Thread derailment

[Temporaryusernamefortoday]

Wondering if I am the only one that’s noticed more and more thread derailments. I’m not talking about TRA taking a TWAW stance but an individual being deliberately obtuse or missing the point of an individuals posts to create an argument about a tangential element. It just seems rather insidious and designed to prevent proper conversation.

This is not a TAT but a thread about a phenomenon.

Its likely that there are derailed who join threads with the intent to derail, others doing it unwittingly and others who didn’t initially have the intent, but are unwilling to let go of a derailing point because they have become fixated on it.

Added to this challenge, we have people engaging at ‘novice level’ in relation to their exposure to the arguments made on the board’, right through to ‘mastery level’ posters.

Mixed in with this is differences between those seeking dialogue and those seeking debate - and accusation that arise just from this difference.

Those wanting to debate are wanting to persuade and convince. This is understandable in light of the issues that are posted about.

Those wanting to engage in dialogue are often wanting to explore wider perspectives at a deeper level. I think these posters can be mistaken as derailers. I think these posters also can mistake responses that reflect debate as being shut down due to posters not tolerating wider views.

Agree completely. I really don't care if this is controversial but I don't think you can call yourself a feminist if you're not GC.
Anyone that includes men in their feminism is not a feminist.

Agree, although someone will probably turn up imminently to tell you you're wrong, you're a big meanie, and how dare you 'gatekeep' feminism (it's almost like words have meanings, isn't it? 🤦‍♂️).

I don't understand what you mean by your second paragraph. Would you mind explaining a bit more?

FWIW, I hadnt noticed the use of 'intersectional' in the board description.

I think its probably because at the time of the great schism, use of the words gender critical would have given some people (especially advertisers) conniptions.

Intersectional is nicely vague but implies all view points welcome. Although tbh it usually signifies TWAW these days.

The next question would be whether there is much point in spending a lot of time debating who is a real feminist and who is not.

Most of the time you are discussing these issues in here, that should be secondary. Everyone feels they are a feminist regardless of their views on sex and gender and that's all the board requires you to be: interested in sex and gender through a feminist lens. We've established that some subgroups of feminism feel that other subgroups arent feminists because their approach to feminism fails at least some women.

We've established that the board isn't just for GC feminists, so who is and who isn't a real feminist based on your opinions of what feminism should be seems like a bit of a derail.

GC feminists don't believe TWAW or TMAM, absolutely right. In that vein we're very much aware that transmen are women and therefore we care very much about their safety, dignity and rights.

No, sorry, I don’t accept that. Women who centre men over women are not feminists, and I’ll be continuing to challenge the idea that anyone claiming to be a feminist is one, whether you find it valuable personally or not. Because I post as I see fit.

And that’s the point, “everyone” feels like they’re a feminist because being feminist lite is trendy, remember Nick Clegg’s “this is what a feminist looks like” t shirt. Is it bollocks. Not so fashionable to stick up for women’s rights at personal cost to yourself.

Okay but at least some of the time, that will be you derailing the thread. But that's what we need really. People to be transparent about when they are likely to derail.

And many of those transmen would think you cannot do that if you don't believe TMAM so in that sense, they are excluded from your feminism.

I’m not derailing, you raised this issue. Or someone did and you eagerly waded in to explain what the board is supposed to be about.

Gender identity ideology is not feminist. Feminism is about women’s sex based rights and position in society. Including those women who mistakenly think they can opt out of facing misogyny and sexism by claiming to be male.

And I don’t normally go around telling these fake feminist people they aren’t feminist, because it’s confrontational (which is more than I can say for them). But it’s still my opinion.

I didn't say you are derailing here in this thread. I said at least some of time, wanting to discuss who is a real feminist will be derailing on other threads about sex and gender.

I don’t normally do it, only when it’s raised and relevant.

That's your opinion. However, it is feminism as its goal is equality for women and it has a targeted approach in how to achieve that. Not all feminists would agree with said approach or common values in that subgroup.

Don't feed the troll, there's no arguing with stupid, don't fight with pigs you will get muddy and they enjoy it, etc etc etc. Everyone needs to show more restraint and impulse control and ignore, ignore, ignore.

And that’s your opinion, with which I completely disagree, as I’ve been clear on.

I disagree. Being potentially wrong about how to fight for someone, doesn't mean you're not fighting for them in the first place. In fact, that's an issue faced by all women, since whichever kind of woman you are, you can find feminist groups out there who fight for your rights "in the wrong way", or even fight for right you don't want! Trans men are nothing special in that regard.

Ideologies that scorn women’s rights are not “subgroups of feminism”, it’s a laughable claim.

@alamak gave an example which was better than mine. This is not a feminist movement, is it?

And they'd disagree back and use that as a reason why GC feminism isn't feminist. Every subgroup could do this but it is largely a waste of time. Feminism has many different approaches. The only core principle is the quest for equality.

I googled this and nowhere that I found do the OWC profess to be feminist. In fact, I found they are openly anti-feminist. They describe themselves as an International Islamic Organization or something. So it's a bit of a moot point. They don't describe themselves that way because they don't have feminist principles.

Can you find anything that says they are a feminist group?

The intersectional bit was added when mumsnet last changed the description. I think that the change was made maybe a year ago