To all those who say on threads 'I am too scared to go into feminism' - this topic isn't scary!

[GetOrfMoiLand]

I think it's a shame when I see threads where the OP says 'I am too scared to put this in feminism' or something.

I am certainly not knowledgeable about feminist theory, but have never felt that my opinion on this thread wasn't wanted or I was vilified for stating what I believed.

I think this topic is pretty inclusive - yes some people are forthright with their opinions, but nobody's word is god, and I would hate to think that mumsnetters were put off contributing to threads in this topic because they mistakenly think the posters on here are viragos.

I don't understand why people are insisting that feminist regulars are denying that there's a problem and persistently excluding people.

LOADS of us have said we will make more effort to explain things and to be more inclusive. I've not seen much evidence of people admitting 'fault' the other way though.

And while I think we regulars should attempt to be more polite and inclusive (as should everyone), that doesn't mean that we stop believing in our arguments and defending them. If our reasoning upsets people, perhaps they should ask themselves why. Like pagwatch says, feminism makes people uncomfortable.

There are some notable exceptions, but I'm basically getting the impression that it's not so much about letting everyone post on here, which I agree is a good aim, but more that we're supposed to let people say whatever they want - however inflammatory - without criticism (as in critical analysis).

What's the point in that?

Proles and itsnotunusual - I DID say, as clearly as I could manage, that there was nothing wrong with seriousness. Why ignore that bit and only pick up on the bit where I explained (in answer to saf) that I prefer silliness?

If you just pick up on one part of a post like that, it just starts another pointless you said I said ding dong. Look, I'll repost it:

I want to empahsise again (in love and harmony) that it's often too serious for me, cos I don't want serious, but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it. Only my preference is for the silly.

Hmm, not sure I agree Lenin. Maybe this is just a personality thing but I think you can fight fire, and I think sometimes you have to.

It's certainly not on to hold someone to a higher standard and expect them not to get upset at personal attacks just because other people may wander in than think it's all a bit heated.

Lenin, yes, you took a risk, and to some extent it has worked. Posters have left or reduced their posting, but other posters who were unhappy about the situation before have started posting and attempted to deal with trolls - Empusa for example has done this.

But it is obvious that many other (often the most vocal) posters on these criticism threads are not suddenly going to start posting on the feminism section because they're not actually interested in feminism at all. They have their own agendas - some of them are some of the most well known posters on MN and just like to be able to set the tone on any thread anywhere on MN, even if they have no interest in the topic. It's just a control issue for them.

But there's no point you now saying, why is nobody commenting on X thread, because some of the people who would have come on threads have stopped posting. I see no point going on a thread to discuss from a feminist perspective (including threads that are not on the feminist section) if the fact that I used a feminist approach means that it is acceptable to dredge up what I said a year from now and complain about it over hundreds of posts, which people would not do to people challenging things all over MN from other perspectives.

We don't have to turn the other cheek, or do anything else that you say. We can just keep coming on MN for style and beauty or whatever, and join other feminist blogs and forums.

Well done in your popularity contest.

I don't think there is a problem when people remain calm and friendly and explain-there is a problem when they tell other people what they are saying (as they interpret it) and then resort to patronising and are not remotely apologetic and insist they will continue to patronise.
There is also a problem when you are told -on a public thread, open to all-that your views are not welcome-by someone who seems to have set themselves up as the person who should decide what is welcome or not, with no actual authority.

I do see what you're saying Lenin.

But this is clearly an issue with (at least) two sides ... there will always be people who come in and troll; there will always be posters who are furious about trolling, and in all likelihood there will alays be people who get caught up in the middle and misunderstood. I don't see how modifying behaviour as a section could help.

exoticfruits you are disingenuous to the extreme and that is why you are patronised. A number of posters spent a very long time on a very long thread trying to explain things to you and you never addressed their points, answered their questions or even tried to engage in debate. You just continued say "Well I think this" regardless of the evidence presented before you. The fact that some of them now patronise you is quite frankly your own fault.

hully, the problem is obvious. That thread started with a nasty reference to 'some posters' that was clearly directed at dittany. This was patently an attempt to circumvent MN's rules about personal attacks.

If dittany says someone is being anti-feminist, she may well be out of line: but you can report her, that is why the report button is there. If you or anyone else makes comments about 'some posters' and mean her, what can she do?

I have had this row with dittany at least twice and I did not enjoy it. But it was a damn sight more honest and at the end of it both she and I have been able to post on other threads and agree very strongly with each other - so the net result was positive. I don't think you could say the same for the AIBU thread.

I don't know Hully. Why it is acceptable for you to derail threads all over MN by turning issues that people care about into a supposedly humorous comedy act, and if anybody complains that you are trivialising something they care about, your followers jump on them?

Or am I speaking out of turn? Are we only allowed to make highly personal, subjective criticisms of Dittany?

Proles - I would agree apart from she calls people out when SHE CONSIDERS those statements to have been made. It is her pov touted as gospel and she will not engage or answer questions that don't suit. If you want egs, read the Palin thread and the AIBU thread. Jam-packed full.

Or don't bother if you cba, I wanted an answer and you gave me one so thanks! We don't have to get into it further. I think we're probably back to perceptions.

Goodness Milly! Followers! I had no idea, nor that I derailed serious meaningful threads.

I will try to be more careful, I have certainly never intended to.

I can follow that, but there is absolutely no excuse for saying 'your views are not welcome' when it is a public thread open to all and there are proper channels to go through if you don't want them posted.
(it is all down to interpretation anyway-I think that I answered their questions and addressed their points- but obviously they didn't so it remained at an impasse and will always continue to do so, especially if people resort to being patronising)
Anyway-it is all down to experience-if I keep off certain views (which I will) there isn't a problem. It was just an experience that took me unawares and wasn't for the fainthearted.

As someone said earlier feminism is a political movement not a comedy club.

This is my big problem with 'radical' feminism.

Sometimes on here and in life radical feminism just seems to me like an extreme section of a political party.

One that will force through it's views at the expense of any other.

Mind you, I can't think of any complaints, only one once that was on a thread about bullying and that was all cleared up and made good. But I'm sorry you see me that way, and if I am doing that, it is bad.