MN - too lenient on hate speech at present

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

Yesterday Amnesty International launched an urgent research campaign into the rise in hate speech Yesterday the UN High Comissioner urged Britain to urgently stop hate crimes

People need to call it out when they see hate speech on mn. There has been plenty recently. It can take courage when so many supporters then pile on though, but you don't need to get into an argument. A simple statement rejecting what they say, without quoting them, is enough. Just simply not saying anything then waiting several hours for mn to delete it adds power to their voice. People always need to report things to mn.

I am concerned that mn are not dealing with things quickly enough at the moment. They must be swamped with reports. I think that an option to report for hate speech should be an explicit available reason and those reports should be red flagged as urgent. The more hate speech that is seen, the more that it tacitly gives others the go ahead to say the same.

I've seen examples of a post being deleted, but the poster not being banned - despite them having said something that is so irrefutably xenophobic, that nobody could interpret it otherwise - and this concerns me. All that teaches them to do is to learn to moderate their language, so that they can get their messages across more subtly. This allows an insiduous tolerance of hate speech to creep across the boards.

It is important to allow freedom of discussion. It is wrong to allow xenophobia, racism and hate to proliferate. It's a difficult one to reconcile, but the balance needs to shift.

MN you could also help by cooperating with amnesty international in recording and reporting incidents to them.

All it's just that your flaming crosses examples seem so much more extreme than what appears on mumsnet.

It really doesn't seem to be a festering pool of Klan members and BNP Neanderthals. There are some ukippers but that's democracy unfortunately.

You just don't get it, do you?

"Democracy" may well allow hate speech to go unchallenged. The law thankfully, does not.

It's time MN actually did more than just delete this shit. They should pass the people's details who post it to the necessary authorities.

Yes yes, I can hear you saying "neeeee, hee haw, don't you think the plod have better things to do than that?"

Actually, right now, I'd say it should be one of their priorities.

It isn't a festering pool. Yet.

It takes lots of cigarette packets, crisp bags and empty bottles of lucozade to dam up a brook and turn it into a fetid, slow-moving body of "water". The first few are swept away as if they had never been there. But other people see them on their way downstream, and it becomes socially acceptable to throw your rubbish in. And then the rubbish gets bigger.

You may not have seen any. Fair enough, we can't all see everything. But, I haven't ever seen Manchester. Doesn't mean it's not there, having a social and economic impact on its environs and the rest of the UK.

Tara

You seem to be implying that although you haven't seen 'hate speech' on mumsnet, it must be there somewhere and therefore must be dealt with.

i think mumsnet is a very liberal pool and most posters who try to invite prejudice and hatred are called out and dealt with pretty quickly.

I think it's also important that women are allowed to discuss current issues including immigration and gender politics. Cologne is an example where many women in Europe felt their rights are thrown under a bus.

I suppose the question is whether women on a forum such as mumsnet can be trusted to control the discourse for themselves to allow to debate as an online community - or whether moderators need to be judge and jury over what is acceptable on every single thread.

I'm sure they have reported folk to the police in the past.

No, Chip, I'm saying I've fricking seen it, hence my opinionated self on this thread, and I am not going to let you tell me Salisbury doesn't exist because you haven't been there!

Salisbury does exist. It's on te ordnance survey map. It has a cathedral.

My experience is that posters are usually scrambling over each other to report, display liberal
Credentials/sociology ALevel etc

Perhaps what might be useful is an explicit statement from mumsnet about hate speech - I suppose they need to define that terms. my understanding as that it about threats to cause harm to members of vulnerable groups or supporting and/or promotion of organisations that threaten/do cause harm to people. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps the terms are wider.

If suggesting that Brexit was a vote by the old at the expense of the young is hate speech, then I'm guilty.

Also, if anyone can't discuss the positive and negative ramifications of immigration and increased trans* visibility without crossing over into hate speech, that is on them as a human being who can't conduct themselves properly in debate.

Salisbury does exist. It's on te ordnance survey map. It has a cathedral.

...

I've just reported a new thread (no posts on it yet, just the OP) which I think is racist hate speech against the Welsh.

Of course there is hate speech on here. Ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Many trolls join and post nothing but hate speech.

'Well, if I haven't seen it neither have you' doesn't wash tbh.

I have seen it. Many times.

I'm not saying it doesn't exist in saying that mumsnet seems to cope well as a self policing community.

Part of the difficulty with 'hate speech' is that people seem to have different definitions of what constitutes 'hate speech' not just as a criminal offence but also as a sort of wider orthodoxy.

I got mail within 15 mins of my report (which others had also reported) to say the thread was deleted and the user banned. Well done MN!

Oh, and if MNHQ reads this thread - no need at all to apologise for mass mailings when there's lots of reports on the same thing. I'm sure we'd all rather you dealt with these things as efficiently as possible - and pleased that others have reported!

"Part of the difficulty with 'hate speech' is that people seem to have different definitions of what constitutes 'hate speech' not just as a criminal offence but also as a sort of wider orthodoxy"

I don't know about the legal definition of hate speech, but when a social group is nagatively stereotyped, I am repulsed. No recently, but I have seen threads where nearly everyone has a go at travellers and none of them have been deleted. I didn't even open up the Cologne thread because I felt sure my blood pressure would not be able to cope with it.

MNHQ say it's fine to refer to all trans women as men. It's only singling out individuals that's not allowed on here. You're only allowed to insult a whole group.

From Report it.com

"Hate crimes are any crimes that are targeted at a person because of hostility or prejudice towards that person’s:

disability
race or ethnicity
religion or belief
sexual orientation
transgender identity

This can be committed against a person or property.

A victim does not have to be a member of the group at which the hostility is targeted. In fact, anyone could be a victim of a hate crime."

and

"If a person is bullied as a result of their disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity, this is also dealt with either as a hate crime or non-crime hate incident. Bullying could include name-calling , being spat at or kicked, or having your things taken or damaged."

Aaaand there it is. One persons hate speech is another persons biological fact.

I have seen a lot of disabilist and ageist posts on mumsnet - some get zapped but ageist posts tend not to. I also see a lot of posts that are rude beyond the viperish, assertiveness we love here - it's not hate speech so much as nastiness but we can't legislate against tha

too quick - we can't legislate against that but I add it to my spreadsheet