Why has the ASDA t-shirt thread been removed?

• *[edited by MNHQ - Quotes deleted post] **

All the regulars know that the preference on FWR is to let personal attacks etc stand

We also all know that there are people watching who report yawn bless biscuit etc

So why the jump to FWR women are reporting valid and important threads?

I appreciate the OP Misread errols post but I’ll be honest i didn’t appreciate the following lecture

Its a shame that FWR regulars are getting told off when the odds are really good that its not us

Its quite obviously the plan, divide and conquer

Maybe this is where the trope about people becoming more conservative as they age comes from. It's just that as you get older you can see more clearly how things have actually played out, often not in the way that was intended.

For avoidance of any further misunderstanding, I don't know why that post from the OP was deleted. I certainly didn't take it as a PA or suchlike. If I'd done what I believe she thought I had, then it would have been justified criticism.

In other words I think MNHQ should look very closely at the people who are reporting these threads. Are they actual posters on MN, or are they unknown anonymous accounts who are here specifically to close down child-protection discussions?

I also think that the "fringe nutters" sometimes have a point. We can't dismiss things just because one side or another says them. Each individual opinion, no matter where it originates, should be evaluated on its own merits.

I mean, I sometimes agree with Trump or Boris on things. Not often, but occasionally

Interesting, something felt off about the OP opening post on that thread but it was difficult to say what.

Entryism, innit?

The fringe nutter knows in their heart of hearts that the general public won't wear their form of insanity in its own right. So they find an adjacent cause which genuinely does have a lot going for it, and try to piggy-back on it.

PIE in the 70s used entryist tactics (piggy-backing on the much-needed and well-overdue campaign to get gay and lesbian rights accepted). We're seeing this all over again - the "kerb stomp a t**f" end of transactivism piggy-backing on otherwise laudable campaigns for minority rights, the MAPs likewise trying to tack themselves onto otherwise reputable causes.

And our side is also vulnerable to it. Because we support safeguarding (and what rational person wouldn't?) fringe nuts like QANON think ours is the side to be exploited for their entryist tactics.

It's like con-artists - you might not fall for all of the cons out there, all of the time, but there's no-one invulnerable to a con artist who happens to press your particular buttons. Likewise no good cause is magically immune from entryists trying to pervert it for their own ends. A lesson to be learned and to inform future discussions, I think.

I did the same Errol. For the same reasons as you, and got the same reply.

Placemarking. I want to know why too.

I hope you've misunderstood what I did - I reported this thread to directly ask the same question as you did, OP, because I didn't understand why the ASDA thread was taken down either, and IME doing @MNHQ doesn't yield answers whereas using the reporting mechanism may. I didn't announce my intent to do so as I wasn't expecting such a prompt answer but I got one which I've passed on. My intent was the same as yours I think - to understand the reasoning so that we know how to continue to discuss safeguarding issues etc.

As I’ve said on another thread, Janice Turner couldn’t post her article on MN if she wanted to. I was banned for a week for making the same points - less bluntly - on MN.

MNHQ have a real problem here.

I accept it's difficult to moderate these type of threads. It is, obviously, awful to suggest a connection between LGBT support and paedophilia, as used to be done in the past - and is still being done in some spurious areas of SM.

The trouble is that the rainbow/pride/LGBT support being conflated with MAP, not necessarily on purpose, by people who are purporting to support LGBT groups. For example the previous troll thread about the misplaced button between the rainbow troll doll's legs and the MAP colours on the troll dress, as well as the ASDA love across the ages type material for schools. Those were hailed as pro-trans; someone has to point out that they are crossing a line.

It isn't, generally, GC feminists that are conflating LGBT with MAP - but while safeguarding is being abandoned by some (stress some) LGBT groups it's not conflating to point it out.

The danger is that anything "pro-LGBT" can't be criticised - everything and everyone should be critiqued when it comes to safeguarding children.

A lot of the child safeguarding stuff is like that. Rainbow clubs have functioned in schools where I am for a long time, including elementary schools where the oldest students are usually about 12. They are run by an adult, usually a teacher in the school. And it's also widely accepted by many, though not officially in school policy, that a lot of young gay kids might confide in a teacher or other adult and this is important if their parents might have concerns or doubts about them coming out.

I don't think we can pretend, when we see the same kinds of approaches with kids who think they are trans, or other social movements around sexuality, that they are not connected in people's minds. For most, a school not telling parents about a child asking to be treated as the other sex is the same as the school not telling the parents that the child is going to the Rainbow club. And maybe it's just a different thing, but it's also valid IMO to question the role of the school with this more generally - do schools really get to make those decisions? Should they really be having Rainbow clubs open to pre-adolescent children? To what extent does the school get to decide the values and worldviews students should be taught are good - because society has given them a lot of leeway in that over the past 25 years. And that leaves the door open to them promoting ideas that many of us might not be comfortable with, like "love has no age limit".

ErrolTheDragon See this article for more about QAnon’s hijacking of legitimate concerns about child abuse/trafficking. www.nytimes.com/2020/08/12/technology/qanon-save-the-children-trafficking.html

Sorry - my autocorrect does weird things. Mostly correct.

BeingBrent @AmazingBrent - his mum looks a hoot (tattoos vicar). Vicarage with tattoos always amuse me for some reason (maybe because our old vicar was a sailor and had tattoos - he used to shock the ladies of the parish by telling them that he got them done in a brothel when he was on shore leave).

Ididnt see the thread. What t-shirt?

I don't think anyone meant to say it, and some posts explicitly made it clear that the historical slurs against gay men were completely wrong. At least... I don't think anyone meant to say that in relation to LGBT people in general. Organisations OTOH which seem to have broadened their remit - pride celebrating certain kinks which we may be sceptical about for instance - I hope those weren't the posts which caused concern. That sort of thing should be up for discussion.

Trying to get amazon to stop...

Oh well. Speaking of t-shirts... I saw a man with Down’s syndrome on twitter trying to get amazon selling T-shirt’s that were pretty awful to people with DS... if you get a no’ check it out...

The thread was started by a QAnon supporter (he/she used one of their hashtags). The woman who first brought the T shirt to people’s attention is a QAnon supporter - her twitter feed is full of their memes and slogans. I am really concerned at how genuine issues around child safeguarding are being hijacked by this insane conspiracy theory.