Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Bunbury's guide to community disruptors part 5

983 replies

ItsLateHumpty · 20/06/2020 15:04

The useful Bunbury Guide to Spotting Community Disruptors is constantly evolving.

The best research and advice is not to engage with community disruptors and trolls. As ever, if you suspect troll activity, report it to MNHQ.

Remember our monitors would like to silence us by fair means or foul.

This is a continuation of the Public Service Announcement thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3691023-Bunburys-guide-to-community-disruptors-part-4

If and when you see threads plopped into FWR, especially a curious repeat of well worn topics, maybe check for poster history before engaging. AS is your friend.

There are a number of posts/posters/threads that are reproduced on Twitter or Facebook to foment controversy using screen shots & flagging to either MNHQ to have threads or posters deleted.. Sometimes, it’s used to approach commissioning editors with ideas for articles. It’s a tiresome tactic that we always have community disruptor posters who themselves post the comments that they then highlight elsewhere as purported evidence of racism, religious intolerance, anti-men sentiments, or transphobia.

Some helpful links can be found in the ‘Break it Down for me’ and ‘It never happens’ threads but in essence FermatsTheorem recommended “that in the absence of a block/hide poster button, I suggest the following strategy (given that you're talking to the lurkers).

Do not name check the sealion. Instead, respond to a depersonalised paraphrase:

"It is sometimes erroneously suggested that blah. Blah is wrong for the following reasons (short and pithy). If you need more information re. debunking blah, here's a link."

Then (this next step is important to combat derailment) go back up thread to the last useful contribution to the discussion, make sure you do name check that contributor, and pick up the discussion from that point.”

Go well Witches Gin

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
ArabellaScott · 17/08/2020 20:32

We watch and learn. Deletions and reports of women sharing their deeply felt and painful experiences. Very telling.

OrangeGeckoWithBlackSpots · 17/08/2020 20:28

I think Flores' (exceptionally moving) post at the end of the thread was deleted for the same reason my much earlier one was. I thought I was within guidelines, but I think the problem is this guideline:

3. Sweeping negative generalisations about any group, including trans people and gender-critical feminists, won’t be tolerated.

It seemed to me that the first thread was deleted for specifics "X person was appointed to Y position" which is deemed to be against guidelines because of criticism of an individual, whereas the second thread was deleted because of many generalisations, many women saying "I don't want any man or any male bodied person doing X, Y or Z.

I'm not sure how these topics can be discussed if neither specific examples nor general possibilities/scenarios/hypotheticals are allowed Confused

Added to which, both threads must have been reported to fuck, I'd say the entire mod team spent yesterday answering reports. Such a waste of everyone's time.

Flowers to all who have shared their stories.

boatyardblues · 17/08/2020 20:26

Also, 💐 for those of you who posted such personal experiences on the MH thread. I’ve learned so much from posts like yours over the years.

boatyardblues · 17/08/2020 20:25

There’s a poster going down the JAQing route that has tripped my spidey senses. They used one of the banned words that annoys FWRers. However, I am quite happy to let it play out because the responses to the endless questions are excellent and will be very informative for anyone new to the topic.

Changednameforthisoneyeah · 17/08/2020 19:51

Spot on, @ContentiousOne
I've been furious about this all day.
(I hope it's ok to join this thread btw)

DianasLasso · 17/08/2020 19:47

Flowers *Contentious. I agree with every word you've said.

ContentiousOne · 17/08/2020 18:49

This is what I mean about posting here being like self harm.

It's humiliating to speak, and then have one's words expunged for thought crime, when we were talking about women and girls at one of the most vulnerable, most difficult times of their lives.

I mean, really....we cannot speak openly and honestly about women and girls experience of being sectioned? Of being so ill and so traumatized that one more impost is too much?

It's ok that the same power structures in psychiatry that minimize, punish, goad, manipulate girls and woman can be replicated in feminist chat and it's OK? Not only OK, but our fault?

There is more I want to say, but can't. That's been made very clear.

I'd like to know if the entire topic of female experience in psychiatric care is verboten here. And if so, what possible justification can there be for that?

ContentiousOne · 17/08/2020 18:37

Mammatino glad/sad it resonated.

FloresTorres · 17/08/2020 17:25

Soh, there's incoming bats.

Mammatino · 17/08/2020 15:56

Contentious I read your posts and I thought they were insightful and full of empathy. They resonated with me and my experiences. If you are being reported you are pushing the right buttons. Keep slogging through the muck.

ThePurported · 17/08/2020 15:56

we let this one run as a 'hypothetical question' but it doesn't seem to be about hypothetical issues

What does that mean? Women aren't allowed to have a hypothetical discussion about anything that is also happening in real life if it involves men who have gender identities? Is that it?

FloresTorres · 17/08/2020 15:50

I'm really sorry. Mea culpa. x
I mentioned no names in that post at all. I asked a genuine question and I made comments that I stand by.
I learned a lot from the genuine contributors on the thread . x

DianasLasso · 17/08/2020 15:25

I will confine myself to saying what a shame it is that we have lost so many fascinating and heart-rending first person testimonies about the difficulties of being a sexual abuse survivor, the mental trauma this can cause, and the difficulties of healing from this trauma within patriarchal institutions which set up institutional structures which favour men's rights over women's needs for a safe therapeutic envoironment in which to heal.

Flowers to all those who shared their stories. I read them, I felt for you, and I learned from you.

ItsLateHumpty · 17/08/2020 15:01

And we’ve just lost MH thread 2.

Michael wrote

“Hi all, we let this one run as a 'hypothetical question' but it doesn't seem to be about hypothetical issues and instead seems to be a rerun of a previous thread - which is against the talk guidelines.
As there are already quite a few posts which break our Talk guidelines we'll be taking the thread down shortly.“

I did manage to post a query for further clarification, but it was deleted very soon after.

I saw FloresTorres had some positive feedback from her last post on the thread, but the post it’s self was deleted Flowers

I can’t say much else right now without possibly getting banned.

OP posts:
AlbusSirius · 17/08/2020 14:59

Well, the watchers have got what they want, as per bloody usual [sigh]

TyroSaysMeow · 17/08/2020 00:24

It didn't look like troll-hunting to me, more like a timely and much-appreciated nudge not to get too wound up and to be mindful of my words because monitors/screenshots/etc.

I need subtle nudges like that sometimes. If they're verboten I'm doomed.

ItsLateHumpty · 17/08/2020 00:08

Yes, my “caution” post could be seen as troll hunting if you squint as I mentioned no names, but it was probably deleted for not being in the spirt of debate and welcoming enough. I did take the risk knowingly to be overt as I’ve had posts deleted for putting up a picture of a grey rock and for the definition of the grey rock method.

ContentiousOne your post was neither troll hunting, or not in the spirt and it’s shit that because MN doesn’t have an edit function, you were deleted.

OP posts:
FloresTorres · 16/08/2020 23:53

Albus, my own view is that we are now being reported for troll hunting as well as the usual stuff. The mnhq intervention was a bit of a heads up perhaps?

AlbusSirius · 16/08/2020 21:57

Someone (or many someones) is trying to get the thread deleted

FloresTorres · 16/08/2020 20:23

Contentious, I'm sorry.
There has been an " angry" post I see on that thread aimed at the mods about not being shut up after a deletion. Hmm

DeaconBoo · 16/08/2020 20:16

I read your post Contentious. I felt it was really important. I am sorry it got deleted because of one word.

I also don't know who anyone is!

ArabellaScott · 16/08/2020 20:11

Flowers Contentious. I'm really sorry. It's just horrible to do this to women sharing painful history like this - as said above, though, it is a perfect illustration of just what matters to the reporters and just how much they care about women.

how the hell you lot keep track of the name changes

I don't know who anyone else is now, but I HAVE MY SUSPICIONS. Smile

ContentiousOne · 16/08/2020 19:50

I said 'masquerade' ie accidentally wrote the truth, while detailing psychiatric trauma in my dd and I as a way of explaining the context of 'care' women receive when sectioned.

I clarified in a follow up post that I had made an error in failing to placate males and their allies reading along and asked not to be deleted on the basis of expression whilst recounting trauma.

I appreciate I've been given the opportunity to censor my post - were there an edit button, I'd probably have done it myself as soon as I read my post back.

But what's the point, really? A kind request to self censor is still an example of how women recounting trauma are policed and punished - and this is nothing compared to how women and girls in psychiatric care are policed and punished...

Datun · 16/08/2020 19:44

Deffo 🤣

DianasLasso · 16/08/2020 19:41

The reports tend to centre round anything that involves "saying the quiet bits loud."

Swipe left for the next trending thread