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

Whilst I don't disagree with the rest of your post, I just wanted to take this bit

I think everyone should be polite through, the aggressive TRAs are appalling. It's not the 'Die Cis Scum' types who are informing government policy though.

Because it absolutely is those types. Action for Trans Health, who were the group who liked the 'let's fuck up some terfs' comment before the violence at speakers corner, were invited to give evidence to the original transgender equality report.

They are unhinged and are calling for the release of all trans prisoners.

Ana Lee who tells children that puberty is optional and to take hormone blockers, was also asked for their expertise, as well as a prominent transactivist who openly advocates for extreme porn.

Alongside the well known trans-pressure groups, there were a number of very questionable people who were asked for evidence.

When MN say the problem is a 'root and branch problem' they are clearly referring to posters who support the consensus, not the occasional dissenting 'sealion', 'troll' or 'plopper'.

Although they may well be referring to regular posters, they're not giving those posters enough information to self regulate. They are also holding them different standards than everyone else.

In terms of the actual guidelines I mean. And what, in their opinion constitutes the wrong tone, or 'not in the spirit of'.

Because the spirit of these talks is to expose the damaging aspects of transactivism and highlight misogynistic attitudes behind prominent transactivists.

All in terms of how it effects women.

That's the actual spirit and the purpose.

If transactivism affected badgers, there would be zero problem. Because it's not intrinsically about trans people, it's about women.

I'm not really contributing to this as I have nothing further to add right now but I am watching it and making note of what is said. I think the fact we are held to a higher standard than the rest of the site is indicative of women discussing political issues in a wider sense. I see this kind of 'policing' elsewhere. That said I can appreciate the pressure MNHQ are under and if we want a space - a space I value not just for this issue but other feminist topics - then we need to be mindful of the political zeitgeist. It helps me to know there are like-minded women in Britain and elsewhere who do give a damn about women and girls, to lose touch with that would be a great sadness.

There is no need for aggressiveness or personal attacks; points can be made well enough without it. So I'm happy to proceed with informative and robust but respectful debate.

It is interesting because in my opinion this board is like that for the most part (until someone comes along with their stirring spoon or pokey stick) but I've been on these boards for a while with name changes and it was ever thus. I can't recall a thread about the sex industry and its effect on women without an MRA with a big pointy stick to annoy us all. If you look back at feminist history, this policing of women's tone, whataboutery and accusations of exclusion has always been around. Divide and conquer tactics all, we need to politely engage or ignore.

I consider myself 'gender critical', but I agree with widowwadman ^The more comfortable people have become with FWR having become a trans excluding space rather than one that is for feminists across the spectrum, the more posts have appeared which are pretty aggressive and mocking. Or link to sites that are.
And any dissent is shut down in the most patronising tone.^

The tone of FWR in relation trans issues can at times appear unpleasant and occasionally nasty. Its different to AIBU because what is being discussed here is peoples deeply felt sense of themselves, often experienced as distressing internal conflict. Where people post insensitive comments on sensitive issues in AIBU those comments are also deleted, threads about parking or dogs are not comparable.

This isn't me having double standards with regards to women being polite. I want my side to take the moral high ground, in my view it's a far better way of getting your point across. I think everyone should be polite through, the aggressive TRAs are appalling. It's not the 'Die Cis Scum' types who are informing government policy though.

I think there is a touch of what is going on with anti semitism in the Labour party going on here with transphobia. Labour members by and large aren't anti semitic, but there is a lot of focus the actions of Israel. Anger directed towards Israel is totally understandable and justifiable, but sometimes the intense focus on Israel by certain groups within the Labour party can be perceived as anti semitism, or does occasionally tip over into anti semitism.

When MN say the problem is a 'root and branch problem' they are clearly referring to posters who support the consensus, not the occasional dissenting 'sealion', 'troll' or 'plopper'.

We are being asked to solve a problem but not given any information about the problem. Is it the moderation load? Is it the reporting by ordinary MN users or by new posters trying to police either side of the conversation? Is it off board complaints? Advertising revenue? Or other stuff?
We can undertake to go high but we can't stop a deluge of reporting. We can't ignore disingenuous posting surely? And MNHQ presumably don't want to make the call on who is acting in good faith because they will get a backlash.
So largely what Datun said.
The logical thing to do would be to get an honest discussion going between MNHQ and a small steering group, off board, in confidence, to understand what's happening and agree a policy that can be put in a sticky. Let them look at the detail. Where are the reports coming from etc? How close are we to the edge?

agree about the success of recentring arguments to put women and girls at the heart. i have found this really helpful personally for my mental health; it feels much better to frame thoughts and arguments positively rather than be on the defensive. this way we take back control of ourselves (to avoid burnout) as well as the debate.

i wonder if this is in part why these demands that everybody must "be inclusive!" (without further thought as to what that actually means) are so succesful. I mean, who doesn't like to feel like they are being inclusive?

And, while I'm on a roll, let's make sure that we give as much attention the other issues relating to women that has informed so much of our feminism.

^^this.

And it has a double result. It raises awareness about all the issues that affect women, but in doing so it relentlessly makes the distinction between men and women. And why that's necessary.

It also creates more feminists.

Someone mentioned DARVO. The particular male/female dynamic where this becomes evident permeates across all issues relevant to feminism.

As a phenomenon, it's instantly recognisable. Once you know about it.

The sort of information, that gets shared on here, isn't just fascinating, it's a vital, collective, modern day version of storytelling.

Not everyone is going to start reading feminist books. But following a thread, with a hundred different opinions, watching a previously unknown narrative unfold before your very eyes. Sometimes it's nothing short mind altering.

And that made me realise that the goalposts for feminist discussion of a political issue with massive public impact are not just in a different place, they're on a different playing field. We are held to higher account, and time and again the regular posters here rise to that standard, and exceed it. Which is why it's such a blow when more obstacles are put in the way.

YY

On a more positive note, the recent movement to re-centre the feminist angle of all this, and to bring discussions that are being derailed by transideology back to women and girls, is proving to be hugely effective.

I really think it could help if we politely reoriented any OP or thread derailment about a trans issue that does not impact on feminist concerns about women and girls. This is a feminist board and discussions should be on topic to feminist issues.

FFJ didn't have access to government. FFJ haven't managed to get the laws changed. FFJ weren't handed schools on a plate by the DfE to influence children with their beliefs.

People have to play the long game here and make a distinction between our feelings about individuals and some of the things they say / do versus the big picture about the erasure of women's identity, safeguarding children, sport, misuse of the Equalities Act etc etc.,

It is evident that the general public understand the dilemmas posed by self ID, sport, children etc when it is put to them. Don't let's throw that away because people demand the same 'standards' that apply on AIBU. This is far bigger than that.

And, while I'm on a roll, let's make sure that we give as much attention the other issues relating to women that has informed so much of our feminism.

Apparently we're reporting each other, based on a comment upthread. This strikes me as a bit of an own goal.

The Girl Guide political action has the TRAs positively foaming at the mouth.

This is what they are angry about - that women object to girls being in overnight accomodation and facilities with males, without the girls' parents being informed.

And we are the ones who are been seen as unreasonable?

This is why they are reporting us, not for for some badly phrased sentence

So we're naughty children who need a time out now?

Exactly Absinthe.

On the site stuff thread MNHQ said they were hiding FWR until the "tone" of posts/threads improved. I said there that if they are going to hide a board because of its "tone" they might start with aibu. But they won't

Do we know who is reporting? I have a suspension that many lurk, never post but report posts. I may be paranoid though.

I haven't ventured out of FWR onto the other boards for months (partly because I was formerly one of the 'terf' usernames, and was conscious that the irony of the label might be lost elsewhere - one of the reasons I changed back to my previous name) Yesterday I dipped in and out of other convos, and was astonished by the combative tone. It made me realise how very adept posters have become here at diplomacy and how skilled FWR users are rigorous, relevant, respectful argument.

One of the threads I looked at was about a reality TV programme I'd caught the end of the other night. There were lots of very harsh personal comments about the participants, of the sort that would be absolutely unconscionable here - all completely unchallenged by other posters or HQ. And that made me realise that the goalposts for feminist discussion of a political issue with massive public impact are not just in a different place, they're on a different playing field. We are held to higher account, and time and again the regular posters here rise to that standard, and exceed it. Which is why it's such a blow when more obstacles are put in the way.

On a more positive note, the recent movement to re-centre the feminist angle of all this, and to bring discussions that are being derailed by transideology back to women and girls, is proving to be hugely effective.
The GG thread in AIBU is a great example of this, and I've seen posters (sorry - can't remember specific names) using it brilliantly to keep threads on track.

Well Lang we are women and we are always responsible for our own oppression

Yes, it's a bit odd.

Please report everything plus there are too many reports so we are hiding you is odd.

I think this is simply a new moderation policy. We are no longer allowed to repeat true scientific facts if they are "hurtful". Added to which instead of deleting individual posts, mnhq have started deleting entire threads.

But mumsnet make the rules up, here.

They don't have to do what they are told by TRAs.

I agree. But, much as I sympathise with MNHQ if they are under sustained pressure from TRAs (they've held out longer than anyone else has!), they've been pretty clear that the onus is on us but to sort it we have to work blind.

And, as we all already know, the only way to deal with DARVO and coercive control is to not comply.

Insofar as I can see, we are in a Catch 22.

I think that if users are reporting anything that they think may be slightly over the line then that's the exact opposite of helpful, and will just exacerbate the problem.

The problem,in part, has been MN policy of encouraging us to report and not engage.

Also, relatively new posters on here might find terms like TIM offensive and report, when, as far as I know, they are ok with them.

I agree that if the reporting of threads is the issue, MN need to discourage users from over reporting.

I feel like I might need a break from FWR.
I’ve found this all very upsetting.

WAWAG, cut loose again.

LangCleg

But mumsnet make the rules up, here.

They don't have to do what they are told by TRAs.

The only way they will cave is if they are being blackmailed by having their revenue threatened.

Or does everyone really think it's about moderating taking up too much time? I'm not saying it isn't, but that seems like a problem that can be quite easily solved.

The answer to that would be to ask for volunteer mods. Or start charging a subscription.

A pound a year would give them £12 million...

Also, the fundamental thing that TRAs don't want said is that male people can't become female. So sure, we can avoid certain pronouns and not criticize particular individuals (though both of these are imo already giving an alarming amount of ground that no other group would demand and actually get), but there's no way to phrase "a male person is not a woman" that won't cause anger, hurt feelings, etc. Even some of the trans people who post here have gotten snipey and "must you really when you know it hurts me?" about that. The people like Miranda and Hope and TruScum who're comfortable enough with themselves to say "yeah, I'm male, so?" are very much a minority.

But if we can't say that very fundamental thing when the battle is already lost. And I'm worried that that's the direction this is all heading.

I can bypass pronouns. I can avoid ad hominems. I can be polite.

But I think we all know how DARVO and coercive control work. If we stop doing A, complaints will shift to B. If we stop doing B, complaints will shift to C. Rinse and repeat, ad infinitum until anything worth having has been destroyed. The same old hackneyed pattern of preventing women coming together and talking, outwith male approval and supervision.

sigh

I report posts if they are defamatory or may be so. The easiest way for TRAs to get this space closed to us is to goad us into a libel

This issue is not going to go away, whether MN decide to stifle debate or not.

As women's rights are trashed, the public will notice. Is it going to be the case that MN will then suddenly allow debate when it is politically expedient? The Boston Marathon, Lauren Hubbel and many other examples will combine to give a massive public WTF. The thousand cuts of transactivism. Because this madness is not just going to pass into normal life. It will erupt into public consciousness.

So sure, ban us. Ban the conversation. But it's not going away. And neither are the trolls who overload the reporting function.

I agree with Datun on the not getting personal re individuals. It is possible to write without using pronouns. Sure, we can 'police' ourselves here. But it isn't women on FWR who are being unreasonable here.

Transactivism is dangerous and cultlike. That's a truth and the truth will out.