This was a bad idea

[GCandproud]

Splitting the forums that is. Sex and gender underlies all feminist issues and you’re now ensuring that a lot of important topics don’t get as much traffic. I won’t be hanging around here but just wanted to make my views clear.

@Quaggars I laughed at your post about the irony of @secondspringing's comment. We were actually all quite happy with the one space for all topics on feminism. It was the people who think we're nasty for saying biological sex is reality who wanted us shunted off to a new space.

Oh and it's not 'trans issues'- it's women's rights issues. Fixed it for you.

Are you really expecting them to look at over 3500 threads to make sure they are in the right place? Well, they seem to have set themselves that rather Sisyphean task. We didn't ask them to. Others, according to Justine, have been emailing, messaging requesting this change!

@GCandproud

Splitting the forums that is. Sex and gender underlies all feminist issues and you’re now ensuring that a lot of important topics don’t get as much traffic. I won’t be hanging around here but just wanted to make my views clear.

👋🏽

@MurielSpriggs

Do we need a razor-sharp scientifically-indisputable definition of what a woman is in order to do feminism? People fight for the homeless or the working class without demanding a watertight definition.

How do you define feminism?

@MetricMs

I never, ever, comment - but today I will.

It’s ridiculous - I agree with you completely OP.

'I never contribute to the topics that the OP is claiming will get less traffic but I'll complain about it too'.

@MotherOffCod

I’m sure if you’re GC it’s a terrifically awful cramping of your world for mnhq to add a separate board that isn’t your own special place.

But for the rest of us it’s freaking lovely!

Shut the door on your way out, by all means.

And if the rest of the GC crowd could resist trying to shoehorn the gender critical angle into every thread and spam them into submission, that would be good too. And respectful of the boundaries of the women who actually prefer a non GC feminism space.

👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

I am very intrigued by all the posters having a gloat and making comments like 'shut the door on your way out' who are finding it 'freakin lovely' but still aren't posting any threads on their tremendously important feminist topics they wanted to discuss.

I've been on FWR boards for well over 10 year (probably significantly over) under one name or another and I've seen people complaining like this before. They just complain, they don't actually DO the thing they claim they are being prevented from doing. This will be no different. It never changes, serial complainers just like moaning about other women.

@MurielSpriggs

Do we need a razor-sharp scientifically-indisputable definition of what a woman is in order to do feminism? People fight for the homeless or the working class without demanding a watertight definition.

There are clear legal definitions of what constitutes homelessness.

Working class not so much, but to be honest I though that most movements for the advancement of the working classes had gone by the wayside some time last century.

It'll be MN bowing to commercial pressures which in turn bow to wokery. Siloing away any discussion of trans people and issues that doesn't toe the woke party line means advertisers don't have to have their adverts on those pages.

I thought, maybe naively, that non-GC feminism was more about being kind and respectful to everyone. I don’t think that has come across here .

@LittleMyTopKnot

I thought, maybe naively, that non-GC feminism was more about being kind and respectful to everyone. I don’t think that has come across here .

Yes that method has always got things done for women. Honest to God ...

I laughed at your post about the irony of @secondspringing's comment. We were actually all quite happy with the one space for all topics on feminism. It was the people who think we're nasty for saying biological sex is reality who wanted us shunted off to a new space

See, that's just it.

We were all

No.
Who's we were all?!
The GC viewpoint or radical feminism is not the only voice, you don't get to speak for all women.
That's the whole "the irony" - you pretend (or genuinely believe, who knows) that you're the only voice.
Everyone else must be a TRA, or a man or whatever.
That's what's laughable.

I am very intrigued by all the posters having a gloat and making comments like 'shut the door on your way out' who are finding it 'freakin lovely' but still aren't posting any threads on their tremendously important feminist topics they wanted to discuss

I've been posting on other threads on here, obviously don't know about whether other posters have

Qaggars, no one asked Mumsnet for posters like you to have their own separate board because they didn't agree with you. People engaged with you instead. That's why it's not ironic.

Who's we were all?! I think that's fairy self explanatory, especially on a singe issue thread, don't you?

All those of us who are GC
Are being told to close the door behind us.

NOT those who emailed Justine/MNHQ demanding change
NOT those who campaigned to have advertisers stop using the site
TRAs, men, women who don't believe that sex is immutable
Contrary posters who just post for shits and giggles

Many other posters who have their own reasons for not being GC. Apparently there are many of them, so many Justine decided to make some changes! Those people did speak for all women, it seems!

I've been posting on other threads on here, obviously don't know about whether other posters have And, regardless of how heated any discussion ever got, 'we' have always entered into debate with you.

Never asked for you to be given your own space so we didn't have to read you. We respond, as we are doing now!

I also am relieved and supportive of the change.

I see the new board as a sub board within feminism, rather than different to feminism.

It will take time for other posters to realise they can discuss other issues without being drowned out.

Never asked for you to be given your own space so we didn't have to read you. We respond, as we are doing now!

Quite.

Agree OP

@Quaggars

I am very intrigued by all the posters having a gloat and making comments like 'shut the door on your way out' who are finding it 'freakin lovely' but still aren't posting any threads on their tremendously important feminist topics they wanted to discuss

I've been posting on other threads on here, obviously don't know about whether other posters have

Funnily enough I have always managed to engage with both. Issues with the sex industry and portrayal of women have always been a very big issue for me and I have always been most concerned with that I think it fundamentally impacts on how women are perceived and treated. Strangely when a thread hasn't interested me (there aren't many in feminism as there is always more to learn alas, since women are still being treated poorly globally) I move on. What I don't do is get upset that every thread isn't in the area that most interests me and ask for a separate board to be made.

Also you may be engaging but if I'm not mistaken you and others have not been creating threads on these topics you wish to discuss as you said you'd like to but were put off from doing. Or am I wrong about that? Have you started a number of new threads in your shiny new board?

@deathbypostitnote

I also am relieved and supportive of the change.

I see the new board as a sub board within feminism, rather than different to feminism.

It will take time for other posters to realise they can discuss other issues without being drowned out.

It would be nice to see you post on any topic inside FWR!

What do you want to discuss?

Do we need a razor-sharp scientifically-indisputable definition of what a woman is in order to do feminism? People fight for the homeless or the working class without demanding a watertight definition.

There are clear legal definitions of what constitutes homelessness.

Working class not so much, but to be honest I though that most movements for the advancement of the working classes had gone by the wayside some time last century.

Similarly "woman". But legal definitions are not watertight by any means, hence much litigation over homelessness. Scientific ones do tend to be (eg based on chromosomes).

And I'm not sure that we should simply accept legal definitions as being correct. The law could easily be amended to change the definition of woman unequivocally to something you don't like. I don't think that would undermine your argument one bit.

With you, jelly? Nothing.

Give it time.

Also you may be engaging but if I'm not mistaken you and others have not been creating threads on these topics you wish to discuss as you said you'd like to but were put off from doing.

Yes, you are mistaken, as I've never said that I was put off from creating threads.
All I've ever said is that it's nice to hear other topics away from "GC" issues and that it's a good idea to hear other women's voices too.
Not just those with a GC viewpoint.
Splitting the boards make it easier for other voices to be heard too and not drowned out.