Why did MNHQ think it knew enough about feminism to split FWR into two

[IwantToRetire]

Why did MNHQ decide that there are 2 types of feminism and that they should not be allowed to mix together so it split the Feminism and Women's Rights forum into 2. One for the nice girls who didn't want to discuss or even know that TW could be a threat to women's sex based rights, and one that tried to dumb down feminism into just discussing sex and gender but not related to feminism.

What was the point.

What do you think is the purpose of this board?

For me, I thought the purpose of FWR threads were feminism and women's rights. And even when there were disagreements, at the centre is women.

For me, the purpose of this board has been to enable the free discussion of the issue of trans ideology/gender identity and its negative impact upon women and children, with others who feel as I do about it. At one point is was literally the only on - line space which existed in which you could do this. As a result a close, supportive on -line community has formed, leading some to meet up with others in real life too.

There is such wide -ranging and informed discussion here, and is a place where women from all demographics, backgrounds and occupations can meet and organise. I can follow court cases and transcripts and discuss their relevence or import with others, including some who have excellent legal knowledege. So many very bright, clever and informed women post here.

I've been posting since 2017, and this board has been through the fire.....with bannings and briggings and warnings....being the target of disruptors and others with an axe to grind who have repeatedly reported posters to the moderator. Some of these people have been other women who have referred to themselves as intersectionalist feminists, and who have berated other women for being so focused on this issue...which is what led to the board being split.

And for you?

From what I remember. The gender debate was swamping all other discussions on feminism. When the split first happened I would sometimes post on Chat but have rarely visited since then. Didn't see anything feverish regarding intersectionality and didn't see it as that kind of split.

I do remember everyone walking on eggshells and at the time thought they had also made the split just in case they were forced to remove one of the topics. In which case, we would have been left with something.

I've taken to using the 'private browsing' function as this seems to resolve some of those issues. I was advised to do this by an Apple advisor when I approached Apple for advice. She saw that my browser didn't like MN very much and advised this course of action. 😂

Isn't the reason it was " swamping" the board simply because that is where most of the intense interest and engagement was? How do you stop people being so engaged and invested with an issue? Must we demand they must discuss other issues in a certain, approved way?

Agree, I was trying to understand why the split and it's only when you look at the overwhelming interest, especially from people in general rather than dedicated feminists.

Personally, I always home in on what I feel are the most relevent threads. I certainly don't open all/even most of the discussions or thread starters.

I said repeatedly at the time that if it is indeed about sex and gender then every topic that's specific to women will be relevant to that board because you can't separate out the fact that the issue stems from being the female sex or the woman gender, and that it would simply generate pointless arguments about which threads should be in which board.
Tbh it's gone better than I thought.

It isn't a "trans" board - but the issue of where we set definitions on what the female sex is or discuss what gender should be used for is ultimately one of the biggest questions that the definition of trans throws up, and that have not been completely resolved in the general population.

I'm going to try to articulate whey I don't think you can hive off discussions about trans ideology from the rest of feminism or suggest that it has no bearing on what we think of as 'women's rights' - as if it is a totally discrete issue.

I'll try and keep it as brief as possible without leaving out what i think are essential points,

As i see it 'feminism' arose as a response to societal conditions and habitual practices which had come to be seen as oppressive to female people. The term 'patriarchy' came to be used to describe a society in which male people held or maintained all the positions of power, influence and wealth, and used their greater physical size and strength to dominate and/or control female people.

It then came to be felt that it was female biology and physicality that was the root of this oppression. The facts of reproduction, pregnancy and childbirth were the factors that kept women subject to men. Taking control of one's own body, sexuality and reproductive capacity was seen to be essential if female people were going to be able to "meet men in the middle" or be active or even compete with men in the public spheres of life and have more power in the home/private sphere.

The bodies of women and girls are at the very heart of every feminist issue ( 'Our Bodies Our Selves')

Combine that with modern zeitgeist of technology and transhumanism - in which the body itself is seen as restrictive and inhibitive to an individual's free expression and freedom to be and do whatever they please. Human kind has always tried to overcome the limitations of nature; conquer and control it - and this desire has been taken up by consumer culture in which everything can be bought or is for sale ( including other people's/women's bodies, wombs, sexual organs)..........leads us to transgenderism which to my mind is the apotheosis of all of this politics of identity, individuality ( being one's 'best' or 'real' self) and consumer culture.

The body is just a 'meat suit' that one can chop and change or disregard entirely. We are not our bodies.Our bodies are what restrict us or cause us suffering and oppression. There are no essential differences between the sexes apart from their bodies and biology - but we can just disregard that - the body is not real and is of no great consequence.

Yet the body ( the female body) and its sexed nature still remains and influences our lives and our behaviours....even if we like to think it doesn't or would prefer it didn't.

As long as we are on Planet Earth in a body we are subject to its nature, its inherent drives and instincts. The best we can do is modify or moderate them.

I also find the Brave browser helps make MN more usable as a website.

For me, the purpose of this board has been to enable the free discussion of the issue of trans ideology/gender identity and its negative impact upon women and children, with others who feel as I do about it.

I agree this has been an amazing space for those discussing the damage gender ideology wreaks on women.

And for you?

For me, women are, and always should be, the primary focus of feminism and women's rights. What you see as dilution, I see as expansion. The fight for women's rights predates the trans shitshow and will continue long after it has been consigned to the history books, filed under "mad things governments believed in the past".

This board brought a lot of women together. Many people came here to discuss the threat of trans. I hope they stay around to discuss the other threats to women as well.

Yet, there were quite a number who actively opposed and didn't like that many people wanted to focus a lot on 'gender/trans' issues and complained that they were dominating the forum. Isn't this why the board was split?

'Trans' won't be " consigned to the history books" unless the sort of pressure and activism that coalesces through this forum is permitted a space. We've come quite a long way in the last 10 years and I suggest this forum has played a significant part in that success/process.

Why do you think the 'other' feminist board had less traffic? And why do you think this board is the one that has the most?

There has always been a sense that for some 'feminism' ( being 'woman centred') is a very particular political project that is associated very much with 'left wing'/'progressive' type politics, and with very certain dogmas and creeds......and I also suggest this is why many who identify as feminists also identify themselves as trans allies and 'intersectionalists'. Feminism was re-branded as being for all supposedly 'oppressd' peoples....and that trans women were really women. Women who didn't align with the very precise outlines of this project were rejected or dismissed as being bigots, 'right wing', or in the pay of someone. The only way to be 'woman centred' was to align with Left wing/progressive values.

These 'feminists' wanted to talk about male violence against women and women having 'equal access' to things - but didn't want to consider that including some men as women, and encouraging young women to reject being a woman at all was a foundational issue. That to properly represent female interests you actually have to be able to identify what is a woman in the first instance - and then recognise their specific needs, requirements as well as their differences to male people ( no matter how they 'identify').

HQ played a bit of a quiet blinder there really.

They were brigaded by emails (probably from a fairly small group) who were banging on and on about how they were desperate to discuss feminism but couldn't get a word in edgewise around the nasty saggy titted ones who wouldn't stop complaining about the damage to their rights coming from men with gender identities and the political movement involved.

So HQ said fine, there you go, have your own board. Enjoy.

FWR cracked on as normal.

And oddly enough all the ones who were so very desperate to talk about naice feminism said 'oh'. And haven't been seen since.

There were about three such posters IIRC.

It was mentioned a few times later that those desperate to discuss male-centred and what they felt to be properly appropriate women's issues didn't actually want to start threads or talk about them personally, they wanted other women to provide threads of the kind they wanted to read.

Performative curated womanning. Nuff said really as to what it was about.

That's right, I forgot. 😂There was also quite a lot of reporting of threads on here to get them dragged into the other board to try and make it look busy.

Oh. I remember that too.

There really is quite a group of posters who believe that they should be able to instruct MNHQ to curate boards and threads to their personal criteria. Hence the same posters on AIBU threads declaring that a thread shouldn’t be there because they don’t want to have to scroll past the thread, while showing that they personally lack impulse control and want MNHQ to structure the forum to suit that lack.

Or perhaps it is more the point they wish to shame other posters who did engage with the thread and this was their victimhood framing to do that.

(Ignore, post didn't work for some reason)

I don't think I understand your point. If feminism isn’t woman centred, what is it?

That seems to have stopped - either these people have gone away or MNHQ stopped playing their game.
With the result that the other board now has quite a lot of threads discussing ‘trans issues. And both discussing violence against women and girls and etc.
So maybe it’s time for the boards to be re-amalgamated, under a broad title such as, oh, I dunno, how about ‘Feminism and Women’s Rights’?

Ah, I dunno. That will spoil the fun of saying to posters who come on here to berate us all about being 'obsessed' and flail their arms about not being able to start 'be kind' threads that there is a board, specifically for them, which somehow they have missed. And it was instigated at those 'be kinders' request, no less.

Let the tumbleweed board reign, unvisited. And the wide ranging chat about everything feminist will continue here, as it has always done.

Cause it's always funny to see the arm flailing posters being given a link to the Feminist:chat board and them having to reply with a sheepish 'oh. Erm, thanks'.

Yes, it's rather like the Dadsnet board. Which a decade or so back used to really annoy the misogynists who'd march on to FWR or site stuff to shout about where was the board for the dads, hmm? What are women doing having things before providing for men?

And HQ would sweetly say 'it's right here and dead as a doornail have a lovely time'.

Yep

Yes, although sometimes people land there and remain unaware this board exists.

I was here when the boards were split and was very resentful of it at the time. But, as others have pointed out, FWR has thrived since. I am also mindful that for so long it was impossible to discuss this pretty much anywhere other than Mumsnet and I will be eternally grateful to them for that. It’s the reason I signed up for Premium and cough up my subs every year. Thank you Justine.