In light of MNHQ's recent statement that the feminism section is in fact not a feminism section but a section 'about' feminism, perhaps we need to be warning people about this up front?

[Beachcomber]

I'm of the opinion that it needs to made clear that whilst the title may be 'feminism/women's rights', this section is quite different to other boards that deal with feminism/women's rights.

It isn't fair to mislead - lots of posters expect the section to be a place where feminist views can be freely explored without fear of posters' mental health being questioned, and a zone where misogyny is unwelcome. In reality, pretty much anything goes here and whilst it is, of course, MNHQ's prerogative to run their site as they see fit, some sort of disclaimer about the section seems only fair in order to forewarn posters (especially posters looking for support or exploration of sensitive issues).

Perhaps it would be an idea for there to be a header at the top of the section stating MNHQ's position?

All suggestions welcomed .

I didn't say that you insisted on feeling hard done by; that was explicitly a comment about the discussion as a whole. The remark about common sense and fluency was general too. I don't think it is rude to suggest to someone that they look in a dictionary.

Oh, right ... you insulted not just me, but lots of other people too?

Yes, I think that's still considered rude.

Did I say that the dictionary didn't contain the negative meanings? No, I said it was a rich and many stranded word -- i.e that hte negative strands were there too (hence "fair play to you sybil")and that it made sense to interprete the use of it inlight of reasonable assumptions about how MNHQ are likely to speak to us.

OFFS. Just drop it, will you? I'd like HQ to come back again actually. That answer was completely inadequate and didn't address any of the concerns we have been discussing.

completely inadequate yes.

lots of questions have been asked since about what needs clarifying. i do hope these are responded to.

let's make it really simple:

-is misogyny, anti-feminism, rape apologetics and child abuse justifying 'opinon' welcome on mn?

also does mnhq give a flying fuck about mra trolls and hate groups being on the boards stalking and harassing people and reproducing their posts all over the internet along with their mn names?

sorry - that sounds a lot angrier than i intended it to do

a lot of us posted on here a lot and really worked at it and building the place up and keeping it busy etc under the misguided opinion that this was a feminist space and that our doing that was feminist activism.

i just want to say to everyone that you did great and put in a lot of effort and hours and commitment to building this section up and it was great before all of the invasions and targetting.

but i'm afraid i do think those days are dead. we were labouring under false pretenses.

this talk of inflammatory posts and disrespect,tell me does that include name-calling? asking me if i am unwell (inference being unstable or unclear thinking) or overall put downs and requests on what to post?
you see some of you have a very clear idea of my shortcomings,and happy to direct me to them .but zero.nada.insight into own behaviours on threads.and happy to ignore. the very behaviours claimed to be disliked eg name calling,put downs, are the ones employed here very readily.seems the irony is lost though

go on,look back i have not
name called
posted maliciously
posted a pm
or deliberately named and talked other posters on different threads

mnhq take dim view of trolls
they also take dim veiw of troll hunters if you think im a troll or derailer, tell mnhq - you know where the the wee red flag is. use it if you feel it is required

"whether you're a hardened rad fem or a non-quite-sure-what-all-this-feminism-is-about type. And, wherever you sit on that spectrum, we'd hope everyone would respect and respond respectfully to others - even if they're sitting right at the opposite end of that spectrum to you."

Why on earth are some of you choosing to take offence at this statement? This was a piece clearly designed to say that this board is for any type of feminist, regardless of where you sit on the spectrum - and there are different places to sit on that spectrum. You're taking offence about being called a 'hardened rad fem' but no-one actually called you that!

And as for the suggestion that all your 'hard work' was done under 'false pretences'. Really?! WTF!

MNHQ created a board called Feminism/Women's rights. What's wrong with that? How on earth was what you were doing to build it up 'for nothing?'

There are some fantastic threads/debates on this board. Don't try and suggest that because MNHQ aren't going to change it that all the women (and some of the men) who have taken the time to post here were wasting their time.

This is a public board on an open forum. You will always get people posting here that have a polar opposite view - that's the nature of the internet. You will also get people posting nasty stuff. That, too, sadly is the nature of the internet, and this board is not going to be any different. Just look at the horrible trolling that happened on the bereavement section over the last few days.

So.

If a poster posts something that it against the Talk Guidelines, report them.

If a poster is spouting an argument you disagree with, then disagree with them.

If it's someone trying to de-rail the thread, ignore them.

BIWI - the problem I have with that statement is that what we were actually complaining about was people who're not on that spectrum, as described by HelenMumsnet.

If this is to be a section where the acceptable 'spectrum' runs from rad fems to people who're 'not quite sure', that does not include people who have a 'polar opposite view' to feminism. If Helen means those people are not welcome, that is I suppose fine. But she hasn't said they will be banned/told off for posting here - she's just ignored their existence. I dunno if this is deliberate or not, but the unfortunate result is that she didn't answer the question, which is a bit pointless IMO.

Sorry if that sounds harsh Helen, but I don't understand why you posted what you did.

BIWI I don't know exactly what I want to say about this, I'm having a think about it.

I did just want to answer something you said about reporting posts though. I do not want to waste any more of my time reporting offensive posts on MN. I no longer see it as something worth doing. No point.

Thank you for responding to this thread MNHQ.

respect and respond respectfully to others is the pivotal phrase
fem topics are quick to name call and pile in with derision.much more than other topic.perhaps the root of this was the assumption by some,of the kind of tone,posts and ethos of the board.

it is a great idea to have fem topics i like posting here.have had some great discussion eg the gender politics and brain plasticity, and then the baron-cohen methodology, the oj methodologies and sexism

it hasnt not all been arguing and dischord far from it.

beachcomber i think it felt worth all that effort when it was a feminist space (which it turned out it never was) and one that was against misogyny. i don't have the energy for fighting in a place that is actually as equally for misogyny as it is anything else.

i think feminists have better things to be doing with their time and energy than policing a patriarchal space.

But you can't stop those who have a polar opposite view posting on the board unless you make it a closed one, and that is obviously not what MN is all about, or - indeed - what you want.

Therefore the 'anti' brigade, however you choose to define them, will always have to be dealt with.

Beachcomber - why do you not see it as worthwhile reporting offensive posts? (Genuine enquiry, not trying to make a point!)

the only moderators or "policing" was mnhq.it never was role of individual posters here to set or enforce a tone.

How on earth, though, is this not a feminist space? And how you get to it being a patriarchal space is really beyond me.

I'm obviously very stupid.

Don't answer that last point, btw

it takes time and mnhq rarely does anything with them anyway.

BIWI: I was going to say something along the lines of LRD. This whole thread was about how some of the posters would like people who post nasty, imflamatory stuff to be dealt with. Some posters have said that they are unhappy that Mumsnet guidelines don't include sexism as unacceptable, for example.

The answer from Helen seems to indicate that they regard the thread to be about arguments between feminists of different persuasions rather than the above. It also appears to suggest that the nastiness observed on this board is a preserve only of feminists. I would suggest that this is not the case.

And for what it's worth 'hardened radfem' will disappoint a lot of people as a choice of phrase.

Still better to know these things eh?

I'm uncomfortable with the quoting of an individual poster (no matter who that poster is) as part of the answer from HQ themselves to a controversy on their website. We have all participated in this slight MN controversy, quoted poster included - that just doesn't sit well with me.

No offence intended to the poster in question, nor am I taking issue with what was quoted.

BIWI - 'But you can't stop those who have a polar opposite view posting on the board unless you make it a closed one, and that is obviously not what MN is all about, or - indeed - what you want.'

Of course you can stop them. That is why trolls in other areas are banned. If you decided you had the polar opposite view to the parents of children with special needs, and posted revolting anti-SN views, would that be ok? Of course not. It happened recently and it was horrible.

This has nothing to do with making a closed board. That's a red herring IMO. MN is not a totally unmoderated forum. There are already rules for what can and can't be posted, and these rules are regularly updated.