Has FWR had its remit expanded?

[IwantToRetire]

Is this sub heading for FWR new?

A feminism forum for sex and gender discussions, feminist chat, theory and intersectional feminism.

I thought when MNHQ forced through the split so that the nice girls weren't going to have to be made aware of angry GC feminists, that the remit was much smaller ie sex vs. gender.

Does this mean we aren't so awful and other aren't unintentionally contaminatedby being in our vicinity?

But also raises the question if it is okay to "chat" here why is there a separate thread called chat?

I don't get it. If "nobody wanted the split" (which seems odd, because obviously somebody did or it wouldn't have happened) why can't people just chat on here?

If you are a feminist, and you want to talk about gender politics you literally can't do that in feminist chat, can you? But if you think that everything feminist comes down to the fact that women have always been discriminated on based on their sex, then this is the only place you can do that, right? Because inevitably it will happen on an instance where a man is encroaching.

I have been having some thoughts about Gender Identity - but it isn't just about trans issues, so where do i get to post that?

If you are a feminist, and you want to talk about gender politics you literally can't do that in feminist chat, can you?
Looking at some of the threads there now, I think actually you can - except that most feminists are on this board not there so they don't go very far.
My concern is that women new to MN may miss out by going there rather than here. The two boards idea is (to no one's surprise) a hindrance not a help.

The intersectional bit sounds good. But it also sounds like one of the terms co-opted by Dentons enthusiasts who've zero intention of being intersectional and every intention of advancing men's rights under cover of slurring critics as not being intersectional IYSWIM.

They can bugger about with this board all they like but based on past experience etc...

Intersectional feminism? Great! FWR should certainly include discussions about it.
Intersectional 'thing that calls itself feminism but includes males' - nope. Doesn't belong on any feminism board.

Anything involving intersections requires that the correct sets are used!

Nobody wanted the split.

That's not quite true. Nobody here wanted it but someone hassled MNHQ into it and they agreed so we can conclude that they wanted it too.

Nobody is saying 'this is how it should be, this is how it shouldn't be'. Some of us are trying to work out what the wording could mean in the context of MNHQ's intentions for the two boards. That's all.

Do you honestly think the confusing new wording is a prelude to remerging the boards? Why would they bother doing that? Why wouldn't they just announce their intention in the normal fashion on a site stuff thread, or in stickies at the top of both topics, as they do every other time they merge or split topics?

For clarity: The boards should be remerged.

Looking at the breadth of threads on both boards now, and the fact the other one continues to get fuck all traffic, this confusing new wording seems like a good opportunity to campaign for that.

But the way to do that is by openly expressing our views to them, not by keeping quiet about a 'mistake' in the hope it might mean something we want it to, or by having a pop at someone you regard as a snitch. That's just juvenile.

But isn't the idea that women are oppressed and discrimanted against on account of their sex itself a form of intersectionality. Intersectionality deals with identity groups and where they blie on a spectrum of powerful to powerless.

I for one, no longer identify as a feminist for this reason. I, of course, acknowledege that sex exists and is real and has consequences which are important for women and girls, especially - but I don't see everything related to sex as a matter of oppression, victimhood and powerlessness with men as the oppressors/the patriarchy.

Where they lie on a spectrum

Of course, I also get it that what we now term liberal feminism ( 'modern' feminists?) and Intersectionalists tend to accept the notion of gender identity - and believe it supercedes sex.

Personally think that merging the boards is a retrograde move if preventing trolling, personal abuse, and general bad manners is the desired goal.

People used to get banned for getting involved in such disputes.

I'm interested in women's issues and rights rather than in specific ideological frameworks.

I'm still with the late, great Magdalen Berns on the topic of intersectionality:

I think most of us just want to be left to discuss the issue of gender and trans ideology without getting banned, and without having to endlessly justify it to all comers ( who often report people which results/or did until fairly recently in them getting banned).

FWR has become THE resource for discussion, education and organisation for many of us who have nothing to do with any other sections of the forum.

Of course you can post it here. This topic has been named 'Feminism: Sex and Gender', not 'Feminism: Trans Issues'.

You could probably also post it in the other topic now, whoever used to care seems not to be around any more.

This is the thread where Justine first dropped in that they were going to split FWR into its current categories

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4267223-Any-chance-of-a-review-of-the-FWR-moderation-rules-in-light-of-Maya-Forstaters-success-in-court-please?page=2

Seems to me that this split didn't have the effect that was intended originally. We adapted and overcame and made a success of it

Thanks @Maaate . Direct link to Justine's post:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4267223-Any-chance-of-a-review-of-the-FWR-moderation-rules-in-light-of-Maya-Forstaters-success-in-court-please?page=6&reply=108110967

Pretty much.

Now, occasionally if threads are not discussing Sex and Gender some one complains and gets it bounced to the other board and it dies from lack of attention. The user names who complain are usually those who complain of a thread discussing anything to do with prioritising sex over gender escapes the bounds of this board.

Those user names are so overly keen on what threads go where. And many would have been the ones to apply pressure for the split - I believe they call themselves ‘intersectional feminists’ using the new expanded definition of the term. But some threads here still escape their notice and remain here because this is the board where the majority read and comment. This is the high traffic board.

Most people forget the other board and post here anyway. The other board can go hours and hours during the day, at a time when this board is heaving, and not have a new post on any thread. And regularly people post sex and gender threads over there anyway.

It was predicted. MNHQ did it anyway.

To clarify, I am all for the original intersectional feminism. But not the expanded label where males are included.

Absolutely @Helleofabore. In fact, the groups of women intersectional feminism was originally supposed to draw in (women of colour, disabled women, women, incarcerated women etc) are generally the groups who are most disadvantaged by the inclusion of biologically male women.

I think it's important to keep discussing feminism more generally on this board, to counteract the accusation that we aren't actually interested in feminism but just want a corner of the internet where we're allowed to be transphobic.

The main issue with that is that feminism affects every aspect of women's lives and so in practice there are threads which could be categorised as "feminism" all over the site, e.g. in AIBU, chat, relationships, health, work, legal matters etc. The idea of confining feminism to a single topic on a site like Mumsnet is a bit daft to begin with.

It never made the tiniest scrap of sense to have a Feminism 'chat' section that wasn't about sex and/or gender.

The lines have always been slightly baffling and we were reassured, when I asked, that threads wouldn't be constantly moved to S&G if they mention being female/a woman etc. Although threads have been moved from AIBU, Chat etc off to the naughty corner...

I don't think anyone's arguing that lines need to be firmly drawn, just wondering what went on with the weird board descriptions? I assumed for Google searches etc but who knows.

I was on this board for ages before I even realised there was another feminism board. I'm glad that, however I found MN, I landed here and not on the other board. The division is artificial.