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.

You could be trans without talking about the trans debate?

But what if they wanted to? You would be excluding them from even acknowledging that they are trans.

Saying you're trans is not debating trans issues though. Just like saying you're a woman is not debating feminism.

So "trans issues" are limited to the existence of trans gender people, then, @Socalm? And there's nothing more to TG life that anyone might want to talk about. I see.

Just like saying you're a woman is not debating feminism

Of course it is if the person saying I am a woman is male.

On this trans free board what would the discussions be that are not already on the FWR board?

Preferably there would be a lot less of this type of discussion where most questions are poking and prodding to get you to engage in a trans debate.
It would hopefully be somewhere where we could discuss issues affecting 50% of the population, without an overriding and overwhelming focus on issues stemming from 0.2% of the population.

Preferably there would be a lot less of this type of discussion where most questions are poking and prodding to get you to engage in a trans debate

This discussion was started in AIBU not FWR and was specifically discussing the trans debate so......

No seriously what type of discussion which do not already exist on the FWR board?

You are asking for a new space to discuss feminists topics that you believe are not discussed on the existing FWR board. The least you can do is give a few examples.

The problem is that gender identity and trans ideology is affecting every issue relating to women. That 0.2% has a massive reach.
There's no real way to have a liberal feminism board and not touch on it at all.
Feminism is pretty much fighting against the gender box that the patriarchy puts us in and how that affects our lives. If you can't discuss the gender box or ways to get out of it, then you can't discuss feminism.

No seriously what type of discussion which do not already exist on the FWR board?

For me, it's not so much the type of discussion as the focus of the discussion. For example, a discussion about sexism in the workplace, on a strongly GC board, might centre on 'gender neutral' toilets, or transwomen being used to fill quotas of women in boardroom positions.

On a board that wasn't strongly GC it might focus more on everyday sexism, micro-aggressions and the gender pay gap. GC feminists might argue that the latter issues are inseparable from trans issues, however there are posters who'd feel they could discuss those things without referencing trans-influence; posters who don't object to a transwoman being included as a woman in boardroom stats; and who think unisex toilets are OK (note - I am not trying to start a debate about those specific issues on this thread - I'm just giving them as an example of how discussions might go different ways).

the gender pay gap

But even your example you've brought up something that's actually sexbasednot gender based.

But even your example you've brought up something that's actually sexbasednot gender based.

I understand what you're saying, but that isn't an angle on the topic I'd (personally) be interested in discussing. I think your response above is quite representative of what would happen on the present FWR boards - the discussion would quickly veer towards a sex-not-gender debate - away from what others might want to talk about from a non GC perspective.

Agree @JustTurtlesAllTheWayDown. The whole concept of feminism relies on being able to identify women, men and the power dynamics between them.

the discussion would quickly veer towards a sex-not-gender debate

That's because the pay gap is sex, not gender, based.
If you are not allowed to define those who are paid more and those who are paid less into their sex based groups how the fuck can up discuss it?

That's a serious question, there are hundreds of genders, how are you going to discuss the "gender gap" without referring to sex?!

Person

I have been around a good few years and can say with confidence those topics have been covered multiple times on FWR and the GC of us do not post to derail. However you must see that something like the gender pay gap will include GC discussion because while males want to be known as women and do women's things they very rarely want to relinquish their male entitlement. That affects women re the gender pay gap.

You cannot moan that feminists aren't discussing feminism they way you think they should. That's silencing and shutting down all debate.

Can you not see that GC views stretch across so many feminist topics because the trans movement is having a negative affect on those topics.
You cannot hide away or hide us away and pretend it doesn't because that suits you.

the discussion would quickly veer towards a sex-not-gender debate - away from what others might want to talk about from a non GC perspective

It maybe called the gender pay gap but it's based on the sex of a person. Makes are paid more than females.
How can you discuss the gender pay gap and not mention sex?

That’s the point and person and the replies to her, have hit the nail on the head.

If I want to discuss the gender pay gap, I would assume everyone on a feminist thread knows what that means. We don’t need pages upon pages of discussion on why ‘it’s sex not gender!’ It just shuts down any meaningful discussion on the topic in hand and spins it all back around to the trans debate.

Yes, the pay gap exists because of biology. Because of the fact that women are more likely to take a step back post kids (biology reasoning), maternity leave being off-putting to sexist employers (biology related) and so on...

We can discuss that and the biological stem of female oppression without yapping on about how TWANW when that is not the subject of the thread. It would be nice to have a place to do so.

Not wanting constant trans discussions doesn’t mean we’re in denial, don’t know what a woman is, can’t ‘identify’ a woman, it means we just want to discuss women and feminism without constantly battling the ‘what is a womaaaaaaan’ crap over and over and over.

@JulyKit I have no idea. I'm a feminist aged 62 and I am just fed up with the endless discussions about toilets and changing rooms. I would lie a separate space so we can go back to discussing abortion, pay, domestic abuse, etc etc etc without everything being dominated by arguments about people who used to have/still have penises ( trans women). It's an important issue but one that I have no experience of or indeed any knowledge of as I dint go to marks and Spencer and use their changing rooms or shopping centres and use the toilet. I'm being slightly facetious but really I want to talk about the issues that affect me as a woman and my daughters as well as 52% of the population

@Potty yes! So much better put than my response. I'm sick of threads being highjacked

And that is why since I returned to MN I haven't posted on any feminism threads as far as I can remember though I read them

I would lie a separate space

A separate space without anyone calling you a bigot for wanting that?

Can you really not see the irony in this?

@Sooverthemill, thank you for your reply. I completely get where you're coming from.
Similarly, I haven't personally experienced 'problems' re. changing spaces, M&S etc.
I have, however, attended a women's group meeting in which, when the issue of workplace sex discrimination was raised, I was told, by a 60-something TW (formerly a father of 2 - now a mother, of course, alongside their 'lesbian' wife), that sex discrimination takes place because women don't 'act more like men', and that if we (women) acted 'more like men' then it wouldn't take place. (That person was officially male when working. I'm not sure whether they considered that their own behaviour was man- or woman-like, but my understanding is that at no point were they required to behave more 'like men', nor had they ever experienced workplace sex discrimination.)
That certainly isn't the approach all TW would take, but it does, perhaps, illustrate the sort of obfuscation that happens when sex is replaced by/confused with 'gender' - i.e when 'gender' ideology replaces actual discussion of sex discrimination and sex based rights. It certainly prevents discussion of real issues, and it's very concerning when it takes place in groups specifically set up to support women.
I've attended women's groups for years. Sometimes they've included trans women. However, the sort of obfuscation of discussion of actual sex based issues in favour of notional 'gender' issues is, apparently, quite commonplace now - and it's really damaging. It's nothing to do with the existence of trans gender people, and it's not really anything to do with TG rights - which, as I'm sure you know, have been very well protected since (at least) 2010, just as they should be.
With this sort of obfuscation of real sex based issues apparently taking place on a fairly regular basis - not because of TWs' existence, but because of current cultural, and pseudo-legal efforts to replace sex with gender - it's hardly surprising that there sometimes appears to be something of a 'fixation' with self-ID, gender ideology, etc. on the FWR boards. Lots of us have been impacted negatively by it, and that's before we get anywhere near issues regarding basic physical safety, etc.

Good point, @TheInebriati.

You cannot moan that feminists aren't discussing feminism they way you think they should. That's silencing and shutting down all debate.

I didn't intend it to sound like a moan, and I certainly don't want to silence anyone - I'd just like to be able to talk somewhere else while the GC discussion carries on as it always has. As I mentioned when I gave examples, I didn't want to get drawn into those debates on this thread. That's not me shutting down the debate, that's me saying 'carry on without me.'

I absolutely think there should be a board where people's perception of what goes on on FWR can be avoided.

It would serve several purposes, not least of which would be to stop people complaining about what they see as a single issue.

I'd be interested to see what happens, actually. Whether or not any activism happens on the back of it, and what occurs when you come up against discrimination laws, which are a cornerstone of any feminism.

Coming at things from an entirely different angle might be very informative.

None of this is meant to sound snarky. It's completely genuine.

Thank you for your input, Datun (which I don't see as snarky). It's valuable to have insights from cornerstone posters on FWR.