If you don't like the idea of hiving off sex/gender issues into a separate board...

[YourSexNotGenderIsOnFire]

I have suggested to MNHQ that instead of moving sex/gender talk to its own forum they could either:

• implement a feature allowing people to block all threads containing a particular word or phrase (eg "trans");
• have a tick box that you can tick when creating a thread on FWR to note if it's intended to focus on transgender ideology's impact on feminism.

What do people think? My view is that this would allow the people who really want to avoid sex/gender issues to filter most of it out whilst leaving us free to largely continue as we are.

If you would support this compromise then please comment on the thread on site stuff: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/4270115-Hide-threads-containing-a-particular-word-or-phrase?msgid=108194142 MNHQ have said "We'll keep an eye on this thread too to see what the general consensus is."

I don’t want to see the issue shunted off to a backwater. I came for the GC but I have learned so much about many many other issues through this board that I would never have seen otherwise.

I like the idea of a word or phrase filter to help people hide threads they don’t want to see.

I think a tick-box is of more limited use to those wishing to protect their sensibilities (but may still be useful) because it would only identify those threads with a main TRA ideology focus. The issue is so interwoven with everything else, it’s sure to crop up in other threads too. Perhaps it would reduce visible threads sufficiently for those who wish to read and comment more broadly, without trying to swerve the issue altogether.

Why can't people hide the threads themselves?

I have suggested to MNHQ that instead of moving sex/gender talk to its own forum they could

I feel like I've missed something. Where is there a proposal to split FWR?

No.
You have a choice to click on a thread, or not.
Leave it alone.

It's here altforvarmt, from Justine as well so you know it's under serious consideration.

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?topicid=1374&threadid=4267223&pg=6

No.
You have a choice to click on a thread, or not.
Leave it alone.

Well that was always my position too but it seems like MNHQ are considering a separate board. This is the best compromise I can come up with 🤷‍♀️

How about if people don't want to read a thread they just scroll on by?

While I agree with Whatsnewpussyhat in principle, if something must be done then I prefer your first option, give people the option to block all threads containing a specific word.

I do just think, what is all the fuss about? Anyone can start a thread on any feminist topic, anyone can post on threads, any opinion can be posted within the guidelines. Threads can already be hidden. Don’t engage with threads or posters that you don’t want to engage with.

I just don't see how we can actually discuss feminism without 'sex' and 'gender' being part of it. It's the absolute crux of feminism - how 'gender' impacts on 'sex'.

So I don't really see how the proposal to split the board will work in practise. The gender issues affect every issue related to women, with no exceptions that I can really think of.

Which is perhaps why, given a moment's thought, it's obvious that so many women who have been feminists for so long, and given the subject so much thought, are concerned and here to discuss it.

I like the idea of a word or phrase filter to help people hide threads they don’t want to see.

But many of those who complain about what we discuss here aren't actual Mumsnet users, so that probably won't help anything. Their issue isn't that they see what we talk about - they could easily just avoid FWR altogether - but that we are allowed to talk about it.

I've commented op. I think it's a much better idea than a split board.
As with the other suggested compromise, I'm exasperated that it's being left to us to come up with solutions while those who don't like the board as it is seem to think they can just expect us to move over. But this suggestion puts the onus on them to take some action which seems fair.

@Zeev

I like the idea of a word or phrase filter to help people hide threads they don’t want to see.

But many of those who complain about what we discuss here aren't actual Mumsnet users, so that probably won't help anything. Their issue isn't that they see what we talk about - they could easily just avoid FWR altogether - but that we are allowed to talk about it.

I agree with your analysis, but i guess if there was a filter such as the OP described, it would make their whining seem even more disingenuous.

@Whatsnewpussyhat

No. You have a choice to click on a thread, or not. Leave it alone.

That’s my opinion too

@Whatsnewpussyhat

No. You have a choice to click on a thread, or not. Leave it alone.

This. I regularly ignore threads or skim read and then ignore if I am not that bothered about it.

I don’t understand how or why, now that GC has finally been validated as a legitimate belief in law, there is a move to hide the topic.

I think people need to take some.personal responsibility and just not read a thread if they don't want to.

We aren't everyone's mother , I'm.fed up enough of having to sanitise what I say to the point of not being able to fill in the very obvious gaps without having to tick boxes to handhold people who won't help themselves .

Could a compromise be on that threads on campaigns or specific issues were in a separate section. ("women's place campaigns and court cases") for example.

But you can't separate out the discussion of sex and gender from the discussions of women's rights when gender is used as a mechanism to oppress the female sex

@Whatwouldscullydo

I think people need to take some.personal responsibility and just not read a thread if they don't want to.

We aren't everyone's mother , I'm.fed up enough of having to sanitise what I say to the point of not being able to fill in the very obvious gaps without having to tick boxes to handhold people who won't help themselves .

Maybe that's the trouble, Scully, they see 'Mumsnet' and think we are all their mother.

No way should MNHQ (or any other board) facilitate this silliness.

As other have said dont click on threads you dont want to.

Start threads you are interested in.

And anyway it would be plain daft as I suspect in 99 out of a 100 any thread on FWR will contain the word trans and not necessary about trans people.

altforvarmt - the main discussion is here www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4268058-Heads-up-MNHQ-planning-to-create-a-sex-gender-topic-separate-from-FWR

Also an amazed this thread has been allowed as apparently TAAT get you deleted. Or maybe only when the thread is actually about MNHQ criticising their censorship.

But you can't separate out the discussion of sex and gender from the discussions of women's rights when gender is used as a mechanism to oppress the female sex

Exactly. It would only work if women were forbidden from discussing feminism at all. And anything to do with our bodies. Or lives.

Maybe it would be best if we just didn't talk at all.

If the issue is the inability to discuss intersectional feminism without discussing implications of TWAW, then perhaps an option to tick a gender identity free thread box when posting. This would give an idea of which actual discussions are being suppressed as alleged before draconian solutions such as splitting the board. It would be interesting to see how and what the people complaining actually want to discuss.

I've started threads which were not about trans issues and have no complaints so would feel no need to tick a box. The discussions have been 3 dimensional i.e. different points of view. I suspect the idea is to reduce discussions to one dimension.

I would be very angry if the the board was split.

Maybe it would be best if we just didn't talk at all

And yet then we'd get the blame for everything when it happens. We already get enough of the " where are the feminists now" comments on the news paper articles.

The sooner everyone realises the only reason they have what they do is because women didn't shut up and bugger off to talk about kittens. Seems they happy to reap the benefits whilst pretending they aren't like us "bigots"

A general feature on the site to block threads with titles containing words of your choice you would be useful - there were complaints about too many Meghan and Harry threads for example.