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

No? I am explaining why it can be difficult and offputting for anyone who isnt GC or disagrees with this section of feminism to join any discourse on this board.

But they are all put under the same umbrella by many on this board.

They are all put under the same umbrella by Stonewall.

Stonewall’s Umbrella, you mean?

Yes, this was the exact argument used before to make the Feminist Chat board.

Why OP is not happy with that board has yet to be revealed.

I do think if someone asks for a specific board, they should be able to say what kind of threads they would have on it that aren't covered by the 2 feminism boards (and the LGBT children board).

I also think if someone says there have been threads that XYZ it isn't unreasonable of them to back that up with examples.

In my view, tone on threads (in general across all MN) tends to deteriorate when the OP only engages with posts supporting their view, and not those putting alternate views. The longer this goes on, the pushier the tone gets.

Also a number of posters on this specific board do tend to be very educated / incisive (not sure that's the right word) on feminism. So it's hardly surprising they can argue back coherently and firmly against weak 'be kind' / TWAW arguments.

I don’t think they are tbh. In any event you have yet to provide an example of anyone demonising trans people. In your own example someone had called you a child molester (I haven’t seen the comment myself), and I am assuming you aren’t a trans person. It can often seem there is a lack of sincerity from many pro-trans commentators on this site and a reflex to using hyperbole in support of their arguments. When asked to provide facts to back up the wildly insulting things they are saying - and there was someone last night posting about ‘genocidal’ attacks on trans people - they tend to attack.

I'm genuinely interested to hear from non-GC feminists (although I have to agree that to my ears that is an oxymoron) because I struggle to understand the values and beliefs that inform a position that is comfortable with males identifying as women and is happy to adopt the term 'cis'.

(By the way, I am in no way threatened by 'cis', as Luna remarked earlier, but I find it insulting.)

I know tone isn't always easy to convey in text but I actually would like to hear from the posters that call themselves 'non-GC feminists' so I can better understand their world-view.

I am not being sarcastic or snarky. Neither am I agreeing that we need another section - I think this conversation is fine just where it is.

If you're not a feminist and post on a feminist discussion board, you can expect to have a lot of people disagreeing with you.

If you're anti-feminism, perhaps a feminism forum isn't the place for you.

Folks - may we draw your attention to the civil discussion mentioned in our previous post? Disagree, by all means, but no personal attacks or troll hunting.

Gender is the social mechanism by which women are oppressed. How could a feminist be anything other than gender critical?

So, why start a thread if not to demonise and shame people who disagree with you?

Do you understand that you opening post has done just that?

Feminists who do not subscribe to those beliefs are often unwelcome and treated with derision and hostility

toxic & intimidating all around.

unpleasant (for us) GC threads

A genuine question. Do you see the denigration of posters who disagree with you in your words here?

Do you honestly think that your posting this thread with these terms being used was going to receive a positive response? Why?

And if you also cannot work out how to use a discussion board site, and find out how to contact the owner to discuss this privately, that is a significant issue. And would then correspond with your failure to post respectfully within the talk guidelines.

Or, maybe you had other motives for starting a thread the way you have.

For anyone who is uncomfortable posting on a feminist board about 'sex and gender', then here is the 'chat' board. It was specifically asked for a while back by posters who were unhappy with what are often called 'gc' views.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/feminism

There is incidentally the whole of the rest of the internet where trans activism and anti-women activism is warmly welcomed. Reddit as mentioned. This is the only place in which women are permitted to equally have a voice regarding women's rights. For example I find it interesting that it is unacceptable to point out that engaging with activism and protecting individuals with dodgy associations and behaviours regarding children leads to questions about yourself, when it is wholly acceptable to question women for not denouncing KJK for speaking at events where someone disapproved of has been involved?

There is the whole of the feminism chat board to talk about issues without having to encounter unwanted information about women's rights regarding the impact of trans activism, that was the point of creating it. Although the women who insisted so much that they were desperate to talk about so many other aspects of feminism and have threads free of all this stuff seem oddly to not be using it much.

Pile ons = a lot of posters disagree with you

Demonising trans people = it accepting the beliefs that people can change sex

Feminism = centering biological women

etc, etc.

And there is also

LGBT Children

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/lgbt_children

and LGBT Parents

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/lgbt_parents

Mumsnet is a big website!

I don't think they are, particularly, on this board

Though they are by Stonewall.

Not accepting the belief.. etc

oh for an edit button.

Why? Because 50 people disagree with them? LOADS of people strongly disagree with me on all matter of topics on this site. It’s a discussion site. People are allowed to have their own opinions. Either back yourself or maybe don’t discuss things on a site where women are robust in their opinions. I find it staggering that any one claiming to be a feminist wants to stifle female discussion on any issue.

As many pp have pointed out, the separation from the Feminism Chat board was set up entirely for this. Funnily enough, hardly anyone posts there (perhaps this “non-GC inclusive feminism” isn’t actually as popular as you suggest…?)

But in any case, this is a discussion board - the clue being in the name “discussion”. None of MN is an “only people who agree with me may post” board - if you aren’t aware of this, why don’t you spend some time on AIBU to educate yourself? You aren’t entitled to have an “only people who agree with me” board any more than anyone else is, and here on the feminism boards we have to put up with the ploppers keen to “educate” us, so why do you think you get a special zone?

If you want uncritical handmaidendry and choicey choicey liberal “feminism”, there’s plenty out there on Twitter for you if you don’t want any other viewpoints to ever enter your eyes.

I think you'll find it's organisations such as stonewall that lump them together. It's kind of part of the problem, do keep up if you're going to contribute 🤔

Please - come and argue your case.

I would love nothing more than to be convinced by it.

I hate feeling the way I do, and wish there was some way to accommodate what trans activists want that doesn’t encroach on women’s rights.

If you can see a path through, there are so many of us who’d love to understand more.

If you have a case - come and tell us. Present it, persuade us. Please.

I’d like to see discussions about gender that don’t devolve into derisory demands of “what is a woman” .

Some possible topics I’m interested in are:

Why gender inclusive language matters
The narrative that lesbians are inherently anti-trans is completely false per Just Like Us survey
feminism & neoliberalism
Discussions of whether the anti-gender movement aligns in many cases with the white suprematist movement.

That kind of thing.

(By the way, I am in no way threatened by 'cis', as Luna remarked earlier, but I find it insulting.)

And the people who like to label other people 'cis' also say that people are trans if they say they are.

So a 'trans' person is anyone who says they are and a 'cis' person is anyone that someone else says is 'cis'. Why can't we self-identify as not 'cis'? I agree that it's insulting to have labels forced on us by others.

A board for feminists that are not critical of the concept of gender....

Located near the boards for vegans who eat meat, straight men who use grindr and trustafarians who need to feed their whole family on £30 a week.

I dont have one?

And even if I did, why do I need to try and persuade you? You are entitled to your views, I am entitled to mine.

Thanks!