"A woman's opinion is the miniskirt of the internet"

[HedleyLamarr]

I posted this in Feminism [brave emoticon], and someone has suggested putting it in AIBU.

So, I was sent a link to this article in the Independent. Your thoughts/ideas are much appreciated .

to not be aware of/do this is filtering to strip out unpleasant messages is frankly in-credible, which is why I think she is being deliberately disingenuous.

I expect that the newspapers have their own moderators to do this for them but the bloggers have a genuine complaint seeing as they would generally moderate their own comments.

you couldn't distinguish between people discussing something controversial and using reported speech, and people just being obscene for the sake of it.

I imagine the vicar's wife would be happy, and all the people who are discussing non-controversial topics. And people who are not posting shitty comments but interesting debate would be able to rewrite their post to meet standards.

I would like mumsnet to take a stand against censorship but it tends to take a populist view on all matters and so tends to want to "ban2 things, whether that is provocative clothing for children or whatever.

I would rather it took a stand for freedom of expression. I would rather it were supporting the right of sexist and racists and even those in favour of ugh.. housewives... to spout their repellant views because I want to live in a country where views of all kinds can be expressed whether that be pacifists on 11.11.11 or whatever. I don't just want views which tally with mine to be around.

However the rather thick populace of this land have always wanted to ban things. It's the group mentality. It's why we don't have voting by referendum and why we delegate power to others who might have a bit more sense than the "root out the paeds and stone them brigade".

Absolutely agree Xenia - but there are too many people who don't want to hear different opinions, they just can't handle them. They're the ones with the problem but they can't see it ( or maybe they can but don't give a toss )

I completely disagree with your views on motherhood ( I believe mothers should be at home with their children until they start school ) but I respect your views on that issue and think you're one of the few posters on here who talks any sense - even if I don't always agree with you.

Oh don't worry Xenia, Mumsnet are quite happy to support freedom of speech for sexists.

They're a little less liberal about racism though. Although actually I think there's quite a bit of leeway on that on this board, you do have to venture into actual hate-speak before it gets deleted. Racism, sexism and homophobia per se, are not banned or deleted here, I think this is one of the most lightly moderated boards on the internet.

I expect that the newspapers have their own moderators to do this for them but the bloggers have a genuine complaint seeing as they would generally moderate their own comments.

Most blogs can set filters too though. LP would know all this, the blogging community is very tech aware and/or knows where to find tech advice.

Agree re most people being fine with a filter that just scrubs nasty words.

My main point is that there is no way someone who is media-familiar like LP had to read those comments, and she knows it - so her kicking off in the Indy to the Net-unaware population is disingenuous (but it's her schtick, so you know whats up), and then a whole lot of Net-naives start wailing for censorship and worse.

That is absolutely playing into the hands of The Patriarchy!

then a whole lot of Net-naives start wailing for censorship and worse.

I agree this is part of the problem and why the complaining has only come now, when Web 2.0 has been going for a while. Back in the day people who used the internet were internet savvy and knew about this sort of thing. Nowadays, a lot of non-internet savvy people use the internet and read already sanitised content and think that is usual because they haven't seen unfiltered content or moderated forums themselves. And then set up their own blog and get a bit of a shock.

And with more people using the internet that also means there are more asshats around.

I think this is one of the most lightly moderated boards on the internet.

I dare you to visit Stormfront, it's an eye-opener. But not at work.

I think this is one of the most lightly moderated boards on the internet

You need to get out on the Internet more :)

I agree, whatmeworry. I suspect Eleanor would have a heart attack on 4chan. But even a hugely popular site like Reddit has some pretty objectionable content (r/jailbait anyone?)

Whatmeworry yet again you make accusations without any back up.

Your insults and rudeness on the other hand are there in black and white. I'll just repeat them:

""complete crap", nasty insinuations just because I talked about rape on a thread about rape threats, calling my posts "Exercises in Orwellian speech", and of course there was "handmaiden of the patriarchy"."

Why do you think it's OK to talk to me like this and then make untrue claims aobut me. It looks like you're projecting your own behaviour on to me.

I haven't addressed your posts unless you addressed mine firts, I certainly didn't insult you yet somehow you feel confident enough to through your weight around and make untrue accusations about me. Why is that?

Do you really not think anything you've said there is nasty Whatmeworry?

thunder, why are you allowed to call other people's posts crap but people not allowed to do the same to yours?

And why is calling someone's posts an exercise in Orwellian speech any worse than persistently commenting that others' attempts to have an interesting discussion are nothing more than efforts to derail the thread from your topic of choice?

Is it possible you need to take a step back from the thread if you're getting upset by what is, IMO, just a bit of stiff debate thunder?

Unless you think WMW has personally attacked you, in which case (and I'm sure WMW would agree) you should report her of course.

Aren't your accusations a bit off topic?

Actually I didn't call posts crap, I called something that people were doing crap. Different thing.

Also the point about whatmeworry is that it's not just one thing, it's one thing after another, spiteful nastiness directed at me and my posts.

Then we get another group of people on here saying how nasty it is that feminists are.

It's not possible to derail a thread by talking about the actual subject of it. Surely you know that NG.

Thanks rycooler and I would defend always the rights of others to post view I hate. Some women are so awfully nice nice nice. I detest it. Their friends always look lovely, they never say what they mean and they live in some kind of coddled nursery world where everyone is like them.

I am certainly I hope never unpleasant to anyone and I don't go around pointing and laughing at fat people or whatever but I do think some women ought to toughen up and if they can't take the heat get out of the kitchen or form their own web site where everyone loves them and spends their time telling them how wonderful they are.

I'm not geting upset by a bit of debate Agent ZigZag. I've been having discussions with you, with noblegiraffe and others fine.

WMW has continually come in and interjected with nastiness. I'm pointing it out. You're right it's off topic but then you'd need to address that to WMW too.

Xenia, I may have missed your answer, but I asked earlier if you think rape threats should be protected under free speech? Do you think that should be the case?

Then we get another group of people on here saying how nasty it is that feminists are.

I don't think anyone has said that feminists are nasty. Just that there is a certain brand of nastiness that appears on mumsnet and is carried out under the banner of "feminism". It doesnt mean it is feminism, and tbh when it is attacking the choices or views of other women simply because they do not conform with a pre-defined set of views / choices I am pretty sure it is not.

Thanks for being such a stickler for accuracy catgirl - it also gave you the chance to criticise Mumsnet Feminists again and ignore the point of my post, which is that WMW is being extremely and continously nasty on this thread.

I'll reword:

"Then we get another group of people on here saying how nasty it is that Mumsnet Feminists are"

Would you like to address my post again now, with the more accurate wording included.

Yes - its still inaccurate and missing my point so I will.

There is a certain brand of nastiness that appears on mumsnet and is carried out under the banner of "feminism". It doesnt mean it is feminism *or "mumsnet feminism", and tbh when it is attacking the choices or views of other women simply because they do not conform with a pre-defined set of views / choices I am pretty sure it is not.

It's neither "feminism" nor is it "mumsnet feminism" just the views of a couple of people. Doesn't make it a "movement" even if some people would like to self-appoint.

And thunders, when there is a much mis-representation of what people say as there has been on this post, it is not a bad thing for someone to try and keep things accurate.

By the way - you appear eally hostile. Has anyone ever let you know that? I don't know if it is how you mean to come across, but you really do seem hostile and defensive and I am not sure it will help people engage with what you are saying.

I agree with Catgirl. Of course feminists aren't nasty. But, just as on AIBU and every other board here, there are undercurrents of 'nastiness', possibly borne out of frustration or anger or whatever, but they don't make for common understanding.

I don't find the MN feminists that I've encountered, anyway, very willing to hear other viewpoints and discuss those. It's very much a battering ram approach and if you're not seen to be running with the ram then you're in the way of the door and wll get splattered.

Fortunately, there are only another 30 or so posts to get splattered in on this thread. :)

Who is "wailing for censorship"

I thought we were discussing the phenomenon of men who hate women speaking openly so much, that they want to silence them with sexually explicit violent threats.

Apparently observing that this behaviour is problematic, is "wailing for censorship".

Thunders - that really takes the

Apparently observing that this behaviour is problematic, is "wailing for censorship"

No one is saying teh ehaviour is not problematic - its some of the proposed solutions that are "wailing for censorship" because they are, er, crying out for censorship. That is what I disagree with.

So you're not going to address what I've pointed out about WMW is doing at all catgirl. You're just going to continue his/her criticism of me and of particular feminists on Mumsnet whose behaviour you don't like. Despite the fact I haven't insulted anyone - called them Handmaidens of the Patriarchy (WMW did that), made insinuations about them because they talked about rape on a rape thread (WMW did that), called their posts "Orwellian" (WMW did that). Why are you ignoring WMW's behaviour when you appear to be saying that behaviour is what matters to you here.

I don't think I come across as really hostile. I've been having discussions with people on this thread, with people exchanging views and contradicting each other, fairly civilly, maybe with a bit of frustration thrown in now and then. I'm seeing the hostility coming from another direction.