Re this recent child abuse case, can we have just *ONE* thread for competitive sadding please?

[solidgoldbrass]

Yes it's awful
Etc.
But we don't need a McCann-esque thread frenzy all saying the same thing.

Round of applause for your post Mab.

so grieve. if you will. in the privacy of yourself. but don't fuel reams and reams of threads with your terrible symptoms of trauma and horror and sadness.

saying things along the lines of: I can't sleep, MY hands are shaking, I can't stop thinking about it, I keep crying etc etc isn't about empathy. it's about the person typing it.

What is the problem with people on an internet forum for parents discussing their feelings of sadness about possibly the biggest news story in the country at the moment? Why does it offend you so much that you have to be snide? Why is feeling sad about the slow torture of a baby somehow shameful or wrong?

Yes, people are discussing their feelings about something that moved them/upset them/horrified them. It's not a crime. It's not bad.

"I believe any society that cannot grieve the loss of a child in this appalling circumstances is not worth living in. "

see, i'd rather be living in a society where people did something about demanding more funding for social services. instead people direct their energies towards calling for heads on websites and moaning about how affected they are.

Even if it is all about them, and they want to discuss it to make themselves feel better, I don't see why that is innately reprehensible. Mumsnet is often about people talking to each other to feel better when they are unhappy. The op wasn't just asking for one thread, she was making a moral judgement about the people who post on such threads. I find that kind of claim for superiority much more difficult to understand than the supposed superiority of 'competitive sadding', and make no mistake, it is a claim for superiority.

it may well be. and those who do have been appropriating the grief of others have claimed their superiority as beings more empathetic than sgb so it cuts both ways. actually, some did that whole thinly-veiled threat thing of 'i hope to god it never happens to you' etc etc as well.

i think it's the way that the sensitive are glorying in the hurt that this case has caused them (nothing, btw, by comparison to the hurt caused a RL boy) that is toe-curling. i think there SHOULD be a public outcry, but a useful one, not just renting of garments then waiting til the next dead/missing/injured child comes along.

aitch - i did'nt say it, but how on earth is saying 'i hope it dosen't happen to you' a threat? - i htink those posters were the one who said that the sympathy of strangers was what helped them through a terrible time.

Well, which seems more reasonable: to be offended and upset by the news story, to the point of wanting to talk about it? Or to be offended and upset by people talking about it, to the point of wanting to talk about that? The latter seems just weird to me, and very much showing off non-vulgar credentials, with perhaps a more conscious impulse behind it than the original threads. Is it appropriation of grief if you feel grief?

GLORYING!!!

i have to say thst i dislike overt public displays of emotion, be they grief or affection, however, i have not read anything that 'glorifies' what happened to baby p on here.

Oh god, yet another thread to hide.

glorying and glorifying are not synonymous. and i do think there is an edge to that 'hope itdoesn't happen to you' thing. if yoou don't , fair enough.

you don't have a clue about me dittany, what i do, what i can do, what i've been through etc, cos i don't blether about it on here constantly... nor do i care to. but, you know, i'll post a line of faces if that will help.

that's not the issue at all. i think it's perfectly reasonable to want to talk about the issues, but this has been more and you know it has. completely tabloid and over-the-top. i'd find all the wailing and gnashing just as toe-curling just as repellent if it were being done by GB himself, even if her were signing off on extra funding for SS at the time. it's disrespectful imo, leave him in peace.

There is a huge difference between sympathy/empathy and the appropriation of anothers grief.
Sympathy and empathy are helpful and postive and human and wonderful actually - and positive for the grieveing/bereaved.
But the appropriation of grief is not. It is more about someone connectingthemselves too closely with a situation that is dramatic/emotional

The appropration of grief does happen. It really does. I lost a very very close friend. I will never forget the weeping and wailing souls at his funeral who I knew were bare aquaintances. I think the written version of that does appear on some of these threads - which is why I tend to hide them. But there is wheat amongst the chaff. I think people who are responding genuinely are feeling got at when mostly it is the people who make their posts all about them who are being criticised.

If you don't believe me then just pay attention the next time there is a tragedy and see how often some people are keen to associate themselves more closely with the event than they actually were. it is odd but sadly it happens.

well, you think i should 'can my attacks' (attacks, ffs, get some perspective, i'm not even talking about people on this thread) so isn't that you being a bit controlling? see how easy it is to start telling people how they should behave, dittany?

Aitch I have to say I think you have talked a lot of sense on this thread.

I think it's fine for people to talk about this case, of course it is, but there is plenty of 'competitive sadding' on mn and I do think it's completely fair enough to ask that all discussions are confined to one thread.

Not everyone wants to see the full details every time they click into active conversations.