FWR split continued

[RebeccaMumsnet]

We have decided to start a new thread about this as the other thread was near capacity and taking a while to load.

Here is Justine's post from earlier on

We can give a Radical Feminism topic a go if that's what people want and see if it works. Obviously we need to be crystal clear that no one is obliged to post in one particular place and no one should feel excluded from any topic but we could test it out, and see if it helps resolve tensions. We'll do that in the next few days.

There are a couple of other things to think about as well.

First, those who come onto FWR to derail and inflame. We acknowledge that we have been too slow in the past to spot these posters for what they were. We're sorry about that and hope we're a lot quicker at dealing with them now. We're all for opinions but we do draw the line at posters whose only obvious intent is to goad.

And secondly, this idea that FWR can be an unwelcoming place to those who aren't following the 'party line'. Judging by posts on recent threads and by our inbox this is a view of a significant number of Mumsnetters and obviously that's not a healthy situation. Mumsnet is a place for discussion and for diverse opinion and it's the exchange of ideas and tolerance of differing opinions that makes it the board it is.

We do hope threads like this help to clear the air a bit and remind everyone that, whatever the differences of opinion, the FWR board will only ever be the stimulating, thought-provoking, enriching place we'd all like it to be if people feel that they can express themselves without being jumped on.

Please do continue to let us know your thoughts.

PIV is a pretty basic fact of mammal biology.

And yes - as far as I am aware - female orgasm helps the conception process.

That radfem section really needs to go.

I can't seem to reply to this thread but as a long time lurker onthe FWR board, wanted to add my support to the radical feminists.

Reading their posts pushes me out of my comfort zone. It makes me question my
choices and my beliefs. They are the reason I've stuck around so long, though in the FWR section I've little to contribute.

Shame that this is how it ends.

I think it should stay Pan - really - then everyone else can use it.

It's tedious and tiring watching people who are simply not as educated/aware of feminism/rape myths/etc being torn apart for posting what are - yes misguided views - when more gentle persuasion would be far more effective.

It leads to far more bun fights than trolls, because people who genuinely don't understand just become defensive and more entrenched in their views.

How what ends? Nothing's ended.

It seems to me that the essential boiled down essence of the conflict is two fold:

1. The conflict between those feeling that on the FWR, because it IS the FWR, it is acceptable and indeed desirable to "call" sexist etc language in strong terms and that righteous anger should be cut some slack (as someone said), and the ethos of Mumsnet.

The ethos of Mumsnet is that every board and thread should be polite, inclusive and welcoming. No section gets special rules, no matter its subject.

1. That because it IS the FWR no views or language other than feminist should be allowed. The problem with this is who gets to decide what is often called "the party line."

Didi I mostly agree.

Obviously if someone comes on and says "women are all slags who want it" then no, I'm not going to give them the time of day.

If someone says "but maybe some women should cover up if they don't want to be whistled at" or something, well, I totally disagree with them, but I'd try to be reasonable, I certainly wouldn't call them an anti-feminist especially if they were willing to see stuff from my point of view as well.

Enough women generally feel shit about themselves as it is without me calling them an idiot.

And yes, I've called women idiots in the past, I really try not to though.

While these discussions have been happening, the FWR board is actually a nice place to be

What does concern me is the lingering attitudes to male posters. There is a perfect example on the paddling pool thread

I totally understand the damage F4J did but these attitudes were there long before that

IMO if we want to change things, men need to change their attitudes too. I believe a man can have feminist leanings, I'm bringing my son up with feminist thoughts and I would hate to think he couldn't contribute

The unwillingness to converse with men or worse, changing the way the discussion goes when a 'man' is discovered is horrible. It also contributes to 'are you a man' situation we get

It makes me very uncomfortable

I posted a real thread there

Anyway, side discussion on PIV/VGRP aside....MNHQ, are you still there.

Seems like the decision to set up separate radfem area has been fairly universally unpopular.

What next? What is your thinking?

Why not try dittany's misogyny/patriarchy suggestion? Is it up for consideration?

The reaction to the male poster on the paddling pool thread was because of his posting history, not because he's a man. I know we're not supposed to bring up stuff on one thread from another, but some things you can never un-know once somebody has posted them.

It's not universally unpopular.

Things are not fine as they are - like it or not - lots and lots of mumsnetters are scare to post there.

it's his posting style because he is a man, not separate

It happens all the time and feeds on the are you a man question

A man, no matter what his politics, will never get a fair chance

Good point him...although how do we alleviate the problems discussed... Semantics for example?

I just read it, Didi. Is there a reason you posted it on that board in particular?

MsCellophane, I assume you're talking about me. I have plenty of reasons why I don't want to talk to men about feminism, which I think were explained on that thread.

Men already dominate the world. They don't also need to come and give their opinions on feminism, since they will never understand fully. And when you point out that they don't understand, they get arsy. I find that, pretty much universally, pro-feminist men are anything but. If they were, they'd shut the hell up and listen to what women were saying. As a white woman, I wouldn't dream of telling an Asian woman what she should think about race. What the hell qualifies me to do that? Why the hell should she be interested in my opinion about her situation?

Normally I am happy to just ignore the men on threads: that particular poster, however, goes on every single sex thread and makes creepy comments even when told he is upsetting people.

Men need to tread bloody carefully when they're discussing feminism, something a lot of them don't seem to realise.

What about a human rights board? I think that would work better, I for one would like to discuss topics from that stance rather than just from a feminist stance... Maybe that's what's missing? Can we try it and leave the fwr board as it is?

MsCellophane, no a man will never be as welcome as a feminist woman. Why on earth should he be? Should we stand up and cry hurrah because a man gets that us women are pissed off?

F that. I wouldn't go into a forum about racism issues and expect everyone to bow down to my opinion. That particular poster just enjoyed telling people what they were doing wrong, he didn't even get the basics of feminism, so forget it. You can't expect women to take you seriously as a male feminist if you haven't even considered the basics. And when you call feminists man-haters and all the other stuff that feminism is fighting against.

Because the topic is there - no-one is using it, it's in feminism but it's not FWR.

I never post in FWR - I've seen too many bloodbaths of posters who clearly don't mean to be offensive in their views.

I don't know Eclectic - all I can think is 'be the change you want to see' ...all of us that have been on this thread expressing dissatisfaction one way or another with the atmosphere of discussion on the board at times.

Sorry that was for pubes

Any problem with semantics should be easily solved by seeking clarification and further discussion at the time, eclectic. It doesn't mean a consensus will be achieved as posters may continue to disagree but should solve any instances of simple misunderstanding.

For example, this article...

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/29/guardian-investigation-abuse-power-police

I'd like to discuss it in wider terms then the patriarachy, what measures can in put in place to prevent these crimes form happening in a practical sense, eater than well this happens as a result of the patriarchy. The police an army are responsible for a range of atrocities and keen to explore what is is about the specific situation that makes these violations of human rights possible.