epidemiology and such. Is that to prove that you know better then a bunch of autodidactic feminists?

Your contributions here echo of the footstamping you mock in others.

if one wishes yes do read prior to posting,expand on long held beliefs by all means.but dont expect it of others.and dont get exasperated at posters whom you feel are re-treading questions for millionith time

That's not really what she said though, is it?!

I am not a medic. I do not read medical research. But neither do I go into the Mental Health section here and say 'this depression malarky is all a bit of nonsense, eh? I used to feel sad and I used crystals to make me feel better, so you should all do the same'. What you're suggesting people do on feminism is the equivalent of that.

I do not need to do pre-reading to realize that the above would be rude and make me look stupid. I cannot begin to understand why you think you need to read something in order to get that. To me it just seems like common sense.

if epidemiologists posted on mn where no prior knowledge is assumed, i expect they would predictably have some posts demonstrably lacking in evidence based practice,that has to be expected

i imagine when the medical doctors and others host a mn webchat they dont expect to only discuss with clinicians or require pre-reading

however,had said epidemiologists hosted a peer discussion in a specialist forum or publication such as the journal of epidemiology and community health,one would expect a certain clinical knowledge

'Feminism is a proper, explored, political subject though, it isn't just opinion.

That doesn't mean that one cannot have an opinion but it is pretty arrogant to assume that because you have an opinion it has to be listened to. Acknowledged, perhaps but not necessarily taken into account.'

^ This.