to really not identify with the feminist boards on here, when i always thought I was a feminist

[DinahMoHum]

seems so joyless and anti sex.

I feel very conflicted now. I always thought feminism was about equality for women, which I dont believe we have, but it seems to re\lly be focusing on the wrong issues for me, and getting too much into dynamics of personal relationships, and peoples sexual preferences

im probably being unreasonable

DinahMoHum are you really unable to see that is is a personal attack to accuse a group of posters of "pushing a huge agenda, and insensitively using other peoples issues, problems or questions as if they're pawns"?

That is a very serious accusation to make against people.

You really should be reporting all these posters because what you are accusing them of doing is considered trolling on MN. MNHQ takes these matters seriously and they will ban posters who do what you claim they are doing.

And this is why MNHQ tell us all the time to report. Not to bite back, not to troll hunt and not to start massive threads about threads and or other posters. I think that advice is sound because it gets these issues dealt with and more importantly it protects other posters and the integrity of the board as a whole.

I assume you have reported this trolling and invasion by radical feminists who are breaking MN talk guidelines? I hope so because what you claim here is very very serious.

We recently had a group do exactly this and MNHQ was pretty swift in banning the culprits.

Perhaps some posters who perceive FWR boards as 'sex-negative' are in fact more interested in becoming part of that 'community' than they are in joining the Catholic Church, TheBigJessie.

bigjessie if you go back to the beginning of the thread there are some non-fwr posting feminists describing why they don't go there. But the thread rapidly gets taken over by the usual posters.

I've got to say I'd love to see a thread like this without the usual posters of both sides.

The fact that it is the same expected names reduces the value of the debate IMHO .

Here you go OP for the policy on troll hunting which is what you did in your last post.

As we hope you've already found out, the vast majority of Mumsnet discussions are genuinely informative, supportive and friendly (even when we all disagree with each other!) but, from time to time, we are visited by "trolls" for whom friendly supportive chat is definitely not on the agenda. (For those who don't know, a troll is someone who poses as someone else in order to stir up trouble, fulfil their own perverted agenda, or just for the hell of it.)

If you suspect someone of being a troll, please don't accuse them publicly on the discussion thread (if you're wrong, you could cause untold hurt; if you're right, you'll merely be giving them just the kind of attention they're after).

Whom do you refer to, when you say "community"? You're being too cryptic.

Look, either sex-negativity really bothers one as an issue in its own right (it really bothers me) and one would be bothered by it in all manifestations, especially the ones that genuinely affect women adversely.

Or one only complains about it as regards to an internet forum. In which case, it comes across as being less about sex-negativity as a cause in itself, and more of an excuse.

Yours,

Jessie against sex-negativity

Irony.

DinahMoHum I thought your earlier post was spot on.

Stick around. The thread will go 'poof' soon anyway.

The fact that it is the same expected names reduces the value of the debate

I agree, SirGin. But I'd rather see a thread where the non-FWR-participating feminists stuck around a bit longer (and maybe even started posting on FWR), than one where the usual posters weren't around. No?

tbh id rather just have a discussion with people rather than report all the time and have messages deleted.

I haven't reported a single post.

I'm a non-FWR-participating poster Plump! Glad that this means that my points are valid to you on this basis.

plumpdog agreed yes.

I think it just proves the OP's point tbh.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

Ditto - not a FWR regular but .

I did report some posts though - but only ones where the poster was being a bit of a knobber.

OP are you telling me to fuck off because I have suggested that you report the presence of some trolls that you have seen invade MN? You seemed to think this was a very serious matter - using other people's issues and problems to push an agenda. Serious enough to start a thread in a high traffic area on MN.

Now the subject is boring because I have pointed out the MN guidelines on this issue? You said upthread that you are a relatively new poster - I thought it possible that you weren't aware of the strict policy on the sort of trolling you are posting about here.

I am bemused by all these people who don't report trolling, think personal attacks are just dandy and don't appear to report getting hate mail.

MN is a community - and we are lucky that it is lightly moderated. It can only continue to be so if posters act responsibly and report destructive actions like the ones being brought up on this thread.

Most odd that people seem to be on a campaign for the right to personally attack and troll hunt .

shirly there is a search function to see where someone posts < stalker >

You might not be prolific in FWR but your last post isn't quite accurate.

< pedantic moi ? >

SirGin "bigjessie if you go back to the beginning of the thread there are some non-fwr posting feminists describing why they don't go there. But the thread rapidly gets taken over by the usual posters."

Yeah, loads of people have posted about sex-negativity on a tiny feminist forum. Why only there?

I've been noticing this for months. Every mention of sex-negativity is in connection with there.

Why is that the only manifestation? The way people post, you'd think they were posting DIY clitoritectomy guides. So, I lurked for a few days and they're not.

tbh id rather just have a discussion with people rather than report all the time and have messages deleted.

Wouldn't we all OP.

I find the best course of action is not to personally attack, accuse people of trolling, tell people to fuck off, get personal when there is no need, etc.

Discussion flows better under the circumstances laid out in the talk guidelines.

sorry Gin, are you saying that I am a FWR poster?

I mean, I have posted there a couple of times, started a thread once (I think that was about a year ago) but I'm not a FWR poster or a "usual suspect" by any stretch of the imagination.

Would you consider yourself to be a FWR poster SirGin?

*almost every instance

For example, SGB has been known to criticise the Catholic Church for sex-negativity.

I am more of a lurker in FWR than a poster, but like many other here I have learned so much from doing so. Aside from that, what I learned in the first few months of the FWR board's existence a couple of years ago gave me the knowledge and strength to leave a relationship that had made me unhappy for years, an unhappiness that I had previously believed was down to my own inability to compromise. My happiness now is a direct result of the existence of the FWR board, and I am nothing but grateful for that.

shirly I think it came back with 47 discussions in FWR for you.

I am being pedantic, but it seems to be more than a couple, and no I don't see your name generally on these threads.

I think I've posted once in there. ( twice if you count a touring thread that was moved in and out of FWR )

47 posts, not 47 discussions - and did you read the content of those posts? Often they were threads which had appeared in active conversations and that's the reason I posted on them, not because they were in the feminist section.

I guess what you're saying is that because I have posted on some threads in FWR that I am not allowed to say that I'm a "non participating FWR poster" even though I am not a regular poster on that section at all.

I think you're being a little unfair here actually.

Has anybody noticed this interesting phenomenon I have noticed happening more and more on MN.

A poster posts something that will be seen as a personal attack, and potentially deletable.

'oh fuck off with your keeping on accusing me of being insulting. Its getting boring.'

This can be construed as a personal attack. The rest of the post says,

'yes I know youre going to say OMG you called me boring, thats a seriuous accusation, Im going to report the thread.

Did you know that you keep calling me insulting, is an insult and im pretty sure thats against MN rules'

If someone reports this post, it's highly likely that it will be deleted. The person who was 'attacked' then says,

'OP are you telling me to fuck off because I have suggested that you report the presence of some trolls that you have seen invade MN?'

Thus retaining the 'bad' part of the post (oh fuck off etc), but discarding the rest (Did you know that you keep calling me insulting, is an insult and I'm pretty sure that's against MN rules). This reinforces the attack, but gives no context for the post. Therefore, other posters who come on later, do not get to read the post in it's entirety, but are led to believe that the whole post was an attack, due to the preservation of the 'bad' part.

It's something I'm noticing more and more across the boards.

I'm not a FWR regular - I have only contributed ever to 2 threads on there. And both of those were tackling attacks against MN/feminists.

I enjoy reading the FWR section though, and find the FWR regulars polite and eloquent. I also don't see any of the FWR regulars starting inflammatory threads in AIBU again.

SirGin says it the same old feminists posting on here? Well I can see the same old 'lets insult the feminists gang' on here.