To think mumsnet needs a separate 'Gender' section?

[Jargoyle]

I've been lurking here for years prior to signing up, but have now all but abandoned the women's rights section due to the overwhelming proliferation of trans threads.

I get that self ID is a big issue but I was saddened, for example, during the whole Irish abortion debacle that the first thread on it was barely two pages long whilst people were happily discussing Caitlyn Genner's style comments until the cows came home.

I think a separate section would be beneficial where the same old posters can have the same old discussions about it all.

Ah I see. She started it to make a point?

Meh.

Still doesn’t seem too awful in terms of the response?

to back up their assertions with some sort of reasoned argument and/or facts, and they could kind of lurk on the FWR board at their leisure (and even decant some of the good sense there onto the lovely Lib Fem board from time to time, once they'd got the hang of dialectic and all that)

In other words, you seem to be saying that there's no place for people on FWR unless or until they've honed their debating skills. Someone who was poorly educated, for example, and hadn't 'got the hang of dialectic' yet wouldn't be welcome. That's the kind of attitude that puts people off posting on the boards as they are at present. OK, you might be happier without them, but surely you must see that feminism isn't exclusive to 'people like you'?

So that what's terrible, a tread of opinions?

What’s wrong with the thread? Some people saying the focus is too wide, some people engaging...

I know. It's a perfectly intelligent, normal, polite thread.

I’m the one who said the “Liberal Feminism” board should be a “twaw” space.

Whereas on FWR, women = adult human females (sorry not sorry).

Its not that you have to believe it to post there. But how can you meaningfully discuss feminism with two totally incompatible definitions of “women”, for Christ sakes?

You can’t. You need to agree on what the hell a woman is, or you’ll just go round in circles forever.

creating a Libfem Board, creates space for those triggered by the “aggressive orthodoxy” that women are female. Win - win.

*In a nutshell a serial filibustered"
No. That's the whole "let's discredit a person we don't agree with" crap that keeps happening.
What you mean is someone you don't agree with.
She was told, repeatedly, over several threads by several posters to start a thread on feminist topics which interested her .
So she did.
You only need to read the thread to see how that worked out.

So that what's terrible, a tread of opinions?

Exactly. And as I said, the FGM information was very interesting.

I’ve just read the first few pages. I don’t see what is wrong with the thread.

Wotcha - what’s wrong with it?

That thread was fine. Some people were snippy, so what? There were some quality discourse.

If some weirdo actually did PM someone to say “don’t engage” (note, I was engaging in the thread, no one PM’ed me) just tell them to fuck off. Why judge a whole board on a bizarre PM

That’s the thread? The one you said was awful? That spawned the PM?

Yes, and perhaps my views are indeed coloured by the PM I received about it, but I think the response the OP received was very unpleasant and it's disingenuous to try and pretend otherwise.

In any event the response was unpleasant enough to put me off starting a similar thread, which is really the point I'm making.

As I've said, I think it would be great if people could refrain from using this as an opportunity to give the OP of that thread a further kicking when she's not here to defend herself from accusations.

Why judge a whole board on a bizarre PM confused

And bring it up months later, as some kind of representation? We all get weird PMs.

As I've said, I think it would be great if people could refrain from using this as an opportunity to give the OP of that thread a further kicking when she's not here to defend herself from accusations.

Don't keep referring to threads that you don't want people to look at, or have an opinion about then.

And if you do, don't tell them off for having an opinion about a thread that you brought up to back up a point that you're using to disagree with them.

🤣

I think the response the OP received was very unpleasant and it's disingenuous to try and pretend otherwise

I’ve now skim read the whole thing. There’s some interesting stuff. Some suspicion. Some tangential discussions - I don’t think it “very unpleasant”. Why do you think I’m being disingenuous?

In other words, you seem to be saying that there's no place for people on FWR unless or until they've honed their debating skills. Someone who was poorly educated, for example, and hadn't 'got the hang of dialectic' yet wouldn't be welcome. That's the kind of attitude that puts people off posting on the boards as they are at present. OK, you might be happier without them, but surely you must see that feminism isn't exclusive to 'people like you'?

Thank you, @PersonFrom2045. I can see that that's exactly how my point must have come across. It was actually written specifically in the context of this thread, and e.g. Cohle's posts on it - i.e someone saying they consider themselves 'bullied' by posters on FWR when in fact several posters there have politely asked them to engage in discussion - but they've chosen not to engage with that.

IIRC, there have in fact been posters on FWR who don't come from privileged or educated backgrounds, and their engagement has been welcome and appreciated, perhaps because the points they make and the issues they raise are genuine ones, perhaps because they don't feel 'bullied' by other people asking them questions and holding them to account for what they say.

My point is that several of the posters on this thread who say they find the FWR boards objectionable do so precisely because they struggle with actual discussion. I'm not sure what they're looking for - validation, maybe? I don't think that has to do with education, or lack of it, just with an unwillingness to actually engage in debate. I assume (wrongly, perhaps) that that sort of unwillingness stems from a lack of confidence.

The OP on that thread seemed happy engaging with various posters .. the snippy once left and they got a good level of engagement!? Where’s the drama, I don’t see any

*snippy ones left

And Again, having an unpleasant experience on MN (which I have had)... does not necessarily = bullied. That word is getting weakened from overuse

I'm sorry if I misunderstood the context of your post, Julykit.

With regard to lack of confidence - it can be overwhelming if you hold a minority viewpoint on a thread, and posters start throwing questions at you on all sides. It also sometimes happens that people start misattributing views to you, so you end up trawling through the thread trying to find who actually said what. It's one thing if the argument is about something you've come prepared to discuss, but another if you find yourself the subject of a derail on a 'gender' issue and have to keep on and on fielding questions (or step away and know that people will be sneering at you for not being genuine).

DesireesChild, I haven't been using any 'line' at all

You seem quite confused. Perhaps read the thread again?

Oh dearie me - how disingenuous. Your wide-eyed, "who me?" innocence is impressive.

Your comments below are doing exactly that. You set up a straw man argument that I have some sort of problem with women expressing an opinion when I did nothing of the sort.

Yes, it's just awful when women have confidence in their beliefs, and vocally disagree about things, isn't it,@DesireesChild?

Why 'the sniping', of course - and all those women who are 'convinced they are right'. You say you really dislike it

FTFOTFVille, I think DesireesChild has made it quite clear: the problem all those 'sniping' women who are 'convinced they are right'. Those women with opinions. I mean, really....

Do have short term memory problems? I strongly recommend you re-read your posts.

I think that's a really good point, @PersonFrom2045 (although that's not the situation I see on the threads Cohle refers to).

In a way, that's what I was getting at when I suggested that a Lib Fem board might be useful. While I know some posters drop by the FWR boards just to goad, I think others do want to engage, and do try to make points that they haven't thought about much, or which they don't have much knowledge/understanding of. Then, when they get short shrift for saying things that are perhaps a bit naive, they become extremely defensive, decide all rad fems are evil harridans, etc., etc.
So maybe a gentle Lib Fem board is a nice starting place for them to discuss things without fear that someone too sharp will turn up and make them feel uncomfortable. That was kind of the gist of my argument.

I think it's a bit patronising to think posters raising concerns here somehow lack the confidence to engage properly in debate.

As I've said repeatedly I'm very happy to engage in, spirited, debate. (Surely my continued participation in this thread is
proof of that? ). It's merely frustrating to be shut out of meaningful debate by accusations of trolling, being a man, a "community disrupter", filibustering with grey rocks or recipes etc.

I know exactly what I said, thanks, @DesireesChild.
And I know what you said too.
But by all means, keep on fuming, repeating yourself, etc., if that floats your boats.

JulyKit I agree with you, now that I understand your point more clearly.

And bring it up months later, as some kind of representation? We all get weird PMs.

Don't keep referring to threads that you don't want people to look at, or have an opinion about then.

I've been asked several times to provide specific examples of the sort of behaviour I'm referring to. So I, reluctantly in some cases, have. I'm sorry if that bothers you. I doubt it's possible to please all posters on a thread like this.

I think it's a bit patronising to think posters raising concerns here somehow lack the confidence to engage properly in debate.

Oh, is there another reason that you refuse to engage with all those very polite, reasoned, respectful posters who invite you to do so, then, @Cohle?

It's merely frustrating to be shut out of meaningful debate by accusations of trolling, being a man, a "community disrupter", filibustering with grey rocks or recipes etc.

Indeed. And yet those are the posters you choose to engage with. As I've pointed out, there are plenty of others who are doing anything but shutting you out of meaningful debate. In fact they invite you takle part in it - but you choose not to...

is there another reason that you refuse to engage with all those very polite, reasoned, respectful posters who invite you to do so, then

I'm really not sure what you think I'm trying to do right now July? You're coming across as needlessly adversarial.