They scraped Mumsnet again.

I feel a bit like Gavin Newsom in this video.

https://youtube.com/shorts/w98m3XPXHQA?si=Y0WZX52S49X1s_CV

"Mumsnet GC posters seem inordinately preoccupied with performing gerbils and there are multiple attempts at stopping them procreating with the gerbils down the road.

We believe this to be some sort of coded anti trans communication that the authors of this paper have so far failed to penetrate."

Is this supposed to be a serious academic paper? Because that intro reads like something from Reddit.

"deploying far-right language and rhetoric"
"further entrenching them in organized transphobia"

It's not about you potatoes!

Yet more tedious incel wankers who cannot stand the fact that women are standing up and fighting back against their misogyny!

So, is there anything we do to make our contribution less useful to them?

I mean, I’m pissed off at the idea I am ‘a gender critical’, as opposed to be8ng a woman who after a lifetime of experience understands that a ‘baby boy without a winkle’ is in fact a girl- and potentially a queen!

Seeing that stray 8 replacing an i, would randomly Inserting numerals undermine the scraping?

Scraping, such a grimy word for a grimy activity from grimy chaps.

Oh my god what a long way of saying ‘women can’t be allowed to talk about what men do to them’.
The modern equivalent of the scold’s bridle is incredibly turgid.

That's what I was wondering! I thought they need a permission?

I suspect its main purpose is to be referred to.

It's the activist version of money laundering.

Unevidenced assertion - unevidenced here meaning not the facts they present about the data they scraped but their assumptions about motivation, cherry picking quotes to provide "evidence" of right wing alignment when any one of us who actually reads this board could immediately find quotes that belie the claim which the "researchers" (ahem) have inexplicably not considered, and so on - becomes laundered into "established facts" through repeated referencing in others' "research".

Suspect we'll see this one turning up as a reference in Wikipedia a lot.

What I dislike is the sense of having these blokes peering over our shoulders, tutting about our déclassé opinions.

Discovering that they're doing it just makes me even bolshier, even more inclined to chuck a few ££ at a crowd-funder for a court case, even angrier at the shit-show of the medical transition of children and young adults, and then men in women's prisons, and the men in women's sports.

Honestly, it almost makes me wish I was a lesbian... Bloody men. Who do they think they are to be, essentially, marking our homework?😡

I know it wasn't in the Bluestocking but it was Boiled so it kind of counts, my favourite ever MN moment in nearly 20 years of MNetting was her first interpretive dance routing. You could, even online, tell how utter baffled the person who dominated that thread was by it all.

are described as "radicalized",,,

And always with the fucking 'zee'! 😡

Interesting to see the type of man who perves over this board isn't it?
i know we've got our own current Howling midnight monitor splurging his google / wikipedia basement life on here in the early hours. All these men's levels of obsession with independent women are extreme - and very sad to see.

Suggests a profound lack of any sort of social relationships.

Sad times.

It always make makes me a laugh when women (most of whom are mothers) are described as "radicalized" for.....recognizing that sex is based on reality and impacts our lives in real and important ways that go beyond what men who like to think they are women experience. We are not the ones who have been radicalized! We are literally experiencing what our mothers and grandmothers have experienced since the dawn of time. I very much doubt this "research" would have been accepted for publication in any mainstream journal.

It’s just another long winded tedious example of men who can’t accept the word no.

😂😂😂
I hope the Bluey blows their brains.
Gnawmi and Gubbins and all...

Something tells me this is not a peer reviewed academic journal. I hope I'm right about that! I wouldn't like to think that somebody's academic reputation is being enhanced by this drivel.

Madison is a bloke, yeah?
<waves> in case he scrapes again.

100% agree with @FlirtsWithRhinos that a spot of work on AIBU and Relationships would give them all a MUCH clearer idea of what it's like being a woman than spying on this board.

And @ArabellaSaurus is bang on about the tedious wank. Isn't it just?
'This study is a part of a multi-year investigation into anti-trans forums and is the first of two publications of our findings. Our analysis suggests that GC community forums are not isolated zones of anti-trans sentiment but culturally diffusive centers wherein users learn, practice, and proliferate anti-trans discursive habits.'
Yawn.
I wouldn't call myself anti-trans. If you want be trans, fill your boots. Just don't involve minors, and if you're a bloke, stay out of women's spaces and sports.

"narrativize"?
Everything I hate about language mangling and pseudo-intellectual knobheads summarised in this one gargle of a word.

I'm looking forward to what they do with data scraped since the Bluestocking threads started.