Can MNHQ set up a new discussion category called Feminism: sex & gender discussion (inclusive, non-GC)

[PlanetLuna]

MN, will you please create a talk group/category of Feminism: sex & gender discussion (inclusive, non-GC)?

MN appears to currently have only 2 feminism categories:
Feminism: chat
Feminism: sex & gender discussions

But the Feminism: sex & gender category on MN is predominantly GC, with its emphasis on trans exclusion ideology. Feminists who do not subscribe to those beliefs are often unwelcome and treated with derision and hostility in discussions. Certainly not always as some GC posters do enjoy open, intellectual discussions but often enough that engagement can be toxic & intimidating all around.

It is almost impossible for non-GC feminists to find inclusive/non-GC feminist discussions, and we have to wade through unpleasant (for us) GC threads while attempting to do so.

GC feminism dominates on UK parenting sites in particular. However, inclusive/non-GC feminism is extremely popular around the world (especially in places like the US, NZ, and AU) and in the UK among younger feminists and those who do not see trans rights as a threat to women & girls’ safety. Many UK feminists are non-GC but may feel silenced on MN.

The addition of another category will help open up and improve MN discussions while reducing the toxicity and hostility that many feminists on both sides experience in discussions.

So I propose the following feminism discussion categories:
Feminism: chat (general)
Feminism: sex & gender discussions (GC)
Feminism: sex & gender discussion (inclusive, non-GC)

@MNHQ

@PlanetLuna please explain what you think GC means in a way that people who are GC would agree is an accurate definition.

being childish and saying silly things

the humanity.

Wow, it took 28 seconds for somebody to do exactly what I said I feared! well don, you win the GC pile on 1st place.

@PlanetLuna any chance of responding to the idea of using Feminism: Chat for your chosen threads and encouraging the calibre of discussion that you want by only responding to approved posts on those threads? What is stopping you from trying that?

Have you asked for a ‘we love Harry and Meghan’ board as well @PlanetLuna because you seem happy to engage against quite defensive royalists on the royal board? It’s so weird this board intimidates you but not that one

Shun the infidel!

In all sincerity, if you can't handle someone responding to something you've posted, at all, then can I gently suggest an internet discussion board is perhaps not the best place to hang out?

So @PlanetLuna how exactly are you going to prevent people posting in the “wrong” board? You do know you can hide threads you don’t want to engage with?

I’ve lost count of how many posters are called trolls or men just because they have a slightly different opinion.

I've been called a troll and a man. Weirdly my fingers didn't drop off and I'm still able to answer a question and state my opinions.
If you're so unsure of your views that they can't withstand someone on the internet being a bit rude then perhaps they're not really worth creating a new board to express?

Ooh, I love a good shunning. Make sure you get my best side, now.

@ConstanceOcean even on this thread there are posters that instead of discussing the pros and cons of OPs idea, they have resorted to being childish and saying silly things.

The trouble is, the OP hasn't been clear on what kind of threads / discussions they would want on sex & gender that aren't already covered by this board.
The OP hasn't answered any questions relating to this.

if you are going to be 'inclusive' (of who when excluding GC views?) won't it be a non-discussion? If everyone on the board agrees TWAW what will there be left to discuss?

Inclusive as in not threatened by using the term cis to describe people like myself during discourse.

I'm not threatened by you calling yourself cis, if you feel you:
a) have a womanly gender identity,
b) and a female body, and
c) you believe that 'woman matches female'.

That's fine. There you go, I'm inclusive. Now will you engage?

Only if you volunteer to water the pot plants.

But if you’re excluding people… how is that inclusive? Do you have a list of what opinions will be permitted in said board? Who gets to control it? What subjects are allowed to be discussed?

Out of interest, if this new board materialised- what sort of things would you want to be on it that couldn't be in the Fem Chat or elsewhere? Specifically?

Inclusive, as in not preoccupied with demonising trans people as part of my feminist worldview. Inclusive as in not threatened by using the term cis to describe people like myself during discourse.Im not threatened by the word cis, but i profoundly disagree with it being applied to me because I don't identify with gender stereotypes, and cis assumes I do.

If people what to describe themselves as 'cis' that is fine.

But is not for people to describe others as cis. It's all self-id isnt it, you don't get to define me. If I say I have no belief in gender as being a real thing, you can't label me as 'cis' as that literally means body and self view of gender aligning.

I want a board of my own too. Feminism but nobody who eats chickens can join and we can’t talk about chickens on it. Ta. Serious this is crazy!!!

i'm not a damn cis anything i'm a woman and proud to be.
all this trans bs for what 3% of the population if that.
NO is a complete sentance.

The problem is @KG74 you’re posting something that most PP disagree with. It’s not a pile-on because people aren’t attacking you - it’s just disagreement. If you hold views which are in the minority, people will disagree.

If you’re not thick-skinned enough to handle robust disagreement then perhaps a discussion forum isn’t the best place for you? Genuine question. There are other sites/groups which are supportive rather than encouraging conflicting debate - which is what MN is for.

And just for complete clarity, I’m not trying to be an arse or silence you. There are some days that I don’t feel robust enough to post because I don’t feel up to dealing with responses (I am GC but I mean in general). I also have my notifications switched off as I don’t like getting emails saying “UserXxx has mentioned you in a post”. I prefer to dip in as and when I feel able to - that’s especially helpful on threads which are very controversial or hot.

I don’t know if switching off your notifications would make it feel easier for you to post? Although people might not agree with you, no one actually wants another woman to be silenced. A GC echo chamber without any dissent isn’t the goal here - it’s just that the majority of women happen to hold that view.

By creating a separate section, MN would have to acknowledge it has an anti trans board, which would scare away the advertisers.

So was I, on a thread where I wasn't going along with the dominant view re Posie Parker vs the Brighton soc fems. The thread was pretty impossible for me (and annoying), but it didn't make me strop off the board permanently nor did it make me demand that everything else should be changed to suit me.

I found it irritating to be wrongly accused of stuff, but shit like that happens on the internet sometimes. It's nothing compared to e.g. getting banned from Reddit for a week for disagreeing with Drag Queen Story Time.

The OP said "Inclusive as in not threatened by using the term cis to describe people like myself during discourse".

It rather depends what is meant by "people like myself".

If it means @AmuseBish's definition, i.e. the OP as an individual, crack on.

If it means "any natal woman who does not identify as trans", no thank you.

I don't feel threatened by that term, I reject it entirely.

You claim to be new here. I am relatively new too but I spent a bit of time getting to know the place and how it functioned. It is easy to pick up that this section is full of brave hardy women who have been kicked out of the main spaces and moderated strictly for views that are still shared by 90% of the global population. You were rude and obviously trying to shitstir OP and got just the mockery and schooling you deserved. Dont try the "you are all so mean to poor old me" gambit now.

How many replies have you made to me in the past hour demanding that I engage with you and do so immediately?

And because you’ve carried on in this increasingly frothing manner (while I do other things in my life besides engaging on a MN thread) with likeminded pp’s you feel that “we’ve established that OP doesn’t actually know what GC means”?

I don’t owe you an explanation of my own feminist beliefs or my perception of your feminist beliefs because I’m not interested in engaging with you on that. Not least because I see from responses to this thread the futility of engaging with people who will attack anyone who disagrees with them.

My request was to MN, which I have forwarded by other means, not to GC posters.