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 would support Sex-based Rights.

I don't see why the word "debate" is needed to be said at all, since debate is pretty much the entire point of internet forums, nobody is going to be surprised that a chat forum consists of debate rather than, say, mayonnaise.

Yes I agree it's not longer and would have been a viable alternative but I'm not sure everyone would have been entirely happy with that given the conversation I've seen... and we thought it would be clearer to use the word debate.

Respectfully, a lot of posters are not at all happy with the new name. Nothing is going to make everyone 'entirely happy' but the current choice seems to go very much against the desires of the vast majority here. Why are the views of people who don't use the section taking precedence?

Why would Sex Based Rights be a good indicator of what the topic is about? It may sum up what the topic represents to you but, sex based rights are not exclusive to the sex and gender debate, and the sex and gender debate is not wholly encompassed by sex based rights. It makes no sense.

@MarshaBradyo

Yes I agree it's not longer and would have been a viable alternative

It gets my vote

I really dislike current version

The problem with this title I think is that it's effectively saying if you don't believe in sex-based rights then you're unwelcome in this topic. We didn't want to split feminism based on belief but rather on subject matter (as I've said all along) still believe strongly (and I know many will disagree) that we need to be inclusive and respectful - whilst absolutely having the right to disagree with others' opinions.

@LoverOfLight

Why would Sex Based Rights be a good indicator of what the topic is about? It may sum up what the topic represents to you but, sex based rights are not exclusive to the sex and gender debate, and the sex and gender debate is not wholly encompassed by sex based rights. It makes no sense.

Agreed - you said it better than me to be honest.

@GreenWhiteViolet

Yes I agree it's not longer and would have been a viable alternative but I'm not sure everyone would have been entirely happy with that given the conversation I've seen... and we thought it would be clearer to use the word debate.

Respectfully, a lot of posters are not at all happy with the new name. Nothing is going to make everyone 'entirely happy' but the current choice seems to go very much against the desires of the vast majority here. Why are the views of people who don't use the section taking precedence?

The vast majority on FWR maybe - although I stress again that we have not silenced or siloed anyone! - but not a majority of Mumsnet users, from what I see.

Why is there a need for the word 'debate' in the title ? It's unnecessary and superfluous. Every board and topic on MN is a 'debate' where different views are expressed and explored. You might as well have 'Telly addicts debate' or 'Litter tray debate'.

On the thread about preferred usernames, the point was made time and again that both topics should include 'feminism' or women' in the title- because if you take those away from the name of this subtopic as has been done, it's like saying that sex/gender is not inherent to feminism, and whether it's a subtopic of FWR or not, one board has 'feminism' within the title and it's been taken away from this one.

Language matters so much- yet women who believe in the reality of biological sex always seem to be bottom of the pile in having our chosen language respected. See also 'menstruators', 'pregnant people' etc.

This feels like every other space that rolls over women’s language.

This is FWR one place left to say sex based rights are important. Probably on of the very few left on the internet - as we get ever squeezed and misogynists take over the spaces

but not a majority of Mumsnet users, from what I see.

Is it more important to listen to users who don’t use the now separated section?

Many didn’t want it to start with, now we have it and still it’s the silent non users that count.

There are a huge amount of people wanting to suppress conversation - why capitulate?

Where are these "majority of Mumsnet users" whenever there's a gender critical poll in AIBU that usually favours the gender critical POV upwards of 80/90% with 1000s of votes?

Odd that considering voting is anonymous.

How about ‘sex-based feminism’ (possibly with addition of ‘discussion’ if needed?)

The vast majority on FWR maybe - although I stress again that we have not silenced or siloed anyone! - but not a majority of Mumsnet users, from what I see.

Did I miss a Poll on this?

@OvaHere

Where are these "majority of Mumsnet users" whenever there's a gender critical poll in AIBU that usually favours the gender critical POV upwards of 80/90% with 1000s of votes?

Odd that considering voting is anonymous.

This. So much this.

@Ninkanink

How about ‘sex-based feminism’ (possibly with addition of ‘discussion’ if needed?)

Won't be allowed as it makes it blindingly obvious how ridiculous and pointless any other supposed kind of 'feminism' is 😂

It’s nice to see @JustineMumsnet here. Not before time though. I’m sorry for sounding rude but I have a few questions:
Why didn’t you respond to the original thread?
Why did you announce this in the middle of a thread about something else?
Why, particularly when it became clear on the previous thread that it was a controversial suggestion, didn’t you start a thread explaining your plans and answering questions so people had some warning / explanation?
Why did you implement the plan without warning and without seeking users’ feedback?
Why didn’t you respond to all the many threads which were started to discuss what forum names and divisions of subject matter that users would prefer?
Why didn’t you post a sticky thread in the relevant forums explaining how these new forums are to be used and what the rules would be?
Why is MNHQ deleting posts on threads discussing this while also not explaining the rules and not responding to the huge amount of engagement from regular users on this subject?

I think people are really getting ahead of themselves here. There is quite a large difference between being silenced or having the conversation "supressed" and that conversation being put onto a subtopic within the same overarching subject. It's already in feminism.

Thank you for taking time to address some of the points @JustineMumsnet I feel though that this has caused a great chasm and share the concerns of others that this board will be repeatedly targeted, moreso than before.

I guess all we can do is see what happens.

Personally I think the name implies the threads will be something they're not, bit whatever. I stated what I thought and was ignored before this changed so I can't see anyone actually listening.
However, Justine I would like to look at both boards. At present if I use the drop down it goes straight to the gender board. I can only get to the feminism chat board by going to talk, all subjects, feminism.
There's not going to be much traffic if everyone has to do this.
So can we get that sorted please. As at present I am sure there will be lots of posts I would like to read on both, die to the confusion around what goes where.

There is quite a large difference between being silenced or having the conversation "supressed" and that conversation being put onto a subtopic within the same overarching subject. It's already in feminism

Exactly, I mean it's in the feminism section, the discussion is still being hosted on here, in the feminism section and the website page (URL) is titled women's rights - how is that silencing, exactly?
People are making out like others are daft and won't know where to look, like it's hidden away in some secret bunker in a dusty corner of the internet - when it's still in feminism all along

Due to* not die to.
Obviously.

I’m confused, because the shortcut to my phone was to feminism chat... have they just renamed it? Or created a new subtopic and just redirected everything there?

Quaggers, I'm actually having trouble accessing both pages. And I don't think it's nice to imply people having difficulty navigating it are stupid.

@LoverOfLight

Why would Sex Based Rights be a good indicator of what the topic is about? It may sum up what the topic represents to you but, sex based rights are not exclusive to the sex and gender debate, and the sex and gender debate is not wholly encompassed by sex based rights. It makes no sense.

But this is the crux of it, the sex and gender debate is all encompassed by sex based rights. As in those on one side of the debate want to get rid of them and those on the other want to keep them. It makes total sense!

@Quaggars

There is quite a large difference between being silenced or having the conversation "supressed" and that conversation being put onto a subtopic within the same overarching subject. It's already in feminism

Exactly, I mean it's in the feminism section, the discussion is still being hosted on here, in the feminism section and the website page (URL) is titled women's rights - how is that silencing, exactly?
People are making out like others are daft and won't know where to look, like it's hidden away in some secret bunker in a dusty corner of the internet - when it's still in feminism all along

Well exactly why is mnhq so worried about search ability?

Sex based rights is easy to get

No problem it won’t be an issue for search