Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

AIBU to think that if MN are willing to boycott certain groups on ethical grounds

292 replies

APartridgeAmongThePigeons · 31/10/2013 10:42

they really should take a look at banning posters proclaiming themselves MRAs?

Sexist,

often racist,

frequently rape/ domestic violence deniers

I know that mumsnet want to keep a lively discussion going and not ban free speech but when they join a forum mainly used by women it's hard to believe it's not about being goady and spewing propaganda.

The result is that normal posters get angry..
engage...

And then get deleted or banned for "personal attack".

Using a nasty word for someone who has by just stating that they are an MRA has basically said you don't matter as a human seems the normal response.

OP posts:
Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:56

Earth, it's up to you. Language is ambiguous.

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:56

You added an option? How kind of you.

Would you be kind enough to tell us what your point is?

EarthMither · 01/11/2013 21:55

But I only want to focus on the options I want to focus on, as you suggested upthread.

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:54

Sabrina, I'm saying I added an option. I didn't tell earthmitter what to focus on

EarthMither · 01/11/2013 21:54

But in suggesting that you are not being consistent in allowing me to focus on whichever issues I want. Jeez, it's hard all this stupidity and and disingenuity, isn't it?

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:52

What do you mean treen?

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:51

Earth, no at all. I was giving you an extra option. You got that by talking directly to the source. No misrepresentation

EarthMither · 01/11/2013 21:50

I thought the whole thrust of your argument was that "people will rightly focus on whichever issues they want" Confused I am focusing on people being thick and disingenuous.

EarthMither · 01/11/2013 21:46

Treen, are you saying that I can't choose which options to focus on?

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:46

Either of those, I think.

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:45

My point was that there wasn't just two options (thick or disingenuous)

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:42

Yeah - the question is - what is your point, treen?

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:42

Read earth's last post, then mine. If there are further questions I'll answer

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:40

So what is your point?

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:39

Sorry Sabrina, that was a reply for earthmitter

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:38

Ugh, what is your point treen?

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:36

Or they are defusing someone's jibes. Many possibilities.

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:35

Of course, gingerbread say that the real problem to single parents (mostly women) is poverty. Of course, a real cause of poverty is the fact that women are mainly left as the carers of the children (left unable to work because of childcare issues, or unable to progress high earning careers), and in 3/5 cases not paid any maintenance by the fathers.

EarthMither · 01/11/2013 21:32

Yes Treen, the phone is an imperfect tool for accessing the internet, and similarly, the internet is an imperfect tool for communicating. For example, it's hard to tell from words on a screen* whether someone is being deliberately disingenuous, or if they're just really, really thick :)

*come back SM!

Grennie · 01/11/2013 21:30

Of course people focus on issues that concern them. Saving worms, whatever. That is their choice. But you don't tell lies to get your cause noticed.

Treen44444 · 01/11/2013 21:28

Earth, no problem it's the curse of the phone. They maybe statistically more significant but you know how it is. People will involve their perspective and situation. Many families that lose a child in street violence will start a charity after the fact. Your circumstances will effect what issues you get involved with.
You don't provide statistics to a family of a son that has killed himself, to show that it's less significant than a daughter killing themselves.
It's hard to detach your own experience. People will rightly focus on whichever issues they want. You shouldn't rank them

kim147 · 01/11/2013 21:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:26

You may as well incite Erin Pizzey and her 'women want to abused' rhetoric.

Grennie · 01/11/2013 21:26

No that is an individual. I can get a feminist who works in the family courts to write a very different opinion piece.

I linked to parliamentary papers. If fathers were really disadvantaged in the family courts, and I have never seen any evidence they are, then you should be able to produce some official evidence.

The truth is you can't, because it is not true.

SabrinaMulFUCKERJjones · 01/11/2013 21:24

It's Karen Woodall!!

Swipe left for the next trending thread