Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Thread gallery
5
Heminist · 20/03/2026 21:09

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

NameChangedWren · 20/03/2026 21:07

LordArnoldsWife2 · 20/03/2026 19:41

@ThimbleThief My understanding is that......

Exactly. All we have is hearsay. There is no way for any of us not directly involved to know the truth of these sort of statements.

As it happens I can tell you exactly how many women who were “removed” from WRN en masse were re-admitted, because I asked a friend who is in the WRN membership team. In Scotland - two women re-entered. In Bucks - no one. In Wessex and Surrey - she wasn’t aware of anyone.
So whole groups ejected and not returning.

LilyCraven · 20/03/2026 20:54

Heminist · 20/03/2026 20:37

Yeah, but there were only ten blue ticks about 4pm today, so given I’ve got shedloads more than that, it’s pretty clear what’s happening.
could you all be any more pathetic?

I’m really not clear what point you are making.

I have a blue tick account. I do not pay for followers. No need to - my original content is sufficient to attract wide interest - nor do I make any money from my account.

What I do know is that what I post attracts high profile accounts with large followings, and it was quite satisfying to see them repost the Women O’Scotland’s quite witty original content too. And why not?

You really do seem to have quite a downer on a group of women determined to restore and protect the sex-based rights of women and girls. What I don’t understand is why.

Seriestwo · 20/03/2026 20:42

It’s not cleaR to me.

Heminist · 20/03/2026 20:37

ThimbleThief · 20/03/2026 19:43

paying for followers on X isn’t an achievement

Having "big name" accounts that promote a new account is where the achievement and sharp rise in Followers comes in.

Yeah, but there were only ten blue ticks about 4pm today, so given I’ve got shedloads more than that, it’s pretty clear what’s happening.
could you all be any more pathetic?

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 20:12

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

PrizedPickledPopcorn · 20/03/2026 19:51

This is extraordinarily hard to follow. I dipped in and out of the previous thread. I need to see what was going on at the end, as I haven’t looked in recently.

ThimbleThief · 20/03/2026 19:43

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

paying for followers on X isn’t an achievement

Having "big name" accounts that promote a new account is where the achievement and sharp rise in Followers comes in.

OP posts:
LordArnoldsWife2 · 20/03/2026 19:41

@ThimbleThief My understanding is that......

Exactly. All we have is hearsay. There is no way for any of us not directly involved to know the truth of these sort of statements.

Heminist · 20/03/2026 19:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ThimbleThief · 20/03/2026 19:27

LordArnoldsWife2 · 20/03/2026 17:21

It is a few documents where stuff that some women say happened is then contradicted by what WRN say happened. The rest of us cannot verify any of it either way.

We also have no idea how many of the women initially removed from WRN as a group then applied to return individually and were accepted back.

Some women have subsequently set up some new independent groups, which is great.

If you want to decide whether the new groups would suit you, then I suggest you sample the posting style of some of the women involved in those groups.

We also have no idea how many of the women initially removed from WRN as a group then applied to return individually and were accepted back.

I assume that when you say "we" that you are including yourself? So it would be fair to say that you have no idea how many of the women initially removed from WRN as a group then applied to return individually and were accepted back.

A lot more people know "how many of the women initially removed from WRN as a group then applied to return individually and were accepted back" than know:

  • how many applied and were turned down
  • how many did not apply to rejoin.

My understanding is that:

  • only a very few applied and were accepted back
  • most "removed members" did not apply to rejoin.

Only the WRN Membership Dept know for sure because, in another fait accompli, WRN Leadership changed the rules and revoked the right of individual Groups to determine who should be readmitted their Group. Now, the "Membership Team" decides and Group Members would not even know if a "removed" member had applied to rejoin.

I wonder how the Membership Team decides whether or not a "removed member" should be readmitted and what criteria they use? Do Coordinators know? Members don't.

OP posts:
Heminist · 20/03/2026 19:04

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

RedRosesToday · 20/03/2026 18:32

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 17:50

I cant see AI altered images of someone.

That’s because it has (rightly) been taken down

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 17:50

PickAGoodOne · 20/03/2026 17:28

Do I really need to point out the ones indulging in personal attacks, name calling and posting ai altered images of people?

I cant see AI altered images of someone.

BoreOfWhabylon · 20/03/2026 17:48

LordArnoldsWife2 · 20/03/2026 17:21

It is a few documents where stuff that some women say happened is then contradicted by what WRN say happened. The rest of us cannot verify any of it either way.

We also have no idea how many of the women initially removed from WRN as a group then applied to return individually and were accepted back.

Some women have subsequently set up some new independent groups, which is great.

If you want to decide whether the new groups would suit you, then I suggest you sample the posting style of some of the women involved in those groups.

Thank you. I have now read through most of thread 1 and think I get the gist.

LilyCraven · 20/03/2026 17:30

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

You quoted my post. It is entirely reasonable to assume you accused me of “personal attacks”. It was an odd comment to make, whoever your target was.

FYI, I do not have, nor have I used, a sock account. I’m a long-time user of Mumsnet and well aware of the rules.

I have only posted on this thread in my own name, and in good faith, but if you wish to raise a concern with the moderators, be my guest.

PickAGoodOne · 20/03/2026 17:28

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 17:25

Which people do you mean? Maybe mention them and they cam respond to your query?

Do I really need to point out the ones indulging in personal attacks, name calling and posting ai altered images of people?

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 17:25

PickAGoodOne · 20/03/2026 17:09

The people claiming to be some kind of victim whilst engaging in personal attacks against others.

Which people do you mean? Maybe mention them and they cam respond to your query?

LordArnoldsWife2 · 20/03/2026 17:21

BoreOfWhabylon · 20/03/2026 12:31

I'm afraid I haven't been paying a lot of attention to this, other than being aware that there was something going on and some sort of schism

Is someone able to give me a brief summary of the issues please? Perhaps by pm if someone monitoring the thread has an itchy reporting finger.

It is a few documents where stuff that some women say happened is then contradicted by what WRN say happened. The rest of us cannot verify any of it either way.

We also have no idea how many of the women initially removed from WRN as a group then applied to return individually and were accepted back.

Some women have subsequently set up some new independent groups, which is great.

If you want to decide whether the new groups would suit you, then I suggest you sample the posting style of some of the women involved in those groups.

Heminist · 20/03/2026 17:18

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

PickAGoodOne · 20/03/2026 17:09

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 17:02

To whom are you referring?

The people claiming to be some kind of victim whilst engaging in personal attacks against others.

FairIsFairIsFair · 20/03/2026 17:08

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Shedmistress · 20/03/2026 17:02

PickAGoodOne · 20/03/2026 17:01

And posters on this thread think you’re the good guys?

To whom are you referring?

LilyCraven · 20/03/2026 17:02

Heminist · 20/03/2026 14:41

🧐

Please explain how my post (informing everyone not on Twitter that the Women O’Scotland have launched their account and that the Women of Wessex support them) amounts to “a personal attack on others”.

Until now, I was not aware that expressing support for a new affiliated group could possibly be construed as a “personal attack”.

If that’s your definition of a “personal attack”, please brace yourself for many more from me, as I have a very long track record of expressing support for the initiatives of other women all over the country and beyond.

PickAGoodOne · 20/03/2026 17:01

And posters on this thread think you’re the good guys?

Swipe left for the next trending thread