Thread derailment

I was here when they made the split, and I never interpreted it that way.

I think fwr was intended for discussion of gender issues specifically. It happens that it is GC dominated. That is part of the reason some people wanted it hived off, but it's not a requirement to post.

But there is no "default" protected stance here. If everyone changed their mind tomorrow, it would be dominated by a differernt perspective.

Yeah, I have seen this.

I remember one thread, or not really remember because I can't remember the topic, and I was finding it really interesting. And the fucking recipe derailers came in and killed it.

I was so pissed off.

I think it can sometimes be difficult to tell if someone is just annoying and a bit dumb, vs, a troll or bot. Usually it will become clear over time. For me the tell is that you end up having the same discussion again and again, not because of a disagreement, but because they claim to not even know things you already spoke about.

The only problem with this rule of thumb is it actually includes a few regular posters who are afaik real and not trolls.

You think the derailers are 'sleep deprived mums'?

Really?

🤨

Quite.

Also this.

Agree.

Never seen tone policing on this board! Except by occasional drive by scolders.

It is , however, one of the politest places I've found on the Internet. Maybe an expectation of civility comes across as tone policing for those not used to it?

You will be expected to robustly defend your points though - perhaps that comes across as rude if posters are used to sites where debate isn't allowed, who knows.

I don't think I've come across an obvious desire for the OP to control their thread, but it's usually pretty obvious if people are posting things which are utterly off topic. Of course, there is a grey area in the middle where the two meet.

But I agree with OP, lots of interesting threads seem to be grinding to a halt. Usually where some posters want to argue some off topic point to death, usually one which has been done in detail on many previous threads which they could have taken the time to look at, if they could have bothered.

I've been on MN for years and you can't honestly say she's wrong (i think she was talking about derailers on MN in general).... MN can be hilarious, enraging, eye-opening, frustrating, ridiculous... but worth it for those moments of connection or that poster that articulates something beautifully that you've never been able to put into words!

Oh, and good luck finding a lesbian subreddit that doesn't accept TIMs. Again, you won't be able to, they've all been shut down.

"Personal insults and hate speech" have nothing to do with the total suppression of any kind of GC ideas, or even comments, on Reddit. It's not a matter of rogue mods- honestly, try finding a subreddit that is GC. You won't be able to, they have all been shut down. If a feminist subreddit doesn't accept that "transwomen are women", it will disappear, very quickly.

Reddit really is a very MRA policed forum.

Yeah those irritable wims picking petty, oh so silly , fights about women's rights. Silly wims!

Do you even hear yourself?

Have an actual read of the intelligent, thoughtful, articulate, massively politically influential posts here and honestly have a word with yourself.

MN has been like this for yeaaars. I put it down to sleep-deprived, irritable mothers taking out their frustrations by picking petty fights. Or maybe that was just me 😆

Well, if you're wrong, people are going to point that out.

It's not about bias or dogma, it's reality.

Your 'nuance' is just a poor argument. Noone has to be biddable to you because you offer an argument that is nonsense. With respect, get your head out of your arse.

I have never witnessed a large discussion forum where commenters are so precious about tone & content policing than MN.

I think anyone who says that is either a liar, or painfully unaware of just about every other talkboard and forum on the internet. The list of sites where banhammers are dished out for the slightest mention of anything GC is too long to list.

Personal insults & hate speech aren't generally tolerated anywhere but that's not to say that some huge forums don't have rogue mods that operate outside the forum's standards because they are so difficult to control. It's often hit & miss on reddit because of its size. But I take your point. I have been 'clipped' on Israel reddit for a purely benign comment.

I have never witnessed a large discussion forum where commenters are so precious about tone & content policing than MN.

Hahahahahah! are you so fresh & new that you didn't know about all the ENTIRELY DELETED Reddit boards - or the constant, ruthlessly brutal banning of contributors for 'wrong tone'?

Some of the deleted boards served nefarious purposes including the criminal. Others were 'gender critical', including some of the trans subs that permitted questioning of genderist philosophy. The existing feminist boards are so touchy that you can easily be banned for 'wrong tone' or an 'offensive' turn of phrase, and your post on any board will be deleted if you misgender without an instant abject apology.

I really hope that no MN board goes the same way.

I think you're ignoring the history of this board. MN set this up when not only were there complaints from other posters about GC posts being allowed in the feminism topic, they were also under serious attack from TRAs for allowing any discussion on trans issues at all. They came up with this board, maybe not ideal, but the fact that they were brave enough to allow discussion of trans issues, in the face of abuse and threats from TRAs, is something I for one am extremely grateful for.

I, too, agree reading comprehension skills have declined in recent years. I also feel, with almost painful regret, that the art of discussion - never mind actual debate - is becoming a rare skill. Twitterisation encapsulates this perfectly, imo.

Fuck knows how bad this'll get when the entire internet is reposting stuff we get from chatbots, which get their stuff from the internet, which consists of stuff humans rehashed from stuff they got from chatbots ... Everything will end up originating from before the 2020s! It'll get more and more normal to simply state the same received opinion on repeat. That used to be a fairly reliable indicator of low intelligence but now we see intelligent, educated people doing it. Exploratory discussion's my favourite hobby (especially with a good dinner), seemingly limping towards a quiet death.

Quite a lot of derailment is now, I think, symptomatic of this. Sometimes it seems to come from genuine stupidity and/or inflexible thought. Other times it seems to be some twat coming here to shout us down, exactly like a typed version of those chanting TRAs trying to disrupt women's meetings. I think this has increased exponentially over the past ten years.

What hasn't altered much is the sealioning and - my second pet annoyance - posters who pair up to argue against one another, disregarding the topic of the thread and any other replies. In a real-life group, the two would be physically edged out so everyone else could carry on without them. The only online equivalent is to ignore them, quoting a relevant post from before they started, but it's far less effective because readers have to scroll through their tedious spat.

Wrt to the purposes of the FWR boards, I don't see them as being for the exclusive use of feminist sex realists. You never get an informed view by restricting your exposure to those who agree with you. For sure, it gets boring to keep being asked Feminism 101 questions or why TW are not W. Previous posters have helpfully made threads to explain, to which questioners may be redirected. Should they keep asking anyway - they're reportable.

It's perhaps worth mentioning that some well-informed people with valuable views are just as prone to inflexible communication as thick people. Having previously wasted too much time, effort and emotion on trying discuss (not simply agree) with them, I've concluded they're worth reading but saving any dispute for another thread, or starting one.

Yes? Maybe? Am I close, at least?

Perfecto!

I'm not disagreeing with any of your initial post, in fact I whole heartedly agree with it. Not sure why you would think I'm opposed to a critique of Atwood tho even if the OP is positive as that would be in the realm of relevant discussion in my view.

Mumsnet is a discussion board, not a bulletin board. If you find yourself unable to have the conversations you want about a particular issue, it might be time to look at how you're framing the conversation. What's your tone? Are you invoking controversial figures as authority voices? Are you using buzzwords that indicate bias? Are your sources open to criticism? What are you yourself doing to keep things on topic? Quite often, when a thread goes south, it's not as out-of-nowhere as it seems.

Yup, I get that it's a discussion board, I'm one of the few posters who's contrarian. My point is simply that in my experience even slight nuance is deemed 'derailing'.

In terms of tone or being open to criticism, kid gloves/egg shells won't even help if you aren't fully on the GC train because the dogma is so entrenched. I strongly suspect 'derailment' is just a silencing strategy. If the 'offended' can't have posts deleted or prevent others from engaging they will play the derailment card.

As far as preventing bias goes, good luck with that. We are all bias to some degree. Discussion forums wouldn’t even exist if bias was a condition of commenting. Nor would they if discussion didn't naturally broaden to related topics.

I have never witnessed a large discussion forum where commenters are so precious about tone & content policing than MN feminism.

"A feminism forum for sex and gender discussions, feminist chat, theory and intersectional feminism."

I never noticed that header before. I'm not sure that it does accurately describe this forum, especially since the 'feminist chat' bit is actually a separate forum anyway and 'intersectional feminism' is not at all GC in my experience.

Still, I wasn't around at the time of the split so I don't know what MN's original intentions were

It's difficult to respond to this, because you haven't directly argued any of the points I made. You've fallen back on broader buzzwords, instead of engaging with the specifics of the argument. Maybe you can't see it, but this creates the impression you're not arguing with me, but with some sort of stick figure you've made out of me, who represents the whole of the FWR board. Or the "GC true believers". Or just the ones you disagree with? It's not clear.

But I think I can fish out your point. You're saying that because GC views are the majority in the forum, they're given a free pass even when they're irrelevant and derail the topic at hand.

Yes? Maybe? Am I close, at least?

The problem with that is that you're ignoring the rest of my post. Atwood's track record on ignoring the erosion of women's rights in America is relevant to any conversation she now attempts to start about the erosion of women's rights in America. It might be the personal preference of the OP to ignore Atwood's failings on this issue, but they're not irrelevant, and it's disingenuous to pretend they are.

Mumsnet is a discussion board, not a bulletin board. If you find yourself unable to have the conversations you want about a particular issue, it might be time to look at how you're framing the conversation. What's your tone? Are you invoking controversial figures as authority voices? Are you using buzzwords that indicate bias? Are your sources open to criticism? What are you yourself doing to keep things on topic? Quite often, when a thread goes south, it's not as out-of-nowhere as it seems.

Okay, I did a bit of searching to see if Mumsnet have said anything specific on this in the past.

Here is anything I found:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4778000-can-mnhq-set-up-a-new-discussion-category-called-feminism-sex-gender-discu

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4271588-Mumsnet-is-hiving-off-sex-gender-issues-into-a-sub-forum?reply=108233287&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

https://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?reply=108112569&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

"A feminism forum for sex and gender discussions, feminist chat, theory and intersectional feminism."

Not that we all can't see it, but this is what it says this board is about on the site. This, to me, is neutral rather than GC.

As i see it, this board is specifically for how women are being impacted by trans rights organisations , (and as a sideline associated impact on children).

All other feminism belongs in feminism chat.
So, want to talk about setting up a rape crisis centre for women - you can use chat.
Want yo talk about the difficulty of setting up a rape crisis centre for women and not include and biological males- use this board.

The 'right wing' stuff i think has just been imported from the USA. In the UK it is hardly the fault of women that the left abandoned common sense, biology, and safeguarding. Many women on this board are clearly upset that their traditional political parties have been so captured on this issue.

Given that Gender identity is belief and sex is fair you are never going square the circle with true believers.