So Mumsnet ignored our request to have something to do with 'feminism' or 'women' in the name of the 'naughty step' subtopic

[StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind]

So we now have

Feminist Chat (which was our space anyway)

Sex and gender debate

If they had to go ahead with this spineless nonsense plan, many of us on the preferred names thread suggested it was essential to include feminism in the naughty step topic. You cannot take the debate on sex/gender away from feminism.

I think my suggestion was:

Feminism: Women's Sex Based Rights

LibFem

So not only are they ignoring us and forging ahead with this crap, they've removed any relationship to feminism and women from the subtopic name.

Absolutely disgusted. This feels so reminiscent of the erasure of the word 'women' in so many contexts. To take the word feminist out of this subtopic- @MNHQ can you explain this? Because it's awful.

Dunno about 'gender'. One reason we're in this mess is that the words 'sex' and 'gender' are being conflated, so I can see an argument for keeping both - it reinforces that they're two separate things, not interchangeable.

We now have Feminism as the first part of the title on both boards! And on my phone, the Sex & Gender board is the first one listed. Is that random or down to busy-ness?

No it links the two as if they’re both equally valid. They are not.

Sorry X post with Nink - that post of mine was about having both sex and gender in the name.

@LazyHorizon

We now have Feminism as the first part of the title on both boards! And on my phone, the Sex & Gender board is the first one listed. Is that random or down to busy-ness?

We now have Feminism as the first part of the title on both boards! We do indeed! Thanks for taking that on board Justine

Ok to be clear, so we can draw a line (hopefully!) - we're going to keep debate to help it be distinguished from the other forum.

On stats for FWR - someone suggested we're disingenuous about financial loss involved in hosting FWR because of the amount of traffic it generates. Here are the stats year to date:
FWR accounted 2.49% of page views on Mumsnet. And ranks 20th out of our forums for landing pages from search.

(Not being argumentative for the sake of it, I promise. I’ll try to come back with a more extensive argument as to why I feel strongly about this but two examples have already been given as to why it’s a highly questionable and extremely insulting title)

Disappointed. That’s really not a good enough argument for that title, @JustineMumsnet.

Ok to be clear, so we can draw a line (hopefully!) - we're going to keep debate to help it be distinguished from the other forum.

Debate distinguishes it from chat

What’s the difference in content?

I know you’d like to draw a line but it does need to make sense to users otherwise they’ll just post about it

(The differentiation angle, that is.)

However I accept that a line has been drawn.

Final request @JustineMumsnet would you consider ‘discussion’ instead? That has a rather more appropriate meaning to my mind.

Appreciate the inclusion of feminism in the title, btw.🌻🌻

FWR accounted 2.49% of page views on Mumsnet

And yet that 2.4% is so threatening to TRAs and women who aren't interested in feminism(?) that MNHQ have been systematically targetted and, presumably, berated/threatened with more action, for allowing us to talk.

So powerful - the words of women. No, wait....

I don’t get how ‘debate’ distinguishes from ‘chat’ or helps demarcate one section from the other

Does anyone post differently if a title has one or the other?

It’s superfluous, despite explanation, I’m not following why

I wonder if it doesn’t rank that highly in search because people have it bookmarked? It’s a destination forum for feminists. The old one was, I mean.

Or perhaps it’s because Google search results are filtered ideologically and in all other ways to match users’ search histories, so those looking for that kind of content are already likely to know where to find it? Lots of interesting possibilities to consider. Who knows.

20th out of all the forums on MN inc AIBU, Chat, Coronavirus et al seems pretty good to me.

It was 3rd most popular in an earlier poll. Different criteria...

So everyone is free to post gender critical threads on the 'chat' section unless they are specifically looking for a debate MNHQ? 🤷‍♀️
The new board is specifically for debates?
Seems appropriate to me considering GC chat/discussions are still feminist chat/discussions.

As a trans widow, I'm quite uncomfortable with our threads being in this section. This is what I posted on the current thread:

"Our situations and struggles are not a debate, and I don't think that it's really part of the "debate" even though it does involve sex and gender. This thread is for support. Just imagine if a new woman who is struggling with her partner's gender issues finds this thread and sees that it's under "sex and gender debate" she may well back away thinking that it will be discussions about whether she should be supportive or not.

Feminism - about us.
Sex and gender debate - about them."

It kind of feels like we were shunted here because we mention TW often, but it's always in the context of our struggles, our feelings, and our reality. It's not a debate.

@JustineMumsnet, could you answer themiserychick's point please?

@JustineMumsnet

Ok to be clear, so we can draw a line (hopefully!) - we're going to keep debate to help it be distinguished from the other forum.

On stats for FWR - someone suggested we're disingenuous about financial loss involved in hosting FWR because of the amount of traffic it generates. Here are the stats year to date:
FWR accounted 2.49% of page views on Mumsnet. And ranks 20th out of our forums for landing pages from search.

Sorry, I don't think the line ca be drawn while the fact the trans widows threads have been placed in the 'debate' section when those threads are nothing to do with 'debate' as they're about support. While I get the difficulties (up to a point) I'm disappointed that the posts from tinsel and others have been ignored, and those threads have been placed in a section which is inviting 'debate' when that's explicitly not what the trans widows threads are about.

I do think that needs to be addressed.

Debate = two or more points of view, discussed.

The trans widows threads are support threads for a very particular type of domestic abuse.

@JustineMumsnet

Ok to be clear, so we can draw a line (hopefully!) - we're going to keep debate to help it be distinguished from the other forum.

On stats for FWR - someone suggested we're disingenuous about financial loss involved in hosting FWR because of the amount of traffic it generates. Here are the stats year to date:
FWR accounted 2.49% of page views on Mumsnet. And ranks 20th out of our forums for landing pages from search.

Purely out of professional nosiness (SEO here & I’ll understand perfectly if you say it’s none of my business) 2.49% of page views (total number of clicks on a page, including multiple clicks in one session) or unique page views (the number of sessions when a page was viewed, regardless of whether a user clicked on it multiple times?)

Landing pages from search are obvs a big thing but I’m also curious about how you compensate for forum size - do forums with more pages have an advantage here or are you specifically talking about the index page for each forum?

And finally, where did FWR rank for landing pages from all channels?

Thankyou @JustineMumsnet for including feminism in the title, it's so important to have it there.

I do wonder if discussion would be better than debate? And there does seem to be real confusion about what should be posted where.

I was under the impression that FWR was the third most popular board, in terms of people's first experience of mumsnet. In other words they came to look at FWR and then looked at the rest.

And that traffic to the board had increased 12 fold in one year? Which would imply an increase in popularity?

But I'm not tecky, and can't grasp the implications of some of these stats.

The lived experience of women is not up for “debate”.

@JustineMumsnet

Ok to be clear, so we can draw a line (hopefully!) - we're going to keep debate to help it be distinguished from the other forum.

On stats for FWR - someone suggested we're disingenuous about financial loss involved in hosting FWR because of the amount of traffic it generates. Here are the stats year to date:
FWR accounted 2.49% of page views on Mumsnet. And ranks 20th out of our forums for landing pages from search.

What was it 18 months ago, before you banned half the FWR regulars?