to really not identify with the feminist boards on here, when i always thought I was a feminist

[DinahMoHum]

seems so joyless and anti sex.

I feel very conflicted now. I always thought feminism was about equality for women, which I dont believe we have, but it seems to re\lly be focusing on the wrong issues for me, and getting too much into dynamics of personal relationships, and peoples sexual preferences

im probably being unreasonable

"If MNHQ is really deleting posts here just for testifying that many people find (some of) the MN RadFems rude/abrasive, ideological and inflexible (or similar), then I think that is doing everyone a disservice because in thread after thread on this subject over the months, many people are testifying to these same issues over and over and over again.

There is just too much evidence to dismiss these views.

You can't censor your way out of a problem, and the problem is not with the MN Mainstream."

But nobody has actually produced any evidence. People say there's evidence, but don't actually produce any.

Aren't you? I genuinely thought you were, apologies. Not that being a man is bad.

WhatMe...you forgot stepfordlike and misogynist

Oh and MRA, don't forget that one.

But nobody has actually produced any evidence. People say there's evidence, but don't actually produce any.

A large number of threads, with a large number of people, saying the same thing over and over and over again.....

That is evidence. You just don't want to take it on board.

I did actually say I dont identify with the board even though id always considered myself a feminist. It "seems" so joyless and anti sex.

Youre making out that i said that every poster on the feminist board is a joyless and anti sex bastard.

Its obvious there is a big difference. One is pertaining to my feeling and the impression I get from the board, and the other that im being accused of, is a direct insult, which I didnt give. Of course the board is made up of many individuals, some of which will be exactly that i am sure, and many wont be, but the general impression I got from the board is that.
Tbh as I already stated, my main issue, I think now, Is not what I originally posted, but the huge presence of radfems turning other posts round in other areas of the board and pushing a huge agenda, and insensitively using other peoples issues,problems or questions as if theyre pawns. Its quite uncomfortable to see

It kind of reminds me a bit of the difference between socialists in general, and members of the SWP who jump on every single bandwagon going, protesting that every single thing is a socialist issue, when really, they think theyre helping but theyre just making everyone else think "oh ffs"

So what we're basically saying is that it's completely OK to call the Fem section joyless, anti-men, anti-sex, hostile, agressive, manipulative, rude, abrasive, bad apples, arrogant etc etc...? But that the posters on that board are obliged to not bite back?

yes?

:o @ whatmeworry that is quite funny.

Ironically the one thing this thread needs is a bit more humour.

An accusation- even lots of accusations- does not addnup to evidence. A bit of cut and paste would be evidence- but nobody will do it!

It's not evidence, it's opinion. If posters don't like the 'tone' of a board then they're free to ignore it or to post there and try and change it.

If I came on and said 'Am I being unreasonable to really not identify with the style and beauty boards because they're just so preoccupied with lipstick and stuff that they're probably not having any fun or any sex come to think of it' then actually, I would being U. It's rude to stereotype.

I don't like all the posts on AIBU, I don't like all the posts on SN, I don't like all the posts on FWR. But that doesn't mean that there's something fundamentally wrong with all the posters on that board.

Be the change.
(I can't believe I actually typed that but I mean it. Do something about it, or at least challenge it in the right place, ie on the board in question)

Is it really a large number? It's a handful of regular contributors plus a dozen or so others across a number of threads that I've read.

There are, unless my eyes deceive me, many posts that are critical of FWR and it's regular posters still standing, whatmeworry. Deleting some posts that contained personal attacks hardly makes this a one sided debate.

So what we're basically saying is that it's completely OK to call the Fem section joyless, anti-men, anti-sex, hostile, agressive, manipulative, rude, abrasive, bad apples, arrogant etc etc...? But that the posters on that board are obliged to not bite back?

Of course they can bite back, you should bite back!

But what I'd also suggest is taking a long hard look at why these threads come up so often, saying the same thing over and over, and get so much traffic.

Ultimately, though, some people not liking the FWR board is really a non-problem, a bit of a 'so what?' issue. If it changes into something that those particular posters do like, there will be others who don't like it and so on ad infinitum. It's not possible to please everybody, those posters who do use it are entitled to have the debates they enjoy, it's not their responsibility to create what others want. Taking up the mantra, be the change.

I wouldn't describe OP's op as 'completely OK' Shirley. I'd probably describe it as 'slightly silly'. But I don't see it as an attack. And I don't see it as similar to describing someone/a group as racist, homophobic, etc.

@ whatmeworry that is quite funny

It requires people with a sense of humour to see the irony :o

WhatMeWorry - I don't need to have a good hard look at why these threads come up so often actually, it's just rude and seen as an easy target.

As I said, I get a nasty time on certain threads in Relationships by a small number of posters - I do not start a thread saying "I find it really hard to identify with the Relationships board - it seems so accepting of infidelity and affairs and when I've questioned that I get really rude, aggressive and hostile posts in response They're horrible on the relationship board"

People would think I'd lost my mind.

Why are only feminists criticised for negative views of sex? Last time I checked, feminists weren't trying to deny women contraception, closing down mother-and-baby units, or claiming that rape victim's sexual history was relevant in court?

Now, that's certainly sex-negative.

WhatMeWorry - I don't need to have a good hard look at why these threads come up so often actually, it's just rude and seen as an easy target.

I think a better approach would be to start with teh actual criticims raised rather than assume those critquing were all rude fools

As I said, I get a nasty time on certain threads in Relationships by a small number of posters - I do not start a thread saying "I find it really hard to identify with the Relationships board - it seems so accepting of infidelity and affairs and when I've questioned that I get really rude, aggressive and hostile posts in response They're horrible on the relationship board"

Someone else did a few weeks back, was quite interesting IMO. But then to me Relationships is frequented by many of the same people that - IMO of course - make FWR unpleasant, so I just stay away from both.

I think you'll find there's a fair amount of criticism of e.g. the Catholic Church for 'negative views of sex', TheBigJessie.

So basically what is being argued here is that posters should be allowed to break the talk guidelines and attack other posters - those posters should just suck it up and not be namby pambies who;

a) respect MNHQ and their rules which clearly say that the course of action is not to bite back on personal attacks but report them.

b) are the sort of person who won't stand for back stabbing personal attacks where posters can neither defend themselves nor quote the event being referred to, because these events appear to be mysteriously difficult to link to for a forum with as good an advanced search facility as MN.

And this is being argued as a really important freedom of speech/censorship issue. Righto.

This is farcical. PMSL.

"Someone else did a few weeks back, was quite interesting IMO. But then to me Relationships is frequented by many of the same people that - IMO of course - make FWR unpleasant, so I just stay away from both"

Yep. I agree that if you find somewhere unpleasant it's probably easier to stay away!

'it's just rude and seen as an easy target'

And that's all there is to it, Shirley?

I don't see it that way. Whenever threads like this one get started, I see posts from posters whose views I'm really interested in and respect (Worra and Catgirl sring to mind...). These are posters who I'd like to see on FWR boards, but the threads always go the same way:
Worra makes a couple of sharpish posts and is out of there, Catgirl gets picked on.

Perhaps these two posters are 'the usual suspects'. Perhaps I am too. But I don't think any of us are out there to be rude and abusive.

Point of intereset also re. 'joyless' (and something that winds me up from time to time about FWR board - which in general I love):
Could it be that by using the label 'fun-fem' as a pejorative term, posters are setting themselves up to seem 'joyless'? (I can't think of any other areas where describing someone as 'fun' is a put down.) Just a thought...

Ah yes, another example of an institution that is commonly criticised by feminists.

So where are all the threads in AIBU from non-fwr board regulars, criticising all the above examples for their joyless, sex-negative attitudes?

Why is the fwr board's alleged sex-negativity the only form of sex-negativy that anyone cares about ?