"Mumsnet statement on moderation with regard to..."

Watch how well we can walk on eggshells. We are good because we have had so much practice, guess.

So using people is a good thing. Kind of like being more inclusive and positive than just using 'minorities', perhaps?

why is 'trans rights' a permitted thing?

I'm presuming because, context - using it by itself seems kind of othering when it's referring to people, but in the context of rights it's more of a shortening of a word and not the othering aspect.

Well, quite HandsOffMyRights. If it's wrong to use trans on it's own, why is 'trans rights' a permitted thing?

How many over parsed contradictions can dance on the head of a pin?

Used to say t*s
that should read

Willis, Chicken's suggestion was that changing the wording to make it broader and show solidarity to all oppressed and vulnerable people was more inclusive of groups that not minorities, but are still vulnerable and oppressed.

You decided, for your own reasons, to take issue with that concept, and want the wording kept as referring to minorities. Chicken's suggestion was meant to acknowledge that women as a group, while not a minority, can be oppressed and vulnerable. You don't like that.

How do you expect that position to be taken on a feminist chat board? Do you think it would be nodded along as just another view, and yes, women should just get on with it, they need no solidarity?

If you're now claiming you think women deserve as much much solidarity as every other group that can be oppressed and vulnerable, why would you have a problem with Chicken's suggestion? Can you see where our confusion has arisen?

The sticky at the top of this board, written by MN, used to say t in the title so I'm even more confused now!

I am willing to take one for the FWR team in the interest of clarity. We need to know which words we are allowed to use and which we are not.
These threads always help clarify the managements position on the relationships between the content providers, management, and the advertisers.

I just noticed that I did not use the term 'the t' as quoted in this explanation, so that the more they explain the more confusing it gets.

OK - bit baffled as to why someone who's had their comment deleted twice would go in for a third attempt?!
Are you actively trying to get it taken down again or something lol?
NOT me who reported it by the way before anyone starts, but it just seems like a WTF thing to do lol

And Justa is valiantly trying to work out why you would offer solidarity to one class of vulnerable and oppressed people, but not women who fall into that category.

NOWHERE have I said I don't agree with offering solidarity to women who fall into the category, stop making shit up.

Kind of. For example, if someone was insisting someone else had said "women were weak"
OK, I haven't said someone else said women were weak.
At all. Anywhere.
To clear up -
I did. As in I didn't think what people are wanting the wording to change to implies all women are weak, oppressed or vulnerable.
As to me it does.
People seem to think I'm saying that all women are weak though, when I don't at all otherwise I'd be fine and dandy with the sentence changing, wouldn't I?
Weak was with hindsight the wrong word to use - it still stands though that we don't all feel like an oppressed, vulnerable minority.
Some do, and that's fair enough.
Some don't, and they're entitled to their opinions too.

Me having my view doesn't mean that I think no woman is oppressed and vulnerable. Oppressed and vulnerable people should always be stood in solidarity with/protected and I haven't said otherwise.

Willis, there are other people responding to you that you could talk to if you ever get tired of attempting to avoid my problem with what you're arguing for, you know? Feminazgul has helpfully explained how Gaslighting and DARVO might be relevant in this thread.

And Justa is valiantly trying to work out why you would offer solidarity to one class of vulnerable and oppressed people, but not women who fall into that category. I'm sure they'd be happy to walk you through this too.

I know I didn't use any new ones Floral, I was referring to this -
FloralBunting Fri 10-Jan-20 18:54:06
I'm sure there are some other buzzwords you don't quite understand you could shoehorn into the conversation if you really try, Willis

I'm sure I do understand them more than you thought I did otherwise you'd probably have told me if I'd got the meanings wrong instead of just replying I hadn't said any new ones

I wonder if this is what happens when you identify as being such a righteous person that you couldn't possibly be behaving badly.

I just think your wording implies we're all vulnerable and oppressed just by being a female, maybe you and others feel that way but it doesn't speak for all of us

But do you think that all trans people and/or all people of colour are vulnerable or oppressed? If so, how do you know? You can't possibly have asked ask them all.

So gaslighting doesn't mean trying to make someone doubt themselves, that they said something else all along?

It does! For example claiming someone said women were weak when they clearly said no such thing could be seen as gas lighting.

DARVO doesn't mean deny, attack, reverse, victim offender? Which if people are called out on the shit that they do they can just cry DARVO and pretend there's nothing to see here, it's them, move along

Kind of. For example, if someone was insisting someone else had said "women were weak" when no such thing was said and then threw a fit of indignation about other people 'making shit up' about what they said, then that would be DARVO.

It's a classic tactic and easily spotted.

Willis! You didn't use any new ones in that post, you just used the ones you've already said.

Do you think vulnerability and oppression is just a personal issue; to be judged on a person to person; individual to individual basis?

That can't be it, or Willis wouldn't have objected to the suggested phrase 'standing with all oppressed and vulnerable people'.

I understand them fine, thanks.
So gaslighting doesn't mean trying to make someone doubt themselves, that they said something else all along?
DARVO doesn't mean deny, attack, reverse, victim offender? Which if people are called out on the shit that they do they can just cry DARVO and pretend there's nothing to see here, it's them, move along?

Ookay Floral, where exactly have I said I object to standing in solidarity? If you read back I said MN should always stand in solidarity with oppressed and vulnerable minorities, so talk about making shit up if you don't like hearing other opinions

My reading of what you said was that because you don't feel vulnerable or oppressed as a woman, yourself, then the wording should not contain 'women'; as that would assume all women were vulnerable ( I thin they are in certain ways, myself)........

But then on the other hand you think some groups ( presumably trans people & people of colour?) should, universally, be treated as vulnerable and oppressed and given special mention or privilege?

That being 'of colour' or 'trans' automatically makes an individual vulnerable and oppressed...... and in a way that it doesn't for women ( because you don't personally feel oppressed).

Or is it that are you disputing this whole concept of vulnerability and oppression - as it relates, in uniform manner, to all members of a specific group?

Do you think vulnerability and oppression is just a personal issue; to be judged on a person to person; individual to individual basis?

I'm sure there are some other buzzwords you don't quite understand you could shoehorn into the conversation if you really try, Willis.

Perhaps you could wheel back round to intersectionalism vs white feminism because you support oppressed and vulnerable minorities but not oppressed and vulnerable women? Give it a try.

Also, can I have some of the pizza if there's any going?

Watching people congratulate Justine on being bullied by advertisers is a bit creepy, especially when it's being spun as "see, she agrees with us". No wonder some people don't want her doing the Freedom Program.

Last desperate gasp of people who realize that their movement is doomed really, imo.