Heads up: MNHQ planning to create a sex/gender topic separate from FWR.

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/4267223-Any-chance-of-a-review-of-the-FWR-moderation-rules-in-light-of-Maya-Forstaters-success-in-court-please?pg=1

We also think now might be the time to consider a reshuffle of the topics in the Feminism board. Feminism and feminist organising has always been a crucial part of Mumsnet and we want all Mumsnet users to feel they can use these boards to discuss the hundreds of ways in which sex - and gender roles - impact on women’s lives, irrespective of their views on sex and gender. So we’d like to introduce a separate topic for Sex and Gender issues and at the same time streamline some of the other topics under the FWR umbrella (some of which are rarely used).

As I said on the linked thread, I thought sex/gender was the basis of feminism and therefore a bit odd to split it off.

You're probably right, but I am just so incredibly annoyed about this. A huge point of law has been made, vindication what a lot of women have been saying, and when asked how this will affect rules and moderation on this board going forward the response is to suggest hiding us away.

Sometimes it seems to me that MNHQ want to take all the credit for hosting these discussions whilst simultaneously coming up with ways of making it as difficult as possible to have them.

It does, and Justine acknowledged that.
So why propose this now do you think? I feel like there must have been something else going on that I've missed.

I came to this board as a worried mum of troubled teens. Mumsnet was a space very important when I Was raising my kids and during primary/secondary checking schools, shopping advice, etc.
Five years ago ROGD hit hard a group of girls in a girls only school I worked for and it was very scary to see. It’s been thanks to this Feminist board that I have found support as a mother, a friend to other mothers and an educational professional to apply some brakes to what it was a sure crash! It’s very sad to think there is a desire to sideline, obscured and annihilated what is a strong support group! I for one will be extremely disappointed on mumsnet. For me is the mains social media outlet to keep informed and participate in social debate. What is going on?

I subscribe to mumsnet, and the only reason I do is gratitude for them having this board where we can discuss this huge issue for women. Even heavily moderated as it is.

So why propose this now do you think? I feel like there must have been something else going on that I've missed.

I agree, but it's probably something we aren't privy to.

If it’s something we’re not privy too, I bet you we can brainstorm it together...
If MNHQ wanted rid of FWR, they would have done so in the last few years, under the guise of some kind of site-wide restructuring. Maybe they haven’t because they don’t want to.
IF that’s the case, then either this proposal is a kneejerk, not-thought-out comment (unlikely since MNHQ don’t seem the kneejerk type) or they have a Cunning Plan 🦊

I think it's a really bad idea, but @Bordois is almost certainly correct.

Mumsnet had somehow passed me by through the years when my children were younger - I remember an article way back in time in one of the weekend newspaper magazines with Justine excitedly explaining why she was setting it up. It all seemed to be about the best buggy and her managing to tag along at the back of the crowd in the great Internet gold rush. I rolled my eyes and gave it a swerve.

Fast forward to the run up to the GRA consultation and my benign area of twitter (Archers, occasional news stories a few NHS doctors and chat) started having more concerning tweets. I credit Dr Christian with alerting me to the word terf. Dr Haddock (who he?) reared his unpleasant little head. And a link took me to this board. I was appalled and amazed at what I found, particularly regarding children. I could not believe that in the U.K., in our NHS, children were being given puberty blockers and put on a trans pathway because they had been judged for playing with the wrong toys. I had been completely unaware this was happening.

I never really took much interest in feminism and didn't count myself as one. I'm lucky enough not have experienced sexual abuse, the flashers that hung around my girls school were widely derided and we felt safe in a gang with our hockey sticks so we never really thought more deeply about it. In twenty years as a midwife I mostly thought feminism seemed to neglect mothers and small children, pushing to get women back in the workplace without considering their desire to care for their own children and the needs of small children.
It seemed to be mostly about overpaid women in jobs like banking and the BBC complaining about not being as overpaid as their male counterparts. Working in a female dominated area, in the NHS with its nationally (then, before devolution) agreed payscales I have never experienced sexism at work. I regret to admit as a midwife I didn't know enough about domestic abuse and how to address it, thankfully midwives are now taught to be alert for the signs and to question women and be proactive, the profession has caught up with the times in that respect.

So finding this board has been a great education for me. Of course the GRA consultation was hugely important and the ongoing discussions and events leading to Maya Forstater and the latest judgement. But there is so much more here, and my eyes have been opened to many other issues, and I'm very grateful for the wider education. I have two daughters, young adults now, and lots of the discussions that happen on this board are relevant to their lives.

Splitting the board will mean that ignoramuses like me will be unlikely to find it anywhere near as helpful, they probably won't find the other section (isn't that the plan?) there will be a greater tendency to think "oh well that's a different issue, it doesn't affect me" or whatever.

I just think it will lead to a slow death of FWR. Which is probably the plan.

Is it a way of telling us not to expect the Forstater case to have any effect here? So the response to asking if the rules can be relaxed is to suggest an unhelpful restructuring. We will then be grateful if they backtrack and we can just carry on as we were.

I think there is some doubling down going on, I think the monitors are out in force and we can expect to see some ridiculous post/thread deletions. I think the worst is yet to come.

FannyCann
Such an excellent post. You have articulated so much and so clearly.
Thank you.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/when-feminists-fight-back/amp?__twitter_impression=true

This is why we speak, and this why we shouldn't be corralled into the Unspeakable's corner of Munsnet

Great post, FannyCann. Maybe it is a really bad idea then. When I first saw the suggestion for the separate topic,I must admit I was naïve enough to assume that the fact that the gender/sex debate might be given its own subsection was a sign that the current steps forward for the GC movement had emboldened MN to grant it a place to stand out more in the open. I guess not.

@Floisme

It does, and Justine acknowledged that. So why propose this now do you think? I feel like there must have been something else going on that I've missed.

To be fair, reading Justine's post, what I got was 'Since we're about to re-evaluate this moderation policy, we'll also get to the reshuffling that some posters have requested for a while'.

I don't think it was meant to be a 'This is what we will do, deal with it!' mandate from MNHQ. I also don't think it was to ban 'sex' and 'gender' on the feminism chat board but to have a separate section for the trans-identity debate but the majority of posters have reacted completely differently to it that I don't think I'm the one who's reading it right. I thought MNHQ were trying to kill two birds with one stone but I could be wrong.

@MiladyBerserko

www.spectator.co.uk/article/when-feminists-fight-back/amp?__twitter_impression=true

This is why we speak, and this why we shouldn't be corralled into the Unspeakable's corner of Munsnet

I had really hoped for a moment that MNHQ might be quietly proud at the protection of the freedom of thought, employment rights and women's rights that they've facilitated.

And then there was a substantial discourtesy to the overwhelming majority of posters who manage to discuss issues within the linguistic and other restrictions that MN mandates.

It's why I'm pegged at a 4 on the 1-10 scale of optimism that matters are improving.

Its all been said as to why this is a bad idea. Just please dont hive off this board. I came to it by accident with a bit of knowledge having tried to help fight off a takeover in a political party and I`ve learned so much. Where else can you get all the links to current articles, discussion, videos etc on sex based womens rights.

[quote Waitwhat23]@TedImgoingmad I'll be interested to see the response to your comprehensive post.[/quote]
Tumbleweed.

Also, just to say that I would happily pay some subs to MN in support of FWR in particular, but I am afraid of being doxxed (and obviously not by women’s rights campaigners)

If there was a way to pay via an anonymous gift card I would do it.

It is vital that we keep all the knowledge and wisdom women have together and accessible.

That would be great.

I avoid this board cause I don't want to get caught up in that debate which means I can't take part in anything else.

And if you're prepared to make the case for your own additional board then I think that's fair enough. Expecting the women who have made this board what it is to move over for you - not so much.

Well, I don’t think this hugely important board should be split.

But if some people want an alternative, why not utilise some of that inclusive language we’re told we all should adopt, and MN could just create an extra board called something like “Board for persons who may or may not have cervixes or menstruate” and we can see how well that one goes down?

I’m only being partly facetious tbh; I think the idea that the most important and fundamental feminist issue of our time should get hived off into different #nasty old fashioned hags and #kind and inclusive! sections is both intellectually incoherent, and completely unworkable in practice.

It is always about women moving over. Keeping quiet. Not speaking out.

Exactly women budge over, always

The answer is no

But people can set up a new area if they want

It's interesting, I'm obviously not party to any discussions at MNHQ but there have been any number of threads proposing that these discussions should be moved elsewhere, and yet I can't remember ever seeing anyone call for an additional board for - let's call it a Lib Fem voice. Not once. Even the current thread suggesting it as a compromise isn't coming from a Lib Fem point of view. Very revealing.

Splitting the board will mean that ignoramuses like me will be unlikely to find it anywhere near as helpful, they probably won't find the other section (isn't that the plan?)

You contradict this by saying earlier in your post that you had no idea this board was here until you saw a shared link. Which was the same for me. I fail to see how this route will change. This topic swamps out other topics on one board very quickly. It's a logical decision to give a bigger topic it's own section under the feminist board. Can't see the problem at all.

Floisme

It is rather par for the course now isn't it. That the minority's needs dictate the decisions like this. That the majority view (as it proven time and again on the AIBU threads) is distorted to being the 'minority and extreme' view while the minority point of view is elevated as being the mainstream.

Rather chilling.