Reducing Moderation Load for MN (continuation of Dealing with Inflammatory Posts)

I was stunned at the difference between the policing of the Feminist chat compared to AIBU.

I am always disconcerted when women are offended and report Feminists for talking like Feminists on the Feminist chat. Hello?
Hiding Feminists from women seems not just wrong but cruel.

It seemed to me that the increase in people coming to show us their shocked face has dropped off in the past couple days.

You're not the only one frustrated with the assumption that we should be grateful for every scrap of consideration we get and that we're allowed to speak at all, Assigned. There's a lot of female socialization stuff going on in the way this is being discussed, in terms of what HQ expect of us as well as internally in the conversation here. Ultimately I think that if we're not starting from the assumption that we should be allowed to speak freely about this issue then we've already lost. Which doesn't mean that we can't collectively agree that maybe it's better to avoid the kind of direct "A is a B" comments about public figures that are easy for those public figures to make an official complaints about if that's what it takes to keep this space open, but the way the meta discussion about if we're allowed to speak and to what extent we ought to be obligated to speak in a certain way and what the relationship of a business to its female customers is is troubling from a feminist perspective. The "root and branch" comment in particular was troubling in terms of what it implies about HQs view of the extent to which women's ability to express anger and frustration should be stifled, particularly in combination with the deletion of thread where people were taking the piss out of a very silly graphic purporting to "explain" agender, genderfluid, etc. The idea that it's fundamentally wrong for women to be snarky and mock things they find absurd is not one I'd expected to see endorsed in any way on a woman centered site.

olennas

Im definitely a serial reporter

They dont always delete but they always seem quite grateful

But maybe they are not, maybe its increasing the work load

So now i dont know whether to keep reporting or not

I thought MNHQ "loved reports" and encouraged us to report anything that was in breach of talk guidelines or seemed a bit off?

Just thought I'd add my two pennies. I am new to mumsnet and started reading threads post peaktrans.

I was jarred (and still am sometimes) by some of the language in some posts. Pro-nouns is something which I make concessions to (pick your battles) but it was quite abrasive when I first came on. What I don't like is comments about peoples looks. WTGLWGH

What' I love about Mumsnet are the intelligent, well worded comments and linked to sources and references. Outside of mumsnet there is no engagement with the questions that I had, which were not addressed by the 'transwomen are women' mantras. It is brilliant for facts - which I often use to support my arguments elsewhere. This is what is going to win the debate, not bitchy comments about Lily Madigan's achne...

I would like to know where the pressure is coming from on MNHQ. I acknowledge they are a business and have a heavy ad reliance, but I think knowing where the pressure is coming from would be enlightening because not all pressures are equal, and something of this magnitude smacks of organisation and power.

Advertisers? - as someone said upthread women make most purchasing decisions. there have been flaps about MNHQ and ads before (swearing for example) but anything that drives traffic drives revenue.
TRA direct abuse?
Personal threats?
Political pressure? If so from whom?
Pressure group pressure? If so what exactly is preventing MNHQ from telling them where to go as they did with f4j etc?
Threat of legal action? If so from whom? Or legal advice from in house?

This is the only issue I can think of where MNHQ have been pressured like this and have conceded. That to me is a huge deal and I would like to know where it’s coming from. The TRA movement is astonishingly well organised and funded - it’s quite unique in that sense.

I also suspect that any sticky would need very careful legal review if it contained examples - to give examples is effectively nailing your colours to the wall. Right now MNHQ can be vague about respect and whatnot, but by putting down actual examples they would declare a position and have that open to challenge.

I had wondered where the feminist threads had gone - I’m quite disturbed they’ve been hidden tbh. It is basically ‘be nice’ isn’t it? I do hope all my posts have been measured on here but frankly, I’ve no interest in being nice. This is the biggest threat to women’s rights in a century - nice isn’t going to work.

Indeed the "die cis scum" People are shaping policy.

Yes, its rather scary really.

I think this is a scandal. Mumsnet, a parenting site, with a specific emphasis on 'mums' funnily enough, is threatening to shut down conversation on the biggest threat to women and girls' rights in 100 years.

I agree with this. however I do understand MNHQ are in a difficult position. But I do wish they would stand on the side of women and girls..as nothing they do will ever be enough for the transactivists who are clearly now stalking the site.

It does not help when users get too wound up and do sometimes venture into offensiveness, BUT at the same time, a degree of exasperation is to be expected surely.

I also think this may be the beginning of the end, and I do hope its not as MN has been a huge help to so many people. And giving in and telling us all to shut up is basically capitulating to aggressive controlling men. If they did not give in to F4J, why transactivists?

Also about the GC reddit...I used to post there, but I will warn people that if you think posts here occasionally cross a line, its a hell of a lot worse there. I did find a few things actually transphobic, and they were not ignored/shut down as they are here..they were usually upvoted.

James Kirkup:
'Bluntly, why the hell is no one in politics shouting from the rooftops about this stuff? We’re talking about people trying to put the frighteners on Mumsnetters, for goodness sake. In any other area of public life, politicians usually fall over themselves in their rush to speak up for middle-class working mothers. Yet the politicians who were desperate to talk biscuits at Mumsnet Towers are curiously silent about the intimidation that some women now report there.'

How best to prevent political engagement than by either closing down debate on MN or by discrediting it and those who post there by either slurs or using the laws that currently exist (which may as yet not be tested) prohibiting 'hate speech' and discrimination on the grounds of gender identity?

Just had a look at the Twitter screenshots - it would be difficult for anyone not well versed in TRA ideology to have the faintest idea what the fuss is about; it's the usual thing of 'extreme transphobia' actually translating as 'talking critically and not paying full ideological and linguistic obeisance'. I can't imagine Tesco et al would easily see what the problem is, it comes down to 'they shouldn't be allowed to talk about it'. That's it.

Compared to what goes on Twitter and Facebook and everywhere else it's extremely polite. Largely it's complaining about molehills and looking hard to find any detail to take offense about.

i once read an interesting guide to making comments online ... something along the lines of summarising the other person's POV to show you understood, stating where you are in agreement and only then putting forth your opposition.

could we have a similar guide here for a bit, but including WAWAG?

or is that just too much self policing and too much typing

so joining up what datun just said with R0wantrees thing about screenshots on twitter....

can't we use this to our advantage? if we keep in mind TGLWGH and importantly WAWAG in every post that we make, then every time a screenshot is posted on twitter is good publicity for our concerns

and by way of balance... this is a very uplifting tweet by La Scapigliata

" Misogynist abuse of women, lead by trans activists, is escalating. This means they are losing, big time. Society has woken up to their lies, women have already won against this tide of misogyny, we just have to hold firm. Solidarity sisters xx"

and a link to her recent article which I think definitely worth reading... lascapigliata8.wordpress.com/2018/04/10/it-is-not-woman-but-transgender-that-is-a-truly-elusive-term-and-how-this-relates-to-the-statistics-of-trans-youth-suicide/

On Site Stuff, MNHQ have revealed more about their issues with FWR - i.e. the moderation workload. They need that reducing.

Please do also take on board the fact that the combative tone isn’t just in relation to goady posts or trolls - the majority of deletions take place in discussions where there isn’t a debate or conflict. It’s a root and branch problem.

Is there a link please?

Wow @R0wantrees just did that. Thread i'm on about the wiki for 'woman' has been screenshotted for suggesting addition of a gender critical narrative regarding the inclusion of 'transwomen' with tesco an birdseye hash tagged

"And for today's dose of important gender critical activity we have Mumsnet in association and promoted by #tesco and #birdseyeuk getting transphobic about the wiki entry for woman including gender identity, and elsewhere belittling trans women's experience as women to fancy dress"

They really don't want us discussing this do they

I've posted this elsewhere but, if you want to understand the nature of the challenges/attacks on this forum, then just put 'Mumsnet' into the search option of an open Twitter account. Its not about challenging it there so much as understanding how it might be affecting it here. The more people who are aware of this the better...

If we are confined to FWR, and never in active, not allowed to post on the other boards, then we are in one womanly echo chamber and noone will be listening except us

I'm desperately trying to read between the lines of the HQ posts, if there are, indeed, any cryptic lines. There may not be.

Thay have said that it's not the threads where there is an actual debate going on, with both sides having input.

It's more the threads where everyone is 'talking amongst themselves'.

To me then, it's those threads where everyone is doing things like slagging off Lily Madigan, posting a video and having a piss take, speculating on what would happen to your marriage if you identified as a man or came out as a giraffe, etc.

Obviously, if you are posting a news story like Laurel Hubbard, the comments are going to veer off into speculation. As people draw analogies, and project forward into hypothetical possibilities.

So that's where discretion, and self-regulation of tone and intent would come in.

Dragging it back to the issue in hand. With reminders of WAWAG and TGLWGH.

"others are watching" - is that sponsors/advertisers?

MN are first and foremost a business, not a public service, and they are absolutely entitled to protect their brand and their income. It's all credit to HQ that they are willing to think and talk about this and to try and make things work even under pressure. I second, critical threads in AIBU are not helpful, and don't value what MNHQ have done this far.

It's also far, far better for whoever IS watching to see in action that allowing discussion and free speech is nothing to be afraid of and isn't at all the nastiness or ugliness it's painted as. That does a great deal in throwing oxygen on the debate and all the facts.

I think this is a scandal. Mumsnet, a parenting site, with a specific emphasis on 'mums' funnily enough, is threatening to shut down conversation on the biggest threat to women and girls' rights in 100 years.

And here we are, debating how to be nice.

It's very difficult to convey my opinion on this without getting deleted but suffice to say I think it's a bloodied betrayal of women and girls and I think Mumsnet should be bloody ashamed to be making us all tiptoe around and ask permission to speak.

If that gets me banned, so be it. I'll take up throwing cups at the wall.

Actually, I think it's about time we started organising marches etc and stop replying on commercial entities to host a discussion that can be deemed not in their commercial interests and therefore shut down.

Seriously fucking angry

Its less about MN having an issue with it and more about those who would seek to close it down being given a reason to do so.
Sometimes comments can be an 'open goal'!

I think surely if it has a strong WAWAG lean to it like the current GG thread in AIBU then it would be hard for MNHQ to take issue with it? As long as the thread policed and reinforced the WAWAG issue every few pages then it would be able to stay on topic.
I think things like sports need a wider discussion.

I don't think so flowers as I said upthread if something is political, legislative or newsworthy and is also in the MSM I don't see why it can't be discussed on other boards.

Would it be goady to post things of broader interest in places like chat or AIBU though? So long as they are relevant to where you post them? The girl guides stuff for example is clearly of interest to a lot of people outside this board. So, if you are thinking of posting a thread that may be of broader interest, why not post it elsewhere? You could also flag it here if you think regulars would be interested. That way the topic isn't hidden. Am I being naive as usual?