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.

people were actively trying to disrupt it because it basically didn't centre them and their interests?

IKR: feminists trying to derail a thread in FWR because it's not a thread about women's interests. Shocking, that. I mean why should FWR discussion centre women, FFS?

And no, @Hairday, that's not how the thread went. Why don't you click on the link if you want to read it?

I don't want to read it. I think I remember it. It was depressing and made me give up on Mumsnet for feminist discussion. That thread and others.

Yeah cohle, I'm just not sure you're cut out for this.

One poster sending you a message telling you not to engage seems to be the pivot for a lot of your comments on this thread. It's disproportionate.

If you're going to get engaged in a controversial subject, you're going to have to be prepared for 'adversarial' responses.

It's kind of the whole point.

Because it's not a thread about women's interests
It was a thread about amongst other concerns, FGM.
How the hell is that not in women's interest?

Could be interesting to find out, @TheInebriati.
The difference in responses, and how those on the shiny new Lib Fem thread develop over time might be interesting to observe too.

Some engaged politely and nicely and there was some good knowledge shared but it’s still an example of why saying ‘go and start your own thread about feminism not trans then’ doesn’t actually work like that

Seems like a description of a fairly standard thread on many MN threads, some people engaging, some people sniping...

Smile you only have to read the thread in question to see the needless hostility the OP was subject to.

It has been explained several times that regulars on any board can get fed up dealing with constant goading from a small handful of posters who 'just want to play devils advocate' to 'balance things out' and 'stop the board turning into an echo chamber'.

theinebriati

I reckon the lib fem one

So is the plan to change the name of feminism chat to rad fem then?

I’d lurk on both boards...im an equal opportunities lurker

Therefore all women of that type are objectionable.

That's a ridiculous mischaracterisation of what I've said. I don't think GC feminists are "objectionable".

I've provided one specific example of why a poster who would like to see more variety of content in FWR doesn't actually think "well just go off and start your own thread then" is a particularly constructive solution.

Cohle

Several people didn't think she was posting in good faith.

Hold the front page!

This is baby stuff.

No, there are plenty of radical feminists who want more diverse discussion.

@WotchaTalkinBoutWillis, if you're referring to my 20:39 post, you'll see that that part of it was in response to Hairday's ridiculous post, and not about the thread itself.

JulyKit: IKR: feminists trying to derail a thread in FWR because it's not a thread about women's interests. Shocking, that. I mean why should FWR discussion centre women, FFS?

You haven’t read the thread have you? Maybe do that first or you might look a bit silly.

No, there are plenty of radical feminists who want more diverse discussion.

Hence this thread. And the suggestion of a different board.

Go for it.

@Hairday, radical feminists already engage in diverse discussion. It's great, actually.

Smile you only have to read the thread in question to see the needless hostility the OP was subject to

I have read it. I see some posters reacting to the wider ranging C&P nature of the OP with suspicion. I see some posters saying that self ID is up there with current threats to women. I see some posters engaging thoughtfully. I see some posters feeling a bit patronised. I see some posters saying it’s a useful thread.

🤷🏻‍♀️ it’s an Internet forum...I don’t see your point?

The comment you were responding too was regarding that thread.

Several people didn't think she was posting in good faith.

Is there some reason FWR is magically excused from the rules against trollhunting?

Presumably as the thread stands MNHQ in fact disagreed with that assessment.

Several people didn't think she was posting in good faith though
Why though? When she'd repeatedly been told to do just that, so did?
What are you basing that on? The fact she didn't always agree on every point of trans issues, and wasn't afraid of putting her point across? That doesn't mean bad faith poster, filibusterer of boards.

I was replying to rufus' idea about having a new thread for libfems. I just think this is not about the radfem libfem divide. In my opinion, it's about the trans debate taking over everything, including radical feminism.

Is there some reason FWR is magically excused from the rules against trollhunting?

You might want to ask MNHQ that question, @Cohle, since they, not you, are responsible for creating and implementing the rules here.

That said, FWR seems to be beset by trolls more than any other MN board. (I wonder why that is? ) MNHQ know that, obviously.
Also, MNHQ explain that they take a nuanced approach. That'll include their approach to trollhunting.

(Do you see what I did there, Cohle I answered your question. It's not difficult, see?)