Compromise for new FWR section - could you support this?

[shesellsseacats]

Sex self ID / sex and gender and related questions are THE main topic of feminism at the moment. This shouldn't be hidden away.

But fair enough, if people want a section that doesn't have this topic in it.

So, how about MN keeps this main topic as Feminism Chat, same as now (all feminist related topics welcome) and then add a feminist sub-topic that's for those who don't want to discuss sex and gender.

This will give those who want it, a section free from this discussion, but be much less of a moderation headache for MN.

Win-win, no?!

Could you get behind this?

If so, what could the new sub-topic be called? (Some sensible answers, please! I'd love MN to take this seriously.)

Remember the Bounty campaign? Back in the day when so many of us complained about them?
It would appear current sponsors etc have decided to apply pressure to MNHQ.
Christ alive. ‘ a forum run for women, by women’ but only if we put up and shut up.
Slow handclap Mumsnet Towers.

The danger is that activists will put pressure on Mumsnet to close the GC board. After all, MN would still have a feminism board - just one where you weren't allowed to criticise gender ideology.

I think this is a good point - just understood it now. It will definitely be an easier target to shut down if separated.

After all, MN would still have a feminism board - just one where you weren't allowed to criticise gender ideology.

Ah of course because then you wouldn't be a misogynist you'd be fighting "transphobes", it makes sense now.

MNHQ want to purge discussion of sex and gender from this board

Since that is the biggest threat to women’s rights at present, how could this board continue to be FWR?

Boundaries.

The constant need to police them and not give an inch because it invites creep.

It's exhausting and damaging. Constant 'small' concessions always end with getting rid of the thing - it's like managing people out in the workplace.

@LeopardHawk

No. You can't engage with feminism while ignoring sex and gender. It would be like a communist discussion board that excluded mention of labour or capital.

This, I’m afraid. They’re aren’t separable.

@Floisme

I don't know op, you're trying to be positive and I feel a bit churlish arguing with you. I just have a strong feeling that it won't solve the objections to FWR. You see, I don't think any of this is really about a desire for a new, additional space because it it were, wouldn't the suggestion have been made already? I suspect the issue is that what is wanted is this space, and that therefore this compromise, admirable as it sounds, won't achieve anything. But maybe I've just had a bad day!

Agreed

@DifficultBloodyWoman

No. I think there are too many Feminist subcategories as it is. If there is a thread that doesn’t interest me, I won’t open it. But at least give me a chance to see and read the title!

(And I do find this very uncomfortable in light of the ruling in Maya’s case).

This

@DifficultBloodyWoman

Also, I get the impression that whoever suggested this doesn’t actually understand feminism.

And this

Quite! The endless small encroachment into women only spaces is how we got here in the first place

“Of course TW offenders wouldn’t be put in women prisons” but they were

“Of course no one would let TW play rugby against women” until the RFU said ‘that’s fine’

“Of course programmes to increase women’s representation in politics won’t be open to TW” until they were

Every tiny concession, every little line that was pushed and women socialised as we are to beeeeee kiiiind said “um well as long as you promise not to taje the piss im sure tjat will be fine” is how we got to having to go to court to have the right to say that no men can’t actually change Sex to be women

Somewhere women aren't allowed to post about important topics that directly affect them sounds like twitter tbh

Good point that isolation will make it an easier target.

I feel bad for the op cos this is still a million times better than MNHQ's proposal and, if I thought this was the 'Lib fem' side of the argument wanting to go off and set up their own space , I'd be saying 'sorry to see you go but fair enough'.
But as it is, it feels a bit like having a teenager who moans non stop about wanting to leave home but who expects you to pack their bags for them - it's not only that it's annoying, it's also that you know it's not going to work.

Wouldn't this mean putting together moderation principles for discussing feminism without reference to biological sex - for this board or a sub-board, depending how they were split? I'd like to know what they would look like. Would they then apply everywhere on MN except the special segregated board?

Nope.

It’s a no from me. I cannot fathom on how you can discuss FWR without mentioning sex and gender. If someone wants to discuss an issue then start a thread on it - don’t moan about the other threads that someone has taken the time to set up because they felt strongly enough.

In answer to the OP, no!

As others have said, this is the single most important issue being discussed by feminists at present. The meaning of the word 'women' has been so compromised that we have to specify with 'natal women' or 'adult human females' or 'XX women' when we mean, yunno, women.

The whole situation is fucking insane.

Cheer up OP. At least you got everyone to.agree on something.

Sounds like this space is under threat. Do we need to start contingency planning a new online space? If Mumsnet are genuinely considering this, they are not so naive as to not understand the implications. Perhaps it is strategic?

Sorry but another no feminism is about women sex based rights

@ChateauMargaux

Sounds like policing womens speech to me... wasnt there some attempt to split this board into Lib Fem and Rad Fem a while ago.. I think that was not super successful!

Jeez, this is like the cancel the cheque thread!

I can see I plainly wrote the OP badly, I should have given the background more clearly.

I'm not suggesting we split the board - MNHQ are.

In their version we get banned from this board, effectively and hidden away.

I'm suggesting this board stays as it is and that if other people want a feminist section where sex and gender are not discussed, then they should have a new thread elsewhere, not us.

A new board, I mean.

a) I don't understand how this is intended to work. How can you talk about feminism and not mention say sexism? Presumably banned as it references the word sex. Or the so-called gender pay gap, banned as it references gender, which is banned.

It's like having a Health board where you're not allowed to mention illness or a Relationships board where you're not allowed to mention the terms husband, partner etc or abbreviations.

b) Why on earth has MN, which has stood strong in defence of its female audience and userbase - without which it doesn't have a business - suddenly succumbed to an attack of what I can only say appears to be cowardice, straight after a judge and the EHRC have officially pronounced that women DO have the right to discuss sex and gender and have opinions on these things?

Why now??

I'm suggesting this board stays as it is and that if other people want a feminist section where sex and gender are not discussed, then they should have a new thread elsewhere, not us.

I agree that if the board has to be split your option is better. But I still believe that people don't want a section where sex and gender are not discussed, they want sex and gender to not be discussed at all.

@GrumpyMiddleAgedWoman

In answer to the OP, no!

As others have said, this is the single most important issue being discussed by feminists at present. The meaning of the word 'women' has been so compromised that we have to specify with 'natal women' or 'adult human females' or 'XX women' when we mean, yunno, women.

The whole situation is fucking insane.

What are you saying no to?

Are you saying no to the idea that feminism shouldn't include discussion of sex and gender?

If so, I agree wholeheartedly.

Are you saying no to the board being split? In which case, yes I agree but MNHQ are saying they want to do this, not me

Or, are you saying no to my suggestion that this board stays the same and any new board goes elsewhere? If so, what is your objection?

@belleager

Wouldn't this mean putting together moderation principles for discussing feminism without reference to biological sex - for this board or a sub-board, depending how they were split? I'd like to know what they would look like. Would they then apply everywhere on MN except the special segregated board?

IKR! It'll be a moderation nightmare for MN, I'm not sure if they really understand the implications of what they're suggesting!