The relationship section of MN makes my blood boil.

[aaaaaaaaargh]

I will never set virtual foot in there again. I have imprints on my forehead of the keyboard from where I have been banging my head against it. It makes no SENSE!!! I have a jaw like Jacob Marley. There are so many threads like this:

OP: The other day I was a miserable cow, kids were stressing me. He came home to a complete shithole and then proceeded to clean up. I could sense he was a bit miffed at the state of the house so I told him to cook his own fucking dinner. He wanted to tell me about a problem with work, but I was pissed off and told him I wasn't interested, tell someone who gives a shit. He then shouted that I didn't give a toss about him and stomped upstairs. I can't live like this anymore.

Reply: He cleaned up?? How controlling is he? He then tried to make you listen to his work problems? What about YOUR problems?

Reply: He's emotionally abusive, but you know this don't you.

Reply: Definitely controlling, he doesn't care about what you want. He wanted to make you clean up and listen to his problems. Why the fuck are you cooking his dinner?

Reply: He shouted at you? This is abusive behaviour. You don't have to put up with this, you need to really think about how to proceed. Has he shouted before? This isn't normal.

Reply: Well actually, you weren't too pleasant to him. Perhaps you should look at YOUR behaviour.

Reply (to above poster): Great support there, this woman lives with an emotional abuser. Don't speak if you haven't got anything constructive to say. Don't listen to that poster OP.

Etc, etc....

I know that a lot of people in seriously abusive or violent situations have been helped in this section, and that that is an extremely good thing, before you point that out to me.

But some of the replies on other threads!!! Madness.

You know OP - flouncing, when done correctly, is a bit of an art. Flouncing over and over just makes you look a bit - ummmm - vacuous and indecisive.

I'm feeling lost on this thread now.

You're very interested in misandry OP.

There's no such thing. Misogyny describes a hatred of women in the context of a history of women being denied to be human and being denied social, economic, educational and legal rights because they were female.

Men have had no such history. The term misandry was invented by Mens' Rights Activists, in order to try and pretend that there is an equivalence between how society treats men and women.

Women don't murder 2 men a week. They don't rape or sexually assault a quarter of all men and then tell them that their rape or sexual assault didn't happen or that they're making a fuss about it. They haven't organised the legal system, workplace and the rest of society, to exclude men and make it difficult for them to participate in it, to earn their living or to compete with women on an equal basis. They haven't set up systems of representation, which excluded men and deliberately made it difficult for men to represent or be represented by, their peers.

Etc. etc.

That's why misandry is not the equivalent of misogyny and the only people who think it is, are misogynists.

#Those sort of men come over here regularly and pretend to be posters. They post advice which advises women that abusive behaviour is not abusive and that they should put up with shit.

If this is true then they are sad individuals. But I would imagine they are a small minority.

They're not pretending to be posters though. They are posters. You could argue that in a free world they are entitled to their views. Even if they are talking crap.

#You know OP - flouncing, when done correctly, is a bit of an art. Flouncing over and over just makes you look a bit - ummmm - vacuous and indecisive.

I would agree with that actually. The indecisive bit anyway.

Are you going to point that out to the other multi-flouncers!

Wow, how did this thread get so massive without me ever spotting it in Active Convos?!

To save me scanning 400+ posts, can anyone just quickly let me know whether the OP linked to any threads that were, well, like in the OP?

Sorry, that should have said bona fide posters, of course.

Yes in a free world they're entitled to their views. But mumsnet isn't a free world, it's a support site for mothers which is about making life better for them, not encouraging them to have shit lives. So those posters are not complying with the mumsnet ethos. To some extent, probably most posters don't comply with the MN ethos sometimes, we all have rows, get bad tempered, are unpleasant to each other sometimes - but the vast majority of people on here, don't actually set out to try and be unsupportive to other posters. This sort of posters, along with trolls, are distinguished by actually intentionally wanting to make someone's life unpleasant.

You are coming across as very bitter Basil. Whilst I don't deny the statistics, I also don't focus on them like a stuck record.

It's almost like you want women to be scared.

Boulevard, no she didn't.

Imagine your surprise.

I think this site may of started as a support site for mothers but I think it's evolved into a lot more than that.

#This sort of posters, along with trolls, are distinguished by actually intentionally wanting to make someone's life unpleasant.

I'm not trying to be unsupportive. I do not try and force people to take on my own views, like some.

You might think it's perfectly OK to link to a thread of a sensitive nature for people to mull over in AIBU. That's your look out. I don't think it is.

I'm not bitter at all Aaaaargh. I've got nothing to be bitter about, I have a life full of joy and love. Not like some of the women who post on the relationship section, whom I want to be happy too. I repeat the statistics, to remind people of the emptiness of the man-hating charge, to compare what man-hating looks like versus what woman-hating looks like. I don't want women to be scared, I want them to be informed.

"#This sort of posters, along with trolls, are distinguished by actually intentionally wanting to make someone's life unpleasant.

I'm not trying to be unsupportive. I do not try and force people to take on my own views, like some."

I was referring to the posters who come over from MRA sites aaaaaaaaaargh. I wasn't thinking you were one of those.

Hmmm, calling Basil "bitter". It's rather like calling a feminist "shrill" because she's making a point or a woman "nagging" because she's asking for something reasonable to be done. For the umpteenth time.

Basil's statistic are the facts of life for 50% of the population, and so, OP, get a grip yourself and don't diminish her points to an annoyance. Unless you think those things ARE trivial.

I kind of understand where Basil is coming from now WRT the trolls

However, it doesn't take away the fact that there are still a tiny minority of regs on there who blatantly think their advice is the only advice the OP should listen to, and they're often extremely rude to other regs with different opinions to their own.

Having a reputation for giving good advice, doesn't give anyone the right to belittle anyone else's just because it differs from their own.

Boulevard the OP was paraphrasing one or more threads - her analysis was exaggerated but instantly recognisable as a summary of some threads on the relationship boards. Maybe you should read through the thread, though, if you want to join the debate.

#I repeat the statistics, to remind people of the emptiness of the man-hating charge

The man hating charge is not empty. You don't seem to have any comprehension of what I'm saying, or others.

#to compare what man-hating looks like versus what woman-hating looks like.

You've not met a radical feminist then?

Yes I'm not sure if calling people bitter counts as a personal insult or not.

But it does count as a silencing technique. Just like shrill, exactly so echt. Tell her she's bitter and she'll STFU.

It's so naff.

And anyway, so given that both kinds of 'hating' exists, does that mean that both are ok? or not?

I would say neither are ok. I would say the world would be a far better place without either.

Objecting to misandry does not mean that I endorse misogyny. A lot of you seem to think that it does.

ah, I see

this thread is going to morph into a feminist-bashing one now

so far, so predictable

Op, you're a bouncy one, aintcha

I've met loads of radical feminists aaaaaaaaaargh.

Not one of them hated men.

I've met masses of women who don't self-identify as feminists though, who seem to have a visceral contempt for men. They are exactly the ones who believe that being abusive, is just part of a man's nature, that he can't help it, he can't do anything about it, because that's what men are like and therefore, women just have to put up with it.

They take the view that expecting men to behave decently to women in their everyday life, is like expecting a cat to bark like a dog - unreasonable and man-hating, because cats can't bark like dogs, they can only miaow like cats, and men can't be decent, kind and nice, because they can only be like men. Therefore, if you assert that you think men ought to behave like decent human beings, they think you are being really man-hating, because you're asking men to do something impossible and against their nature.

I find that really man-hating.

If you are insulted then I'm sorry. I said that you were coming across as bitter, I didn't say it was a fact. I'm not telling you to shut up. If you do then you've chosen to.

Every time someone posts 'aaaaaaaaaargh' I keep thinking they're having a hissy fit mid post

You can call someone 'bitter' all you like, but assuming they're not actually bitter, but rather just enjoy examining the world through a particular lens, then the calls of bitterness simply won't resonate at all...