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.

So if I post on the board I'm a demon inclusive of penis am I?

And I meant feminist not demon!

Sex and gender identity?

Agree debate is not great.

I'm really not sure what the purpose of the split is.

It came out of leftfield.

There are loads of reason why it will cause MN more hassle than they get at the moment which I imagine is a lot!

It's a neon light saying here there be dragons! No more trawling through threads about reproduction and whatnot.

OTOH the topic has got dominated by the topic which is understandable. It might allow other issues to come to the fore. I'm not sure though. Fwr cycles through different dominant flavours, as it were, depending mainly on the most regular and frequent posters. And how dominant they are, I suppose. I've loved some and hated some.

In the end. Maybe. The board has become single topic really. And women coming to MN who don't know much about feminism night have a look. And in its current form it's pretty off-putting I imagine and anyone popping by won't stop and find out more etc. This topic also has attracted a large number of people who care about this topic but aren't Feminists, also posters from overseas who again are here for this topic and on other threads can sometimes press points that are not relevant here.

So maybe it's a good thing. I've come round a bit.

Happy to give it a go.

Still think change it to sex and gender identity though.

No, ‘sex and gender identity’ is still not an accurate representation of the discussion. The two are not linked in any way.

I do not want to discuss gender identity. I want to focus on women’s issues. Without it becoming about men.

However given that the tide is turning perhaps future battles will no longer be fought on Mumsnet.

@Ninkanink

No, ‘sex and gender identity’ is still not an accurate representation of the discussion. The two are not linked in any way.

I do not want to discuss gender identity. I want to focus on women’s issues. Without it becoming about men.

However given that the tide is turning perhaps future battles will no longer be fought on Mumsnet.

Yup. This is about women's rights.

@ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn

Has this ever happened before here, where decisions about a topic are made based on the opinions of those who don't use the topics and existing topic user views are dismissed?

It does come across as MN not wanting to 'host this debate' when it's presented like this.

Yes.

When the FWR board was set up in the first place.

It didn't used to exist.

Lots of posters didn't like some regular posters, bringing their feminist perspective to threads all over the place.

They said can't we put the Feminists on a separate board so I can hide it.

There was quite a lot of to and fro but in the end get topic was created. Many feminist posters were not happy.

There were merits on both sides and disadvantages. I was on the fence tbh.

So yes it has happened before. And it was about feminism then as well! Don't know about other boards tbh.

Surely the point is that 'Sex-Based Rights' is what posters want to discuss. We want to protect sex-based rights from ANY attack upon them, from whatever source. Since the majority of posters who will use this board want to use it to discuss how to protect sex-based rights, then that is what it should be called.

MNHQ would also then be able to introduce rules specific to this board, such that posts which denigrate or advocate the destruction of sex-based rights would be removed.

'It's fairly obvious why this has happened and the significance of the timing of it. Although there has been constant attacks against FWR for the length of its existence, it was easy for TRA's to smear the women on here as 'transphobes', 'mad feminists', 'genital obsessives' etc. People would parrot that it's a 'transphobic' website based in part on bad faith posters who post carefully curated screenshots on Twitter.'

You've seen what Twitter is like.
You've seen the threats.
You know what the dominant political and media angle has been.

Justine is not anonymous.

I dread to think what she's getting posted at her etc, every day, and for at least the last couple of years over this.

They did not have to host this topic.

I find the idea that the fwr board and this topic are somehow vital to MN success really peculiar. It's tiny compared to the rest of the site.

I've also been here through at least two exoduses of large groups of women from fwr. Long term regular frequent posters. It didn't impact the site at all! Apart from maybe some posters who had been lurking starting to post as the intimidating ones had gone.

MN also survived when a large group of posters here from the early days who posted all over the place and very well known etc left. People missed them but there was no falling away of other posters.

I'm willing to give this a go

I think maybe I see what they're trying to do.

I find the idea that the fwr board and this topic are somehow vital to MN success really peculiar. It's tiny compared to the rest of the site.

It's really not.

@datun had some figures, tagging for her attention.

Oh and the idea there's a 'proper' feminism board and one for a mainstream feminism that is a bit rubbish.

I don't disagree that libfem does nothing for women.

However the other board will have the threads and posts that are written. I will start threads about other stuff around the world and will happily discuss my views.

The boards have the flavour of the women who post.

I would urge you not to turn your backs on the chat board but to engage and share your perspectives. Lurkers can and do post, women click something in active.

If all the women who have the view eg prostitution is not work it's exploitation leave. Then who is there to face up to the sex work is great posters who rock up whenever a post on that topic comes up on here?

*Justine is not anonymous.

I dread to think what she's getting posted at her etc, every day, and for at least the last couple of years over this.*

I definitely agree with this! Given the general misogyny directed at Mumsnet anyway. I hope she's ok- it must be awful.

I still don't necessarily agree with what Mumsnet are doing but absolutely agree with NiceGerbil there.

I find the idea that the fwr board and this topic are somehow vital to MN success really peculiar. It's tiny compared to the rest of the site

Same

People like to make out that feminism is all that people come here for - it really isn't.
Yes, it's an important part of the site, and a large section, but MN is so much more and people seem to ignore that or pretend not to see.
Yes, Datun might have some figures on the feminism traffic, but that doesn't take away from the fact that a hell of lot of people come for parenting advice, talking about their cats or dogs, recipes etc (NOT saying that's all women think about before someone tries to twist what I'm saying!)
Just that there's a broad range of topics, people and opinions and the site will continue to be massive and diverse even if some FWR posters are pissed off and decide to leave.

I've not RTFT .... just started trawling through threads I started, reporting ones that seem to have been moved here in error.

@ViperAtTheGatesOfDawn

I find the idea that the fwr board and this topic are somehow vital to MN success really peculiar. It's tiny compared to the rest of the site.

It's really not.

@datun had some figures, tagging for her attention.

The new registrations/ direct to fwr stats?

Yes I saw those.

But how many of those are single issue/ not interested in feminism/ definitely not feminists?

I've seen a lot of really odd posts on other topics on this board.

Also the influx of women from overseas, while welcome obviously. Has led to some pretty confused threads with talking from totally different cultural and historical contexts.

If the G-word is going to be in the title of this section, I'd want it to be 'g' for 'Girls', to go along with Women's Rights. That's the G most of us are fighting for.

All this has done is give some people either twice as many boards to complain about or twice as many boards to hide 😂

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/4276869-Seeing-a-hidden-section

I don't think this is a big section.

Ok I post s lot. But I recognise most of the usernames on this thread for example.

Telling MN that women on FWR posting on this topic mainly are vital to their business is only going to piss them off tbh.

It's just not true.

@ErrolTheDragon

I've not RTFT .... just started trawling through threads I started, reporting ones that seem to have been moved here in error.

Good luck. They seem to have ignored my reports (not threads I had started though).

It doesn't matter how many people post, the revenue from advertising will be related to the number of views, the length of stay on the site etc etc.

IIRC feminism chat was the second or third (?) most clicked topic/threads. As advertising spends are based on clicks that's pretty significant.

MN is absolutely reliant on posters, we are all the content providers.

I agree with quaggers! For maybe the first time on this matter.

I think I've agreed with you on other stuff though. It's about the conversation not about the people.

Although when you get a MN stalker it's s right pita!

MN has had plenty of exoduses of groups of well known/ popular posters.

And with the best will in the world. Loads of women hide get completely. And are rarely popular!

I've seen numerous threads on chat/ aibu over the years saying what do you think of fwr.

And the responses are mainly not interested, boring, too shouty, scary, etc etc.

Anyway. I don't think MN are quaking in their boots.

They didn't have to host this conversation.

To turn that around to you need us, and getting angry with them. Seems a bit. Biting the hand that feeds you really.

I'm also prepared to cut Justine and MNHQ some slack as I can only imagine the amount of grief they get for hosting these debates. They display an impressive commitment to free speech that few organisations have managed to match.

Looking at it from another perspective, this could actually be a win win. If you think of all those who hate Mumsnet (yet incredibly spend so much time on here looking for things to report), there's now two busy boards to police

Double the time to spend checking women for wrong speak!

No they probably don’t need us. I don’t really care about that side of it.

It doesn’t mean we can’t have a better title that reflects those who use it rather than those who don’t.

@AssassinatedBeauty

It doesn't matter how many people post, the revenue from advertising will be related to the number of views, the length of stay on the site etc etc.

And are women who post about this topic valuable to their advertisers?

I'm guessing here but from what I know from having met lots of fwr regs in the past.

As s group, the demographic the ads on here are aimed at are not of interest to them, for s variety of reasons.

Agree Marsha.