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.

Not really no, posts on the LGBT boards are routinely hijacked. Using your analogy they shouldn't be, but there will always be a group of "rugby" fans who turn up.

I was unaware of the LGBT boards so I popped over and had a look. I think you are being very disingenuous, a few threads had started life on the FWR boards so naturally they featured regular FWR posters, those posts were moved not hijacked.

I recognised a few other names from the FWR but they appeared to have skin in the game wrt the topic of conversation. Your own comments were measured and supportive and would not have been out of place on FWR.

Overall I felt the tone of the threads was supportive, there were a few deletions for uncivil behaviour but those posters were not feminists or there to offer constructive advice as I'm sure was obvious to you.

Pretty much every feminist related discussion is linked to sex - surrogacy (only biological women can be a surrogate), sex work (exploitation & trafficking of mainly women), workplace discrimination on the basis of sex, sex differences in health, etc etc.

You can't separate the two.

I paid to become a premium member to support Mumsnet as they'd allowed these important discussions to keep going (albeit with some censorship). Not sure I'll bother if we're just going to be shoved into a box in the corner.

It won't work. Most issues start with biology or end up being about biology.

If there are people who want an additional board to discuss other issues then I think it's up to them to make the case for one, think up a name for it etc. I don't see why an established, well used and fast moving board should be the one that has to be moved.

Agree

I would be really angry if I started a thread on FWR and lesbians / lesbianism and someone moved it to the LGBT board.

Whoever is doing this must think we are really stupid. If you want a discussion on same sex (oops that word again) attraction but in a feminist context it isn't anybody's business to stop you from doing this.

What is wrong with people thinking they can decide for somebody else what they really wanted.

Now I have heard this I am cross all over again.

I am now wondering is the thread on women walking alone has been moved because even though it is about the (sex class) of female somebody has decided it doesn't have a feminist aspect.

Am beginning to wonder who all these rule makers are, who somehow dont seem to grasp that the very basic point of feminism is that it is about women being treated differently, badly, violently because of their sex.

I am now wondering is the thread on women walking alone has been moved because even though it is about the (sex class) of female somebody has decided it doesn't have a feminist aspect.

Unless I misunderstand your comment it's still here.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4266448-Do-you-walk-alone

What PaleGreen said:
It is not our fault this is where feminism currently is. I can't imagine having a board for another rights campaign where those with an understanding of the structural inequalities that are the very basis for that rights campaign to even exist are asked to keep their thoughts separate.

Thanks EmbarrassingAdmissions - I did go and check!

But still dont understand why petitions on feminist issues are shunted off into some unknown back water.

I do not understand why MNHQ isn’t hugely proud of this forum. There have been two monumental rulings in the last 6 months: Maya’s this week, and Keira Bell in December. These rulings have been huge for the protection of children being harmed when they can’t consent, and to protect women’s rights to not be discriminated against for agreeing with biology. I would not deign those rulings to be as a result of this forum, but both of those people, Maya and Keira, have posted here for support and proven to be right. I would imagine they would both acknowledge that this forum helped them in their causes. This forum facilitates huge discussion and momentum for change for the better for women and children. It’s probably one of the most “bang for your buck” places to make these changes. It’s a forum that misogynistic men like Owen Jones belittle, but I suspect are secretly terrified of. It’s a forum that is standing staunchly to protect women’s and girls’ rights even if there are those who are naive, not bothered, or think it doesn’t affect them when it does.

And this is all done within, quite frankly, ridiculous extra moderation rules that aren’t applied to any other sub forum, and exist only to appease external monitors whose feelings get hurt by discussing reality.

This forum should in no way be subdivided. It should be front and centre and indicative of how support for women can bring change as monumental as those two rulings. Which is more important to MNHQ? That discussion of such things on this forum loses sponsorship, or that discussion of such things on this forum is supporting changes, legal changes, that will be discussed for decades to come in reference to women’s rights?

Don’t cave in MNHQ. Protect this forum, be damned proud of it, don’t cave in to pressure from those who seek to silence by dividing.

@Blibbyblobby

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.

Agreed!

I came to this issue not from a feminist angle, but from free speech perspective. Censorship and ghettoizing of commentary is anti-democratic and goes against everything a liberal society should stand for. There are plenty of views of all sorts here. It really sucks that the opposition tends to post and run and when they stay cannot back up their assertions with facts. There are plenty of other threads here. I just posted in one a day or so about anesthesia and pain relief for women. Nothing trans there. Grow up.

I'm US based, but I come to Mumsnet because they are one of the few places women can discuss this and the demographic here is more my style than Ovarit. I would hate to see this bastion of good sense disappear especially when the tide is turning.

Women are not transphobic for wanting to preserve the sex based definition of womanhood or their language, rights and dignity.

I do not understand why MNHQ isn’t hugely proud of this forum. There have been two monumental rulings in the last 6 months: Maya’s this week, and Keira Bell in December. These rulings have been huge for the protection of children being harmed when they can’t consent, and to protect women’s rights to not be discriminated against for agreeing with biology. I would not deign those rulings to be as a result of this forum, but both of those people, Maya and Keira, have posted here for support and proven to be right. I would imagine they would both acknowledge that this forum helped them in their causes. This forum facilitates huge discussion and momentum for change for the better for women and children. It’s probably one of the most “bang for your buck” places to make these changes. It’s a forum that misogynistic men like Owen Jones belittle, but I suspect are secretly terrified of. It’s a forum that is standing staunchly to protect women’s and girls’ rights even if there are those who are naive, not bothered, or think it doesn’t affect them when it does.

So true.

Not a good idea at all.
The discussion around sex and gender has been the way back into feminism for me. The topics on fwr are what the members want to discuss. Recently there's been a ton of gender and sex discussions because that's where the debate has been.
If, for example, there's legislation planned which will impact on women then fwr will likely turn to discuss more on that topic eg surrogacy, prostitution, abortion etc.
Sex and gender is at the heart of feminism fgs.

Please don't do this. This forum is amazing. Books will be written about it in the future. It's a unique place. If it's not broke don't fix it. I've never seen a board with so much engagement and intelligent thought provoking posts. Anyone can post, if people are engaged they will reply, if they're not they wont. You can't dictate what people want to discuss.

I first started reading this forum in 2017/2018 and even then it was clear that the conversation was unwanted here. Which is fine, it's a commercial site after all, but I never understood the praise MNHQ gets for (just about) tolerating discussion about women's rights. It would be absurd if it was banned altogether.
This latest move to hive off troublesome women from the main boards doesn't surprise me at all.

This would be a really bad thing for women and feminists as said above.

It is exactly what someone would do if they wanted to divide and conquer.

Is that really what MN towers want to achieve?

Is this a time when we could do with the various academics for whom we've written letters to Uni VCs to protect them reciprocating? Might they contact MNHQ to say what FWR represents? Kathleen Stock, Rosa Freedman?

And journalists like Suzanne Moore? James Kirkup, Janice Turner?

Lawyers like Naomi Cunningham.

Academics/authors like Sarah Pedersen?

Jane Clare Jones. Sharron Davies.

EmbarrassingAdmissions yes! It would be great if the big names stepped up and acknowledged how valuable this corner of Mumsnet is and that it is under constant attack and being undermined at every turn.

Ditto to greying . I became a premium member to be able to show a tiny bit of appreciation for having this board where I could freely post. I don’t see the point if we’re just going to be hived off again. Other posters put it more eloquently than I can but yes, Mumsnet ought to be proud of this board and the influence it has had. It (as in all the FWR posters here) has been a Godsend to me- a safe place when I’ve received the most Godawful threats elsewhere.

Personally I don't like always being labelled a radical feminist just because I don't think male born people should compete against female born people in sport.
I prefer to be just another human rather than a radical anything over what seems to me an obvious unfairness.
The media refer to radical feminists all the time so arguments appear to be held by a minority of extremists when that is most likely not the case .

I'm no expert on this stuff - just my view.

Let's be Frank. This plan is the first step along the way for Justine to jettison FWR completely.

We all know its a bad idea and will likely cause more disruption, reports and additional resources to mod, and that will then be the reason given for shutting it down completely with the added bonus of "we tried to give you a space but you nasty women just couldn't behave"

I'm not sure it's fair to say MNHQ want to ditch FWR when they could have done it years ago and saved themselves a hell of a lot of hassle, legal consultancy fees and, I don't doubt, personal abuse. What puzzles me is the timing. Why now? I would have thought that the Maya Forstater ruling vindicated FWR so what's going on that I'm missing?

@Bordois

Let's be Frank. This plan is the first step along the way for Justine to jettison FWR completely.

We all know its a bad idea and will likely cause more disruption, reports and additional resources to mod, and that will then be the reason given for shutting it down completely with the added bonus of "we tried to give you a space but you nasty women just couldn't behave"

Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think so. MN could have chosen to shut down FWR a long time ago, but they didn't. For all the issues some have with the guidelines, it is still pretty robust and effective. But it is true that there have been regular comments from general users that FWR is currently a 'single issue' board and that if only there weren't all those 'trans' threads there would be other much more interesting threads on other issues that of course they would join in on. I think MN are responding to those comments without thinking through the reality: a) no one is stopping other topics, and if something is raised it gets debated, b) there is a reason why there are so many gender issue threads, and that is because Stonewall and similar over-reached themselves in trying to take over single sex spaces, the word woman etc etc. We wouldn't need (m)any threads on trans related topics if Stonewall et al had stuck to acceptance and third spaces and not tried to encroach on the word woman, and if Mermaids et al had been more up on safeguarding of children.

Guides admitting boys on the sly brought me here.

I would have thought that the Maya Forstater ruling vindicated FWR so what's going on that I'm missing?

It does, and Justine acknowledged that.

I agree with PP, MNHQ should be bloody proud of what they’ve recently helped to achieve, MN has been part of the struggle to get our voices heard. But less than 24 hours after Maya’s historic achievement they’ve just made most posters on the Feminist Board, angry and upset!