Dealing with inflammatory posts re Trans on MN

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

I am concerned to see the message below from MNHQ at the end of the T thread. Regarding posts that I consider "goady", I have a personal policy of not feeding them, not engaging and not rising to the bait. I ignore them. OPs looking for conflict as a way to feed themselves won't get it from me. Firstly, it's exhausting-they are not interested in dialogue, despite what they say, and secondly the best way to deal with them, imo, is to starve them of attention and not rise to the bait. Don't give them what they want i.e. a fight and conflict.

My concern is I predict there will be a lot more new threads and OPs looking for a fight, as the public becomes more aware of the issues and the tide starts to turn against TRAs. They will want to try and get this Place closed down for discussion, and none of us want that to happen.

Personally I have found it empowering to learn how not to engage and to turn it back on them if absolutely necessary, by the use of ridicule and short rebuttals of their nonsense. I am happy to share some techniques if it will help plus learn more from others. There's no point in trying to score points and win all the arguments they make as it's the engagement down their rabbit holes they want - they literally feed off conflict. They're anti-social remember, so any attention is better than none. They want to keep you coming back and arguing, so they can derail, prolong, provoke and generally make life difficult for MNHQ - to force them to take action. The negative attention "turns on" those looking for a fight….so please don't feed them, ignore them and lets keep this place open.

Message for MN:

Hi all

Since this thread is getting near its end, this seems like a good moment to make a really serious point.

We've just made some more deletions on this thread, and we're pretty exasperated tbh - we feel we're running out of ways to say 'please stick within the TGs or risk losing MN as a place to discuss this issue.'

We're really proud of our commitment to free speech, and we put a huge amount of time and resources to enabling this debate to take place - as many of you have pointed out, it's one of the few places left.

To those who haven't yet been able to stop and look at things from our end of the barrel - please understand that you're risking this space for everyone; if you really can't debate civilly with those you disagree with, it might be time to consider that MN is no longer the place for you. We're sorry to have to say this - we don't like it one bit - but tbh nothing else seems to have got through so far: we're at a point of last resort.

Thanks to all those who modify their first instincts and manage to make their points in a calm, considered and civilised manner - even in the face of goadiness. We appreciate it (and so would Michelle.)

Thanks all

MNHQ

I was just thinking of composing a similar post woman, but you have said it much better than I could.

MNHQ are to be commended for allowing these discussions and I have no doubt they are under great pressure not to.

I am slightly worried by that message tbh, as I think that transactivists will see that as the green light to invade (oddly enough, when MN regulars were just yesterday accused of being far right invaders ). Sealioning, being purposely goady, then reporting any replies, in the hope that HQ will get sick and just go back to banning all discussion on the topic (which TRAs really do want, they HATE that MN let us talk)

Vickxy, we have had invasions of all kinds over the years I've been using this forum and they have, until now, been dealt with with a level of sarcasm and enormous good humour. There has been a change in the way some posters see fit to communicate with goady fuckers and it's that that will cause the problems.

Thank you MNHQ! I wanted to say that, but the post closed.

It's important, IMO, not to give ammunition to the poor martyred trans dialogue with personal attacks. When they complain of aggressive terfs, but can show only 'in what way are we both women?' as evidence, they look pretty foolish. When they can show swearing abusive texts (no matter how justified), they look better.

I will do my best. Even though my gob is enormous and often hijacks my brain. I will do my best.

Sealioning, being purposely goady, then reporting any replies, in the hope that HQ will get sick and just go back to banning all discussion on the topic (which TRAs really do want, they HATE that MN let us talk)

^
Yep. This is a well rehearsed tactic, used across the entire internet to close women down.

Wind ‘em up and watch them go and then send in a raft of mates to report, report, report or even threaten legal action.
It’s deliberate, they know it will lead to the whole topic being closed down here and they know it because they’ve done it elsewhere over and over again for the past decade.

I hate the thought of this place becoming a gender critical version of what TRAs have created for themselves on Twitter, an echo chamber of the same murmurs of agreement and beige personalities. There needs to be away of engaging with the likes of the Donna whilst making sure we stay squeaky clean (ugh). Those threads also probably bring more people to peak trans than anything, however I feel like there needs to be some very careful toeing the line. We are in a precarious position here./

MN will be under considerable pressure to close this down, they probably have TRAs contacting them and advertisers constantly.
This forum is one of the only places we have left, it’s terribly worrying that we could see it disappear.

I think it's hugely understandandable that women are getting frustrated but also important to keep our tempers.

We're winning the PR battle at the moment. The tide is starting to turn, the debate is starting to happen. More and more people are noticing what's going on and coming to have a look. Let them see reasonable arguments and courteous debate.

I agree. TRAs have been much in evidence these last few days. They want to shut down this space. Don't feed them.

"Sealioning, being purposely goady, then reporting any replies, in the hope that HQ will get sick and just go back to banning all discussion on the topic"

I remember when there were constant goady MRA threads using just that tactic

I agree Vickxy.

It’s a matter of being careful to stay in control, count to ten and take some deep breaths if a post gets us riled up, and always stick rigorously to the talk guidelines.

If we pride ourselves on open, reasoned debate, we have to uphold the principles of that, even when it’s hard and things are getting emotional.

Everywhere else on the internet (and the wider political world) is getting more insular, and debate is being shut down in favour of ideology. That makes places like this ever more valuable.

Sorry @MNHQ.

One of my posts was deleted and deservedly so. I was incredibly frustrated and angry with the lies, gaslighting and abuse on twitter.

No excuses. I will do better.

Thanks for supporting free speech, and women.

&

I'm sorry if I did any of that, does one get an email if one has a post deleted?

I agree with the majority. I think it's @Datun who says ' remember the lurkers".

It's like dealing with teenagers - it is incredibly hard for adolescents to be repeatedly rude to adults who consistently model assertive respect back at them - no matter how offensive they are being.

The public narrative is shifting - #nodebate is recognised as oppressive and people are starting to talk. Let's ensure that everyone sees the debate as powerful, respectful and reasoned on this side.

I got banned from another forum because I got angry at another poster's deliberate goading about being trans.

I know how feelings can build up - especially when they affect either you or something you are passionate about.

MN is right in the thick of the debate. It's good that things can be debated.

Perhaps it would be best not to engage with OPs with no posting history, whose first posts are either inflammatory or sound disingenuous?

It's frustrating when people are spending time and energy on patient explanations to which the OP has no intention at all of giving considered thought. And whatever is said here, however clear and polite and robust the argument, it gets called 'abuse' and is described as 'hysterical' and bullying etc. And obviously causes MNHQ no end of grief to sift through too.

Perhaps it would be best not to engage with OPs with no posting history, whose first posts are either inflammatory or sound disingenuous?

Yes. Just report as '?TRA goader'. It's what I used to do with the MRA tools.

It's frustrating when people are spending time and energy on patient explanations to which the OP has no intention at all of giving considered thought. And whatever is said here, however clear and polite and robust the argument, it gets called 'abuse' and is described as 'hysterical' and bullying etc

I find it helps if you think of yourself as replying 'to' the lurkers rather than to the disengenuous poster

Can I ask, MNHQ... I saw the thread this morning and immediately felt it was an attack. I therefore just typed in . I see two others followed.

Is that an acceptable response? I confess I hoped that the OP would just receive a whole raft of biscuits and perhaps think twice before engaging again in such a manner.

I see that later the wonderful Datun said that she felt such threads were useful, in that the important arguments were laid out again.

Would there be a preferred way to deal with goady OPs? There’s a danger if regular posters such as Datun don’t engage at all, then other less patient posters might take over completely.

In case anyone would also like to engage elsewhere, there is the CATT group on Facebook.

*disingenuous

I don't know if it would be helpful if, as soon as any regular posters recognized that someone is a dubious poster, they just post the word 'stop' or some such, and those that follow recognize it and then deprive the poster of oxygen?

It can be good to engage sometimes to debate, but other times I think it can do more harm. I guess the difficulty is in figuring out which to engage with and which to avoid.

Good post OP.

I think when we see threads that are potentially trying to invite an angry response from our side, the first person who can just posts a quick message reminding everyone to keep it civil and points out that responding negatively does not help promote the GC cause.

Whilst many people already know this, new members may not and also its a gentle reminder to us all - it can be all to easy to lose your temper on some threads, but ultimately its not helpful.

Just to add, I'm not sure that not engaging is helpful.

It gives the impression that we don't actually have the facts/points/evidence to back up a GC position.

It is important to do it without being offensive though.

Hey all - really sorry to post and bail but I'm not technically 'on' on the weekends and family is calling. Briefly though - honestly think that the best thing is either to engage calmly with a measured response, or, when you just don't feel able to do so, to not post at all. Biscuits do often seem pretty antagonistic (aware how bloody ridiculous that sounds) and it's the general atmosphere of antagonism that makes it harder for MNHQ to hold the line, as it were.

Off to wrangle, but rhanks for engaging with our post, everyone - really do appreciate it.

@DarthArts

Good post OP.

I think when we see threads that are potentially trying to invite an angry response from our side, the first person who can just posts a quick message reminding everyone to keep it civil and points out that responding negatively does not help promote the GC cause.

Whilst many people already know this, new members may not and also its a gentle reminder to us all - it can be all to easy to lose your temper on some threads, but ultimately its not helpful.

This is such a good idea, thanks Darth