Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

FWR

1000 replies

MarsScarlet · 27/01/2025 06:05

FYI: I've name changed for this to avoid a pile-on.

This post is about the overwhelming negativity and hostility with the FWR board that new posters and posters with a differing viewpoint face if they attempt to use the board.

There is a persistent group within the board that are, to put it simply, hateful towards others. Despite posting there on and off for more than 4 years, I have never felt welcome, despite not holding any particular extreme views or being abusive to others. Without exception, I am accused of being another poster, or a man, a TRA, or some kind of paid activist. This occurs again and again until I leave a thread in frustration.

I’ve seen this happen to many other new posters. Few return. Why would they? Such an acidic atmosphere doesn’t encourage healthy discussion. I’d just like to discuss women’s rights, but this board makes discussion impossible.

I’m not exactly sure what the answer is, except for @MNHQ to request the board to tone down the rhetoric a bit and back off on any new names they may see on the board. Let people engage with you rather than actively drive them away.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
16
AccidentallyWesAnderson · 28/01/2025 00:17

PeopleLikeColdplay · 28/01/2025 00:11

Haha I don't think I need say any more. I'll let the posts speak for themselves!

They really do.

MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 00:25

GailBlancheViola · 27/01/2025 13:05

What I've gleaned from the OP is that FWR Sex and Gender must be tone policed, posters must argue in a more feminine manner (whatever that is and however that is to be policed I know not), posters such as Hellofabore must not post peer reviewed evidence or proven facts nor used their lived experience and knowledge.

Authoritarian much?

Some clarifications for those who require it:

  1. I am only asking for more civility in discussion, particularly with new posters. This does not mean to be more "feminine".
  1. Facts/evidence/experience are great, just don't use them against others. (Eg. We've been here longer than you, we've been fighting this fight forever, read all the material..)
  1. Hellofabore was brought up once, in context, as an example of a poster who does write about knowledge/experience frequently, as Eresh wanted examples. I gave an example. It was not a personal attack on Hellofabore.
OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:27

Hellofabore was brought up once, in context, as an example of a poster who does write about knowledge/experience frequently, as Eresh wanted examples. I gave an example. It was not a personal attack on Hellofabore.

The personal attack was when you called several posters unpleasant. Practice what you preach.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:30

I am only asking for more civility in discussion, particularly with new posters. This does not mean to be more "feminine".

This was you, wasn't it, OP?

"you've given yourselves the permission to be more male in your response patterns"

AccidentallyWesAnderson · 28/01/2025 00:33

Civility isn't going to be my priority when being called transphobic, bigoted, blah blah because I won't go along with the Emperor's New Clothes. And neither should it be for anyone else. Nope.

Bannedontherun · 28/01/2025 00:36

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:37

It's quite clear that for all the posturing about "civility" some posters much prefer to just call women transphobes rather than advance any sort of convincing rational argument as to why we should see some males as women and why our rights and feelings should we should come second to theirs.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:38

I totally struggle with men standing before me purporting to be women when i know they are not women.

Me too. It's misogyny.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:41

Unlike misogynists, even the ones among my own sex, I don't think men come first. I don't think they take precedence. I don't think males claiming to be oppressed is more important than all the shit women have to put up with.

MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 03:19

Bannedontherun · 27/01/2025 20:21

A strange thing for OP to do, name change on site stuff as if MNHQ does not know our various incarnations, because of course they do.

and of course they back check on posters activities to draw conclusions as to how to handle things.

I was not keen for the posters from FWR to look up any posting history and use it against me. I’m fine that MN can see it. I have nothing to hide from them - I’ve been here for almost 20 years and have had relatively few deletions.

OP posts:
MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 03:30

Helleofabore · 27/01/2025 20:53

Indeed. A poster name changes and then name checks other posters for wrongdoing while posting under that new user name. How very civil and honest.

If I had posted under my usual name, I would never be able to post in FWR again. Ever. My posting history would be forensically picked apart for everyone’s enjoyment, so I wasn’t doing that.

You were name-checked and your feelings were hurt? I apologise. Perhaps you have an idea, just a little, how it feels on the other side. It isn’t a great place.

OP posts:
MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 03:40

Ereshkigalangcleg · 27/01/2025 22:26

Again for any lurkers here:

As a woman, with a female body who was born a girl and has suffered more than my share of sexism and misogyny:

  • I am not allowed to disbelieve that men can be women even though I think it's patent nonsense
  • All these males are allowed to be abusive to me because of this disbelief and I am not allowed to say anything back
  • I am not allowed to call said pseudoscientific, unfalsifiable, quasi-religious faith-based belief in gendered souls "an ideology" even though it literally is
  • I am not allowed to campaign for a space free of males
  • And I must be entirely subservient to whatever some of the most sexist men I've ever encountered fancy "being a woman" is.

No. That doesn't work for me, sorry.

My OP has little to do with the above. It’s about the lack of civility and a general tone of hostility on the board, primarily.

OP posts:
MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 04:01

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:27

Hellofabore was brought up once, in context, as an example of a poster who does write about knowledge/experience frequently, as Eresh wanted examples. I gave an example. It was not a personal attack on Hellofabore.

The personal attack was when you called several posters unpleasant. Practice what you preach.

I didn’t call posters unpleasant.

So. Unpleasant.

That was the post. Oblique, but it was referring to the way the thread had turned - posters were attacking me. I sent a message to Hebe reporting the thread saying I was leaving it as it was affecting my mental health.

That was what it was about.

OP posts:
MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 04:02

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:30

I am only asking for more civility in discussion, particularly with new posters. This does not mean to be more "feminine".

This was you, wasn't it, OP?

"you've given yourselves the permission to be more male in your response patterns"

Not the same thing. That’s an observation, not a directive.

OP posts:
MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 04:03

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

No one is asking you to change your opinions.

OP posts:
MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 04:05

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/01/2025 00:37

It's quite clear that for all the posturing about "civility" some posters much prefer to just call women transphobes rather than advance any sort of convincing rational argument as to why we should see some males as women and why our rights and feelings should we should come second to theirs.

Sorry, that doesn’t make sense. You can be civil and also debate these things rationally.

OP posts:
AlisonDonut · 28/01/2025 04:33

PeopleLikeColdplay · 27/01/2025 23:55

Hardly.

I've yet to see anyone really counter those points either. How do you get your way about this without making the lives of already marginalised people, who haven't done anything wrong, even harder than they need to be? Can you accept that not all women perceive the same level of threat as you do? Some of us would like to treat trans women like human beings, not the enemy.

Maybe then people would be more amenable to hearing you out in return. But actually trying to accuse me of doing the same thing you've been gleefully doing for the last several hours isn't an argument that will either wash with me or distract me.

How do you get your way about this without making the lives of already marginalised people, who haven't done anything wrong, even harder than they need to be? Can you accept that not all women perceive the same level of threat as you do? Some of us would like to treat trans women like human beings, not the enemy

It never ceases to fascinate me that people see violent men, who say three little words 'I'm a lady' and think this wipes all their aggression and violence away and we immediately have to treat them as if they are the most vulnerable special people over everyone else. What happens in that change to the onlooker to cause that reaction?

Take any of the murderers or rapists that declare themselves women in between the crime and the handcuffs. This is the attitude that places these violent men in women's prisons and this subjects every woman in there to a lifetime of hell. I just don't understand what goes through the minds of the people who do that.

But they never explain it, they just call the people saying 'this is madness' all the names under the sun and refuse/accuse/flounce.

Waitwhat23 · 28/01/2025 06:56

blownawaybyit · 27/01/2025 22:44

Oh, I see what’s happening here: some of you are trying to dress up your dismissiveness as some kind of intellectual civility. Let’s dissect the points since you’ve gone to the effort of misunderstanding everything so thoroughly.

No, it’s not “transphobic” for women to advocate for single-sex spaces - it’s transphobic when the advocacy assumes that trans women don’t belong because of some imagined universal threat. Framing trans women as intruders into these spaces isn’t protecting anyone - it’s othering a vulnerable group for existing. If your solution to safety is exclusion based on stereotypes, it’s not about safety; it’s about discrimination.

Once again, you’re misconstruing the argument. It’s not bigotry to discuss fairness in sports; it’s bigotry to blanket all trans women as "males invading women’s spaces" as though their identities and intentions don’t matter. Governing bodies already regulate these issues - based on actual science, not your feelings - and the tiny number of trans women in elite sports hasn’t “destroyed” women’s sports. Your exaggeration says more about your biases than reality.

Calling gender identity an “ideology” is reductionist at best, disingenuous at worst. Gender identity isn’t a set of arbitrary beliefs - it’s rooted in decades of medical, psychological, and sociological research. Calling it “ideology” is a rhetorical sleight of hand to strip it of legitimacy and equate it with subjective opinions. That’s why it’s dehumanising - it reduces people’s lived realities to a debate about “beliefs.”

The ultimate irony here is that you claim I don’t want to discuss when it’s clear you’re not here for good-faith dialogue. You’re not interested in understanding trans people - you’re interested in presenting your position as “rational” while dismissing theirs as emotional or invalid. The invitations to do it "on our terf (ha!)" over on the FWR board is very telling.

So no, this wouldn’t have been an “interesting” discussion because you’re not engaging with the actual issues. You’re just repackaging exclusionary rhetoric as polite disagreement and hoping no one notices.

Sports -

www.shewon.com

www.boysvswomen.com

Ideology -

www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/r-d-adams-v-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-4102236-slash-2023

Safety -

www.nationalreview.com/news/transgender-sex-offenders-placed-in-womens-jails-in-scotland/

archive.ph/2022.10.04-232359/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/half-of-scottish-trans-prisoners-changed-gender-after-convictions-pftqbbhg6

www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/anger-trans-inmates-revert-males-25840252

Waitwhat23 · 28/01/2025 06:57

Can't edit at the moment so

www.shewon.org

PepeParapluie · 28/01/2025 06:59

I don’t have the time for a more in depth response right now, but I see @blownawaybyit has perceived my invitation to FWR for a discussion as a bit of a threat or like a call over there. I only said that because this thread is actually supposed to be about something else, and I thought it more appropriate to discuss @blownawaybyit’s arguments in a more appropriate place, not because I wanted some kind of ‘home advantage’!

FlirtsWithRhinos · 28/01/2025 07:07

PepeParapluie · 28/01/2025 06:59

I don’t have the time for a more in depth response right now, but I see @blownawaybyit has perceived my invitation to FWR for a discussion as a bit of a threat or like a call over there. I only said that because this thread is actually supposed to be about something else, and I thought it more appropriate to discuss @blownawaybyit’s arguments in a more appropriate place, not because I wanted some kind of ‘home advantage’!

Yes. There's a lot of unsubstantiated accusations and misinterpretations in that post I'd like to address (and also highlight the flipping of criticism legitimately made of genderism to apply to gender criticism where it just doesn't make sense, rather than, y'know, starting with what GC people actually say and think and basing criticism on that) but I don't want to bring that conversation into this thread. I would be keen to join a discussion of that poster's points on an appropriate board though.

popeydokey · 28/01/2025 07:16

@blownawaybyit I'm not interested in proving you right or wrong or anything like that, but i am interested in finding out a bit more what you mean and where we agree/ disagree. Would you be interested in that at all? On another thread?

AlisonDonut · 28/01/2025 07:37

popeydokey · 28/01/2025 07:16

@blownawaybyit I'm not interested in proving you right or wrong or anything like that, but i am interested in finding out a bit more what you mean and where we agree/ disagree. Would you be interested in that at all? On another thread?

I'd love to know what these 'actual issues' are.

ArabellaScott · 28/01/2025 07:52

MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 04:01

I didn’t call posters unpleasant.

So. Unpleasant.

That was the post. Oblique, but it was referring to the way the thread had turned - posters were attacking me. I sent a message to Hebe reporting the thread saying I was leaving it as it was affecting my mental health.

That was what it was about.

OP, you can't force people to get along.

If this thread is affecting your mental health, and FWR upsets you, I'd gently suggest you ask yourself why. There will always be people on the internet who say things you find hurtful.

FWR is on the whole fairly civil, but at the end of the day it's an anonymous internet discussion board.

It seems to me that you are perhaps looking for something else. Wishing you all the best.

Helleofabore · 28/01/2025 07:54

MarsScarlet · 28/01/2025 03:30

If I had posted under my usual name, I would never be able to post in FWR again. Ever. My posting history would be forensically picked apart for everyone’s enjoyment, so I wasn’t doing that.

You were name-checked and your feelings were hurt? I apologise. Perhaps you have an idea, just a little, how it feels on the other side. It isn’t a great place.

I see.

You thought it was illustrative so you thought it was appropriate.

Well I think it was highly illustrative of the negative feedback farming that some posters engage in. I don’t believe you are careful at all about your own civility, just how you personally get treated. And if people point out that your post is incorrect and engage with you as to why, and even when your evidence is not credible, you resort to the very behaviour you complain about.

Just like this post here.

I read your ‘You were name-checked and your feelings were hurt. I apologise. Perhaps you have an idea, just a little, how it feels on the other side. It isn’t a great place.’ and see it as no apology. It is a sorry, not sorry statement starting with more jeering and then followed by a ‘but you deserved it’ .

And that jeering is entirely illustrative of your own posting style.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread