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.

I’m struggling to get my head around what goes on at advertising companies. They’re prepared to give up advertising on forums with 97.51% page views of the entire site, because a bunch of bullies on Twitter complain about what gets posted on a forum with 2.49% page views of the entire site?

To use a football analogy, given the Euros, and assuming full capacity for Wembley, it would be like pulling billboard advertising for the entire stadium because some people watching on TV at home didn’t like what section 139 in the corner were singing. Just bonkers .

And you wonder why people are so pissed off? Who were you trying to please?

Just a few nitpicks.
Debate needs to be changed to discussion, otherwise it's implying a hostile environment (and I thought the rationale was to make it easier and less daunting for certain types of people.)
Both sections need a drop down from feminism in the main site shortcuts, or one will get more traffic by default.
Capitalisation is all over the shop in terms of titles. Not necessarily the most important thing, but it's been bugging me.

And given that TRAs position is "No Debate", who is the debate with?

Please change debate. It's designing conflict into the board.

I can't really get in a tizz about this. I think we need to be kinder and more understanding re Justine and team, after all they could have just said 'sod it's and closed down the feminist boards due to all the hassles.

A site aimed mainly at mums and women would be a bit odd without a feminism section, no?

If they closed the feminism section then the feminism would just leak out elsewhere. It pretty much does that anyway.
What the hasslers ideally would like is no site at all.

@Majorfluff

I can't really get in a tizz about this. I think we need to be kinder and more understanding re Justine and team, after all they could have just said 'sod it's and closed down the feminist boards due to all the hassles.

Yes, indeed. But that's what I don't really get. I must admit, I'm getting more confused, rather than less.

My question is: in terms of advertisers, does this mean there are more people who would buy from the advertisers, if FWR was shut down, than potential customers attracted by FWR?

I totally get the transwidow concerns and I think that needs addressing.

Aside from that issue, and now that 'feminism' is in the name, I'm not too bothered about 'debate'. In fact after all these years of being told there was 'no debate' seeing it up there feels like a tiny little 'fuck you'. But then I am a bad person and not at all kind.

How this can be justified that using uncontextualised stats I'll never know. A fundamental rule of research/data analysis is that a hyper focus on quantitative data makes your findings limited and even misleading especially in reference to complex human beings.

That said, thank you for the clarity on your position @MNHQ.

You have just told your entire audience our legal rights and protections as a sex class are up for debate.
You have your line, we have ours. When the world wakes up to this batshittery, I wonder what imapct that will have on reputation.

Something else I’m curious about - in the spirit of quality over quantity, do you know which forums have the highest conversion rates for people joining MN?

@LazyHorizon

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.

Yes, LazyHorizon, there's another metric you can measure in your site stats (well, there are loads), which is direct entry.

I don't google FWR, I have the board bookmarked. Users having FWR as a landing page was a pretty high number, too.

There is also entry via links from other sites including social media. When I was webmaster of various busy sites, Google search entries were typically our lowest percentages.

However, I would not expect FWR to make up the majority of traffic for MN, given that it's a site for so many different topics. Top 20 board and one in 40 entries from Google search for a website with millions of users is bloody impressive though.

Just To be clear, I’m GC, Spartacus etc. I lurk A LOT and rarely post but regularly do share the wonderful analysis of so many of the FWR regulars who I admire and respect enormously.

Maybe we are looking at this the wrong way round? How about if we approached it like this:

• Feminism Chat has always been our space and still is.
• MNHQ have created a new board called Feminism: Sex and Gender debate.
• We will ignore this new board because we don’t believe Women’s sex based rights (which permeate throughout all feminism) are up for debate and as a rule, we don’t believe in gender anyway.
• We will continue to post in Feminist Chat, centring women and girls, fighting for our sex-based rights to single sex spaces and services as we have always done and anyone wanting to debate what is being talked about can be encouraged to start a thread in the shiny new “Debate” board created exactly for that purpose.

Wouldn’t this work for everyone?

That said, thank you for the clarity on your position @MNHQ.

You have just told your entire audience our legal rights and protections as a sex class are up for debate.

Yep, nice to have it spelled out so clearly.

A bit concerning that the support thread for transwidows has also been thrown to the wolves, mind. I thought we were all supposed to be exhorting ourselves to "be kind"?

Moving a support thread to a debate board, and signposting it to attract aggressive confrontation doesn't strike me as particularly kind. But then again, the meaning of words keeps changing, so perhaps kindness now means exquisite cruelty?

I'm not too bothered about "debate" either, particularly after "NO DEBATE".
Titles can only ever be loose anyway and hopefully not too prescriptive.

@Floisme

I totally get the transwidow concerns and I think that needs addressing.

Aside from that issue, and now that 'feminism' is in the name, I'm not too bothered about 'debate'. In fact after all these years of being told there was 'no debate' seeing it up there feels like a tiny little 'fuck you'. But then I am a bad person and not at all kind.

From that perspective I can get behind it a little bit more, tbf.

@FlankerMum

Just To be clear, I’m GC, Spartacus etc. I lurk A LOT and rarely post but regularly do share the wonderful analysis of so many of the FWR regulars who I admire and respect enormously.

Maybe we are looking at this the wrong way round? How about if we approached it like this:

• Feminism Chat has always been our space and still is.
• MNHQ have created a new board called Feminism: Sex and Gender debate.
• We will ignore this new board because we don’t believe Women’s sex based rights (which permeate throughout all feminism) are up for debate and as a rule, we don’t believe in gender anyway.
• We will continue to post in Feminist Chat, centring women and girls, fighting for our sex-based rights to single sex spaces and services as we have always done and anyone wanting to debate what is being talked about can be encouraged to start a thread in the shiny new “Debate” board created exactly for that purpose.

Wouldn’t this work for everyone?

That sounds excellent. I'm astonished to see people meekly posting topics in the 'debate: section when they are of general interest, and not debating anything.

Aha. That is an interesting angle, Flanker. Makes good sense.

My worries with Flanker's approach is that it's MNHQ who retain the right & capabilities to move & delete threads, & take action against posters, at their whim. So you can post stuff where you like but it may not stay there.

I'm also a little concerned that all the old Chat threads are now in the new board, so if it's ever decided that the new board can go, all those old threads will go with it.

I don't know what the answer is. I think it's a matter of regret that MNHQ haven't been open with their users. Have they updated any T&C yet? Have they put out a statement clarifying what goes where, who can say what & what restrictions there are on each board?

Sinister? I'm just trying to be honest with you. There's a reason why other platforms have stopped housing this debate and it is because of finances - it costs them money - in terms of lost ad revenue, resources to moderate and the cost of staff upset/recruitment. There's also an unknown reputational cost

I wish they'd stop saying "house/host the debate" as if is a Question Time producer trying to engage both sides.
This is just a forum where women talk about what the issues of the days are for us.

This mentally of 'debate hosting' is very strange, would MN say that about AIBU or Relationships boards?? We can talk much more freely on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter than we can here BTW.

The ridiculous rules that only apply to feminists are off putting. Most of us are here because it is a majority female user base.

I wish they'd stop saying "house/host the debate" as if is a Question Time producer trying to engage both sides.

This is just a forum where women talk about what the issues of the days are for us.

I know it makes me cringe a bit

It's an interesting idea Flanker. The trouble as I see it is that the genderists are there already, plumping the cushions, removing all the Jess de Wahls artwork and stripping the bookshelves of JKR and Germaine Greer. I'm tempted to leave them to it and make the best of it here, whatever goady title they've given us.

As someone pointed out on another thread, if they're flagging up that this is a place for debate, surely they can't continue to censor language or delete posts that mention key words and phrases the TRAs don't like. If you come in here, you can't have a fit of the vapours if certain acronyms relating to male sexual fetishes are mentioned, or words that might be applied to mountaineering, animal maintenance, or the four-letter c word that is bizarrely deemed more offensive than the usual one.

@JustineMumsnet Sinister? I'm just trying to be honest with you. There's a reason why other platforms have stopped housing this debate and it is because of finances - it costs them money - in terms of lost ad revenue, resources to moderate and the cost of staff upset/recruitment. There's also an unknown reputational cost.

I understand platforms don’t want to lose money, but if they keep giving into bullies demands, instead of remaining firm against them, they will always be at the mercy of controlling bullies won’t they? Surely refusing to give into their demands, and naming the bullying behaviour for what it is, is the only way to stop it? As more and more say no to them, and name the behaviour for what it is, the less power the bullies will have. (This is true whatever the issue is bullies are trying control speech about.) I think it will only do companies reputations good to be seen as not caving into pressure from bullies.

@LoverOfLight

I don't agree. As a feminist without the trans debate at the forefront of her mind, it was disheartening to see a feminist board filled almost exclusively with trans/gender theory issues. Especially as it is such a popular and active site.

It's not "your" space in the sense you can pick and choose the subjects, and if a board that is supposed to represent a multitude of issues becomes the platform for one specific issue within that topic, it makes sense to have a clearer platform to discuss just that topic. They do it quite frequently.

Sex and gender debate sums up exactly what is constantly discussed so I don't see any issue in it.

Get on with posting all those important threads you wanted to post then.