...to wish that 3 particular words would vanish from mumsnet forever.

[BertrandRussell]

They only ever seem to be used to diminish and try to shut down discussion. To deflect from somebody's argument without addressing it, and to try to make the other person look irrational and/or mean spirited, or to characterise their point as an overreaction, however moderately it's been been put. They are the polemical equivalent of playing the player not the ball.

The words are froth/frothing/frothers, sneer/sneery/sneering and hate/haters.

Will Nyone join me in. Moratorium?

Fanjo I find "virtue-signalling" a really useful concept, as long as it's being used correctly, ie to refer to people who don't say useful or helpful things because they are useful or helpful (or more often when they are neither, but sound good), but to signal that they themselves are more enlightened than everyone else.

Eg all the people who, after the Paris attacks, posted "but why all this attention on Paris when this also happened in Beirut, huh, huh?", with the clear implication that everyone sad about Paris is a tedious old racist unlike their enlightened self. (Ignoring that plenty of people had talked about Beirut, that they themselves had never shown any interest in giving a damn about Beirut before, and also ignoring that Paris includes plenty of people who are not white, so parsing "caring about Paris" as "caring only about white people" is in itself pretty racist.)

Mansplain is a great word.

"He explained breastfeeding to me, in this condescending and patronizing manner that quite a lot of men use fairly commonly when talking to a women."

He mansplained breastfeeding.

Mansplain is not a great word. It's aesthetically hideous. And it's actually often used in a manner as condescending as the phenomenon it seeks to describe.
To each their own though.

Oh you are definitely NBU.

So many bloody posters use words like sneery, judgy, or pearlclutching, to put down someone who simply has a different opinion to themselves.

And don't start me on the incorrect usage of the term 'passive aggressive'. I have been put off that expression for life by the number of posters who fling it around triumphantly when they obviously haven't a clue what it means.

"I dislike any sort of brigade, bf brigade, sn brigade. It's said to be cuntish."

I don't agree with this. There are certain groups of people who march defiantly onto any thread where they can climb onto their hobby horse and accuse other posters of saying things they never actually said. They dilute the real and genuine message surrounding their cause, and piss everyone off.

Bezzy, as in : bezzie mate.

OP's ones don't bother me too much. I do wince when I read 'haters' though. Especially in that godawful "haters gonna hate" sentence

I think what I have a problem with is the rhetorical device which massively exaggerates the other person's reaction in an attempt to mKe it look ridiculous. Someone on another thread today used "a huge song and dance" in the same way. "Why are you getting so het up?" is another one. Well, no I'm not- I just expressed an opinion!

I wonder if there's a name for it. There is for most argument techniques. It often goes hand in hand with "whataboutery"......

That's just it, Bertrand- the actual words used aren't the problem, it is the intend to belittle. Rather than have an argument just push it aside and say there is no issue or one so petty you ought to find something to do.

There can be a reason to say "this is a non-issue" if a poster threatens to go nc with their family over an imagined slight, but that's quite rare. Calling another poster "uptight" or "over-invested" is another one of those tools.

Betrand I suppose it's similar to the straw man argument, although rather than misrepresenting what they have said to win the argument you are misrepresenting the way they argued it. I like this website about logical fallacies. yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

godawful "haters gonna hate" sentence

Yes. I feel like screaming. This is an utterly meaningless sentence and it doesn't make you sound like you're from South Central LA, it just makes you sound like a grade A-tosser with gangsta pretensions.

It is a parenting forum, not the bloods vs the crips and you are a mother of two from Surbiton, not Biggie Smalls.

"Hataz gonna hate" is fine if you are 14 and just desperately trying to be a goth/ punk/ emo/ whatever the fuck the cool ones now are. Bit silly much later than that.

" “Oh would some power the giftie gie us, To see ourselves as others see us"

I couldn't but help think of this quote.

"That's just it, Bertrand- the actual words used aren't the problem, it is the intend to belittle"

Your posts are spot on reni.

There are numerous tactics used by posters to belittle, squash and write off other peoples experiences.
I have seen some posters ( the same ones) so many times, belittle and ignore at will anything someone says, no matter how brutal, because it does not fit with their vision.
I think op should have included, tactics and intentions as well.
I have seen posters writing about very painful experiences being battered by aggressive questioning as if they were in the dock with a Barrister/ Rottweiler on speed going at them. Then, when the poor person has spilled out more guts, they are ignored.

Sorry op, back on point my words would be Tarquin, Humous and Entitled.

But it IS a bit suss when someone starts a controversial thread and then vanishes entirely. I've never seen faux-concerned 'has OP fallen down somewhere' type 'where is OP?' only ever ' Where is OP? (because the benefit of the doubt is wearing thin)' type enquiries.

Trans issues?

Nothing wrong with 'Where's the OP'. Especially when they start a thread and then never post again which happens a lot.

Or they start off all involved then seem to disappear leaving everyone arguing.

There is a point to "where's the OP". Loads of really goady ones never re-appear, a few OPs cannot take it when told they ABU. But I can see Ego's point, too, most of us have to do some other stuff and I think it is ridiculous she's expected to answer at 1am. The beauty of mn is you can pick up an argument where you left it 12h ago.

I'm thinking if it was heated at 1am, it must have been something particularly contentious.

Ah a slow burn

That's what happens when you start threads about The Royal Family.

Someone has to Sparkling or we wouldn't have any to enjoy.