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 agree. Thanks to the MN feminists.

to all feMNists, regular or occasional who have inspired me. Cannot say more am just so aghast at the hatred directed at you. (oh, that's a 'global' you btw)

I want to get involved in this discussion but I'm under the cosh.
CatalalieSisters and Celestina have spoken for me several times, most recently on this thread at Thu 22-Sep-11 09:21:06. The existence of this board has diluted, possibly irreparably, the feminist support that was offered as standard on the MN I knew.

I've lurked for a year or so, on and off, in and out; to me, you've taken a brilliant thing, and fucked it up. Frm the oustide, the aggression and unkindness has been at least as bad, at times, on the fem side. It's been a supportive place only to those who toe the line. It's shat on newbies. It's lionised individuals who do as much harm as good. All this has been challenged by very few (but outstanding) MNers.

That's allowed, I guess - but it means that I (and probably lots and lots like me, also lurking) just can't get onside when the supportiveness of the board becomes one of the central arguments for the fem board to be a special star within the MN universe.

Another thought from outside: most MNers who are interested in feminism - maybe really, really interested, to the extent that it will change their lives and thence lives of others - ain't never going to be rad fems. Why are rad fem sensibilities (and sensitivities) running this board? Honestly? It just looks like cock-waving to me. I was meh in the early-80s and I'm meh now - most of all I resent the way they've colonised the feminism/class nexus, so that all non-rad fems are 'middle-class liberals'.

I'm really sorry to post and run, and I won't be coming back because of time, but honestly? From the outside, this all looks utterly fucked in the head, and it makes me really sad.

Apols that this only obliquely addresses the OP's concerns and is annoyingly general. Didn't, for obv reasons, want to start my own thread.

As someone who is a newbie and wasn't posting here a year ago, I disagree. Strongly.

@LeBOF

Yes, Stewie, absolutely.

MNHQ, Are you listening to ANY of this?

Yes, yes we are listening. Hope you will understand that some of us have to pick up kids etc etc, so may not be able to respond instantly.

Anyway, we're here now for a wee while and will try to respond to some of your most recent posts.

(Btw, I mean I was on MN over a year ago ... just not so long on here.)

"we'd like to think Feminism is a place where all are welcome to post, 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 has MNHQ got nothing to say about those people who are not on that spectrum at all, but who post here purely to disrupt? Is it because they actively want this space to be one of those asinine places where everyone agrees tht they're feminists because they're women and everything a woman does is a feminist act because she's a woman? How bloody netmums. Pathetic.

Cock-waving. That's a new insult, haven't had that one directed at me before!

Gosh it really is quite an education this 'about feminism' malarkey.

Have never been called so many names before.

Good show. It's all good discussion!

Oops, cross-posted. Hi again Helen.

(Btw, I'm sorry, I didn't realize MNHQ didn' have a rota on the go - oops! )

Oh. Cross posted. So what's the deal on those who aren't on that spectrum Helen, and only come here to disrupt each and every tedious drawn out time?

Final point - there's a slippage between 'post entirely to disrupt' and 'just disagrees to fuck with my politics'. You need to distinguish, very clearly, for this argument not to sound like a weird combo of bullying/whining.

I don't think feminism, the politics/philosophy/lifestyle, needs a safe space. It's not damaged, it's strong.

And of course, the whole of MN is available for you to offer feminist support to the thousands of MNers who need it.

@StewieGriffinsMom

We are complaining about the derailers and MRAs who only post in this section to cause trouble; the same types of fucknuts who post destructively in relationships, lone parents, SN and bereavement.

OK, and we try - and having been trying (gawd blimey, you have NO idea!) - to deal with derailers and fuckwits in Feminism in the same way we'd deal with derailers and fuckwits elsewhere.

We look at your reports (that's why it's always worth reporting) and we investigate.

Sometimes, it's easy and quick to take action - we can see very clearly that it a deliberate attempt at derailment or fuckwittage and we delete and ban.

Sometimes, it's not quite so clear, and, after we delete, we need to fire out an MNHQ warning shot.

Sometimes, it's not at all clear - even though on many many occasions we blinkin' wish it were - and we have to let time - and more reports - do the work for us. In these cases, it's often the buildup of reports that allows us to paint a picture of deliberate derailment or fuckwittage that isn't immediately clear at first - often because the poster is posting quite cunningly/cleverly.

These are the cases that, we know, annoy you the most (because they annoy us the most) but we do think it's right to stick to our Guidelines, to err always on the side of giving the benefit of the doubt. If we didn't try to treat each case fairly and on its own merits, regardless of our personal feelings/spidey sense about certain posters, we wouldn't be doing our job properly.

And yes, we do ask you to post respectfully - or, if you can't, just to ignore those you can't post respectful replies to - because it's hard to warn/ban someone for posting in ways that break our Talk Guidelines/wind people up when they can just point to post after post of personal attacks on them.

Yes, I didn't realise that either- sorry if I sounded rude, Helen. I also thought that what you had just posted was MNHQ's final word on the matter, and it seemed to me to have missed much of the point.

Therebebollox - Have you considered the possibility that a lot of MNers hesitate to call themselves feminists, because some on Feminism threads are so out there?

@LeBOF

Yes, I didn't realise that either- sorry if I sounded rude, Helen. I also thought that what you had just posted was MNHQ's final word on the matter, and it seemed to me to have missed much of the point.

That's OK, BOF. I should apologise really for posting and running (to the schoolgate) but we didn't want another day to pass without commenting on this thread.

Thanks Helen. Would you consider adding sexism to the list of -isms that are unacceptable according to the talk guidelines? It seems a real oversight that it's the one thing that is missed off the list.

I'm going to bow out now if this is going to turn into yet another thread about how nasty feminists are. In my entire MN life I have never been deleted except at my own request. I have lost my temper with once or twice some people and been rude (and then apologised and asked for said deletion); I have been in many discussions about lots of polemic issues and have contended that something was sexist and misogynist when I have thought it. I have never called anyone insane nor dismissed their arguments as nonsense or stupid. I strive to be polite and courteous at all times.

I have also been on AIBU and have to say that for all the complaints about the FSWR board I have seen more venom from everyday posters there than anything on here. There is a banner there warning people that the section is not a free for all. Yet there seems to be a dearth of threads in which say "AIBU posters are rude and unwelcoming".

My contribution to this thread was to suggest that a banner be added which said something along the lines of "Lots of feminists post here. Feminism is a movement which is characterised by its criticism sexism and misogyny. Please be aware that comments may be criticised from that perspective."
This is not meant as a prescriptive "you can't post here if you are not a feminist" or "only feminist viewpoints allowed"; it is designed to lessen the misunderstandings and offence that seems to be had when someone posts an argument that they feel is reasonable but that another considers sexist or misoynist. Both are entitled to their opinions. Both have a right to post. The key factor is that these ideas are actually debated without the argument being reduced to "you are stupid" or "you are talking nonsense" or even with a veiled threat of rape. None of this I would classify as acceptable behaviour anywhere at any time, on or off the web.

@CristinadellaPizza

Thanks Helen. Would you consider adding sexism to the list of -isms that are unacceptable according to the talk guidelines? It seems a real oversight that it's the one thing that is missed off the list.

Yes, we are talking about this.

We are trying to think of a good way to phrase it, though.

We want it to cover straight deletion of outrageous sexist crap statements, while not meaning we have to delete somebody's lighthearted whinge in Good Housekeeping about how useless men are at putting the washing machine on.

Please bear with us while we think on't - or feel free to offer some suggestions here.

Xpost with too many people; since LindsayW actually. Apologies to all now tha discussion has moved on.
Thanks for coming back Helen. I will read your posts with interest.

I know this isn't central to the debate, but a willywaving emoticon......any chance at all MN?

Oh and adding sexism to the list of -isms would be good.

But if I had to choose......

beachcomber - well, perfect example. To me, cockwaving = bullying in an environment where the bullier has unearned privilege.

To you = a ludicrous insult implying rad fems would like to have cocks.

Thanks Lindsay

Said it before but I'm going to say it again: to say that MN/MNHQ is 'supportive' of rape-myths or misogyny is simply untrue. The examples which have been given ('some 13-year-olds love attention from older men') have been lone voices and have instantly been deluged, quite rightly, with hostile responses. And if you really believe that MNers/MNHQ don't give a crap about rape, or think domestic violence is funny (and I hope you're aware that these are really insulting insinuations), why on earth would you continue to lend your support to this forum by posting on it?

As to why sexism/misogyny isn't included in the list of deletable sentiments, I think it's an interesting problem. I think one answer might be that there isn't a broad consensus on what sexism/misogyny looks like. I think most of us know racism when we see it, but sexism looks like different things to different people. So you're effectively asking that the posters on Feminism be able to set their own rules about what people can post in the topic, and that's just not how Mumsnet works. Alternatively, if a no-sexism rule was applied site-wide, you'd have to delete every post saying 'why are men so crap at arranging childcare?' And before you knew it this would be the dullest talkboard in the world.

I'd be surprised if MNers hesitated to call themselves feminists based on a few out there threads. Someone else's opinion or words aren't going to change the fact that I'm a feminist as I can hold views without everyone agreeing with me and also without agreeing with what everyone else writes.

I am tired of reading posts by the same people rehashing the same comments though. But that doesn't make me less of a feminist either.

I think you'll find racism looks different to some people too Celestina. There are many many threads about that. Sorry that isn't an excuse to not have a clause about sexist remarks.