Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

This should not be allowed on Twitter *Normalisation of MAP*

186 replies

Motherofmonsters · 30/07/2020 17:45

I've just come across this and I feel sick. How is it allowed.

So much stuff is banned from Twitter but this is fine. I have no words

This should not be allowed on Twitter *Normalisation of MAP*
OP posts:
RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 31/07/2020 14:17

If FWR is subject to special rules regarding deletions Then personally i think they should as a matter of course email the posters on FWR ONLY, and tell them exactly where they went wrong

We’re not bloody psychic!

WhatRhymesWithTerf · 31/07/2020 14:40

There's some social commentary type youtubers starting to pick up on this.

ReadyToGlare has done many vids about it and she's spent a lot of time researching and looking this stuff up.

Here's one her recent ones about underage MAP "allies"

She also has some showing the code and lingo they use to share content with each other of children being abused.

Alabamawhirly1 · 31/07/2020 15:21

Omg that's other thread linked.

Either these people have never met a child or they actually think the rest of the world is stupid enough to fall for their bullshit.

Trying to frame it as "love". If it's just about loving relationships, why do you need to have sex with them. No child wants to have sex. They want to go to the park and play with their toys. They're trying to say that kids are missing out on not getting to have sexual relationships. One person even said removing the age of concent would resolve the issue of "repressed teens" teens can already have sex with each other - we have Romeo and Juliet laws in this country. I haven't heard any teens complaining that they're desperate to have sex with a 40 year old creep of the Internet.

And if there was a concent exam that could be taken from 5 to allow "full sexual rights" no child would be able to pass it. Most people would be 21 before they could pass it - thats if it was a true test of ability to fully understand the complexity of sexual relationships.

KingFredsTache · 31/07/2020 19:24

There was a similar thread going on today, about men displaying their fetishes around kids at Pride and its been deleted because MN didn't line the 'tone'?

KingFredsTache · 31/07/2020 19:25

This part of your excellent post is very true. This reminds me very much of a regular poster, she was very concerned with safeguarding.
The sacred caste was a particular concern of hers.
Well said.

I'm pretty sure I know who you are talking about, and I definitely learnt a lot from her Smile

DaisyDreaming · 31/07/2020 19:26

The whole twister MAP stuff is insane. Ive heard of posts being allowed to stay which argue if a child is old enough to choose which flavour icecream they want then they are old enough to choose whether to have sex with an adult or not. I don’t understand how that argument can make sense even to the sickest of people. I don’t understand how any pro map stuff is allowed

SirSamuelVimesBlackboardMonito · 31/07/2020 19:27

@KingFredsTache

There was a similar thread going on today, about men displaying their fetishes around kids at Pride and its been deleted because MN didn't line the 'tone'?
That thread was deleted?? What the hell?! The Monitors must really be out in force right now.
RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 31/07/2020 19:29

sirsamuel

It was deleted cos of tone

Fucking tone ...it’ll get ya every time

RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 31/07/2020 19:30

I’d laugh

‘Cept its not fucking funny

KingFredsTache · 31/07/2020 19:30

Yep, just a few minutes ago, there was a message saying that they didn't like 'the tone and direction it was going in' , I wrote a post asking them to clarify exactly what was wrong but by the time I posted it had already gone!

I can't believe that a thread about whether kids should be around sexualised content and sexually explicit activity was deleted! I'm quite confused tbh....

KingFredsTache · 31/07/2020 19:33

I'm really confused about what sort of 'tone' we should be using when discussing men in fetish gear with erect penises sitting with children at a public 'family' event?

RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 31/07/2020 19:34

I can't believe that a thread about whether kids should be around sexualised content and sexually explicit activity was deleted! I'm quite confused tbh....

Yeah

I was on that one and I would also like clarification on the ‘tone’ and ‘direction’

See the tone and direction seemed to be men exhibiting sexual fetish’s around children was ‘not a good thing’

But maybe i got the wrong end of the stick...maybe its a good thing, its so hard to keep up

Motherofmonsters · 31/07/2020 20:05

I can't believe they deleted the other one. I was all caught up.on it and didn't see any inappropriate tone. Guess we can only discuss things positively.

How long is this one going to stay...

I can't even see what the consent questions would be? How would they even know what was being asked

OP posts:
RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 31/07/2020 20:11

Guess we can only discuss things positively

I can give it a go.....one assumes that emojis and hearts and things are best the way to go

So pieased...sorting out the kiddies Christmas party this year ❤️❤️❤️❤️#santalove 🎄🎄🎄

And we’ve got a fab guy to play santa for us 🐶🐶🐶🐶 #not just for Christmas

How am i doing? Finding this much harder to do Than i thought i would

😡

OhWhatFuckeryIsThisNow · 31/07/2020 21:12

@KingFredsTache

The actor James Dreyfus is also doing great work on Twitter trying to shine a light of this - you can totally feel his frustration that no one seems to care!
He has and potentially screwed over his career in the process. But good for him, shame a few more prominent people won’t speak up.
Thisfucker · 01/08/2020 00:18

Poster starts a thread, poster went to a promoted family day out. It was linked to Pride. Poster expresses concern about the flags and links to sexual fetishes and kinks, especially pups.
Many opinions were expressed, some agreeing, some not.
MNHQ delete the thread because they don't like the tone or the direction that the thread was heading in to.
This is very concerning. Does MNHQ agree that sexual fetishes and kinks are fine and dandy for children to see?
Or does MNHQ think that these aren't suitable subjects for concerned parents to discuss.
Or is there is a sacred caste that cannot be criticised, if that's true then MNHQ need to step back and reflect on their principles

nauticant · 01/08/2020 07:46

It's the last. People have become scared of saying anything that can be interpreted as an attack on LGBT. Predictably this has caught the attention of a whole range of unsavoury characters who have understood that if they get themselves under the LGBTQQIP2SAA++ umbrella then it becomes very difficult for them to be criticised.

For parallels see Catholic priests in pre-1990s Ireland. I'm sure there were plenty of priests who were not abusers. But that's not the point.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 01/08/2020 07:50

It's been done before and MN, being a business, have backed off, chosen to restrict us, how we express ourselves about saud 'sacred caste' rather than be subjected to even more of the aggressive tactics used against them and their funding streams.

I guess we can't blame them. But it is really fucking annoying that @MNHQ will have to acquiesce, again, to MRA tactics that silence women!

nauticant · 01/08/2020 08:15

Ironically even though I tried to find the most inclusive term above by posting LGBTQQIP2SAA++, this is exclusionary of K (Kink) which many believe should be included.

Mummyoflittledragon · 01/08/2020 08:40

I was on the other thread. It is disgusting that mnhq decided to delete the thread. Does anyone have any links to material there so it can be added here? But not something, which may be so “subversive” it would be deleted...l

RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 01/08/2020 09:32

But not something, which may be so “subversive” it would be deleted

See thats the issue

No idea what the tone was, or the direction or what was subversive

We are Mushrooms Mate Grin

Mummyoflittledragon · 01/08/2020 09:53

Yeh point taken. Grin

Incidentally all the twitter links to posts about master / “pup” servant / BDSM etc have been removed. I went down one of the rabbit holes to see a photo of someone’s splayed arsehole with a quote similar to “the only response to your master after a hard day at work”. And discovered lots of female “pups”. The but plug tail as a reward is um interesting.... Hmm

amusedbush · 01/08/2020 09:58

I actually stumbled across shit like this on Quora a few days ago. I'd gone down a googling wormhole, idly searching how people stay looking much younger these days (DH had showed me photos of 30yo footballers in the 70s and 80s and they all looked about 60!). Someone had asked on Quora what age people tend to look their best and someone responded with a rant about how young teenagers are at their peak in terms of looks and "sexiness", and that the age of consent was a violation of human rights Envy

KingFredsTache · 01/08/2020 10:17

The stuff I posted on that thread I also posted on here. I don't think my links and pictures got deleted, and I assume they are still on this thread although I haven't checked.

For parallels see Catholic priests in pre-1990s Ireland. I'm sure there were plenty of priests who were not abusers. But that's not the point.

It wasn't just in Ireland, the priest of my childhood English Catholic church was convicted of sexual offences against children a few years ago (thankfully I was never alone with him) and there are loads of cases in America. It wasn't the country of Ireland that was the problem (although they also had the abuse in the laundries as well), it was the Catholic Church itself. It was so beyond criticism, anyone who dared to question anything (and they were few and far between anyway I think) was met with 'how could you say that?... How dare you accuse X of that... etc'.

I remember being in Ireland once when I was young and my Aunties having a conversation, this was probably mid 90s so doubts were starting to be raised - they were talking about a rumour that someone they knew had been to confession and the priest had made a sexual remark to her in confession. I remember thinking that they believed this woman because they knew her well and they knew she wouldn't make something like that up, but still couldn't quite bring themselves to believe that a priest would do this.

The Catholic Church is a brilliant example of an organisation that attracted bad people because they knew the organisation itself would be a great cover up. Predators were attracted to the priesthood because they knew it would be a good way to carry out crimes and get them covered up, not because loads people who became priests the subsequently started to develop abusive tendencies. There are too many stories of abuse within the church for it to just be 'a few bad apples', the organisation enabled it. However, the fact remains that most priests were and are still good people who generally want to do the work of God.

We have seen it with big charities as well - sex abuse at Oxfam, how could anyone question these men they are charity workers they are 'good people'? Why would someone who works for a charity want to hurt anyone? See also Jimmy Savile.

We know from history that when you have an organisation that can never be questioned, even when stuff is staring people right in the face, that organisation becomes incredibly attractive to people who want to carry out bad deeds.

Every time someone like Mhairi Black dismisses people's concerns about 'Flow Job' visiting schools and then posting photos on their adult social media without parental permission, as 'hateful' ....every time someone like Owen Jones dismisses people as 'homophobic' because they think that the NSPCC should be coming down like a tonne of bricks on a man (who happens to be gay) who wore a gimp suit and filmed himself wanking in the loos and then linked that video directly to the fact he is someone who works at the NSPCC...every time someone like Munroe Bergdorf dismisses people who have concerns about Desmond is Amazing as 'bigots'.... The umbrella of LGBT+ becomes a little bit more attractive to certain people.

whattimeisitrightnow · 01/08/2020 10:40

As someone who is both a CSA survivor and Bisexual, the drive to class child abuse as a ‘sexuality’ is a double whammy. It both seeks to undo years and years of work that has begun to reverse the idea of LGB people being perverts, and is a huge slap in the face to those of us who endured this ‘love’ as children. No CSA survivor would ever describe what happened to them as something beneficial or something to be aspired to (unless they were still being manipulated by their abuser, which is a whole separate topic). It’s just so vile. It makes me want to weep.

Swipe left for the next trending thread