Oh look, it's those guidelines making no sense whatsoever again!

Thanks for the second holding response, Michael. However, I do note that this is not the first thread to be concerned about the guidelines and consistent, clear application of them by the mod team - there have been several both here on FWR and in Site Stuff. We have yet to get any further than holding responses.

Meanwhile, posts you delete are going viral on other platforms with significantly bigger reputations for censorship on behalf of genderism than this one.

Can we at least look forward to something substantive this time?

ditto

Thanks for the update MichaelMumsnet

Waiting with much interest

@MNHQ
Hoping your delayed response means that you are carefully considering our requests for clarity regarding posting.

I suspect that the moderator team do not have a united opinion. It's weird that the deletions and bans of FWR posters increased in a seemingly random way after Justine made a statement to defend speech here and said that Upfield/Flora were bowing to pressure from a handful of activists on Twitter.

Pretty sure HQ are hoping this thread will die soon while throwing darts at a board with my name on for starting it tbh.

It appears to be the pattern with this type of thread. A mod post saying We hear you, will discuss it and get back to you - then crickets. One would have thought, if the team has it all clear in their minds and are operating as one, our objections would be relatively simple to rebut.

The rules in fact are applied consistently if you look at it from a male perspective - anything they say is the law.

Astute observation, Louise.

Another neuro-diverse person who struggles to get thoughts down on paper clearly at the best of times. I compensate for that by being fairly blunt. Can't do that here. Don't post much here - too much added mental load when neuro-diverse people already carry increased load.

Not to mention the additional load of having a neuro-diverse child to manage.

But a lurker who listens here and does a lot of in real life discussions.

I can see that the rulez are being inconsistently applied by moderators who appear to have their feminine socialisation intact. The rules in fact are applied consistently if you look at it from a male perspective - anything they say is the law.

Please address this issue Mumsnet.

I am a member here and concerned about this.

Well @MNHQ must be having a very long chat about providing answers to our questions. Perhaps we have to wait for them to run out of before getting back to us.

Well, it’s only at 330 posts. Plenty of room left.

Conservatism: "There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time."

I think we all know where we fit in the regulatory framework.

...but also, like everyone, waiting for clarification from @MNHQ that they will not allow their mods to ban decent women after mass reporting by TRAs, and that women must be able to talk about SEX, the protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010, on a feminist forum without fear or sanction

Crikey, had to go to parents evening last night and have only just caught up. I had NO IDEA that it was remotely controversial to say that breast binding is self-harm. Of course it bloody well is, and we should be allowed to say that. Loud and clear. It is extremely harmful (one study showed that 97% of the female respondents experienced harm), and it is done by females to themselves. It is self-harm. And it only happens to us - women and girls, the female sex. It needs to be discussed on a feminism board. Anyway I've heard back from @MNHQ now who've said they're happy for me to re-post, but not to make it specifically about one individual (a female presenter on CBBC)

So, are Mumsnet prepared to be the ones who capitulate to the TRAs, or will they stand firm and protect freedom to discuss issues and law changes that affect us?

At the moment, Justine is saying the latter, but the moderators are doing the former.

Yoohoo, MNHQ & Justine.
Any clarification for us on this?

I think one sign that a society is misogynistic is that women's speech is constrained in a way that men's isn't. I think that women who have the desire to restrict other women's speech almost always have misogynistic motives for doing so, though they often won't admit that to themselves.

Yes, exactly.

'Negative generalisations' being a cause for deletion will cause a problem on 99% of election threads and will mean they end up looking like swiss cheese.

Oops, silly me, that's not going to happen is it. It's just the feminists that must be policed

What ever happened to NetMums? Is it still going? They immediately disallowed anything other than positive affirmation of trans stuff. Hence loads of AGPs being on there when I last checked a few years ago.

I have no idea who the CEO is. They never make it into the papers, or indeed the public consciousness. And they ban you for swearing.

Their USP appears, to me, to be banal, copycat jibber jabber.

I'm sure they have good, supportive or funny threads somewhere - but I just wouldn't know 'cos you never hear of them.

Mumsnet, on the other hand, including, or maybe because of, FWR is never out of the news/social media. Because it's content is important, relevant, interesting and informed. Because of the relevant, interesting and informed women who generate it.

Is there any point to correcting typos when I will invariably make another? one, not on.

I am guessing on of the mods decided they needed some praise, or failing that the women on FWR needed some criticism.