Why is it suddenly ok to make multiple threads on the same subject over and over again?

[DayBath]

I'm talking about the Feminism board. Please could MN explain why it's ok for the same poster to keep starting new threads on the same topic repeatedly without the previous ones filling up or reaching any limit?

Surely there's a point where this is considered "not in the spirit" as you love to say. By all means this person should be allowed to post but why are repeated threads within hours of each other being allowed to cause Groundhog Day over there?

It not if. Sorry.

@LangClegsInSpace

It won't be news to anyone reading this that MNHQ's commitment to hosting conversations on this difficult issue has been costly for us in lots of ways. It would be much easier for us to throw up our hands and say we won't host these discussions anymore, but we carry on because we believe it's the right thing to do.

'conversations on this difficult issue'
'these discussions'

I would like MNHQ to be upfront about what conversations and discussions they are aiming to host here because I don't think there's a shared understanding.

My impression is that the vast majority of posters on FWR are interested in discussing feminism and women's rights. The only reason we are discussing anything about trans is because it impinges on women's rights and child safeguarding.

My impression is that for MNHQ, 'these discussions' means 'the trans debate' and while that may be costly to host in lots of ways, it's actually quite lucrative in other ways. It generates a fuckton of clicks and a fuckton of attention on other platforms.

The trouble is a lot of us don't want to have 'the trans debate' we just want to discuss women's rights. It's not possible to have those discussions if we have to frame everything in a way that is acceptable to adherents of gender ideology because we need to be able to name sex and we need words like 'woman' to actually mean something. We can't have conversations or discussions if we don't have any words left.

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet I’d like a reply to this too pls- as well as my post above.

@peachgreen

I think it's been really refreshing to see some new voices on FWR. It's shaken up the echo chamber a bit. Can only be a good thing.

There were some very refreshing posts from a transman on one thread (op not the multiple poster). Thoughtful and intelligent, so that was good.

There were some very refreshing posts from a transman on one thread (op not the multiple poster). Thoughtful and intelligent, so that was good.

Yes. I would like to read more for that poster. They had something to add and stayed within the guidelines. I don’t doubt they would have some different perspectives to add. And probably some good ideas for solutions so that everyone’s needs can be equitably accommodated.

Yes that poster was a breath of fresh air. Courteous and thoughtful.

Sorry to derail slightly but there was a thread running on transplants yesterday evening but I can't see it now ... is that another that got zapped, does anyone know?

@tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz

Sorry to derail slightly but there was a thread running on transplants yesterday evening but I can't see it now ... is that another that got zapped, does anyone know?

tellme. Is this the one?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3605548-Imperial-College-Womb-Transplant-Survey-Redux

The poster who is a trans man though wasn't a "different viewpoint" though, if I'm thinking of the right person, had a more "GC" stance, so stands to reason people are fine when he talks.
I think MN are more meaning that the place is hostile to people who don't always agree and aren't as "GC".

Well yes, that poster was vastly more thoughtful and reasonable. I don't know if I would describe them as "gender critical", but they engaged a lot more rationally and politely with people than the various people who don't agree with the prevailing view on FWR who dropped in to berate FWR for being hostile, while being extremely rude about posters and dismissing their views.

@Mockolate

The poster who is a trans man though wasn't a "different viewpoint" though, if I'm thinking of the right person, had a more "GC" stance, so stands to reason people are fine when he talks. I think MN are more meaning that the place is hostile to people who don't always agree and aren't as "GC".

I think your confusion @Mockolate is between the FWR boards and MN in general. MN is 100% inclusive and welcoming. Check out the boards list, there is something for everyone.

But if you want to see hostile, take yourself to Style and Beauty and start a few threads about the evils of fashion, vanity, and how empty-headed you think they all are. Or maybe just go to the Housekeeping board and suggest that Zoflora is the devil’s piss.

Maybe you should be asking MN for a trans board? I can promise you, I would have zero interest in posting there. I go to FWR because I’m interested in Women’s issues, not trans issues, not style and beauty, not housekeeping.

Or maybe just go to the Housekeeping board and suggest that Zoflora is the devil’s piss.

Whatever it is it makes me sneeze and feel ill.

Or the doghouse and start a thread about how you prefer cats.

Why has the boots thread gone now . Did some thing kick off over night or are we now not allowed to ask why , on.IWD, that females do not get full representation?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Or the doghouse and start a thread about how you prefer cats.

@Ereshkigalangcleg pretty sure @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet says that’s ok because you don’t know the rools there so it is not at all provocative. If anyone gets cross with you, report them for troll hunting and trying to ‘chase off’ new posters. Pretty sure that’s how it works now.

I wonder whether posters new to FWR will be allowed to make mistakes and perhaps inadvertently cause offence to others will receive the same tolerance and assumption of good faith from MNHQ if their posts suggest a feminist inclination, or if it's only MRAs who can expect to enjoy this special treatment. After all, what's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Hi Nef that's a similar one but I'm pretty sure the one I'm thinking of was started yesterday.

With all the odd goings on of late I may have imagined it

But Mock this thread isn't referring to having different views it's referring to a blatant and deliberate organised attempt to wind up and goad regulars for the specific purpose of screen shots. They did not post in good faith. They did not want a discussion.

How is that helpful to any of us?

@Doyoumind

The OP from those threads had multiple violations that were allowed to stand.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. MN doesn't let anyone post under Sex until they've been here long enough. I don't think you should be able to join and immediately post in FWR without being an established member - even if it's just a 24 hour restriction. It would help prevent this kind of nonsense.

I agree with this.

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet please explain why the ‘crucial language’ of the trans community is permitted but not that of the community of biological women when it comes to talking about the lived experience of actual, biological adult human females (women).

It won't be news to anyone reading this that MNHQ's commitment to hosting conversations on this difficult issue has been costly for us in lots of ways. It would be much easier for us to throw up our hands and say we won't host these discussions anymore, but we carry on because we believe it's the right thing to do. However the flip side of that is that it's absolutely crucial for us to be inclusive to voices from both 'sides' - because if we aren't, we're not hosting a discussion: we're hosting a filter bubble. There's no running away from the fact that in some circles FWR is regarded as being hostile to trans people and we're determined to show that we are not

While I do understand the commercial aspects of this - Mumsnet is running a business and obviously needs to make decisions based on the best interests of the business, I do find this disappointing.

The reason why it is so costly to host FWR is not because of the posters on FWR. It is because of outside influences who don't want women to have any public forum to discuss issues that concern us and are attempting to make it commercially unviable.

The members of FWR are not 'trans-hostile' - far from it, there are many conversations that take place with actual trans people - some who agree with us and some who wish to put forward an opposing point of view. The difficulty is that the ever moving goalposts and the ever increasing demands encompass everything as being trans-hostile if you are the wrong person. In some cases, even the 'right' people are being targeted now - Katy Montgomerie, prominent transwoman and trans activist has had a 'pile-on' on twitter and been accused of transphobia for stating that sexual attraction is related to genital preferences.

As many members of FWR point out, there are trans family members and friends and I think the majority of conversations include empathy for trans people's situation while also pointing out that there is a clash of rights and needs and that needs addressing but the authorities are failing us by not even acknowledging the issue and ignoring us.

I feel uncomfortable that there seems to be a tacit acceptance from MNHQ that the unfounded accusations have some foundation and seem to treat us accordingly but as I say, I do understand that Mumsnet is a commercial enterprise that needs to protect its interests.

I just want to say though - we are not the bad guys.

@tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz

Hi Nef that's a similar one but I'm pretty sure the one I'm thinking of was started yesterday.

With all the odd goings on of late I may have imagined it

tellme Ah sorry, that's the only one I've seen.

Everything gardenbird48 just said.

What I don’t like, and makes me sad after years of posting, is that I feel I can’t ask MN what I want to, or comment freely on this thread, because I’m already on a strike so feel my card is marked, and if I say anything remotely negative I’ll next receive a “go well” email.

Feels pretty hostile to me.

If someone is using cis because it is a 'crucial piece of language' for them, can the same courtesy please be extended to women regarding TIM

Some crucial pieces of language are more equal than others.

@JaneJeffer

MNHQ generously gave that poster a second chance And thanked them on Twitter for coming on to post!

What the actual???

I think that the bottom line that we would all do well to remember is that:

• we are the product offered by this website, not the users
• as with any other online business, the website benefits financially from getting more people clicking onto it