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.

@Blibbyblobby

^^ That's not to say the lib fem threads should not be here obviously! Just an explanation for why they may not get as much traffic. It's not that people don't care, more that the first few posts most likely cover what most readers are thinking.

I frequently find I open threads in FWR that are about more traditional feminist subjects, and short of posting to say, "I agree" or "This is dreadful" I don't honestly have a lot to add.

It'd be like going on to the Dogs board and writing a post saying, "I enjoy having dogs as pets". Unless the thread is joined by people from outside the Dogs board who want to argue that dogs are horrible creatures, what you'll likely get is a handful of people saying, "yeah, I love my dog" and then it'll just fizzle out.

@EmpressWitchDoesntBurn

I think it means that in Robin’s opinion, you can’t be a feminist if your main priority is females.

It's not my impression that RMW engages in good faith.

When will FWR posters' sense of fairness allow them to set aside Robin's opinion except where it intersects with interesting events?

I enjoy reading the FWR board, as a transwoman I have learnt a hell of a lot. Seen things from another point of view and heard of issues that had never even occurred to me.

I can't really see the point of a separate board, if you have an interest or a point to make wouldn't you just seek out the board anyway?

Will it keep the transphobic out and allow a better flowing debate that could actually lead to alliances being formed?

If the feminists want it left as is, then leave it as is

@Imasoulman

I enjoy reading the FWR board, as a transwoman I have learnt a hell of a lot. Seen things from another point of view and heard of issues that had never even occurred to me.

I can't really see the point of a separate board, if you have an interest or a point to make wouldn't you just seek out the board anyway?

Will it keep the transphobic out and allow a better flowing debate that could actually lead to alliances being formed?

If the feminists want it left as is, then leave it as is

It is, as usual, interesting to read your opinion Imasoulman No matter how much we have disagreed in the past (sorry, I have name changed so that will appear creepy from your perspective ) it has mostly been on data, perspectives, and not personal insults.

I hope MNHQ have got the gist now. Splitting the board. Bad idea. Creating a new trans free zone, less bad idea, but probably unworkable, keeping things as is, not perfect but the best we have for now. It will balance out as the broader discussions in society balance out. When there is a #nodebate mandate, then of course the fee places where there is a debate to be had will be dominated by this topic.

When the necessary discourse is happening where it should, in the pub, in the workplace, in the courts in our unions, in the press etc, then the discussions here will naturally wane.

But, until then this is the biggest show in feminist town and it will demand the lions share of attention. Shunting it off won't solve anything.

MNHQ I suggest if you do do this that you agree a set of criteria to evaluate the success of such a move. What are your key objectives and what metrics will you use to evaluate whether they have been met. I still don't really get what it is you are trying to achieve.

I suggest before they even start of having a discussion about how it might work that they put it to the vote.

And to ensure it isn't swung by outside interests it would be easy to send us via our emails the link to a closed survey.

Anything else in undemocratic.

I’d still like to know whether the FWR moderation policy will stay the same in the new sex / gender topic, or whether we’ll be able to refer to people by their correct sex.

There are so many problems with naming already, I don't see the point in adding to them: 'FWR' - who knows what an obscure set of letters is meant to be? Some ancient code for the initiated? Please drop it and use words. 'Feminism Chat' - what's that supposed to mean? Discussion of feminism, you might think, discounting the trivialising 'Chat'. Apparently not, as users of the forum insist it means Feminist Discussion whenever anyone questions feminism; assuming they are correct, then name it that. 'Gender Critical' is a misnomer and does not convey the actual sense and substance of women's rights being the subject and the focus of women's interest and advocacy. How is anyone supposed to know what you mean by Sex and Gender? They are the same by the way but you may mean something else by them. Who knows how people would know where to post? There are problems with the Feminism Chat forum being assumed by users to be solely about trans identity matters and posting on that assumption but I don't see this proposal as being of the slightest use in addressing that.

The forum used to be called Feminism and Women's Rights, which was abbreviated to FWR.

You can tell a population (in this case, mumsnetters!) that you are renaming a thing and that they must all call it by the new name (feminism chat) but making people comply with that is a different matter.

@Blibbyblobby

FWIW, I didn't engage on the Guerilla Girls thread because there's not really any discussion needed. I'm pretty sure everyone on a Feminist board would agree it's a shit situation. There's load of analysis of the female body in art out there - I wrote some of it myself 20+ years ago.

I'm not saying it's ok - clearly not, because it's still an issue 20 years on! But the conversation that needs to happen is not here on the feminist boards but out there in society about why it is, when we all agree on paper that sexism is bad, shit like this is still so ingrained.

And that's also the reason FWR appears to be "dominated" by gender ideology - because in its current form it's a new thing and feminists are working their way through it, sharing experiences and analysis and coming to conclusions and consensus (or at least coalescing into a few camps).

By contrast, the stuff that is more lib fem is more established and already accepted at least in principle in society, so the work to be done is less theory and analysis, and more getting out there and getting that principle applied in practice. And as I said in an earlier post, that's happening all over mumsnet every day.

Very well put.

I wouldn't mind a spilt if we can truly speak our mind (aka call a man, a man) and have a reasonable name and give us the option of not seeing one or the other boards in our searches.

I like the names...
Women centred radical feminism
Transwomen centred liberal feminism

Simple and clear as to which camp you wish to post in. Everyone gets space to post.

Then if Mumsnet Towers still gets poster's coming into a section just to complain. Then MNT can rightly tell them to quit moaning and block that board. So less moderation headaches too.

If people don't like a particular conversation and struggle to see it because it is too upsetting then go past them. I certainly have subjects on this site that I find triggering (actually triggering) because of past trauma. Other posters are free to discuss them because we are all grown ups.
This is a key discussion in feminism. It is not a niche area. It panders to TRAs to shove it into a corner.

@Worrysaboutalot

I wouldn't mind a spilt if we can truly speak our mind (aka call a man, a man) and have a reasonable name and give us the option of not seeing one or the other boards in our searches.

I like the names...
Women centred radical feminism
Transwomen centred liberal feminism

Simple and clear as to which camp you wish to post in. Everyone gets space to post.

Then if Mumsnet Towers still gets poster's coming into a section just to complain. Then MNT can rightly tell them to quit moaning and block that board. So less moderation headaches too.

I'd be happy with that that split if there was no hierarchy, if they were separate boards with equal status.

We'd need different names though - I don't think splitting it into rad fem / lib fem works though, as Radical Feminism means something specific, it's not synonymous with GC. What about Socialist Feminism? And Marxist Feminism? Or feminist women who don't affiliate with any of those sub-sections of feminism? (as Maya stood up and declared at WPUK2020).

If it was called Rad Fem, then we'd get people arguing about whether topics were sufficiently Rad Fem enough.

I think it has to be one general feminism topic (this one), ideally a lot less moderated than now.

And another where talk of sex and gender is banned, for those who don't want it.

But what MN have suggested is to purge discussion of sex and gender from the main feminist chat section and make us a sub section. Which is a crazy idea, it won't work for anyone.

MNHQ I suggest if you do do this that you agree a set of criteria to evaluate the success of such a move. What are your key objectives and what metrics will you use to evaluate whether they have been met. I still don't really get what it is you are trying to achieve

It's been done now but I do hope they consider this valuable suggestion.