Coming Clean by Liz Fraser

[RhinoRhino]

A couple of threads that I had posted on relating to the Memoir ‘Coming Clean’ by Liz Fraser have been deleted from the MN site, apparently due to non-compliance of the MN guidelines from the posters. MN are obviously well within their rights to delete threads if they demonstrably fail to comply with their guidelines, nevertheless I feel strongly that MN posters are given a platform to critique this book, and also any other public ventures by this author. It would be neither fair nor right that posters are completely silenced in this particular matter.

As such, and in line with Mumsnet not seeing “anything wrong with honest feedback” I would like to make the comment that Coming Clean as a Memoir falls short due to the shaky and not entirely truthful narrative. There are certain facts contained within this memoir that are easily disprovable (for example, relating to the marital status of both author and her partner when they started their ill-fated affair), which leaves a massive question mark over the rest of the book. Is it entirely reasonable to make money from something that is promoted as truthful when it is, in fact, not entirely true?

I think there are people whose lives have been negatively impacted by the book and its subject matter, and I hope that MN will agree that these people should have a voice, as should anybody who wants to comment on a published piece of work.

As long as posters align their comments with the MN guidelines, this is a topic that people may wish to keep discussing, and also keep in the public domain. And if MN wants to provide a set of rules particular to this thread – certainly if they are arbitrary and differ from the general guidelines - I am sure it would be very helpful.

Mumsnet, please help us to help each other by keeping in the public domain something that us silenced mums feel should be out there.

Thank you @RhinoRhino I was trying to think how to respond myself. You are the voice of reason that no-one could disagree with (unless they were an unreasonable person who needs to tightly control the narrative)

@RhinoRhino @Larkspurblue hear hear!

I think it’s a very important subject as is written by a ‘proclaimed’ parental expert famous for targeting books to mothers. Hence why mumsnet is a important place for it to be discussed. That’s a serious amount or discrepancies in the ‘truthful’ book and from that back of that, public requests for personal donations to Liz. Considering this is likely targeted at many mothers it’s important for the clarifications to be out there so that mothers will not part with money under false pretences.

I feel it is worth noting, while we are discussi delngeted threads, that the subject of those deleted threads indulged in some very unedifying gloating yesterday. Timed to coincide with the last two threads being removed Liz Fraser posted a picture of herself sticking her tongue out to background music "F@ck You". She was so pleased with herself that she went on to post it three more times. I won't upload the post here so that I don't transgress any guidelines, albeit arbitrary ones (as pointed out by @RhinoRhino above).

I would be interested to know how Mumsnet would respond to the fact that the person they protected from the consequences of her own behaviour was quite happy to act with the maturity of a primary schooler. It isn't a game by the way. People have been genuinely harmed. Perhaps Ms Fraser could be gracious enough to acknowledge that she has had a get-out-of-jail-free-card handed to her by MNHQ and not be so infantile.

Just going to pop this here- MN guidelines

• No personal attacks
• No posts that break the law, including hate speech of any kind
• No trolling, misleading or deliberately inflammatory behaviour
• No trollhunting
• No spamming
• No multiple accounts

Just keep swimming cleaning ladies😉🧹

@Larkspurblue I had not seen the post you mentioned, but it would seem to fit in with Ms Fraser’s somewhat unorthodox method of communication through social media. The cryptic messages she chooses to put into the public domain can often be pretty extraordinary. (Not to mention occasionally very funny.)

I’m a firm believer in saying what you mean, and meaning what you say, but that’s just me …….

Back to Coming Clean, the crux of the story focuses on the fallout from the partner’s descent into an alcoholic vortex after the couple and their young child moved to Venice.

I have often wondered why neither of them ever stopped to think:

Here’s a man with a known drink problem who
Has a small child
Lives in a small apartment
An apartment which wholly belongs to his partner and is not jointly owned
An apartment over which he has zero rights of ownership or even residence
He now has no job
Has moved to a foreign country
Where he does not speak the language
Where it is hot and muggy and buggy and crowded
And where baristas and photographers are probably 10 a penny
His drinking is getting worse
He has no purpose
No money of his own
He has a history of depression and now ……
is completely at the mercy of his partner, who finances everything, owns everything, apparently controls everything, including whether or not he can sit in a bar on his own and have a drink.

Wouldn’t a sensible person pause, assess the situation, and say to themselves “this is no place for Mike. It is not working for him. He is not thriving in this environment. It might be my dream to be here, but for his sake and the sake of our child and our relationship, we need to stop the drama, stop the chaos, move back closer to support networks and have a rethink”?

Wouldn’t that be the conclusion of a sensible person, who genuinely cared for their partner and wanted the best for their family?

Nice to find you. And to be able to find this support network again.

Hi @Beanchops 👋

Very useful reminder. The problem I have is that some of these "guidelines" are open to interpretation. For example, what does "personal attacks" refer to? I get that remarks about someone's personal appearance break the rules. But, what about calling out someone's behaviour? Or inaccuracies about what they claim in the public domain; is that ok?

One example, to test the parameters of this discussion, is the article written by the Daily Mail on 25 November 2021. The article referred to Liz Fraser's "best-selling book" Coming Clean (the subject of this thread). I wonder what most people would imagine is meant by "best-selling book"? The "Sunday Times Bestsellers List" is taken as a good yardstick. Did Coming Clean appear in this list? No. It was, briefly, the "Top seller" in the Amazon category of "Addiction Biographies" (a tiny list you will probably agree). It has become a matter of lazy journalism that the book is a "best seller".

In reality, this is in the public domain, is that the book received some harsh reviews on Amazon and Good Reads, some reviews criticising the publisher, Bloomsbury. It is also in the public domain that the paperback version of the book was pulled (I daren't speculate as to why this might be!) Is it ok to call this out?

Back to Mumsnet - they state that some of their decisions may appear "arbitrary". My thought is that, if the ultimate decision is based on a "fickle", "case by case" judgement, why have guidelines at all?

As @RhinoRhino said - are you able to help us out Mumsnet?

@Larkspurblue does seem open to interpretation. once again , using JM as an example one post still up was discussing her appearance and said it looked like she had got her jacket out of a skip- I would say that is quite personal .
Ironically the repeated deletion of the threads on here have led to a lot of comments on TL - they are not concerned about being deleted , so their comments are not pulling any punches. 😬

So, thanks to HG getting these threads deleted there is a growing body of online evidence about her behaviour that will be available for potential contributors /donators to her latest venture. Parents will be able to make proper informed decisions before they are parted from their hard earned( non generational wealth )money 👍

I think lots of contributors here are going over to TL so that they can express themselves without being constantly silenced. It’s is getting tiresome that so many threads are getting taken down at the behest of the subject of those threads. And the threads are created - let’s face it - to discuss the subject’s tendency toward controlling ALL narrative anyway. So it just feels like mumsnet are colluding with that tbh.

If anyone at TL can send an invitation...

@Burgundybrin are you not able to join the convo - will try and invite you. I joined TL ages ago but rarely go on or contribute as preferred Mumsnet - but Mumsnet has let us all down so I've considered going to TL. My name is different on there and I have mainly read posts but since I joined ages ago I guess I'm not on a waiting list (someone did mention a waiting list some time back). Will see if I can invite you x

@Raffington55 I agree, it's very annoying.

I notice today that she has put a picture on her stories of her in a short pair of shorts with two emojis - "hello" and "troll" (I won't reproduce the post). I think we are being goaded into doing something that will breach the "guidelines" and get us taken down again.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that, in itself, "trolling":

"a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting a response from them"

Are you taking notes Mumsnet?

Thank you. PM if you need anything more from me

@Larkspurblue Don’t you think today’s way of messaging should be applauded? “Hello trolls”? So succinct. So to the point! Fabulous. That’s the kind of plain speaking I can get behind!

So much quicker on the brain than sausage semaphore, venison vitriol, prosecco provocation etc Though I still crack up at the sausages. Never before would it have occurred to me to troll somebody via the medium of processed meat!

So funny!

Talking of which, another question I have about Coming Clean. Ms Fraser definitely makes the claim that Mike was “funny”. There is no evidence whatsoever of that in the book. None. If anybody can quote any passage from the book which would credit him with even the teensiest hint of a sense of humour I’d be astonished. I’ve met funnier people at a service station.

And @Raffington55 I can understand why a lot of posters would want to join TL, as some of the posts on the deleted threads were of outstanding comedy value. I mourn their passing! But I still think it important that MN facilitates a group of mums who wish to comment on the various broadcasts/publications (eg books, magazine articles, radio/TV interviews and social media) of the author of Coming Clean, Liz Fraser. In isolation each book/venture may (possibly!) seem credible on its own merit, but taken as a whole there is definitely a shaky narrative going on.

And nobody should ever be prevented from discussing any of it on a public forum for mums.

Agree wholeheartedly!

We've been silenced again.

“This isn’t a how-to guide …. It’s a memoir, a diary, and account of one person’s experiences of it – but I hope it might change the way we think and talk about addiction, open people’s minds to both sides of this all-too-common human experience, encourage dialogue and mutual support, break stigmas and provide support for those who need it. All sides of a story need a voice. This is mine”

Page 3, Coming Clean by Liz Fraser

All sides of a story need a voice. This is ours.

There is plenty to review on here, and no reason it cannot be done within the MN guidelines.

Very pleased to find you. I haven't read the book we are currently discussing but I am interested to learn more about how she has been advised to have at least 26 sessions of EMDR, when most qualified psychotherapists believe that between 6 and 12 weeks, maybe twice weekly is enough. I have CPTSD, and it's been suggested that 4 to 6 would probably help with my issues. Perhaps areas vary?
It's a well known intervention for CPTSD so it's also a little confusing that she pronounced it as a brand new treatment.

Her book is certainly getting some very poor reviews on Amazon

@RhinoRhino

There is a great deal of jeopardy involved in investing time and thought on these threads.

Would one be wasting ones time by going on to Site Stuff and asking MN why they keep deleting these threads..I suspect so ..

I think some posts went against the guidelines for sure. But if so, why not just delete the posts instead of the entire threads? Genuine question.

I have lost cost of how many threads we have lost now? 3 at least?
including THE thread which was just… SO SO funny.

if any of you were able to CODE us on the TL Liz Fraser thread would be amazing / however completely agree, as above, that Mumsnet should also allow space for the discussion of a public figure (! Who goes on TV as an self proclaimed ‘parenting expert ) thus has an ‘audience’ of mothers.

plus - begging for money while substantially wealthy while ‘luring’ people to her page under the guise of ‘trauma / DA / anorexia / mothering expert’ is just utterly unacceptable and the TRUTH does ought to be alone so MOTHERS can make informed choices….

@Intriguedbythis 7 threads by my count. I expect this will be the 8th.