Any chance of a review of the FWR moderation rules in light of Maya Forstater's success in court please?

[ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn]

The belief that transwomen are men and that transmen are women has been accepted as a legitimate and protected belief, yet we are not able to state this on Mumsnet under the current rules.

It has become increasingly difficult to discuss feminist issues on the dedicated feminism boards as a result of the moderation rules.

In light of Maya's success in court, and that 'gender critical' beliefs are considered protected under the Equality Act, would it be possible for the FWR sex/gender mod rules to be re-visited please?

Adding my voice to say the proposal is unworkable and that it's not the core FWR users who have any problem scrolling past topics they aren't interested in.

If the idea is to create new sections or boards, I think it would be more relevant to have a board for trans issues that relate to trans healthcare and trans rights because often threads are posted in FWR that don't seem to have a direct link to feminism. Why isn't that offered as a resource for interested parties to discuss issues that matter to them?

I confess I've not read the whole thread so I'm not sure how we've gone from the original op to discussing a separate board. But I agree with this point:
Just thinking more about the Black Mumsnetters board. I don't think the women who campaigned for that wanted other posters to relinquish an existing board did they?
They wanted somewhere to discuss issues that affect them uniquely and that they have a special interest in, so that's what they campaigned for.
Could the people who don't want to post on FWR for what ever reason do that?

To repeat what I posted in FWR, if there are people who want an additional, separate board then I think it's up to them to argue the case for one, think up a new name for it etc. I don't see why an established, well used board should be the one to move.

@SeaShoreGalore

Having separate boards for different kinds of feminism seems a bit ridiculous. Who the hell even knows what kind of feminist they are these days?

I agree. I don’t particularly know what they are and just think I’m a feminist

And what’s the point in ring fencing types of feminism so you only get answers that agree with you

And what’s the point in ring fencing types of feminism so you only get answers that agree with you

It's the very definition of an echo chamber. Something that we are always accused of being in!

@Helleofabore

Perhaps but isn't that policing people's titles?

yes. But isn't asking for topics pertinent to feminism to be hived off to a separate board policing people's feminism? (not aimed at you personally, but merely using your phrase as bouncing the idea).

I think there's a difference and I could go into it in details but I'm surrending on this because I've posted too much and it's beginning to seem like it's my hill to die on. It isn't. I think it's a good idea for the reasons I already said but I don't think it's terrible if it isn't moved.

@Sillydoggy

I can't see how you can possibly separate out sex, gender and feminism. I cannot think of a topic that isn't impacted by the issues of the definition of woman. To have to discuss a topic like how to encourage girls in sport without mentioning the trans issue would be stifling. Women would be biting their tongues and end up just starting the same conversation on the other board without the restrictions. No one actually wants this. After after a little flurry of interest the people who complain about trans issues taking over will melt away and there won't be enough people to justify the conversation. Please don't do this. If you must then create a separate board for them not for the regular users. What we discuss is feminism and all the issues that impact women and girls we don't discuss 'trans rights' except where they impact feminism.

Exactly this. If I want to discuss the epidemic of sexual assaults on girls in schools, where should I post it? What happens when someone on that thread mentions the move, in some schools, to mixed sex toilet facilities? Do you move the whole thread? Or do you wait and inly move it when someone spells out why schools have made facilities mixed sex? Will the feminism board have rules that allow speaking from the assumption biological sex is real and matters, and allow terms such as trans identified male, while the disallowing of such terms will only apply on your new trans rights board?

However you shuffle boards and subjects around, this question remains:

Will there be a board where women with the protected characteristic of Gender Critical philosophical beliefs can freely, in words that do not obfuscate or tie the poster in knots, talk about all issues facing women and girls?

But now we have a court judgement. What, Justine, if the other side becomes as aggressive as the TRAs? Does the development of ever increasingly placatory policies and moderating attitudes and actions in favour of genderism now constitute illegal discrimination against GC women? What if some women start saying they do and invoking lawyers and advertisers in the light of this judgement?

All we're saying is that this is an important and far-reaching judgement as Maya's solicitor Paul Daly has pointed out.

Are you sure you're on the right side of it now that you are more censorious than Twitter? And will you reconsider these policies?

This. Please consider the implications of discrimination against people's protected beliefs.

having a man moderating the speech of feminists is a strange choice. The things we say WILL make him uncomfortable.

Indeed. As is natural. Feminism is a movement for women and girls. It deals with women's lives and experiences in a world which centres males.

At the end of the day, the suggestions around changing board names and making new boards in feminism is all a bit of a red herring, and is serving well to distract from the main issue here, which is that 'gender critical beliefs' are unfairly moderated under the existing mod rules.

It doesn't really matter what the board is called, look at how many of us still call feminism chat 'FWR' when it hasn't been called that for yonks.

"Threads devoted to named individuals to unpick their gender presentation, appearance, lifestyle or personal choices constitute a personal attack, so we will continue to delete them along with unfair generalisations"
Has there been a lot of this happening? I read this board a lot, and haven't seen any threads that would come under this description, though I appreciate I may have missed them.

@ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn

TBH I'd really hoped that MNHQ would spend a bit more time thinking about this and not make a rushed decision. At the moment this feels hurried and poorly thought out.

Can you take some more time please Justine, this is important.

I agree with this, please consider this thoughtfully.

Let this thread run for a while longer, then take the many suggestions that have been made, and do this, suggested by Vanishun:

Could you do a user survey where people have to be logged in to do it, and then poll user feelings about the topics? Possibly dividing into new vs older members too?

@JustineMumsnet
The women who post on mumsnet in general, and in particular on FWR are some of the most thoughtful, articulate, balanced and well-informed posters I have ever come across on any forum. I'm sure you realise that.
Take your time, and listen to the women who use your forum!

I do think that combining the boards under Feminism could be good, rather than having separate boards for Feminism chat/activism/theory/support etc.

having a man moderating the speech of feminists is a strange choice. The things we say WILL make him uncomfortable.

Hmm could you say this about having a White person moderating the speech of Black people on BMN being a strange choice? Not saying a man should but I can't help but compare statements like this with others.

@inever

having a man moderating the speech of feminists is a strange choice. The things we say WILL make him uncomfortable.

Hmm could you say this about having a White person moderating the speech of Black people on BMN being a strange choice? Not saying a man should but I can't help but compare statements like this with others.

it's a good point inever. I know the women who campaigned for the board felt strongly that MNHQ can fail to recognise and deal with racism, so maybe

How can you discuss feminism without talking about sex or gender?

And I have no idea what Justine's suggestion has to do with the OP's question. Perhaps Justine should start her own thread?

@Nellle

People write that trans women are men and that trans men are women all the time on MN and they aren't deleted.

Mumsnet don't get every post, they only act if a post gets reported.

There's a pinned post on the FWR board that has the moderation rules, if it's a rule, it'll be in there.

Mumsnet don't VET every post, that should say!

There are plenty of rules that aren't explicitly spelled out in the pinned post. Hence many posters tripping up over language and getting a warning they weren't expecting.

@Sweetpeasaremadeforbees

How can you discuss feminism without talking about sex or gender?

And I have no idea what Justine's suggestion has to do with the OP's question. Perhaps Justine should start her own thread?

@OvaHere

There are plenty of rules that aren't explicitly spelled out in the pinned post. Hence many posters tripping up over language and getting a warning they weren't expecting.

Yes this is true. Some posters have been warned for things that aren't clear in the rules. This makes trying to talk about this extremely difficult and many do not post or have given up because of this. The rules also make is easy for posters to be targeted not for what they posted after the rules came in but what was posted previously. The people that target these boards have been known to trawl through a posters history to try and get them banned

If FWR is dominated by threads about the impact on women of the demands being made by TRAs, that's because those demands constitute the single greatest threat to women's rights currently in existence. Everything from 1) the fundamental question of 'how do you advocate for women's rights if you can't define what a woman is' to 2) the damage being done to far greater numbers of girls than boys by the medicalisation of gender-non-conforming children, to 3) the potential dangers of being forced to share formerly single-sex spaces with men (however they identify) to 4) the women and girls losing out on life-changing opportunities through mixed sports, to 5) anti-FGM advocates being accused of transphobia for claiming the clitoris is a female sex organ, to 6) the risk of women - often the least privileged - missing out on essential healthcare because of forced changes to language which obfuscate and make ambiguous that which was previously clear, plus far more besides, is affected by those demands.

If there are other burning feminist topics that posters wish to discuss that aren't affected by this fundamental threat to so many aspects of women's rights, they are free to start threads about them and if there is the will and desire to talk about them, others will come to do so.

I am absolutely opposed to any 'hiving off' of topics which are so indisputably feminist in nature, and I'd be surprised if a majority of regular FWR users were either. It feels like we're being told we're doing feminism wrong, again, when in many cases we've been the ones holding the line for women's rights, funding and publicising the campaigns that are now seeing some victories for common sense, and pointing out again and again that this is not anti-trans, it is pro-women.

And I do hope this proposal isn't being used solely as a diversion to avoid reviewing the FWR Talk guidelines in light of yesterday's judgement.

Some posters have been warned for things that aren't clear in the rules. This makes trying to talk about this extremely difficult and many do not post or have given up because of this.The rules also make is easy for posters to be targeted not for what they posted after the rules came in but what was posted previously.The people that target these boards have been known to trawl through a posters history to try and get them banned.

Several posters whose knowledge and expertise about safeguarding have been removed this way.

Arguably, safeguarding is one if the most important and most pertinent issues we are acing right now. For fairly obvious reasons, being able to name sex is at the heart if this, and sex segregation is a key safeguarding mechanism.

Safeguarding is a feminist issue, and often involves talking about males who profess female gender identities.

Will there be a Women’s Rights board where we can talk about this, in clear and accurate terms? Will the existing rules that make talk about safeguarding and abusive power dynamics be rescinded, in light of our protected characteristic?

And once again I will point out that the thread rules do not appear pinned on the app.

I do find this whole thing about a new board really odd. Mumsnet has permitted it's posters to discuss this under some fairly hefty pressures. Well done you have just been vindicated.

But you now want to move us to another board to encourage other people who don't post on the board to now post there, even though there is nothing stopping them from starting their own discussions at the moment.

This will be a nightmare to moderate - you KNOW that you will have people reporting on the basis it is on the wrong board they won't need to point out transphobia.

I'm appalled that after the fight we've just had and are taking a well earned breath, that you would even consider selling us out MNHQ!