"Anti-trans views classed as misinformation in government report"

This comes up as an issue every now and again. First of all even if you / MNHQ decided this is how we should use MN / FWR not everyone would agree or would even be aware.

Look at the still ongoing repercussion of MN high handedly saying those of us who are gender critical should be siloed off so that "nice" feminists could be in a space free of terfy attitudes.

Also, it would lead to incredibly long and tedious threads. Most of us dont have time for this. I know there are a few long threads on specific issues for those who have strange interests, ie main stream political parties! Although in fact I think having political parties having their policies and behaviour put under the sharp eyes of feminists is a good thing.

The main problem is the forum software. If it was one of those that allows sub threads within a thread it might make it easier to navigate. Assuming everyone using FWR agreed with the sub thread groupings! And each thread would have to have the option for trolls and thread subverters to agree to use.

Isn't there a phrase about "herding cats"?

I don't think I believe in coincidences. But, I've been mainly watching the foot soldiers and where they're going, with occasional dips into some of the Regular Characters (Stonewall, Government, CS, NHS, a couple of the smaller think tanks). It appears we're going to have think bigger. I suppose this is what Sex Matters, et al., are doing. But MN is bigger, and has more "watchers."

I think there’s likely to be a renewed effort to get this stuff on the agenda, new broom and all that.

Yes, just had a quick look. This could be starting again, or maybe I'm just feeling pessimistic today? The Burnham government will either crash and burn, or will take over and settle in for the next however many years. If they do crash and burn, I think there is a genuine probability of a minority Reform government after that. Rock and a hard place.

Also @BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp take a look at the 2024 thread I linked about “the disinformation industry” earlier.

It’s DEFINITELY #NoDebate 2.0. I wonder if there is any coincidence in timing with the Amnesty report?

As we've seen in the behaviour of Stonewall, Amnesty, ILGA, and UN Women, this is all part of 'no debate' v2.0 - undermine the credibility of women's and LGB groups by throwing mud and hoping enough of it will stick.

This is all very worrying. As you say, this is not really "Be Kind 2.0" but rather "No Debate 2.0". It seems they are plotting again.

We now have separate threads on:

Stonewall shenanigans/finances
3x threads re Amnesty meltdown
Diversity Role Models thread (I want to keep track of where these activists pivot once the new KCSIE is in force)
Stonewall "Proud Employers" thread
long- running series of threads re NHS audit/lawbreaking
Andy Burnham thread which is fairly new
UN Women threads
Be Kind 2.0 and activists' tactics thread

among various others, including, I think, one on the Lemkin Institute.

And it seems that this new No Debate 2.0 could tie them all together. It always starts by controlling language and shutting down debate. If the activists are positioning themselves to influence the new government (and one of Andy Burnham's key strategic advisors is Neal Lawson from Compass https://www.compassonline.org.uk/ ) - how are we going to keep track of it all, so we can head them off at the pass?

I'd like to add some of this recent info to the Be Kind 2.0 thread, but I'm wondering if all of this needs its own thread? Or could THIS current thread serve?

I think we will need to be able to find the information easily.

And the average temperature of the country in 1215 was 5 degrees higher than today. I read a book about the Magna Carta (or however you spell it).

Doubt anyone thinks that snow contradicts climate change. Climate change happens all the time. Catastrophic climate change happened at the end of the High Middle Ages. The much warmer weather created the arena for an explosion of ideas etc., but then the Medieval warm period (which had allowed Vikings to safely cross the Atlantic, allowed grape vines beyond the Antonine Wall, etc) ended and a much colder period ensued - no factories were pushing out CO2 etc at the time.

It doesn't matter what the bulk of the report is about, it doesn't detract from the fact that the report is smuggling in some highly inflammatory activist information that is actually disinformation, in a report about the spread of disinformation.

The report itself doesn’t give that many specific examples of anything, we’re meant to interpret that these are the ways in which misinformation/disinformation spreads across all the categories. The description of the “gender” one I’ve included upthread.

I wouldn’t say they’re unconnected. The report sets out its stall by including them at the start.

Its interesting that the Telegraph does not link to the actual report
beither do GB News who are very frothed up

because the bulk of the report is about issues utterly unconnected to trans and gender

As I say, I suspect they pointed to health misinformation to justify it as it is the focus of much of the references in the report.

Indeed.

Anyone fancy doing an FoI? I'm away from home at the mo and it would be a faff to do on a phone, but I'll try to remember to put one in when I get back if there's not one on What Do They Know? by then.

I wonder who it is gets to decide what today's 'Kind Narrative' is, and who gets to shut up and chant whatever bollocks they are told to regardless of their 'life experience' and objective perceptions and the damage being done to their rights? Under threat of punishment for failing to obediently be a mouthpiece for whatever they're told?

Because I can bloody describe them.

This is sociopathic.

Indeed. It’s worth reading the thread I linked, and watching the video if it’s still available. It lays this aspect out in more detail, with reference to the shadowy ratings agencies.

.......... it's TRUE, but it's hate speech because the purpose of speaking truth was to...

you what now? We're valorising Kind Lying as a prescribed Thing enforced by law?

Someone's meds need checking.

'Genuine information used with the intense to cause harm. Includes leaks, harassment, and hate speech where the content is true, but the purpose is to cause harm.'

Woah, what have I just read?!

And we have discussed this scope creep previously here:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5051761-worth-watching-unherd-investigation-inside-the-disinformation-industry-kathleen-stock-specifically-mentioned?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

Something else that concerns me is the addition of a category in the terminology section “malinformation” which they describe as “genuine information used with the intent to harm”.

Genuine information used with the intense to cause harm. Includes leaks, harassment, and hate speech where the content is true, but the purpose is to cause harm.

It doesn’t take much imagination to see how that could be weaponised against political opponents, whistleblowers, and people campaigning for real issues which clash with the agenda of the supposedly right thinking monitors.

The report in section 4: Findings: Understanding and Measuring the Problem starting on page 14 categorises different types of misinformation/disinformation:

Gender, LGBTQ+ and EDI

Anti-LGBTQ+ narratives, ‘gender ideology’ claims targeting schools and public institutions, Pride event misrepresentation, and transgender athlete controversies.

In the table entitled “prevalence of false and misleading information by category” it’s stated that

“LGBTQ+ and gender” issues of misinformation/disinformation were present in 43 out of 56 months examined with a prevalence of 76.8% (something they see as higher than AI based misinformation over the same period). They are classified as “high” meaning that they are present in >75% of months over the period examined.

That’s why they’re using “anti gender” as a nice catch all term. You see if you look at the categories list, “anti gender” is exclusively used for LGBTQ, women’s rights don’t get a mention, as if no misinformation/disinformation is ever spread about women’s and girls’ rights.