Is FWR like a vegetarian restaurant that meat eaters keep going into and say it is an echo chamber to stick to saying they dont serve meat

[IwantToRetire]

Most people would think if someone wants to set up a vegetarian restaurant and some people want to eat there, that’s up to them.

But somehow women wanting to have a forum where they can discuss, organise and publicise different groups of women doing the same in different parts of the country (world) is not acceptable and so don’t have the right to do just be allowed to do this

Not only do they not have the right, they should be scolded and endlessly interrupted and have their forum bogged down in repetitious whatabouterry.

Does this only happen to women?

Do right wingers endlessly invade meetings and forums where Marxists meet and discuss Marxism? Do atheists barge into meetings held by people of a shared faith?

Or is it just the default assumption that women do not have the right to think for themselves, let alone think they aren’t obliged to have to respond to demands made on them to justify themselves?

It's more like militant vegans stomping into regular restaurants and screaming 'you're eating dead animals' at the customers.

We know we are, most of us have thought about that and made our choice on the basis of many things.

For the analogy to work, the carnivores would need to spend all their time at the vegetarian restaurant, to the extent that one would have to wonder whether they were motivated by something other than disagreement over dietary choices - loneliness?

Yes you’ll get political debate, yes you’ll get discussion re religion, all quite normal. Women are not homogeneous in their views and this being a feminism board doesn’t mean we all have the same views re sex and gender either, it’s a debating board. Refusing to accept women have differing opinions is a dangerous, extremist - far better to hear all sides of an argument

That is true mamagogo but I've been on here nearly a decade and i joined because I was actively looking for an explainer of the TRA position because I assumed I must be missing something.

I can genuinely count on the fingers of one hand the number of posters who have been honest and tried to tease out and accurately communicate what it is they actually think. The rest is largely insults, strawmen and plain old ignoring the question.

To go back to the analogy, you could say "well, do you believe eating meat is ok, for you personally? " and they'd reply "wow can't believe that vegetarianism requires you to police what everyone is eating / you claim to know the difference between meat and veg but that question shows you don't, actually / I'm not talking about whether it's ok for ME to eat meat" etc etc

So I'm still waiting to "hear the side of an argument" that explains what the difference between a man and a woman is if it isn't the sex of their body.

Whilst prolific posters like Howse do indeed demonstrate that FWR isn't an echo chamber, they hardly make use of that fact (well not intellectual or perspective-broadening "use" anyway. It's entirely possible women here are being "used" in the more traditional, patriarchal sense).

The vegetarian analogy made me chuckle as an alternating veggie/ vegan. My mind immediately went to being served pizza with the pepperoni removed, as if it wasn't still swimming in meat juices. Make of that what you will!

But really no analogy is needed. What is done to women here is just the same old misogyny. Why would a misogynist respect a thread of support for women who've experienced sexual violence? They probably identify more with the perpetrator.

Why would a misogynist take the time to understand a feminist point of view and reflect it back before offering a counter argument? It's a patriarchy! Misogynists don't need to do this. They can continue to take whatever they want relatively unimpeded.

Why wouldn't a misogynist appropriate our words or use our presence non-consensually as part of some kink? Misogynist men have been doing this for time.

In the vegetarian/vegan analogy you'd still find an activist having a meltdown if even one dish was available that didn't contain meat identifying as not being meat with everyone valiantly pretending to pretend and shouting 'yum I love being vegan' as they ate it.

I think I took the vegan vs. vegitarian comparison as vegans being militant sex based rights, and vegitarians not quite standing firm.

So have spent a restless night concerned that I am not hard line enough.

But the point of the OP is that in terms of FWR providing a shared space for women with gender critical views, it is amazing how many people think we dont have the right to that space. And feel they can demand the right to question its existence. And resent that we dont stop what we are doing at every opportunity to answer their demands.

But never bother barging into groups set up for people with a shared believe they dont have, and demanding attention whilst insulting that believe.

This sub forum was intentionally hived off ( from the main feminist board) years ago at the request of those who didn't want to discuss trans ideology and gender identity theory and its negative impact upon female people. It has long been established as the place where people ( mainly women) could meet to discuss, share experiences, follow court casees, inform and organise on this particular issue.

There was a time, just a few years ago ,when discussion was literally forbiden elsewhere; and even on here women were being banned for speaking freely and openly. You have to intentionally seek out this particular sub -forum, and anyone who does so is being disingenuous to suggest they were not aware of any of the above and expected anything other than they have found.

No.

This branch is for sex and gender discussion. Not for 'sex and gender talk for GC women'

If someone who is not GC (or not GC enough for the majority) they should be able to be heard and their point discussed without venom. But that isn't what happens, generally. Virtually all the regulars here agree with each other, so it pretty much is an echo chamber.

So to go back to the OP it's like food club for omnivores to talk about food, and the benefits or downsides of being a carnivore, omnivore, vegetarian or vegan. But this is a food club where if you're not vegan, you and your views are not welcome.

This!

But you're here. Your post won't be deleted, we can't (not that I would) mute or block you, you aren't kicked off for having a different opinion, and you can (with talk guidelines) disagree with other posters to your heart's content.

Other people disagree with your opinion. They are allowed to.

i'm not sure what your point is about the majority - should there only be a certain number of women who disagree with you allowed to post at any one time in order to make you feel better?

What's your thoughts on the actual echo chambers of Reddit and Twitter?

You might like to think that, but if those who are the forum are there to advance their believes and activities and campaigns they are not obliged to have to justify this is what they want to do to someone who wants to dabble in a bit of a discussion.

In fact if you want questions asked about sex based rights why not go to feminist chat and ask what they think about it.

Or set up a forum to debate whether sex based rights is a valid position to have.

Nowhere does it say we have to keep on having to go back to ground zero and turn the forum into ground hog day.

Although of course there are some who want it to be that because they it never moves forward, as it basis is constantly being rediscussed with what some might think is the deliberate intent to not allow it to be the leaping off point to got beyond why be gender critical.

How long have you been posting here, I wonder? I'm not suggesting that other voices aren't permitted. They are, clearly...and most people here are not in the habit of reporting posts and trying to get people banned just because they continualy counter the main thrust and purpose of the board. But this board has long been the place ( for a long time virtually the only on-line place) for grassroots activism on this issue.

It has been a central rallying place , and a place to share, diseminate and educate. Personally, I'd never had anthing to do with MN before seven years ago.... and still don't get involved or even read other sub forums. It has been an incredibly important resource and platform.

Not sure it's a very comparable analogy, because vegetarianism is very much a minority position whereas womens rights are vital for 50% of the population. Also it doesn't affect anyone else's life if one person chooses to eat meat or another person chooses not to.

The womens rights/trans rights situation is more like if a group of activists wanted to make it mandatory and unavoidable that all vegetable products globally must be coated in a mix of lard and beef fat, and expect muslim, jewish, hindu and buddhist people to just shut up about it. TRAs want to make it impossible to have a single-sex space anywhere, or to have anything at all that is reserved just for women, for any reason. It affects a lot of people.

So to go back to the OP it's like food club for omnivores to talk about food, and the benefits or downsides of being a carnivore, omnivore, vegetarian or vegan. But this is a food club where if you're not vegan, you and your views are not welcome.

You didn't read my OP. I said it was a restuarant ie a service with a menu that makes it clear meat isn't served.

And 99% of the population would think fine if that's what they want to do. And some vegetarians might well be pleased.

But it would be extremely odd if an established vegetarian restuarant found that every now and again someone burst is saying why aren't you eating meat? And you have to answer my quesition. I dont respect the right of vegetarians to have a place dedicated to them.

Well the odd drunk might on there way home. But otherwise not something anyone would expect or think acceptable behaviour.

I wonder how many Marxist discussion groups get random posters saying why are you only discussing Marx, despite the name clearly indicating that is the purpose of the group.

If someone who is not GC (or not GC enough for the majority) they should be able to be heard and their point discussed without venom

Did you read my recent post regarding exactly this?

As I said, I'm genuinely, honestly, curious about the beliefs of people who think that the difference between men and women is something other than the sex of their bodies, so I ask about it.

I am never given the courtesy of a response.

Frequently if there is a response they reword the question that was actually asked into a strawman.

Instead of "here is my view, let's see what yours is and we can analyse where they diverge" it's constant derailing and refusal to even set out what their point actually is.

Is that what is meant by "echo chamber"?

I'm not getting all of this vegetarian/vegan talk. I've been vegetarian for 44 years...long before radical veganism became a thing. I'd say radical veganism now belongs in the 'identity politics' stable.

When I first became vegetarian I did know some vegans and I attempted this discipline myself but found it too difficult to sustain in the long term, outside of those veggie circles. Back them being a vegetarian was difficult enough when you mixed outside of 'the community'; eating out and at the homes of family members etc

I was probably more of an activist in my youth on the matter...but certainly no longer, and have to say I find the recent vegan trend to be annoying.....and many new vegans don't really last the course because it is too extreme.

It's far easier to be a vegetarian these days and most restaurants serve veggie choices; though I will never eat in a steak restaurant or in a place which is heavily focused on meat, for the reason I find it aesthetically unpleasant to be around.

Well done for getting "fascistic" in, Howse, right up the top of the responses! Did you know the word "fascist" doesn't mean "something I don't like"?

OP, I like your restaurant analogy. The feminism board tends to attract feminists, as one would expect. We express many different opinions, give and ask for information, and share thoughts and ideas. We make jokes, send hugs and listen sympathetically when someone needs to have a rant.

It also attracts some antifeminists, who take up space with boring lectures, groundless complaints, and unconstructive demands. We don't owe them anything, but we are usually polite. And it is quite funny when some of them claim to be feminists, while demanding that we prioritise men.

But again, you're basically saying that this branch is purely for strongly GC women, so no-one else should come here with any other expectation. But it's not. It's for everyone to discuss/express an opinion on sex and gender, whatever their take on it.

Edited: Misunderstood the poster, apologies

And people are free to do that. No banning, no muting, but also no presumption that they will find instant agreement or not meet robust argument disagreeing with them. There are other feminist boards on here for more general feminist discussion or chat.

And I remember, when the FWR boards were split, women who have gender critical views were told to 'fuck off to your own board' by those who had demanded the Feminist Chat board. That really was creating an echo chamber on the (since proven to be rather irrelevant) Feminist Chat board.

But we still get fairly regular howls of 'why are you obsessed with talking about sex and gender!!' ...on the sex and gender board.

I do wonder sometimes if they wander onto the Doghouse board and demand to know why they're not discussing cats.....

Err, don't expect any coherence here. This OP constantly 'forgets' the premise of their posts which in this case is that the MN sex & gender forum is "theirs" & goes on to make an irrelevant analogy about vegetarian restaurants as if this forum's website has specified only one specific ideological dish on the S&G menu.

"Not only do they not have the right, they should be scolded and endlessly interrupted and have their forum bogged down in repetitious whatabouterry."

Perhaps a more relevant analogy might be wild animals claiming territorial boundaries via a pissing contest? 😂

Honestly, what is it about TRA's and piss? Absolutely obsessed.

That and italics.

Owwww, stop, those italics are huuuuuurting me!!!