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 thought it might. Well, I can't see how it's a personal attack to name a person, describe the behaviour with quotes, describe the effect it has had, and explain why I think it's a bad thing for the board. So here goes:
the person: edd1337 (that's "leet" as in elite, in geekspeak, for those who don't know. I mention this as I think it's pertinent to the mindset behind the posts)
the behaviour: posts strongly anti-women statements, typically aimed at being diametrically opposed to the sentiment behind the OP. For example, on a thread that began with expressions of sympathy for Amadou Diallou, he posted "Serves the "victim" right for lieing. I hope she has to pay legal fees, gets charged and has to pay him compensation"
the effect: derailment and anger. A conversation that was previously about how rape is treated by society became partly a conversation about Edd's perception of Ms Diallo's behaviour
why this is a bad thing for the board: no new insights came from the interchanges with Edd. It was a lot of energy for not much reward. The most value that came out of it for me was the Brechtian-style poking fun at his lack of insight, poor spelling, and ignorance of the details of the case.

Edd frequently claims that he is being slighted for no reason other than having a different opinion to others. It's clear that Edd lacks insight (e.g., he thinks this while also calling people "darling". On a feminist board!), so I guess there's a faint possibility that he is not a true troll, in that he could be posting his honestly-held beliefs. But motives are less important than effects here. And the effects of engaging with him are that we get troll-like derailments. So in practice, Edd behaves like a troll, irrespective of what is going on in his mind.

I think a lot of us could agree on what vesuvia expressed in her sensible and reasonable post.

vesuvia Thu 22-Sep-11 11:53:44

A section "about feminism" is seen by anti-feminists as an open invitation and opportunity to:

a) oppose the need for equal rights for women and girls
b) oppose the right of feminism to exist
c) oppose the right of feminists, be they liberal or radical, to express their opinions.

This has allowed much trolling and derailing, by short-term misogynistic trolls joining MN to do nothing but that, as well as derailing by anti-feminist long-term MNers.

In contrast, I think a "feminist section" would take, as given:

1. females do not yet have equality with males
2. the need for equal rights for females
3. the right of feminism to exist
4. the right of feminists to express their liberal or radical opinions
5. feminism has been a force for good in society, improving the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

I don't think such a "feminist section" would mean that only certain types of feminist could post on its message threads. This second approach could still accommodate plenty of civilised discussion among both feminists and non-feminists. That is the type of section that appeals to me.

A request to MNHQ : Please would you reconsider your statement that this is a board "about feminism"? Could issue a statement explicitly backing the right of feminism to exist and for that to be taken as a starting point for any discussion on the feminism board?

Nope it meant that I'm not surprised that you don't see the trolling or the problems, if you don't post a lot here.

I'm surprised that you don't see it as a lurker though.

Beachcomber, what would you want the consequences to be for a post that was not in accordance with these principles? Deletion? And who would decide? MNHQ? I am struggling to see how it could be implemented in practice, despite the obvious attractions of the idea.

Well look, I'm going to leave this discussion now. In all the threads I 'lurk' on I see lots of familiar names - Hully, LeninGrad, PosieParker, Beachcomber etc and have only come across Edd once. His comments were just boring.

Beachcomber, I have tried to help and understand. I would class myself as feminist. But if you are unwilling to listen to anyone but those who agree with you then there is no point discussing this any further. Hully is a regular poster on Fem, would you take more notice of her? Oh, you don't, because she disagrees with you. There you go.

'Consideration and politeness are always to be striven for.'

So, perhaps not accusing people of having mental health problems because they hold a different opinion to yours?

Agreed Lenin.

Actually, on that post, I felt that my exchanges with Edd were worthwhile, because of the opportunity to satirise his anti-women postings, and because it wasn't much effort to do. I also managed to avoid getting wound up!

But others clearly did take him seriously, get wound up, and put significant effort into writing back to him. And I had to plough through their posts to keep up.

You know what has just occurred to me? The simplest solution of all would be to implement threading (ie replies are shown as indented sub-posts). That would mean that readers could skip over an entire tranche of threads that were proving fruitless for them. Many many sites do this (including Slashdot).

No, I'm not for deletions.

I'm for certain standards of behaviour being expressly stated as being desirable and others being considered unacceptable. (Bit like the mentions of racism, etc in the guidelines).

And if that is too much to ask (which appears to be the consensus, particularly of posters who don't use the feminist section), then please can we have a header?

Although that appears to be an unreasonable request too .

Rhubarb are you intending to make that as personal as it reads?

Rhubarb, if you do a quick search for Edd, you'll see that there are six pages of his posts, almost all in Feminism. His comments may simply have bored you, but they have done much more to others.

Beachcomber- there you go again! "which appears to be the consensus, particularly of posters who don't use the feminist section" there are plenty of posters on here who ARE regulars and who don't agree with you either!

And if you imply that I should have no say because I only lurk and don't post then I am entitled to reply to that, am I not?

This is exactly why I don't often post in feminism, because sometimes it's a case of "you're either in or you're out." Disagreement gets you cast as an anti-feminist and then your status as a mumsnetter is questioned with statements like "you hardly ever post on here" which is somehow taken that your points are not valid.

So I just had another look at how the rules are written.

In short, they say that racism etc is undesirable and will be deleted.
They go on to say "it would be nice if you could be courteous to each other".

From what I understand, BC, you'd want something in the second category (we prefer you behave this way but won't delete you if you don't), rather than the first?

I personally would like:

• what you suggest re the express standards of behaviour (assuming I've understood you correctly...)
• threading and potentially moderation

I can live with or without a change in the header title. I think it will be difficult to express its intended essence in three words or fewer!

I must also say, writing "posters who don't use the feminist section" is a bit weird. Not posting is not the same as not using. Lurkers use the section a lot.

OP - you seem to want the MN Feminism section to be a "section reserved for Feminists, with what constitutes a feminist as defined by a certain tiny sub-section of MN posters".

Actually I wasn't thinking about you personally when I posted that Rhubarb - I was more thinking about the endless threads we have had on the rest of MN slagging the feminists off.

Apologies if you thought that was a low shot at you in particular - I can see how it would read that way.

Now now slhilly, having an opinion =/= attacking you/anyone else personally

Apology accepted. I haven't seen threads slagging off feminists either. I thought I was a regular too

Lenin, I guess what I'd really like is the option for threading...I doubt I'll get any of what I want anyway, sadly. The costs of the new implementation would be quite high, given the backlog of posts.

Right edd1337 - out with it. Why firstly, are you a poster on Mumsnet? Serious question by the way. Do you have children? Do you come on here for support and advice? I am genuinely interested why a man posts on the feminist topics and no other. What made you first join Mumsnet?

Edd, did you honestly think I meant you when I was talking about personal attacks. I was talking about me. Whoosh....that was the sound of the point flying waaaaaaaaaay overhead.

Xposts with slhilly too.

I wasn't really referring to this thread but more to some of the wider discussions there have been on MN in recent months. I hope that is clearer.

Slhilly you said;

"From what I understand, BC, you'd want something in the second category (we prefer you behave this way but won't delete you if you don't), rather than the first?"

Well I think it was a good idea on vesuvia's part and worthy of discussion.

I suppose it would then mean that we wouldn't need a header on the actual section as you quite rightly point out.

I'm not for the header more than anything else, I just think the section is a bit of a misfit and a little tweaking is required.

Rhubard

Mumsnet has a lot of high-traffic and is a good freedom of speech zone. I like the way I can post and not get banned for "being a man not a woman" or similar reasons. You can also see I post on relationships and AIBU

Children? None of your business. The more you know about me the more others can you my personal life as a weapon

Support and advice? I'd go to another sub-section of MN for that, I don't usually require it by making a topic, i'll read others

Bonsoir I think you may have misunderstood.

I have made a couple of attempts at clearly stating that I think feminism is a grass roots thing for all women. I appreciate the thread is long though and confusion arises .

Where did I see that odd punctuation symbol before? Oh yes, it was from a particularly odious troll with a different name. It's not searchable either. How frightfully clever.