"Isms" on Mumsnet

[LaMarschallin]

I'm avoiding AIBU because threads there often end in an argument and I really don't want one.

So, if I don't get "traffic" I'll accept it.

There are various, what may be described as, "Isms". It seems to me.

For example, often people who criticise Meghan Markle or Prince Harry are accused of racism.

(I mention that because, personally, I've noticed it quite a bit.)

But ageism seems to me the most prevalent and least objected to on MN.

Just throwing that out there for a (hopefully reasonable and well argued) debate.

Someone mentioned on a thread recently about MN being very anti religion. I'm quite a new poster and hadn't seen any of that so searched up some of the old threads. Crikey, I've never seen such open, accepted vitriol against religious people. Fwiw, I'm not religious but I know many people who would have been so hurt reading those threads with posters saying that people who believed in God deserved to be mocked for believing in their "sky fairy" or flying spaghetti monster".

Ageism is the last ism that is commonly accepted. Annoys me as much as any other prejudice.

There was thread in which there were suggestions that a man in his 80s who had given the OP a leaflet about helping a newborn baby to sleep (the OP was very reasonably asking if people thought he was genuinely trying to help or hinting that the baby's crying was disturbing him) be given in return a leaflet about rest homes or a leaflet about Dignitas.

I haven't seen many anti-religious ones but I'll probably notice them because I've got a touch of religion myself.

@staydazzling

yeah its a real shame the had to hide SEN board, shocking really, from active, ignorant ppl ruin everything sad

I'm really sorry but I don't underestimate this.

The anti-religious ones drive me mad too. "Sky fairy", "indoctrinated", "otherwise intelligent people", "imaginary friend"... you can always play bingo on those threads.

I'm really sorry but I don't underestimate this.

Just re-read my post.

I meant "understand" not "underestimate".

I should imagine that nobody could understand my post after that.
Sorry.

Fthe sn boards were hiden years ago.
This was because posters would not realise it was an sn thread and pile in.
I remember being on one, we were talking about breakfast or something and someone , might have been me, said their child would only eat chrisps. You can imagine how that went.
So to be fair it was more because of that than disablism.
SEN is a totally different topic.

@Samcro

I see. Yes, that sounds unpleasant.

sorry typos galore, what samcro said but also I think there was general antagonising of parents i can imagine, ive seen enough "child flapping and being noisy in restaurant but ive paid to be here too!!!!" comments in various threads, i mean wtf is there a suggestion SEN parents aren't paying??

It is disabilism though, the inability to grasp "just laying down the law" isnt an option with some kids, the bold arrogance that their parenting could defy neurological diversity , its very insidious in society.

...allow the word Gammon in relation to white males

That's news to me. I've been on MN for a very long time and I can honestly say that I've never ever seen that before on MN, or indeed seen or heard it anywhere else either.

The only mention of gammon I come across would be on cookery threads - usually around Christmastime.

disablism is still rife one mn sadly. I reported a post a while back it was a disablist dig at Prince Harry. I even googled the words(incase i was wrong) it was left up!
By the way SEN and SN are not the same. you can have SEN with out having SN

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3667174-To-urge-you-to-teach-your-children-to-be-genuinely-inclusive-not-just-polite

Here is an example of an awful thread

i appreciate its different i was just trying to encase all.

oh god yes that thread felt so sorry for the OP

staydazzling I know. its just of late I have noticed a lot of SEN/SEND which is ok, but if your child is an adult it does't fit.

Isms are sad and we have ones which effect us personally more. I have a son with Autism so my sensitivities lie with lack of empathy in that area.

I feel quite strongly that the threads where people make frankly rediculous ism statements need to stand, so long as the posters who make them are reasonably challenged by subsequent posters.

Better out than in. If people believe these things and we just delete as soon as they make the statements, there is no learning, they don't change their opinion. For every thread there are also many readers and followers who don't join in just observe, if the ism is addressed it provokes others to think about their opinion and reactions to situations.

I get frustrated when i've spent time on a thread gently challenging opinion to keep things balanced then the thread is pulled. Often its only one or two posters who could do with a rethink. The exception for me is direct personal attacks on a named individual. Its too personal.

Most isms aren't from a nasty place. They're from a not thought through one. On that basis, mumsnet provides a great free speach attitude that allows people to speak as they find, which allows the mumsnet society to counter their findings.

Sometimes pulling people up is tiring and I avoid certain threads. I haven't read the recent why do some people not believe in ASD one. Things aren't brilliantly stable at present and we're away DS had a major wobble on the short flight and a restaurant silent meltdown/ shutdown a day later. It was in the familiar small safe hotel restaurant that resulted in me having to help his giant 6ft self manouevre out, he stimmed and his head wobbled with tears rolling down his cheeks. We received a few disgusted looks. He hadnt made a noise and we'd arranged a tucked away table so no one had had their meal ruined but they still felt it necessary to make it plain his excistance wasn't acceptable to them.

Isms are sad

True. The only time "-ism" seems to be used in a positive way is in "feminism".

And I'm sure ultimately we all home in the ones which ring bells personally for us for whatever reason.

Most isms aren't from a nasty place. They're from a not thought through one.
That seems a good point to me too.
And maybe ageism is one of the most casually applied ones without, generally, having malice aforethought.

Eg "little old lady" is such a common phrase. Even if sometimes the - subjectively - old lady is 5' 11"

And, totally agree with Samcro that the thread linked to above about the attitudes to children with SN was heartbreaking.

I find it curious that there is so much disgust for men who regard women as sex objects, but it is perfectly OK to have pages and pages of posts about ones dream celebrity partner or secret crush or some other thinly disguised euphemism for shaggable men*

*yes, yes I know that women get in the lists too - same principle still applies.

Ageism is rife (I always report)
Certain kinds of racism are tolerated against particular ethnic groups.
Misogyny - a certain type of sneering woman on woman misogyny is especially unpleasant.
Total lack of understanding and empathy for any kind of disability,
Total lack of empathy for women in abusive marriages ('pull up your big girl pants' 'grow a pair' 'stop being a doormat')
Use of dismissive terms that peple use in arguments to try to put people down and not listen to their point of view. Such as 'Snowflake' (applied to anyone who shows the slightest concern for their child's welfare) and Pearl Clutching (applied to anyone who doesn't think it is OK for people to grope them or shout 'cunt' in their face)

But actually people don;t change if they are racist or ageist or anything 'ist' they will carry on being so howeve many of their posts are deleted and however many people tell them they are using unacceptable language.

I think on the whole the nasty people on here are in the minority, but they often shout the loudest.

Ageism is rife (I always report)

I haven't. I hadn't previously considered why, but this phrases far better than I could:

feel quite strongly that the threads where people make frankly rediculous ism statements need to stand, so long as the posters who make them are reasonably challenged by subsequent posters

because

Better out than in. If people believe these things and we just delete as soon as they make the statements, there is no learning, they don't change their opinion.

Although, it's also been said elsewhere on MN that there's no arguing with stupid.

So, in that case, "gently challenging" may not help. I tend to try challenging. Sometimes maybe not gently enough

I think on the whole the nasty people on here are in the minority, but they often shout the loudest

I hope so. That would be an excellent case for optimism

mn hq are really good at deleting agism, so best to report

I think you make a good point LaMarschallin about letting stupid speak for itself, - I often challenge and report (belt and braces ), but on a thread where people are arguing vociferously about the main topic, I find challenging ageism (or any ism) goes unnoticed.

but on a thread where people are arguing vociferously about the main topic, I find challenging ageism (or any ism) goes unnoticed.

Also a good point.

I guess we all have a tendency to scroll past/scan read (I know I do) so the challenging can often be without point.

(Although, it seems to me encouraging that people have talked about this in a reasonable way and not just typed "Fuck the fuck off" or "ODFOD" )

There is loads of anti-Americanism on MN.

I often see a thread where someone wants to name their DD Juniper Sparkles (i.e. a completely random and silly name) and there will be multiple replies "It's awful and sounds American."

Wanting to have a party with too many decorations/asking for gifts/wanting guests to play games - "No don't do that that's so American."

Anything associated with being "grabby" is often linked to being American.

I am confident the majority of people who make these comments have never been to America short of a holiday to Disney World or Las Vegas.