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

Ayerobot: I've been trying to find the threads I'm thinking of. The one you linked is not the one; but I think the "earlier thread" referred to in it may be the one. For I did as I was bidden and googled, and found and linked the Fawcett figures (including their view on underreporting and lack of reliability). In the read you linked, I was using language closely modelled on the Fawcett society report. Looking at it now, I did feel the poster who commented (to both me and another poster) was rather scorning.

Thanks for pointing up another example.

I really enjoy the feminism boards. Tbh, i find them one of the more supportive and interesting areas on MN. The fact that a number of the posters are extremely intelligent and come from a highly well read and intellectual viewpoint is something that is a major plus for me as I often have the sense of learning something when I read posts.

MRA types and trolls (of which the feminism areas get more than their fair share) do get pretty short shrift, but I imagine that if I went onto the dog lover areas and started posting about how I like making poodles into fur hats and mittens and then told everyone to lighten up, I'd get a bit of a going over too.

People who are genuinely interested in a feminist discussion rather than a "you are all joyless, sexless and not proper feminists" type set of statements wind up having interesting discussions and aren't "shouted down".

Ah I see that the discussion about that that article on trauma bonding has been brought up again (just like in the last thread about the Mad Bad Evil Feminists).

A few posters discussed the article and commented that it was an interesting viewpoint but a bit 'out there'.

And yet this is being used as an example of what a shitty forum the FWR is

And meditrina if the thread linked to is the one where you where bullied and told off sharply then I think you are being very unfair in your reading of the thread. You asked other posters to provide links to complicated stats in order to prove a point you were making - finding the stats would probably have taken ages. Did you really expect other posters to drop their discussion in order to hunt down graphs and charts for you? You weren't asking for background information you were asking for a lot lot more.

I have found that in general when posters ask for links or basic background stuff in the FWR section, people are generally happy to help if they have the stuff at their fingertips. We are not a public information finding service though.

What do we make of ladies' fingers?

Wow.

An AIBU thread slagging off the feminism section.

How unusual.

sniggers at ladies fingers. Surely thats a reference to lesbianism Katie.

I like the sounds of a FWR quiche. Yum. Does it have bacon in it?

You really thought that people would drop everything to find out what you wanted, especially after "Try not to get wound up about the insults! This forum is notably intolerant and hostile if you are not part of the claque. I keep posting despite that, as it is important that proper debate takes place, and occasionally it does." And think that you were scorned? And that it is a good example of what the OP is on about, not what FWR regs have mentioned?

I'm starting to think that it's true that there is no reality, only perception,

But pikachusmate the general consensus on the FWR was that the trauma bonding article was a bit 'out there', wasn't it?

Did you read the mild discussion that was had on the FWR section or did you just read what was said in the AIBU section about the thread?

And what is it to you if people do discuss stuff that is a bit funky and out there anyway? Nobody on the thread said that anybody was trauma bonded to men.

Beachcomber: your last post crossed with mine. That was not the thread.

Two threads then out of hundreds? One of which I have read (sonographer one) where majority said what a load of nonsense to get upset about. The other has been mentioned by another poster as having been hijacked as an example of the evil MN feminists.

I've read a thread in AIBU where MILs got a slagging. Does that mean all DIls hate their MILs? Of course not.

It is to be expected on a board with literally thousands of posts that some of them will be a bit shocking or just downright bonkers. That doesn't mean the whole board is.

The FWR section can be a bit intimidating to be fair, especially if like me you are an instinctive feminist rather than an intellectual (for want of a better word) one, but so what? How sad that being intellectual about what is in fact a political movement is seen as being a bad thing, almost smacks of "book learning being bad for the women folk".

I lurk, I read some fascinating, thought provoking stuff, I occasionally post but most of all I learn and that's because of all those "over intellectual snobs" so thank you to them for not being ashamed of their smarts.

Btw, anti-sex? Seriously? you do know that SGB posts on FWR?

'Btw, anti-sex? Seriously? you do know that SGB posts on FWR?'

Sounds delicious Rhino :)

I did think that when I first saw the thread.

If the OP starts slagging off morris dancing the shit will really hit the fan.

A lot of the complaints on here I think can be reduced to posters having experienced a certain abruptness that, for some, comes with being familiar with their area of interest, having restated a set of views numerous times, and being reluctant to go over them again.

It's not unique to FWR and can be found among any group that has consolidated a set of fairly generally shared ideas/views. I'm willing to bet you'd see it on the dog, horse, SN or BF/FF boards here too amongst others. Personally I generally avoid the 'niche' boards on MN for this reason.

It is striking, though, the way these complaints come up again and again and usually about FWR rather than the other niche interest groups I mentioned above. Perhaps this is because of a latent antifeminism that we have absorbed as part of our conditioning. Or perhaps this is because there's a sense that, women being 51% of the population and everything, feminism shouldn't be a niche thing at all, and resent being addressed in a way that foregrounds their ignorance of specialist knowledge associated with that niche.

But while you could claim that anyone possessing a vagina should be welcome at the feminist table, it's debatable that simply possessing a vagina makes you a feminist. As such you can argue that there is a body of specialist knowledge associated with feminism and that it behoves posters interested in feminism to at least make some effort to acquaint themselves with it.

I still don't think that excuses rudeness. But rudeness from regular posters is a standard feature of any online forum, especially one with a shared theme. Trying to make a special case for feminism as a theme that should somehow be specially nice and inclusive by virtue of its relevance to 51% of the population is probably a waste of time.

That's a bit rich Rhino, that it's the same old "quiche" of FWR regs defending the board - seems like the same old regs are here abusing it.

I think all the talk of "projection" is very interesting.