to think I should not be threatened with a ban for questioning the use of offensive language?

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

I am a member of a very heavily moderated website. Swearing is not allowed at all, threads are pulled regularly if people are mean to each other, not threads about threads are tolerated and you are not allowed to mention anything said before on the boards at all. All these things will result in deletion and warnings.

I have been a member for years (before mumsnet even). There was a particularly nasty thread that was allowed to go on for pages which ended with a woman referring to children with LDs as 'being tapped in the head'..

I started a seperate thread wanting to discuss the use of disabilist language on the site and asking why words like bitch, whore and piss were not allowed yet retard, mong and spaz were.

I was told that some people might think it was ok to use those words so they couldnt filter them out, it wouldnt be fair.

I continuned to question this in a firm but polite manner and have now discovered I have been sent a message telling me that my style of posting is offensive and I have been taken straight to a final warning!

Not that I give a toss, the site is crap. I guess I am taken aback that you can be pretty much threatened into silence if you dare question the mods on this HUGE and well known site.

Its an issue that means a lot to me. If it was a site on which everything went language wise I wouldnt have bothered. But on this prissy site where you cant say bugger - you can call something retarded or monged out with no bother.

I think its bollocks and makes me glad I have mumsnet to come and tell people to fuck off on.

Where I live "mong out" or derivatives are used in the relax sense to such an extent I (educated professional woman of the world type) didn't know there is an other meaning and use the term.

Thanks MrsDV for drawing my attention to my ignorance. Do feel a bit dumb.

May join mm though to resurrect your thread after they kill it.

I am not banned yet but I can feel a banning coming on.

Next door's bungalow continues to drive me to daily doses of valium but and yes, I am avoiding essaying. I have asked for a few more days grace and I will get on with it later. (yes I will!).

I have managed to put a few thousand words down on paper I just have to arrange them in a cogent manner now......

They put posters on the naughty step?

So glad I've never registered, it really must as bad as it is made out to be.

(predicts this thread is going to get deleted)

Prim fuckers, Fashionista.

Why you meeting up with NMers bear

Actually I met the founders once at a family informaiton seminar thingy where I was speaking.

They seemed quite nice.

Hmmmmm

I cannot believe that one poster has got on her high horse about the fact that because she's not offended by Mong, that it shouldn't be banned!!

I have explained several times that it's offensive, and posted links, but she still lthinks it's okay!

just had a peek: all that orange, moving smilies and pretty piccies is positively hideous.

Thank fuck I live here

RachelB is the twat and ignoramus.

I've reported RachelB too, because I really, really want to thump her.

That is dreadful OP

I'd rather be called a cunt in every thread than read disabilist speech or sentiment

Netmums, for instance, are a bunch of disabilist enablers

I am shocked, I thought netmums was a more grown up version of mn, sounds like a site for idiots.

@ the notion of the nm stasi.

lou33 - wasn't it mumsonline that was the alternative mn site? So weird as I was only thinking about that about 2 hours ago.

MrsDV you could question whether or not allowing use of disabilist language is in breach of s26 Harrassment of the Equality Act 2010 as any poster who suffers from the condition being mocked / shockingly mislabelled may find it offensive see s26 (1) (b) (i) & (ii) especially (ii)

So perhaps you are doing them a favour by pointing it out!

s26
(1)A person (A) harasses another (B) if?

(a)A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, and

(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect of?

(i)violating B's dignity, or

(ii)creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B.

(2)A also harasses B if?

(a)A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, and

(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect referred to in subsection (1)(b).

(3)A also harasses B if?

(a)A or another person engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature or that is related to gender reassignment or sex,

(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect referred to in subsection (1)(b), and

(c)because of B's rejection of or submission to the conduct, A treats B less favourably than A would treat B if B had not rejected or submitted to the conduct.

(4)In deciding whether conduct has the effect referred to in subsection (1)(b), each of the following must be taken into account?

(a)the perception of B;

(b)the other circumstances of the case;

(c)whether it is reasonable for the conduct to have that effect.

(5)The relevant protected characteristics are?

  age;

  disability;

  gender reassignment;

  race;

  religion or belief;

  sex;

  sexual orientation.

The front page of mumsonline is a Happy New Year message

StrandedBear I had this image of them all talking about knitting and stuff ,
sounds like they are just horrid, i joined but it looks horrid and too bright.

It needed pointing out to Netmums that there is a far more widely respected and successful website for mums and that the moderation of their website and the disablist language might have a lot to do with that.

So I did. :o