Genuinely posting in good faith: Mumsnet Film Review

[BonfireLady]

I have no idea how this will go or even if it's allowed (please don't delete MNHQ! 🙏 The link is in the public domain) but I've been involved in two really interesting threads over the last few days and have learned lots about how a) genuinely good faith discussions can and do take place, even when the subject matter is difficult b) it's pretty much impossible to define a "rules of engagement" that everyone can sign up to, but even though this isn't ideal, it's still possible for insightful conversations and exchanges of views to take place respectively (but it's not always easy). Some people don't like rules of engagement, some people think they are essential.

With that all in mind, I'd like to try something:

Can the brilliant minds on this board from the UK, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere collectively review and discuss the film Adult Human Female? Link below.

Rules of engagement*

1. everyone who comments needs to have watched the film. If you don't like the idea of watching the film (I'm halfway through ATM so won't comment yet except to say I think it's very watchable) or the rules of engagement that's fine but please scroll on by to a different thread
2. use whatever language works for you in your comments. If you have a gender identity and/or believe TWAW then use whatever terms work for you (cis, transwomen, women etc). If you don't have a gender identity and/or believe TWANW then use whatever terms work for you (woman, adult human female, biological woman, men etc). It's probably going to be clear from the style and content of the comment what someone's position is but some people may want to state theirs. Here's mine: I don't have a gender identity but I respect that some people do hold a belief that this is important. I believe TWANW. However, I'm happy to engage in respectful debate with someone who believes that TWAW. I'm not going to argue over the word "woman" and I'm not going to try and convince you that TWANW - I simply want to discuss the content of the film
3. speak in your own style. If you break the MN rules your comment will probably get reported by someone and presumably deleted. If you set out to cause offence you'll probably achieve that. I'm not sure what else you'll achieve though.
4. I'll come in to facilitate and moderate this post periodically but not continuously. It's not about me responding to each comment, it's a general discussion. I won't be making my own review comments until I've finished watching it anyway, as per rule 1 😁

*I should imagine this won't be enough to please everyone but please could we see how we go 🤞 If we can't get past discussing my admittedly limited rules of engagement, then at least I know I tried.

Very much up for this! It may be a little while before I get back in touch, but an excellent idea, and look forward to reading and commenting...

2) use whatever language works for you in your comments. If you have a gender identity and/or believe TWAW then use whatever terms work for you (cis, transwomen, women etc). If you don't have a gender identity and/or believe TWANW then use whatever terms work for you (woman, adult human female, biological woman, men etc).

Not going to work when some terms are banned by MNHQ. Posts have to remain within their terminology rules, otherwise the whole of what could be an extremely interesting discussion may be deleted.

I should be able to watch tomorrow

If the terms that work for someone are considered offensive or outside the guidelines by MNHQ they'll be deleted, agreed. I think most people who post here have a reasonable idea about what gets deleted even if they've never read the terms. Many have been long time lurkers even before making any posts. If anyone isn't sure they might want to err on the side of caution and see what terms others use first.

Glad you're up for it @Catiette A Yours is one of the posts that inspired me 😍
Me too @howdoesatoastermaketoast for the second half. I think I need to go to bed soon!

@BonfireLady lol yup on the whole the days of starting a movie at 11 on a school nights are behind me

Same 😂 Rock and roll 😴😴😴

@JellySaurus just realised I missed the crux of your point.
Yes, the whole lot may get deleted but I'm going to hope not. If anyone does try to sabotage the whole thread I would hope that this will be obvious and MNHQ will leave it standing 🤞🤞

I’ll give this a go, provided I can stomach watching the film to the end

Hmm, I think it jumps about a bit at the start, really seems to start building confidence and momentum about the 10 minute mark.

I think a viewer who was part of the 66% of the population who haven't really been paying attention to the debate thus far would probably be most surprised by the fact that the things that were being said were actually so controversial.

yeah I didn't make it to bed

😂😂😂
Thank you for leaving the review too.

Yes.... The 10 minute mark. If I had no real interest in this subject at all other than in passing (the majority of the population as you say), such as thinking it's right that women should vote and I feel that parity between the sexes is getting better and almost there but not quite, I'd not bother going past that point.

Interestingly though, on this board we represent the minority of the population in that we do care deeply about the subject matter. No matter whether we think TWAW or TWANW.

The title of the film is "provocative", the first 10 minutes are a bit dull. It's a strange combination. I need to finish watching the second half (after work today - I hang my head in shame at the marked contrast in our "commitment" @howdoesatoastermaketoast 😂) before I add my own review but I felt this 10 minute mark was an excellent point.

Thank you for giving it a go, even if you don't make it to the end.

I'm wary of more threads where "rules" are set out by the OP. MNHQ has specific rules for this board and one of them is about language.

If we start having threads with their own rules, eventually this could gather enough steam such that anything goes and we even lose this space too.

I have watched the film and I felt it was excellent. A really clear setting out of the topic. Although I'm gender critical so it supports my views.

I may try to watch it again as I've looked at sooo much information recently I'm muddled exactly what was in the film.

The firefighters story has remained with me

I've seen the film and thought it was excellent. In essence, it's a bunch of intelligent, thoughtful, articulate women talking about their rights. No wonder men's rights activists hate it.

Understood. I am too.

I put them in because there were lots of people commenting on previous threads that no good faith conversation could be had unless the "rules of engagement" are clear.

If you feel strongly against it as a principal, please do feel free to ignore. We could fill up the thread with why rules are or aren't a good idea but we'd never get to discuss the film 😁

I get it, I just worry about the possible consequences of threads with rules in. Knowing how the monitors work etc

By 'rules of engagement', I assume most of the feminists here start with 'define your terms'. If we aren't using the same language and agreed terms, its just not possible to reach a consensus.

As an aside, I find the 'Genuinely posting in good faith' schtick pretty irritating.

Point 2 hopefully does a reasonable job of addressing your feedback. I appreciate it probably isn't perfect. As for the title... It's a homage to one of the threads that's got some great debate on it ATM.

If you'd prefer not to watch the film, please do ignore the thread. If you'd like to and share your feedback, that'd be great.

I hope it's OK but I'm not going to respond to any more feedback about the "rules of engagement" directly. It'll fill up the entire thread and there is no perfect answer on this one. If people do still want to post ideas about how the original ask could be improved, please do but hopefully the thread can be for the film review from all different viewpoints. It'd be a shame if we didn't manage that.

I watched the film in full last year thanks to the Streisand effect of it being cancelled, and Robyn Woof being a bit spitty.

When I watched it, I felt relieved to hear calm, measured voices just quietly talking and explaining the issues women are dealing with. That has been sadly lacking, the ability of women to speak without being shouted down. It was a breath of fresh air just to hear their voices.

The film starts off a little shakily and slightly amateurish with a bit of a biology lesson, and I’m not sure anyone needs to see squirrels shagging. But it really comes into its own once the women start speaking. I was particularly struck by the story of the lesbian being kicked off a dating site for stating her preferences were for biological women only. I had no idea how bad things had got, so the film really opened my eyes.

My takeaway from the film was that everyone should watch it, regardless of where they stand on trans rights, as these kinds of gender-critical voices are so often silenced and shouted down. Anyone watching will see that these women are not monstrous t3rfs; they’re decent, intelligent, sensible people with legitimate concerns about women’s rights. The tone is generally less abrasive compared to KJK for example, so it could be a good introduction to GC beliefs for those who can’t deal with KJK’s no-nonsense approach.

Thanks for starting this thread, let’s hope more people watch this film and learn from it.

I loved the film.

I’m quite new to this board and found out about the film from another thread here.

Watching it, it was clear that these people weren’t ‘hate filled transphobes’ but people with genuine concerns about women’s rights.

The reactions to the attempted screenings of the film have also been enlightening.

Really good film with compelling personal testimonies.

Finally finished watching it!
I'm really glad I did. Totally agree that everyone should watch it @KalimbaMoon.

I hadn't heard Shereen Benjamin speak before (in fact I've never heard of her) but the way she spoke so calmly about universities needing to return to being places of debate and challenge was put so well. It's really sad that instead of doing that over this film, with lots of different viewpoints coming together in debate, universities are cancelling it from being screened. Also I felt she explained the impact on children really well, including acknowledging the importance of the very real and historically known distress of gender dysphoria and how the watchful waiting approach has been replaced.

The firefighter's story remained with me too @PurpleBugz Her own experience covered so many examples of the impact of laws and rules being made based on gender identity.

My "university debate" opener/film review discussion point is admittedly very similar to what I have posted in other threads:
I always come back to religion as my analogy. If Christianity was new right now, there would be some people who believed in it and some people who challenged its validity (where is the proof that God exists? etc). For people who have faith in God, that's enough and that should be respected. As I understand it, gender identity is a individual and innate feeling and is not based on or directly linked to biology, so a belief. I'm absolutely comfortable with the idea that some people believe in gender identity and some people don't - for some people it's a really important part of who they are. But at the very least, if governments are considering laws based on a belief, there should be debate about how those belief-based laws impact people who don't hold the same belief.