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?

However you divide it, its going to cause problems. That's why user research will help. Make it something that's wanted by regulars.

Well the aim here is to facilitate the many requests we've had for a reorganisation from those who are keen to discuss, for example, inequality and stereotyping but want to avoid discussions around the trans vs women's rights debate. So yes we'd ask you to post accordingly.

So @JustineMumsnet, and thank you for continuing the discussion, does that mean if the majority of posters wanted to maintain the single board without hiving off the topics, that you would listen to the majority?

You must know that many other topics are discussed at length on the board. It is simply not true that it is one topic board despite the biased views that it is. Those are usually the exact same posters that accuse other women of transphobia.

You do already have other boards under the Feminism topic, are they well utilised? Do you believe those that wish to hive off these discussions are not able to post on those other boards themselves?

@Sophoclesthefox

Here’s an idea. What if you flipped it, and had a section for trans issues, including “intersectional feminism”? In addition to the LGBT parenting board.

People there can discuss those topics relating to trans that don’t take a gender critical feminist perspective.

I for one, as a confirmed gender atheist, would be happy to promise not to post anything about my version of feminism there. My concern genuinely is women’s rights, and if people did want to have a section where they discussed trans and feminist issues where opinions like mine wouldn’t be encouraged, I wouldn’t oppose that.

I think that could equally serve the needs of people who find feminist chat overwhelming.

Worth considering?

this seems like a good compromise

i'd be sorry to lose some of voices who do come and test the arguments and share ideas, but if people who identify as intersectional feminists find FWR isn't a comfortable place for them for some reason, them having a dedicated space seems OK.

In the same way as I respect the Black Mumsnetter's board I would respect their space

I prefer a topic being created for liberal feminism, and perhaps intersectional feminism (there'd be an argument about that that really is however.)

You'd still end up with discussions on sex and gender.

Well the aim here is to facilitate the many requests we've had for a reorganisation from those who are keen to discuss, for example, inequality and stereotyping but want to avoid discussions around the trans vs women's rights debate. So yes we'd ask you to post accordingly

but you know as well as we do that MN is monitored by people who dont post here but sit on threads looking for things to report. They dont even need to be a member. Its just a new tactic of the same old old same old 'stop talking about this'

Given the recent shift in reporting around this issue in the mainstream media it seems incredibly convenient that just as the wider public is waking up to this and saying no, court cases are going the GC way and organisations are questioning the Stonewall apporcoh, that MN are now getting a load of requests to have a separate topic area downthecorridorroundthecorner8thdoorontheleft

Is it possible to give some examples of discussions (maybe from the current 4 pages) and where they might belong? Just so that we have a fuller sense of the proposal?

That's a good idea Embarrassing, it would help to see how this would look in real life

@WhatKatyDidNot

Justine, you haven't responded to the actual issue.

It doesn't matter where these discussions take place.

The point is that you have special rules for moderating pro- and anti-gender theory discussions, and that those rules privilege the pro- posters and inhibit the anti- posters.

In the light of the Forstater judgement, you may well be illegally discriminating against a protected belief - one side is allowed to fully express their protected belief; the other side is not.

This can constitute a hostile and degrading environment, regardless of board organisation.

We are asking you to reconsider these asymmetric moderating rules and the often inconsistent application of them in the light of an important court judgement.

Will you?

Yes. This.

@TinselAngel

This feels like we're being punished for Maya's judgement rather than it giving us any benefit here.

This. Completely contrary to the spirit of yesterday's judgement and incredibly disappointing.

I must say that having comments deleted for pointing out that a group of people are male when the whole blooming problem is that they are male does make talking about the problem quite tricky.

I'd go so far as to say that not to be able to clearly state what your actual argument is creates a hostile environment

Eg in Feminism: "these mothers were all victims of stalking, what can we do about it? "
Goader: mothers? You're grouping them according to their sex? Can this be moved to the Sex and Gender forum please mods?

@CardinalLolzy I doubt MNHQ would move post based on that, especially with the court ruling terms based on biological facts shouldn't be policed so much now. It's clearly trolling. I think it's more about separating anything where the main issue is to do with the trans debate/trans issue against women's sex-based rights than not being able to mention sex or sex-based rights anywhere else. It's what I'm getting from Justine's posts anyway so could be wrong.

@JustineMumsnet
First of all, a heartfelt thank you for continuing to host these discussions when it would have no doubt been so much easier not to. I have no doubt that yesterday's result was due in no small part to women being able to discuss their concerns on these boards.

I agree with reducing the number of boards under FWR but I'm not sure that what you are suggesting is the best way to go. It seems to me that it would just result in GC and Lib Fem silos.

Perhaps just remove the unused boards and see how things go now we have had clarity from yesterday's verdict that, as you rightly say, has vindicated MN's approach?

@inever

*Eg in Feminism: "these mothers were all victims of stalking, what can we do about it? " Goader: mothers? You're grouping them according to their sex? Can this be moved to the Sex and Gender forum please mods?*

@CardinalLolzy I doubt MNHQ would move post based on that, especially with the court ruling terms based on biological facts shouldn't be policed so much now. It's clearly trolling. I think it's more about separating anything where the main issue is to do with the trans debate/trans issue against women's sex-based rights than not being able to mention sex or sex-based rights anywhere else. It's what I'm getting from Justine's posts anyway so could be wrong.

Ok then, same question but someone asks if we're including trans women in the group of women we're talking about, thread gets derailed about what people mean when they say "trans" or "woman". Would it get moved? This is what happens with the FGM threads as mentioned above.

For the record, I've never requested for the feminism board to change or be moved or divided. It doesn't really bother me the way it is but I can see how it would be useful to not have to wade through so many trans-related threads to get to other feminism issues.

I also agree with pp that it could be divided based on libfem, gc fem, etc feminism. Some of us don't have a label so could go from one to the other and join in any thread.

@WarriorN

I prefer a topic being created for liberal feminism, and perhaps intersectional feminism (there'd be an argument about that that really is however.)

You'd still end up with discussions on sex and gender.

Yeah, I think you would.

You can’t separate off the topics, because the user base doesn’t divide neatly like that.

I would also like to see some concrete examples.

Because what I imagine happening is this:

Topic: woeful funding of rape crisis centres. Definitely feminist. But what if they lost their funding for not offering gender neutral services? Move to new section or not?

Topic: maternal mortality in Black women. Definitely feminist. But what if the literature refers to them as “black birthing bodies?” (Yes, sadly,this has happeneded). Move or not?

Topic: deficiencies in funding for research into female specific diseases. Definitely feminist. But the Endometriosis Society now says that “10% of people have endometriosis”. Move or not?

Topic: MVAWG. Definitely feminist. But how do you talk about it without defining who is M and who are W & G? Move or not?

Please do take this in the spirit that it’s meant, which is that I’m trying to understand both what’s intended and how it would work.

@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.

I don't really understand how this would work in practice.

There's a Government consultation on women's healthcare. Let's say there's a topic about this in the general feminism board. One of the topics that people might want to raise in their responses to the consultation is the so-called inclusive language ("person with a cervix" etc.) that excludes many women - particularly those with English as a second language/lower educational attainment etc. Can this be raised on the thread or do you have to start a new thread in the sex/gender topic?

I wouldn't have known as much about the sex/gender debate if it weren't for stumbling across this stuff on the general FWR forum. I would hate to see it hived off into a sub-topic. Why not have a sub-topic in feminism for those who believe in gender theory?

I also agree with pp that it could be divided based on libfem, gc fem,

Surely liberal feminists are critical of gender roles in society too?

It doesn't really bother me the way it is but I can see how it would be useful to not have to wade through so many trans-related threads to get to other feminism issues.

mmm.... like scrolling quickly past them. As you would on AIBU? Or do you actually open each one and read the OP? Could it be that we could be better in our titles to make scrolling easier?

I’m not sure what liberal feminism means in this context?

Been a while since I’ve thought about it though

I agree Sophoclesthefox. And if the very concept of what a woman is, is being erased, it affects every single part of feminism. Quite apart from the fact that the issues we are talking about are now in all the papers, every single day. It's more current and more urgent than it's ever been.

I honestly, quite genuinely, don't understand how it would work.

What I can see is more censorship, rather than less. Or threads moving from one side to the other like a bloody yo-yo.

Honestly, are we going to have threads dominated by people saying this shouldn't be here, it should be there, no it shouldn't, it's about this, no it isn't, you said the word trans.

@Datun

I agree Sophoclesthefox. And if the very concept of what a woman is, is being erased, it affects every single part of feminism. Quite apart from the fact that the issues we are talking about are now in all the papers, every single day. It's more current and more urgent than it's ever been.

I honestly, quite genuinely, don't understand how it would work.

What I can see is more censorship, rather than less. Or threads moving from one side to the other like a bloody yo-yo.

Honestly, are we going to have threads dominated by people saying this shouldn't be here, it should be there, no it shouldn't, it's about this, no it isn't, you said the word trans.

Pretty much

I’m also not convinced there are enough posters to keep the section going bar telling other people where to post (just like aibu recently)

Ok then, same question but someone asks if we're including trans women in the group of women we're talking about, thread gets derailed about what people mean when they say "trans" or "woman". Would it get moved? This is what happens with the FGM threads as mentioned above.

@CardinalLolzy In my opinion, it shouldn't be moved because it was clearly a derail from the topic and I really doubt Mods would move threads based on that unless the whole thread becomes about it. I really don't think they would/should be heavy-handed about moving threads, it's just useful to have somewhere specific for threads that are trans-related from the get-go.

I'm not exactly campaigning for this, i just see that it would be useful. If it doesn't happen, I'm still fine with it. I'm more interested in posters being able to reapectfully state biological facts while talking about girls' and women's issues without it being an issue to some people.

I don’t think it should be separated

thread gets derailed about what people mean when they say "trans" or "woman".

Agreed. Does derailing or merailing a thread to change its context mean that it will now be moved? Is this another move in gamers' paradise like the automated reports of women's accounts on Twitter to have them constantly suspended? Like has happened to remove the blue tick from the LGB Alliance?