Deleted for calling someone out on gender stereotyping

That didn't clearly answer a single point I raised, Becky.

That reply hasn’t really cleared anything has it

Exactly. Have you looked at colditz's link above, MNHQ? Which of those uses of "bollocks" were making a point as part of a civilised discussion?

we think it’s reasonable to ask users that when they disagree with someone, to make their point as part of a civilised discussion

You won't do anything but delete posts, then.
I thought you drew the line at personal insults.
Otherwise, it's hypocritical of you because so much nastiness is still allowed. You'll end up with.
"I disagree with your ideas, hun" and not quite MN.

The spirit of mumsnet lately (having been here since 2006)

1. Transphobic
2. Snowflake
3. Oldtimers not welcome.

We're turning into netmums.

I think "gender stereotyping is bollocks" is a fairly mainstream opinion on here, rather than particularly uncivilised.

I think what really bothers me about this is that MNHQ seems to have become happier to allow gender nonsense, and quicker to delete comments that are at all gender critical. Not sure if that’s a fair impression, but I’m aware of TRAs very actively trying to silence debate by intimidating the moderators on various chat groups and I wonder what’s going on here?

Ok.....I’m not sure that actually told me anything though. I mean you’ve said a lot about MNHQ but nothing about whether (on reflection) Feenie’s comment should have been allowed to stand.

Have had an email from MNHQ saying they’re reviewing this thread and the original thread so let’s see if we get any kind of sensible response!

I would also like to see an end to covert email exchanges

I absolutely agree with this, asking people to message then either ignoring or sending out stock replies helps no one, all it does is hide HQs absolute incompetence from the rest of the board.

It's a crap system.

I would also like to see an end to covert email exchanges and shady "not in the spirit of mumsnet" explanations for deletions.

How about some clarity on policy and some transparency on decision making?

And if not, WHY not?

Yes, I would be interested, too. The email exchange after a recent deletion made me think I am talking to someone who has never been on MN, a temp perhaps.

I'm serious.

I would like clarification about

a) when (and why) "the Spirit of Mumsnet" started to included not saying Bollocks to people, or telling them they are wrong.

b) why MNHQ stopped leaving the MORE than capable denizens of Mumsnet to deal with their own personal insult incidents and started deleting posts simply because they were reported

c) what 'level of aggression' is actually considered appropriate? The 'spirit of mumsnet' has always been an aggressive little fuckstain, why muzzle her now?

d) why MNHQ has started handing out bans and deletions left, right and centre, essentially 'naughty stepping' grown women, when this is something that simply did not ever happen before, regardless of how angry, aggressive and sweary people got. The culture has become teacher and student, or parent and child, rather than peer to peer. We are adults having discourse. We are peers. We are not children for you to silence and punish. When did THAT become "the Spirit of Mumsnet"??

MNHQ, you didn't muzzle us after the Gina Ford debacle, why start now?

WHAT HAPPENED?

Bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks and did I say bollocks?

Bumping this.

And everything colditz said.

There’s a pattern to deletions that has come about fairly recently. And there’s a pattern of interaction that has moved from an adult “oh I say, that’s not on!” to a parental “you are naughty. Go and sit on the naughty step for a week”

I don’t know if they e employed some new mods who don’t actually understand what the spirit of Mumsnet has always been, or if whoever is moderating has gone power mad and isn’t no longer capable of critical thinking and evidence based reactions, but the word “bollocks” never used to be considered a personal attack that needed to be deleted.

Something has changed. I would love to know WHAT has changed, and WHY it has changed, and what this change is predicted to achieve.

And denying that there has been a change in the face of clear evidence to the contrary isn’t cutting the mustard anymore MNHQ. It’s not in the spirit of Mumsnet is it?

www.mumsnet.com/SearchArch?search_origin=mobile&mustmatch=Bollocks&dontmatch=&nickname=&fromDate=&toDate=

[https://www.mumsnet.com/SearchArch?search_origin=mobile&mustmatch=Bollocks&dontmatch=&nickname=&fromDate=&toDate=]

MNHQ I’m going to report this post as well just to make sure you’re seeing this thread!

Just bumping this: MNHQ - can you come back to this and respond to some of the concerns, please? Especially the question of what you mean by “not in the spirit of MN” and also whether that means gender stereotyping is in the spirit of MN. Also, with regard to the poster who says they were deleted for saying that men cannot change into women - are we not permitted to state scientific fact any more either?

I think these are really quite important questions that deserve a response.

I really can't understand why the initial post stood but yours was deleted.

It was gender stereotyping and it was bollocks