Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

New sub-section please?

396 replies

RatRolyPoly · 03/02/2018 15:02

Hello MNHQ, may I gently put forward the idea of a new Libfem sub-section please? I don't know if the idea has been floated before so I'm not sure what appetite there would be for it, if any at all, but in the interests of feminism being accessible to all women and for the benefit of all women I'd like to raise my hand in favour.

By "all women" I primarily mean women such as myself, who would appreciate a section on Mumsnet to discuss feminist and women's issues without what is serving to all intents and purposes as "entry criteria" on the existing board; that being the obligation to deny the legally recognised genders of a group of individuals - contrary to the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

This situation, I believe, has become the case due to prevalence of a certain brand of feminism having become overrepresented on this board, but serves the purpose of excluding and silencing the valid views of many women and feminists.

I'm not attempting in any way to discredit or silence the position of this current majority, merely to suggest that a specific board is needed to enable the voices of liberal feminists to be heard; not least by each other, in order to discuss the ongoing struggles faced by women in today's society.

Cheers.

OP posts:
Original poster
RatRolyPoly · 07/02/2018 08:04

What about a section for people that want to discuss trans issues? Would that help?

The main board is understandably a theoretically open place comfortandjoy, which means you can't go squirreling one group away against their will - or one topic. Which is all fair and good.

The problem comes when one group speaks out and says they're marginalised by the current set-up and could they please have somewhere else established. Which is what a few of us have tried to say on this thread.

OP posts:
Original poster
RatRolyPoly · 07/02/2018 08:07

Hi Kate, thanks so much for your post and feedback.

Whilst I obviously disagree with some points I do agree with others; and certainly I'd be interested to see if more general topics do start popping up with a qualifying statement as I think if nothing else this chat has highlighted the fact that some people really don't want to engage with single issue feminism.

OP posts:
BeyondWitchbitchterf · 07/02/2018 08:12

Another example of a board not split is religion.
No CoE/Catholic/Muslim/Jewish/JW/Wiccan subboards.

Rufustherenegadereindeer1 · 07/02/2018 08:12

I think part of my confusion is that there are non trans threads on FWR

But its also up to other people to start general feminism threads

I am not starting a thread on FWR Smile

BeyondWitchbitchterf · 07/02/2018 08:20

Firstshiny - "post more (my eternal suggestion to those who don't think there's enough of what they want to see)."

Yy. Also my eternal suggestion whenever anyone complains about all posters on relationships just say LTB

Original poster
RatRolyPoly · 07/02/2018 08:28

Ah, Beyond, I think I misread that from firstshiny when I saw it the first time around; luckily I'm a glutton for punishment Grin

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 07/02/2018 08:45

"The problem comes when one group speaks out and says they're marginalised by the current set-up and could they please have somewhere else established."

Which brings me back again to how people holding the majority view feel marginalised.......

BouncingIntoGraceland · 07/02/2018 09:03

If you want to discuss libfem theory then just post that in your title surely?

I don't understand, I mean I do think that self id threads dominate at the moment and the majority posting seem to hold radfem views and anyone else says they are shouted down.
From what I've seen, shouting down = asked actual questions about their views that they can't seem to answer without saying "why can't we just be nice"
Radfems are almost begging for actual responses.

As an aside, I find it most odd that saying "women don't have penises" or "I don't think it's great for women to be paid to have sex with whoever a film director/pimp tells them to is good for women" is considered radical.

MNHQ
KateMumsnet · 07/02/2018 09:17

Gnnn. Preface not presage.

GoodyMog · 07/02/2018 09:24

From what I've seen, shouting down = asked actual questions about their views that they can't seem to answer without saying "why can't we just be nice"

Yeah, that's what I've seen. Occasionally there will be posters who are ruder than that - it's pretty much a given on any forum/social media - but MNHQ can and do delete personal attacks.

Yes there will be difficult questions, it's kind of hard to talk about feminism without them. And there's the issue where words can mean different things when in context of different theories, eg. gender.

Transwomen are men might seem offensive from the libfem point of view - but merely a statement of fact from the radfem point of view.

Whereas "cis" "identify as a woman" are going to be offensive to those from a radfem point of view - but just facts from a libfem view.

I still don't see that a separate forum would help, personally I think it's better to have a mix of views so that we can actually find common ground, rather than divide and make it easier for the MRAs.

Thisusernamethingistricky · 07/02/2018 09:36

From what I've seen, shouting down = asked actual questions about their views that they can't seem to answer without saying "why can't we just be nice"

Yes, this. And not just for trans threads either. It really annoys me when people say 'I was shouted down' or 'I was piled on' when actually what happened was that people asked you to back up your opinion with an actual coherent argument.

I think Feminism Chat could be quite a scary place if yours is the minority opinion. But if you actually believe what you say and believe others are wrong, then you should have the conviction to argue your point and be able to back it up. And if people continue to counter and you realise that actually, maybe your opinion isn't all that robust, then be a grown up and have the guts to admit that someone has made a good point that has given you food for thought (as I have had to do a fair few times). Don't flounce off the thread saying you have a cake to ice or start throwing slurs around and complain that you were 'hounded' off a thread.

Youcanstayundermyumbrella · 07/02/2018 10:24

I've been a feminist for over 30 years. I've been involved in active campaigning at times, and in others I've been a vocal supporter of those who are. I've not read an enormous amount of academic feminist thinking, so I tend to avoid contributing to online feminist discussion as I'd rather read what others have to say and build my knowledge, but from what I know I am broadly second wave. I don't identify as either rad or liberal to my knowledge.

This thread has puzzled me because the OP to my mind really hasn't explained what other than trans a liberal feminist section would be about. I note that MNHQ has interpreted her request as a place to talk about feminist issues other than trans. It's interesting because Self ID and trans-activism are what most people I know IRL are talking about right now. In all the years of being a feminist, and an LGBT ally, and firm believer in equality across the board, and tearing my hair out over intersectional issues, I've never seen a time when committed people feel more concerned, and more threatened, and actually genuinely worried not that they will be on the 'wrong side of history' but that history will be made in a really dreadful way. I include in that the many male feminists I know, and even a close friend who is a very prominent LGBT campaigner.

So speaking as someone who doesn't see themself as a Radfem, I really think we need to press on as we are, with robust debate. One thing as a (mostly) lurker I find really frustrating is the lack of argument put forward by those who argue in favour of the TRA views. Maybe that's why 'ignoring it' is difficult; it feels very much as if it has become a faith position, and must either be accepted or fought against, but not debated. Maybe if we had more real debates on it, even-handedly, it would feel less dominant on other threads?

HelenDenver · 07/02/2018 10:26

" But the old guard have abandoned it, and all discussion of feminist theory now squarely takes place on the chat board."

Much of the 'old guard' disagreed with the topic areas in the first place and didn't find the splits helpful. So, other than book club, we largely stayed on chat.

"Ghandi got called a cunt"

A bastard, actually: That Bastard Gandhi. On account of his deciding to test his willpower by sharing a bed with young, naked girls. Not just out of nowhere.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jan/27/mohandas-gandhi-women-india

HelenDenver · 07/02/2018 10:28

But that was years ago: if you want the other boards in feminism to have traffic, post on them!

Youcanstayundermyumbrella · 07/02/2018 10:41

if you want the other boards in feminism to have traffic, post on them!

Also this. I've taken part in, and moderated, various online communities and the only outcome every time is that users create the discussions they want. It's really common to create little sub-folders that go ignored, or are used for secret discussions, or are full of unanswered single posts from new posters, while more general folders are full of everything going. It happens on here, and it's self-perpetuating, because people openly admit to posting on Chat or AIBU 'for traffic'. You ultimately can't control or maintain a community in a shape that it's not happy with, and it evolves constantly. MNHQ could create this sub-section today and it would die a death if there isn't the material or the interest in it. If You Build It, They May Well Not Come. Use an existing underused area to build these discussions organically maybe?

ygrec · 07/02/2018 10:48

“Dittany left because she was told actually the FWR board wasn't 'her' board”

That’s not actually the case; Dittany left because she was constantly hounded by MRAs and posters with personal vendettas against her (several of whom still post on here).

SuperLoudPoppingAction · 07/02/2018 10:51

Yes that's absolute nonsense about Dittany. And Dittany never acted as though it was 'her' board - she spent countless hours supporting women on 'relationships' and all sorts.

ThePinkPanter · 07/02/2018 10:57

I am not nearly as articulate or knowledgeable as the majority on this thread so I'm not going to give my opinion on the majority of this discussion. Saying that I do not like the idea of naming your board as liberal feminism. I consider myself liberal in every way and I don't like the underlying sentiment that I am not liberal because I don't agree with biological males, trans or not, being allowed unrestricted access to female spaces.

Original poster
RatRolyPoly · 07/02/2018 11:12

I consider myself liberal in every way and I don't like the underlying sentiment that I am not liberal because I don't agree with biological males, trans or not, being allowed unrestricted access to female spaces.

Whilst every effort has been made to use my (barely expressed) position on the whole debate the reason for this request, it is not.

Whilst other posters have come on to say that the trans debate is a reason they would like an alternative subforum is a tangental issue.

I rather know my own mind I'm afraid, and whilst I have to concede I may not have convinced others that my request would be beneficial or that it doesn't come from a stance on one single issue, I rather have to state again that my position is:

I think a Liberal subsection would be good for feminism on MN.

This is not because

Although it seems odd that anyone should be so determined to consider the validity of this statement - I think a Liberal subsection would be good for feminism on MN - so strongly in terms of their perceptions of the requester's intentions.

But I accept it.

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 07/02/2018 11:17

“Although it seems odd that anyone should be so determined to consider the validity of this statement - I think a Liberal subsection would be good for feminism on MN - so strongly in terms of their perceptions of the requester's intentions.“

I think that might be because you haven’t explained why you think it would be good for feminism on Mumsnet and so people are having to guess.....

Youcanstayundermyumbrella · 07/02/2018 11:18

Rat, I came to that conclusion, and I think that others have, because you haven't given us any suggestions for the sort of threads that a Liberal Feminism section would have in it, other than 'not-Trans', so not-Trans becomes the only argument we can see. If you could perhaps explain better what you see as a particularly Liberal Feminist conversation it might be clearer.

Youcanstayundermyumbrella · 07/02/2018 11:19

I mean, MNHQ came to that conclusion too, based on your posts. It's not just posters determined to read you wrong.

Original poster
RatRolyPoly · 07/02/2018 12:01

Oh really Bertrand? I really thought I had...

Youcan I didn't at any time stipulate "not trans", in fact I went out of my way to say it wasn't "not trans", but yes I do accept that MNHQ came to that conclusion. I don't agree with it but I can see it. But I guess my going back to further my case with potential threads and angles etc. is somewhat by the by now Smile

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 07/02/2018 12:04

“Oh really Bertrand? I really thought I had...”

Can you point to where?

Original poster
RatRolyPoly · 07/02/2018 12:21

No, it's okay, I'll just try and do better next time Smile

OP posts: