Women's Rights Network Imploding - thread 2

To reiterate the answer to that question YES , most certainly. HTH as we say around these parts

Do these “women of “ groups (is there a group name?) do things like “organising and attending protests, leafleting, street stalls, debates, writing newspaper and media articles, doing TV interviews, writing books, lobbying MPs, starting petitions, writing letters, submitting FOIs, research, raising lawsuits, supporting women at tribunals”?

Yes

Part of the problem in explaining things on here is that you can be banned for having 3 posts removed.

You can be banned for being too generalistic. And also banned for being too specific.

So people are forced into not writing too much, not being specific and not generalising.

So trying to explain anything ends up like swiss cheese.

It is actually helpful thank you.
Do these “women of “ groups (is there a group name?) do things like “organising and attending protests, leafleting, street stalls, debates, writing newspaper and media articles, doing TV interviews, writing books, lobbying MPs, starting petitions, writing letters, submitting FOIs, research, raising lawsuits, supporting women at tribunals”?
i gathered that wrn did that but the “women of” groups were just twitter accounts?

So women’s rights groups on X are not doing activism? OK 😂 Have you thought maybe that’s just a platform they use to publicise some of their activism, gain members, and communicate? Then maybe, just maybe, they do their activism in the real world, like organising and attending protests, leafleting, street stalls, debates, writing newspaper and media articles, doing TV interviews, writing books, lobbying MPs, starting petitions, writing letters, submitting FOIs, research, raising lawsuits, supporting women at tribunals… the list is endless. It is possible that all the hard work and activism goes on behind the scenes and just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

Regarding the previous post and confusion about what’s happening: the previous thread was filled, all the info is in the thread and the conversation continued onto a new thread. Many of the posters on here know who each other is and they’re having a bit of a rant at each other, it seems some posters are defending WRN and speaking (anonymously) on their behalf but doing a bad job of it. Some are attacking WRN. WRN is a large women’s rights group in the UK, with various local groups around the country. They did some silly things ejecting women and behaving like bullies so some of those bullied and ejected women took to Mumsnet to vent their frustration and expose what happened. The previous poster mentioning the followers gained in 12 hours may have been referring to the new Women of Scotland group and comparing it to the WRN Scotland group. Hope that helps.

Also being on Twitter or on Mumsnet is not activism. It’s being a social media warrior. Very different

Hard agree. A lot of people seem to know each other and so it’s like a conversation where I can’t keep up because they keep presuming we know what they’re talking about.
@TipsyKhakiJoker said “one such organisation got more followers in 12 hours than the one that kicked them out managed in 5 years, shouldn’t the one dropping women like flies maybe rethink how it operates?”
what did that mean?

@weegielass tells us that LWD are having problems but presumes everyone knows what this is about?

The suggestion was genuine not snarky! As an anonymous Facebook user you could bring women’s rights issues to the women on there if you think there’s such a gap. There’s nothing stopping you from providing info on many different women’s groups, you don’t have to speak for them or have membership just get it out there and groups and individuals could contribute too. How is that inappropriate?

You do seem fixated with the number of users on Facebook compared to X but you might not be aware of the effectiveness of each platform? More users on Facebook doesn’t necessarily equate to meaningful followers or members for women’s rights groups.

For example:

Women’s Rights Network have 45.4K followers on X but only 10K followers on Facebook. Some of those followers and likes will be the same person and / or members. I don’t think their membership numbers are public.

For Women Scotland have 74.5K followers on X but only 8.9K followers on Facebook. They don’t have a membership like WRN.

The new Scottish women’s group mentioned earlier has 9.3K followers on X and no Facebook page. I don’t think their membership numbers are public.

These X numbers are not a ‘small pool’!

Of course women’s rights groups will always welcome more exposure for the cause but whether Facebook is essential to that is debatable.

Thanks yes, it was Resisters.

And yes, sadly an example of setting up a web page means having to maintain it.

(and no I wasn't being ironic, but a reminder that without always the same reasoning it can be hard to build networks)

Have you considered making a Facebook page to list all the women’s rights groups yourself and getting it out there to women? As you’re on Facebook and Mumsnet you’re already aware of a few of them and you could share that information and help with their exposure, then other women who are also on X would share info they have from there too. There are lots of ways to help with women’s rights activism these days.

That would be totally inappropriate.

And you seem to have gone off on some tangent, when I was just pointing out that unless you only want to be in touch with the same small pool of people, which by comparison if you compare how the number of twix users have dropped considerablly in one year, seems counter productive. Especially when if you arent signed up to X you cant read. Let alone the message it says when most women's groups have publicly left twix because its politics.

So just pointing out that if you want to reach more women you would opt for a platform that is more used. Not just the die hard twix recidifists!

And again if you had read what I said I was just talking about an place where the fact that the groups existed could be seen. Which I would have thought would be an objective. Nothing to do with open conversations.

And again why should I do it? I am not part of the group, and as indicated am already part of existing information exchange FB group,

Why not look at the more easy to achieve, and as a temporary stop gap, just having a thread on FWR which info about groups coming into existence could be posted about.

Were you having a bad day or something.

I agree, a lot of women are unaware of women’s rights groups, but given that many women’s rights groups are already on Facebook, it would appear that those women either aren’t searching for them or the algorithms don’t promote them the way the X algorithm does.

Many women’s rights groups protest and are active in real life. They also still spread their message through word of mouth and leaflets not just social media. There are also many local groups that are active, with chat groups on various platforms, but they aren’t official organisations so they have no public social media presence. By chatting to someone in real life, I’m sure most women would eventually be invited to something similar whether it’s on Facebook or not. A lot of women activists are in more than one group too. There’s also media exposure for protests, events, and court rulings, etc. And of course, many groups are active but don’t accept members, so I’m not sure what your point is. Are you referring to a particular women’s rights group that doesn’t use Facebook?

I find Facebook far more toxic in the replies than X. Ironically, fewer people use anonymous accounts on Facebook, yet the comments are usually much worse and not worth the hassle, especially if it’s political. Most women’s rights posts on X are left alone these days and have more support than negative comments. Maybe it’s just your experience of X (your particular echo chamber?) because it’s not as bad as you make out it is.

Have you considered making a Facebook page to list all the women’s rights groups yourself and getting it out there to women? As you’re on Facebook and Mumsnet you’re already aware of a few of them and you could share that information and help with their exposure, then other women who are also on X would share info they have from there too. There are lots of ways to help with women’s rights activism these days.

I dont really bother with the WRN anymore and LWD are also having issues

My guess is that she was being ironic and referring to the Women’s Rights Network.

I am on facebook annonymously. And as I am annonymous here I will admit I have a second annonymous account for updating a shared public page, for obvious reasons.

So that really isn't an issue.

I am just being really conscious that many, many women just never hear directly about feminist activism, let alone take part.

And Twix always was, and still is a really unpleasant space so many women have never gone near it, and as it is now being politically boycotted even more anachronistic to go on being part of it.

So, and not wishing to pontificate, but in considering out reach, or being welcoming the best approach isn't always what I like should be the criteria.

But either way, it would be good to have some sort of public page where existing groups could be listed. And quite honestly why not as part of a thread on FWR.

Which reminds me wasn't there a next work of local women's groups that had a central web site where you could check if there was one in your area.

It wasn't that long ago, and I just cant think the name of the network.

I know several women in the Chilterns group and a couple in the new Scotland one, and they are flourishing. The affiliation with more established groups is giving them a lot of support to get set up, and they are generating loads of backing. I’m a bit envious honestly, I wish there was something like this in my area!

That’s fair comment. I see that FairIsFairIsFair has also added her own very fair comment.

The Women of Wessex use X/Twitter as their main method of communication and the recruitment of new members because we can keep up-to-date, and get in touch directly, with prominent women’s rights campaigners and groups while preserving our anonymity.

Like our three affiliated sister groups, we also use WhatsApp to communicate and organise, but a new member is not added to those chats until we are absolutely sure of her.

Our shared vetting procedure is strict, but no one who knows anything about personal security would claim it was 100% foolproof. No system ever is. Our reasoning is that if a X chat group was compromised, we could shut it down, change our screen names, regroup under new usernames. It would be a palaver - but not as much as it would be if our mobile numbers were compromised. Just think how many people and organisations you’d have to inform if you changed your mobile number.

You have a valid point, but many people can only do their activism on X because it allows anonymity, unlike Facebook. If a woman has work colleagues on her Facebook, she might not even like or comment on, let alone follow, women’s activist pages, because it could cause problems at work if it became known that she holds gender-critical views. Many women are also still targeted and attacked by TRAs, so having their real name and profile picture visible on Facebook may deter them from interacting with women’s rights groups there.

I've only recently had time to catch up with the end of thread 1 and then this one.

Sorry that this thread seems to have been hijacked by someone with some sort of agenda about not sure what.

As someone who is not part of WRN have found the thread very informative, and also really positive to here other groups have formed and are networking.

My only niggle is that even though individuals may like twitter now X for whatever reason, please remember it is now one of the least used social media platforms(*), and worse, cannot be read by those who have not joined. Ditto Instragram but does have many more users

So please always think of a second outlet. A Facebook page doesn't necessarily have to have chat. It can just be used to post updates. Or even be a shared page for each group to post updates?!

Only saying this because I am sure there are many women who would really want to opportunity to be part of these new groups.

And of course really welcome this development because as I posted on the first thread in the early days of Women's Liberation that was the model. Each group was autonomous and took its own decisions, and accepted that other groups may have different priorities but would still work together on a common issue of concern, whether a local refuge losing its funding, or campaing or lobbying. And this with done without the aid of new technology.

And although I am sure that some groups found an individual or core group tried to register the name of the group as though it were their invention, it rarely happened and many groups have kept going!

Just adding this because from the first thread and on this there seem to be some who only have a negative view of women working together as equals, based on having a shared outlook, politics and women's sex based rights.

Just so strange. Nothing to stop other groups setting themselves up in other ways, such as Sex Matters had done. So long as it is transparent.

Hope that on occassions those who are active will pop back to this thread and let us know or if even more new groups have been started. (In fact nothing to stop having a Women of --- thread on FWR, which anyone can read as a way of sharing online!)

(*) TwiX has dropped from 9th placed to 15th in the past 12 months. Which may mean the boycotting of the platform has worked.

2024 https://www.statista.com/statistics/284506/united-kingdom-social-network-penetration

2025 https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/

I don’t thunk mine was deleted, I didn’t get a message and don’t know what I could have said that’s deleting. I asked question’s because I thought I was in WRN but turns out I wasn’t because I wasn’t thrown out, is that a bias?

This is a classic example of confirmation bias @Seriestwo In fact, one of your own posts was deleted on page one.

@ThimbleThief The flaw with your 'mathematical' arguments is that you assume that loads of members or ex-members of WRN are on MN following these posts and adding their comments. Of course, we will never know how many lurk, but only a handful are posting.
Very few women in my own WRN group ever mention MN. Most seem to get their info directly from other online sources.

Well, signed up to twix to go follow and DM (well, at least I think I did) Women O'Scotland. Here's to a fruitful endeavour.