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?

Might I suggest that the people who dislike/are so uninterested in Feminism to the extent they've hidden it - so can't even see the threads and scroll past- might not be the most appropriate people to have the overall say in how the Feminism board is run?

Absolutely! @CardinalLolzy 🤷🏼‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏾‍♀️

But my main question is if you post something unrelated to gender ideology on the feminism chat board, does that mean you can't then say something if it's relevant to gender ideology?

I think this feels like a kick in the teeth because it's the TRA movement all over again.

"Transwomen are women, we claim this womens space as mixed sex space. You lot go over there if you don't like it."

And now it's happening to the Feminism chat board too.

I genuinely don't get it on any level. It would be less of a kick in the teeth, plus better for new and existing users (who have hidden the existing one apparently) to create a new board called "Feminism chat (no trans discussions)" and go that way.

Those who are in favour, could you please give me some examples to help me understand? What would you go and post about right now if this new board existed?

Obviously I'm not in favour but somebody explained the other day they would like to be able to discuss the gender pay gap and associated stats in depth but didn't want to talk about the baseline data being corrupted by self identified gender because that becomes the dominant theme.

Personally I don't see the point of putting the effort in if the data can't be guaranteed but each to their own I guess.

It's also not a gender pay gap, it's a sex pay gap. It doesn't matter how butch or feminine the person is. But again some people don't care about that either.

@OvaHere

Those who are in favour, could you please give me some examples to help me understand? What would you go and post about right now if this new board existed?

Obviously I'm not in favour but somebody explained the other day they would like to be able to discuss the gender pay gap and associated stats in depth but didn't want to talk about the baseline data being corrupted by self identified gender because that becomes the dominant theme.

Personally I don't see the point of putting the effort in if the data can't be guaranteed but each to their own I guess.

Well I'd be interested in all aspects of that. Obviously defining what we're talking about is key for any data analysis but that's not the only thing to discuss.

@OvaHere

Those who are in favour, could you please give me some examples to help me understand? What would you go and post about right now if this new board existed?

Obviously I'm not in favour but somebody explained the other day they would like to be able to discuss the gender pay gap and associated stats in depth but didn't want to talk about the baseline data being corrupted by self identified gender because that becomes the dominant theme.

Personally I don't see the point of putting the effort in if the data can't be guaranteed but each to their own I guess.

Hmmm. Yes, I’ve just been given that same example on another thread.

Great, then! Let’s have that thread, uncorrupted by the sex or gender question. I’m not sure that this new board is going to be jumping, though, that topic won’t sustain a whole sub board. But happy to be proven wrong.

Well I'd be interested in all aspects of that. Obviously defining what we're talking about is key for any data analysis but that's not the only thing to discus.

I did a search and found a 12 page thread from 2019 that didn't really bring gender identity up at all so clearly those threads can happen in FWR as it is.

@Vanishun

I think this feels like a kick in the teeth because it's the TRA movement all over again.

"Transwomen are women, we claim this womens space as mixed sex space. You lot go over there if you don't like it."

And now it's happening to the Feminism chat board too.

I genuinely don't get it on any level. It would be less of a kick in the teeth, plus better for new and existing users (who have hidden the existing one apparently) to create a new board called "Feminism chat (no trans discussions)" and go that way.

That was my reaction too, however I assume from the proposed name that all posts relating to trans/women's rights will belong in Sex and Gender, so if anyone really does believe they've talked MNHQ into setting up a TWAW board they might be in for a surprise.

I foresee the same old same old on the new board and, as for the new one.... well I guess we'll see.

Can I ask @MNHQ as the OP was about talk guidelines that apply to the feminist chat board and with the decision to split the board being made clear, will the talk guidelines be amended, and whether they are amended or not will they be applied to both the existing board and the new board? Or just one board? I'm confused.

I'm not clear as to whether the OP's question has been answered and what words or phrases will be allowed or not.

I think part of MNHQs problem is that genuinely the majority of site users don't believe humans can change sex. Polls in AIBU are pretty conclusive.

you can't change the overall views of site users. All you can do it get them to shutupshutupshutup about it. But I don't know how well that will work

If threads aren't moved or deleted without very strong cause, it could make sense.

Feminism, sex and gender - start a thread about Stonewall, court cases, schools diversity training, pronouns etc
Feminism chat - start a thread about pay gap, sex work, domestic violence

Introduce themes of sex, gender, self-identifying etc wherever relevant, on either board - thread doesn't move. That would be okay. Is that what's planned?

If they were creating a new space specifically not to include a GC perspective, that would be harder to define and police. If it's as above - seems okay and I can see why the more specialist forum is the new space.

I genuinely don't get it on any level. It would be less of a kick in the teeth, plus better for new and existing users (who have hidden the existing one apparently) to create a new board called "Feminism chat (no trans discussions)" and go that way.

It makes zero sense to censor discussion on one of the most active boards on the site. (Are we the most active after AIBU? I think maybe so?)

If people want a new board where they can discuss feminist issues minus sex and gender then they need to make a new board, not us.

Anything else is bonkers.

So instead of using being scared they will trip up using the wrong language, they are now going to be scared they are posting in the wrong topic and will be sanctioned for that?

Is that right?

And in reality policing what you can post where is going to be a massive headache and you can't talk about the elephant in the room in the wrong section if it does happen to be relevant to the direction of the chat.

Ok.

Sex debate?

That’s the name of the board?

What debate? There is no debate; only scientific fact.

So the guidelines won't be amended, the board will be split in a way that none of the board users want, and posts will be sanctioned if they are on the wrong board in the same way as the current opaque deletion rules.

This is just more of the same.

@Thelnebriati

So the guidelines won't be amended, the board will be split in a way that none of the board users want, and posts will be sanctioned if they are on the wrong board in the same way as the current opaque deletion rules.

This is just more of the same.

This. Way to respect your loyal users. AGAIN.

I don't see how any of this is a solution to the problem of derailing. It's often not regular or GC posters that introduce gender issues into threads.

I said earlier in the thread I don't think new sections will work and I'm frankly pissed off that MN seem to listen to the minority or those who aren't even interested in the feminism topics or have certain motives, and base their decisions on that. Yes, people contact MN complaining and wanting change. That doesn't mean they are representative of all users. Do they expect to get an equal number of people contacting them on a daily base to congratulate them and tell them how happy they are? That's not how it works. You hear from dissatisfied customers, not satisfied customers.

And there's no doubt there are many people reading and reporting and contacting MN with a particular agenda.

@BearPie

Sex debate?

That’s the name of the board?

What debate? There is no debate; only scientific fact.

The proposed sections are Feminism Chat Sex and Gender discussion

What this conveniently does is segregate the largest women's rights battle happening currently. Not just physically but also linguistically by distancing it from the word feminism.

I think that's the crux of why most of us are unhappy.

Having reflected, I am quite disappointed in what seems like a lack of real consideration of the judgement in Maya's case.

The red herring of new boards feels obfuscatory to the main issue which is that many established and loyal regulars feel unfairly treated when discussing feminist issues. We are not able to use clear language to articulate our position and we are forced to either stay away or to compromises our beliefs when we post so that we don't upset some men (yes, I believe they are men, I do not believe in the concept of 'trans', and this is a belief worthy of respect in a democratic society).

Not RTFT - just want to say I agree 100% with you OP.

This is so disappointing 😕

Before we are banished to the Mumsnet dungeon for naughty feminists who believe in the reality of sex can we have a guarantee from @JustineMumsnet that current and historical threads will be protected