Trans identified Mumsnet member AidaP is scraping Mumsnet

The argument that over a period of a year (or possibly more) FWR, which usually has at least a couple of dozen active threads EVERY DAY, had TWO objectionable threads that were deleted, and that this proves that everyone active on FWR is hate-filled if not outright evil make precisely no sense at all.

Fifty five and a half thousand threads presently visible, versus two deleted threads, equals unmitigated and undiluted transphobia?

Not in my universe.

And this comes down to the heart of the conflict. I would be extremely surprised if Aida would be happy if a MN user was scraping something like r/transgender with the aim of exposing its users. But somehow it's okay when he does it

From what I can see, it doesn't say anything about exposing users? Reading the blue sky post it just says that it's to get an idea of how ideas on MN get entrenched and where they start from. Something like that anyway.
Which seems weird to put it mildly but doesn't say anything about what you are saying from what I can see.

This is an interesting point because I would absolutely agree with this. No one should be in a position where their daily lives include fear and harassment.
This includes both women and trans people.
Which brings us back to the original topic of this thread. We have a user openly scraping data of the predominantly female users of this forum, while being openly antagonistic and aggressive towards us.See the splintery rolling pin comment.
If you consider previous MN data breaches, then the ongoing attempts to get women doxed and sacked from their jobs by trans activists, then surely Aida's activity comes under this category too?
And this comes down to the heart of the conflict. I would be extremely surprised if Aida would be happy if a MN user was scraping something like r/transgender with the aim of exposing its users. But somehow it's okay when he does it.
So should women also be able to go about our lives without fear and harassment? Because Aida's activity can certainly be considered it.

I don't think there's much point in you and I getting into a discussion about this, as I think neither of us would gain anything from it.

But I'd start from the proposition that, if they are behaving in a lawful manner, and not engaging in public life (there's the private bit), then it's, at best, poor form to post shitty threads about their appearance and conduct.

If you want to change the law about use of changing rooms, access to employment, or whatever else, then by all means petition for that (and, genuinely, I think we'd agree on more than we disagree). But not by going after individuals and certainly not by mocking or 'transvestigating' them. To be clear, I'm not suggesting you've personally done either of these things, but you do seem fairly relaxed about it (feel free to disabuse me if I'm wrong).

"And I'm sticking up for the rights of private trans people to go about their everyday lives without fear of harassment."

Would you like to clarify what 'go about their everyday lives' means?

Does this mean that they only ever use an alternative solution and not the female single sex provision, if they are male and reject using a male single sex provision? Including sport and any event, role etc.

Do this mean that they are not posting content or leading any discussion about how they should be treated as being female when sex matters?

Because having to have that very carefully clarified is necessary because there is a considerable difference in terminology and language and expectations here.

I don’t think threads on Mumsnet prevent people from going about their everyday lives without fear of harassment.

Some people would benefit from thicker skins

Giving big "It's only banter, what, can't you take a joke love?" energy there.
The pp has been referencing the sports runner that was torn apart for "being trans" and her looks when she wasn't at all.
Should she have had a "thicker skin?"

If a thread is so hateful that it’s delayed deletion is an issue, how can it also be worth reading to try to understand what we don’t agree with?

I'd not give this person any headspace.

Fine, we can agree on that.

And I'm sticking up for the rights of private trans people to go about their everyday lives without fear of harassment.

Can we agree on that?

I’m sticking up for people’s ability to voice opinions that you don’t like.

you can label things how you like, but I’ll also stick up for your ability to say that “I’m sticking up for transphobia”. And anything else you want to say.

Some people would benefit from thicker skins.

If a male person is using female single sex provisions, that is not someone just going about with their lives. If a male person is also then participating in sports, organisations, events and programmes that have been designated as being for female people, that is not someone just going about with their lives either.

If a male person also posts content on publicly accessible sites that describe them doing the above or behaving in intimidating ways to enforce acceptance of him doing the above, that is also not just going about their lives either.

Those male people's behaviour and actions are open to discussion because they are acting in ways that cause potential harm to female people.

IIRC, one of the objections raised at the time of the Aston data scrapes (more than one), was that the stated objective was to analyse linguistics. The fear was that they could build a model that would characterise individual users posting styles and track them across name changes. Indeed track them across the whole of MN. This could then be misused to dox individual posters, even if they have shared snippets of their life across different boards and different usernames.

It sounds very much like this is what AidaP is doing. It’s a valid fear because we know that plenty of women have faced discrimination, harassment, bullying and even losing their jobs, simply for expressing the basic fact that human beings cannot change sex. We watch the resulting tribunals, we know.

Are you seriously suggesting it's 'shameful' to read and try to understand viewpoints we disagree with?

Well no, if I see. Thread that horrible I’d report and not read on. You appear to have read every post to the extent of recognising the user names. Shame on you.

As far as Aida goes, a lot of places and people scrape data from all manner of websites. It's usually against ToCs but it's done anyway. I think it is worth reminding everyone that any social media, MN and everywhere else, is effectively a public arena. Anyone can view or scrape anything publicly posted.
I think it's a strange, obsessive little project for him but ultimately, I suppose will keep him occupied.
If he genuinely wanted to understand MN, then posting here and talking to posters in good faith would be the best place to start but as we've seen from his actual posts, good faith is nowhere to be found.
I imagine his project will have exactly the same blindspots.

But targeting and mocking individual private trans people, who are just going about their lives, is.

The only point I've tried to make is that this practice is toxic and drags PPs down to the level of some of the trans rights types.

But I've been repeatedly told it doesn't happen.

"avidly reading" 😂
Great use of language there to try and paint a picture of someone just.... reading MN threads like people tend to do. 😕

Sticking up for the rights of women and girls is not transphobic.

"confidently assert there's no transphobia on Mumsnet."

There is also a difference between transphobic content being posted and then deleted on Mumsnet, in which case the moderation team will remove it and accusations that then rely on that content being made to make a generalised negative statement about a forum or a board on a forum. Or indeed a group of posters that you disagree with.

Does content that then gets deleted get posted on MN for many reasons, including transphobia? yes. Of course it does. Has anyone denied that it will sometimes get posted?

Does that make MN a place where transphobia is generally posted? Not really. Very few posts on MN are deleted in general, and even fewer for being transphobic, I would estimate. It is therefore a negative generalisation that is relying on a catastrophisation, a cognitive distortion to make sound credible.

When the claim is then made by someone who perhaps has made judgements based on their personal very low standard for hateful posting behaviour that may not be considered reasonable by the wider population, there is a great deal of room to doubt negative generalised statements about a group of people that the accuser clearly has an issue with.

What a bizarre, irrelevant reply

You keep sticking up for transphobia.

So why didn’t you report them at the time instead of avidly reading each post?

You saw an objectionable thread and you didn’t report it. You complained that it was up for too long. “That house was burning down and nobody called the fire brigade! Nobody called the fire brigade for ages!”

Sometimes I see threads and posts I don’t agree with.

Sometimes I see posts on Mumsnet that “go too far”.

Sometimes I am personally offended by what people write.

I remind myself that in an open society nobody has the right not to be offended or upset by what other people write.