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.

This is a stupid idea. You can't separate out bits of things that affect women. Why are MN doing this now when the rest of the world are realising how dangerous extreme trans ideology is. Read the room Mumsnet. I'm sureyou get lots of sex positive cool girls moaning about it but they need to see it, it's for their own good.

ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE MAYA DECISION YESTERDAY.

It's precisely because of the decision yesterday. The monitors aren't happy at all and probably very worried that even more pesky women will be radicalised to center women in their feminism.

If the board must be separated we should call it the naughty step just so that we're all very clear about how unacceptable so many people find women's opinions.

It won't make any difference at all, no matter which board these issues are discussed the transphobic brigade will hijack any discussion and turn it in to yet another single sex space argument.

They couldn’t let us have one whole day could they.

@lakesummer

I think that this suggestion underestimates how interconnected these issues are.

There is currently a thread on FWR about the Oxfam training which suggests that white women shouldn't seek legal justice following rape.

This is clearly a feminist issue. But the training came out of the LGBT+ group in Oxfam and is routed in queer theory.

One issue cannot be discussed without discussing the other.
These issues are intertwined at a political level in many organizations.

Yes this. So much is interconnected.

@LizzieSiddal

They couldn’t let us have one whole day could they.

Could well be an own goal.

If using this board gets difficult then there will be more posts in chat and AIBU.

Quaggars that's possibly because oft times posters post things that are not science based, would discommode women, would further erode women's rights.

It's the FWR that is the clue. If you want to post in support of anything else, wish to dilute women's rights, to change the way the words woman's and female are understood in law, then you are going to get a determined push back.

It's a bit like going into a forum about football and insisting they discuss rugby!

@Imasoulman

It won't make any difference at all, no matter which board these issues are discussed the transphobic brigade will hijack any discussion and turn it in to yet another single sex space argument.

That's just the kind of "what about rugby?" post I mean.

I remember a wonderful thread from a few months back which was started by a woman who had been carrying out research into play spaces, and how they are rarely designed to cater for the needs and preferences of girls. There were lots of enthusiastic contributions and some really valuable ideas were shared and explored. Not once were any gender identify or trans issues mentioned, because (for once) these issues were completely irrelevant to the subject being discussed.

I resent the implication that FWR is a rabid pit of GC nutcases. It really isn't. It is just the unfortunate reality that the current issues around gender identity have huge implications for an incredibly wide range of feminist issues. You can't forcibly separate the two.

Well that's going to be 90% of all threads started being located in, or moved to, the new area then. I bet a lot of threads will start 'I'm not sure if this is allowed in FWR or should be moved across to Sex and Gender'....

Massive own goal and will just demonstrate how much this stupid ideology affects every aspect of a women's life. Bring it on and then show the stats for threads and visitors to threads and each fora.

forum, not fora.

Seriously? The day after it was confirmed that believing that women are female is an acceptable and justifiable position?

How can MNHQ conceive of separating sex, the axis (sp?) of our oppression, from the feminism topic? Without sex there IS no feminism.

@cheeseismydownfall

I remember a wonderful thread from a few months back which was started by a woman who had been carrying out research into play spaces, and how they are rarely designed to cater for the needs and preferences of girls. There were lots of enthusiastic contributions and some really valuable ideas were shared and explored. Not once were any gender identify or trans issues mentioned, because (for once) these issues were completely irrelevant to the subject being discussed.

I resent the implication that FWR is a rabid pit of GC nutcases. It really isn't. It is just the unfortunate reality that the current issues around gender identity have huge implications for an incredibly wide range of feminist issues. You can't forcibly separate the two.

That is an amazing thread - and yet another campaign that arose from MN FWR discussion iirc.

but they need to see its for their own good
Oh wow lol
Sure you didn't mean it (I hope) but that totally comes across as silly women just don't know their own minds
Which was what people were on about earlier, including MN themselves I think.
The other viewpoint.
That people say is welcome here.
No, it isn't
If you don't ''think' ' right, you're just a silly little handmaiden who doesnt know what's good for them and needs showing the way.

Doesn't all feminist discussion fall under Sex and Gender? Or vice versa?

Personally I'd like to see trans/gender identity dominate less of FWR, but I understand why it does currently. I don't think dividing it off will help, and I hate the idea of separate libfem/radfem spaces. I think it would just contribute to the division and antagonism. When realistically if we want to make a difference to things life violence against women or structural sexism we need to find a way to work together ultimately - even if grudgingly.

The day after a judge ruled a belief in biological sex was worthy of respect in a democratic society we're still being called transphobes and shuffled off out of sight. And people are still claiming confusion about why sex is so important when discussing issues affecting women. You really couldn't make this up.

@Quaggars

but they need to see its for their own good Oh wow lol Sure you didn't mean it (I hope) but that totally comes across as silly women just don't know their own minds Which was what people were on about earlier, including MN themselves I think. The other viewpoint. That people say is welcome here. No, it isn't If you don't ''think' ' right, you're just a silly little handmaiden who doesnt know what's good for them and needs showing the way.

According to ONE poster.... just one... who you can thoroughly ignore if you disagree with. This catastrophizing from what one poster says to make it "everyone on FWR says"... is just bizarre.

but they need to see its for their own good

That will always sound dubious and corrective.

I do understand the need to read outside one's own perspective - however, in most specialities as well as in general, that confers no obligation to read unevidenced assertions nor proffers that appear to be from bad faith actors.

Ridiculous, patronising idea.

Also, the whole feckimg problem stems from conflating gender with sex!

Have a Gender board, by all means. But there can be no feminism without reference to sex.

I didn't say it was the whole of FWR at all.
Of course there's going to be different views.
It IS the prevailing view though when you post not agreeing with everything, you just get dismissed as not knowing your own mind, not knowing any better or you're secretly a man.
Because women just don't know any better if they don't agree Not any better if it's women doing it to other women, than when it's a man doing it.
That's what posts upthread were referring to, and I presume what MN meant too - an example comes along to show nicely and it's nothing to see here, we're not all like that.
Never said everyone was.

It would be interesting to see some threads classified as S&G or FWR to see how MNHQ propose to do it. I can't see how it would work.

I’m old enough to remember the internet before social media and then Trans Orthodoxy came along. It was very common for popular boards to have a Women’s thread or sub forum because women were usually outnumbered and wanted a place where their voices were not drowned out by the majority views and interests of men. Sites that survive from back then often still have them. Mumsnet is a really interesting exception in that being female-dominated from the start it went the other way and has a Dadsnet

So the women’s board would be set up. A typical dynamic would then play out. Some men would take exception to this and insist firstly that it was sexist and shouldn’t be allowed, and when that failed, that for equality to be served they needed a Man’s version as well. This would duly be set up and there would be an initial flurry of activity as the men involved congratulated each other. A few would try and post something “men’s interest” but as the initial excitement waned they would get fewer and fewer responses and the board would slowly die a death as no one posted.

These men’s boards typically failed because they weren’t needed in their own right as a place to talk, they were just set up out of malice and opposition with nothing to drive their own focus. Men’s needs/interests were already being met by the site as a whole so they didn’t need the separate space. Meanwhile, the women’s board would continue to be relatively active because it had a genuine purpose.

I’m pretty sure if you split sex-based feminism into its own area, a similar dynamic will play out here. The sex-based board will carry the FWR momentum and the gender-based feminism board will dwindle.

Mumsnet itself is a feminist site simply by dint of women talking and helping each other deal with the stuff that crops up in women’s lives. You don’t need a soft, don’t scare the horses feminist discussion board because that’s already covered by the site as a whole. You need a this-isn’t-nice-but-it-hurts-us-and-it-needs-to-be-said feminist discussion board or it has no purpose.

If there was a Sex & Gender discussion board, would it be bound by the current FWR moderation rules, @JustineMumsnet? Or would we be able to speak more freely?

I profoundly disagree, @Quaggars, that there is a prevailing situation that if you disagree the general response is that you don't know your own mind, that you don't know any better or that you're a man.

I'm not saying it never happens. I have seen some examples of the "you're a man" type posts, they aren't a majority and people often ignore or point out the unhelpfulness. Again, not always.

Is it really too difficult to ignore posters that aren't responding in a way you'd like and simply reply to those who are? Whilst also reporting any posts that go too far to MNHQ?

If anyone is interested, the initiative around play spaces for girls which (I think) orginated from here has a website makespaceforgirls.co.uk/ which is really interesting - some great initiatives and research going on.

In terms of talk about how discussions around how feminism is affected by our biological sex being shunted off into some side board, the misogynist monitors must be loving it. It's also completely unworkable and will be constantly attacked by bad faith posters. But that's the point isn't it? Making it unusable until it dies a death and all those nasty 'transphobes' bugger off somewhere else. It's coming to a point where MNHQ need to decide where they stand, honestly, without sitting on the fence, particularly in view of the ruling yesterday.