Women's Section Last Post (see what I've done there)?

[hufty]

Just out of interest, will there be a review of whether this sub-forum has proved vital, in both senses of the word? I note that the previous post to this one was six weeks ago and there have been 31 threads started in 10 months - it's more moribund than the MTB subforum even!

[eileithyia]

Certainly very quiet at the moment. The total women's cycling forum is also relatively quiet and the time trialling sub forum has been fairly quiet in the off season but is now more active. Subjects discussed do provide an important resource for ladies who are new to the forum, so their worth is difficult to calculate. Even if it is not over active I believe it should remain for anyone to access.

[LollyKat]

Even if it is not over active I believe it should remain for anyone to access.

+1

[DaveP]

I think so too.
FWIW I also think it might be quite difficult for the CTC to remove this section while pushing the concept of inclusivity.

Something I have wondered about from time to time: Do you think this section would be busier if it was available only to women?
I look in from time to time, and have offered a suggestion or two in the belief that it was generally supportive, but perhaps it would be better not to do so. I can't tell...

[Farawayvisions]

I often take a peek to see if anything's been posted in this section and believe it's useful for female specific queries. I'm OK with it being read by men.

[Slowroad]

I often take a peek to see if anything's been posted in this section and believe it's useful for female specific queries. I'm OK with it being read by men.

Ditto - I like the non-gendered nature of most of the forum but this certainly has its uses.

[mjr]

FWIW I also think it might be quite difficult for the CTC to remove this section while pushing the concept of inclusivity.

Really? All they need to do is INCLUDE the women's topics in the mainstream boards.

I've reported this thread because it would be better moved to one of the boards discussing forum operations, whatever the decision. I don't think occasional postings challenging if any board is still alive is a good thing to post in the board itself.

[Flinders]

It seems a reasonable place for the OP to me.
Some of the women-specific things covered here have been very useful. They may not need revisiting, as in most cases the threads brought out all the information that most people would need, but I feel that they ought to be kept separately here on this specific section so as to be easier to find.

Some may be added to as more women-specific products come available too; women-specific gear is a relatively new thing for the most part, and I think will be a growing one.

[Geoff.D]

FWIW I also think it might be quite difficult for the CTC to remove this section while pushing the concept of inclusivity.

Really? All they need to do is INCLUDE the women's topics in the mainstream boards.

The whole question about having a section specifically for women's perspectives came about from someone asking "Why don't more women post on the forum?" There followed an incredibly lengthy discussion. One acknowledged factor was that any minority group (women in this case) can feel intimidated and excluded from participating in an activity if it's dominated by another group (irrespective of intention). A return to expecting women to post within the overall (male) forum would have, at least, two results

1. The women who have felt able to post purely because there is a specific place for them to do so, will not post
2. The CTC will be retreating from an "active" and visible inclusivity, replacing it with a "passive" policy and practice.

My personal view is that this section serves a purpose, whatever the participation rate.

[mjr]

One acknowledged factor was that any minority group (women in this case) can feel intimidated and excluded from participating in an activity if it's dominated by another group (irrespective of intention).

Yeah, but there was a logical disconnect between that factor and the creation of a ghetto board as the remedial action. Creation of only a ghetto without a similar space for dominant-group-only issues reinforces the misconception that the rest of the space sort-of belongs to the dominant group. (Edited, to use dominant instead of majority/minority: in the population, women are the majority, but they don't seem to be on this site.)

So as for the claim that "2. The CTC will be retreating from an "active" and visible inclusivity, replacing it with a "passive" policy and practice" then actually I think that "passive" is the current practice, with this topic created and then apparently sitting back and doing little else to promote inclusion. It would be a far more active and visible step to update the forum terms and conditions to contain stronger assurances about equality, discrimination and inclusion than "We hope that the boards develop and maintain a reputation for friendliness, inclusiveness [...]" about this and to announce it in a high-profile way. Something like http://koha-community.org/about/policy/code-of-conduct/ but for a forum.

But so far, an action that I predicted would be largely ineffective was taken and it's been largely ineffective... and recently it's been repeated with another catch-all ghetto for minorities... do you know what? I expect that will be ineffective too, if left at that.

[mjr]

It seems a reasonable place for the OP to me.
Some of the women-specific things covered here have been very useful. They may not need revisiting, as in most cases the threads brought out all the information that most people would need, but I feel that they ought to be kept separately here on this specific section so as to be easier to find.

This site has the "too good to lose" sections and index topics to make things easier to find - shouldn't women-specific topics be included in those as needed?

Some may be added to as more women-specific products come available too; women-specific gear is a relatively new thing for the most part, and I think will be a growing one.

I'm sure someone will be along in a minute to remind us of Victorian women-specific cycling products...

[pjclinch]

Yeah, but there was a logical disconnect between that factor and the creation of a ghetto board as the remedial action.
... snip ...
But so far, an action that I predicted would be largely ineffective was taken and it's been largely ineffective... and recently it's been repeated with another catch-all ghetto for minorities... do you know what? I expect that will be ineffective too, if left at that.

For some values of "ghetto" and "ineffective". If you just go by volume of post then e.g. the National Standards Training is an "ineffective ghetto", but as one of the few people using it I find it useful. As a couple of the people this area is specifically not aimed at I don't think we're in a position to judge if it's either of the things you've decided it is.

[Geoff.D]

Yeah, but there was a logical disconnect between that factor and the creation of a ghetto board as the remedial action.
... snip ...
But so far, an action that I predicted would be largely ineffective was taken and it's been largely ineffective... and recently it's been repeated with another catch-all ghetto for minorities... do you know what? I expect that will be ineffective too, if left at that.

For some values of "ghetto" and "ineffective". If you just go by volume of post then e.g. the National Standards Training is an "ineffective ghetto", but as one of the few people using it I find it useful. As a couple of the people this area is specifically not aimed at I don't think we're in a position to judge if it's either of the things you've decided it is.

I'm quite in agreement with the sentiment here. Since the objective was to have a section that encouraged members who were fearful (of participating in the general sections), it's for them to speak of the effect of that encouragement. Participation levels are not the criteria. Feeling comfortable and encouraged are.
Actually. with regard to "ghetto", I read and post in the womens' section, and I note that women read and post in the general sections. I see no "ghetto" into which people are being shepherded and then constrained.

My views might seem, to some, to be theoretical. But, I can quite clearly remember just how long it took me as a newbie to post on any section. Years. It seemed to me that they were populated by people much, much further up the cycling tree (knowledge, experience, quality of bike, attention to detail and high values, etc) than I am. I certainly felt overawed.

[Si]

a section that encouraged members who were fearful (of participating in the general sections)

Indeed, and ongoing arguments, mainly by men, regarding what is best for the females (tries very hard to resist saying "what is best for the little ladies" ) has a good chance of sinking this aim* before it gets going. Ditto the inclusive cycling section.

*before anyone says anything - I am not stating that this is the only aim of this section.

[mjr]

a section that encouraged members who were fearful (of participating in the general sections)

Indeed, and ongoing arguments, mainly by men, regarding what is best for the females (tries very hard to resist saying "what is best for the little ladies" ) has a good chance of sinking this aim* before it gets going. Ditto the inclusive cycling section.

*before anyone says anything - I am not stating that this is the only aim of this section.

Well, I did ask the moderators to move this topic to a less damaging area and that was refused, so I feel having this discussion here is your(collective) choice, not mine.

As I revealed on this site this January, I am in a minority in another so-called protected characteristic. That's part of why I was so worried that the mistake of creating a space and leaving it at that would be repeated for other characteristics, which it has been, shotgunning the rest of us together under the awkward banner "inclusive cycling". After 10 months, there's less than a page of topics and many of them (including this one) would have been appropriate elsewhere and possibly had beneficial effects from that. People can keep claiming that any board is being judged "before it gets going" forever, can't they?

Remember that I also started reading this site long before I registered and even then it was over two years between my first and second posts, so I do know the feeling of being intimidated about posting here.

When will the moderators please take some active steps to improve the conditions throughout the forum, instead of what I feel is basically telling us to be happy that minorities have been granted enclaves?