dear mn hq why are so many disablist threads being left up

[Samcro]

one today for instance and mn hq post
"We don't think that this thread is disablist, it is a valid discussion that we don't think should be shut down. "

yet it has obviously been reported.
cause hurt and upset
how is that making life easier(or better) for the sn community`?

or this message from mn hq
That CBeebies is just far too PC
Thread deleted
Message from MNHQ: Thanks so much for all the reports about this.

Although there has been some interesting debate and discussion, we do agree that the OP and some of what ensues is disablist, so we have decided to delete.

how can these be interesting debates??
\not long ago mn hq said that they were going to be quicker dealing with this stuff
what happened??

MrsFizzy I think you and others are misunderstanding...
I am not debating whether Autism is a disability or not, I have no doubts on that matter, I have friends with autism, and friends with children with autism who will never have a normal life, of course it is a disability...

However...

• this thread is not about autism, it is about how MNHQ moderates threads about disabilities
• Autism is not an absolute, no two autistic people are the same in how it affects them, and there are levels of severity, none of that denies whether or not it is disabling to the person, it simply helps explain why it can be difficult to moderate some threads...
• Autism / aspergers etc is a scale where at some points a person will never function in society without care, at other points they will find it a daily challenge but survive, at others they will find it difficult, but adjust, and at other points it is there, but just creates differences not issues...

All of which is not to justify / deny / criticise or anything else those who live with it... It is to help understand why a bunch of people running an online discussion forum (where by the nature of the forum emotions do not translate well to the written word however many little smilies or emoticons there may be) can find it difficult to determine what is or isn't acceptable discussion...

Even on this thread there are examples of personal opinions being put forward as fact and ring-fenced and others being told it is not up for discussion... Sorry, that is not how discussion forums work, if you are on a forum, discussion takes place and that usually means a minimum of two views, opinions or perspectives... As such there is a fine line to draw between bullying and censorship... My suggestion is simply that you need to take an approach of ensuring posts generally on any subject are enabling, supportive, kind, etc. And that is what the talk guidelines set out to shape - that is the right way to moderate an online forum, not for individual members to put their flag in the ground and say that no-one is allowed to say anything they don't approve...

Very well said, akkakk.

Akk is just arguing for the sake of it, for some unknown reason.

Someone having a different opinion doesn't make something disablist.

Being disablist is what makes something disablist.

It is acceptable to ask that disablism is not allowed on MN just as racism is not allowed. Plus some opinions are actually hate speech.

mN, as well as being a discussion board, is meant to be and said to be by HQ ' a place where all parents can come to have this lives made easier' and that includes parents dealing with SN.

The rest of your post about 'posters saying they are the only ones allowed an opinion' is just the old usual SN brigade nonsense dressed up in flowery language.

The facts are clear about disabilities, they are not a matter of debate, as MrsFizzy said.

And the board isn't just about every arsehole having his say and who cares if it offends someone. Well it shouldn't be but seems to be these days.

It's meant to be an inclusive parenting board not 4chan.

aak but surely people with disabilities are the best ones to help define what is offensive? If they are telling MNHQ that actually, this persons "opinion" is hurtful and disrespectful and are then backed up by others who are in the same situation, isn't that what should be listened to?

Just realised akk that my phone has autocorrected your NN twice. Sorry.

'Putting their flag in the ground' yet more 'Sn brigade' drivel wrapped up in flowery language.

The written word shouldn't be the only thing than matters on a supposedly supportive and inclusive parenting forum.

Not sure why you're so desperate to defend the right of people to be disablist anyway.

Well, I suspect I know.

Anyway I have said my piece.

Would love to tell you to shove the flag up your arse but it's a moderated forum and not a free for all intellectual wankathon where people's feelings don't matter. Or it's meant to be.

akkakk I'm not entirely sure why you are trying to complicate something which really doesn't need to be.

I take your point about autism being different individual to individual but...

none of that denies whether or not it is disabling to the person

It doesn't matter about the differing 'symptoms' of autism. It is ALWAYS disabling.

It is always classed as a disability.

It should always be treated as such and be given the sensitivity, compassion and protection that other protected groups get.

My suggestion is simply that you need to take an approach of ensuring posts generally on any subject are enabling, supportive, kind

Good luck with that on an Internet forum. I think disablist posts, regardless of the disability they are aimed at, should never be left to stand.

"This thread is not about autism, it is about how MNHQ moderates threads about disabilities"

Except it was started about a thread about autism, where MNHQ stated that autism couldn't be compared to other disabilities in as far as whether it was debatable as being a disability because it's not diagnosed at birth.

If the people moderating view it as different, then it will be moderated as different...and it's not and should not be.

So actually whether autism is a disability is right at the heart of it.

akk I think the point is that you seem to be saying that some people with autism seem minimally affected, and indicated this with aspergers, like that it's some sliding scale that means people are rarely affected,

This is a pretty common attitude. That parents are just looking for a trendy 'label' for their kids. The truth is that once you are diagnosed with autism, it's acknowledgement that you are massively affected day-to-day.

For a parents of a child with autism, or I imagine for a person with autism, such a flippant suggestion is massively hurtful.

MrsFizzy ideally you are right, however desirable or not we need to remember:

• MN is a business that makes money out of discussions, not out of closing down threads
• that is a potentially dangerous policy for MN, while it starts rooted here in compassion and understanding, that same policy allows people to be 'hurt and disrespected' by almost anything they disagree with and therefore suddenly the moderation is done by posters with a personal interest in having differing views closed down... How does that then work on e.g. The relationships board where a discussion might be triggering or hurtful to one person, but supportive and useful to another?

In theory, the option exists for members to report posts and therefore the option you suggest is in theory a part of MN, however, my point is simply that it is difficult for MNHQ, not that it is impossible...

The OP was asking about moderation, I am trying to give a view on why it isn't as easy as some think... For context I have had considerable involvement in the 'Autism world' at a charity level, and considerable personal experience of Autism... I also have experience of running forums, at least one of which is a subject matter that often attracts those on the spectrum - it can be challenging to say the least!

(Don't worry about nicknames, I answer to most things

Do you answer to Xenia?

fanjo I am sorry you are upset, but perhaps you simply prove my point about shutting down discussion...?

At no point have I supported being 'disablist', nor have I at any point denied that someone with autism is disabled, nor do I support trolls or those who are rude etc. I am supporting MNHQ with a realistic understanding that it is not always as easy and as simple as some people make out...

I think also we would all be very foolish if secure in our understanding of autism and its disabling effect on someone's life, we then assumed that everyone else / the public had the same level of understanding...

The professionals in education and medical circles can't fully agree, so how could we expect MNHQ to suddenly be experts with the wisdom of Solomon?

For context I have had considerable involvement in the 'Autism world' at a charity level, and considerable personal experience of Autism...

Really? Because you seem to be arguing that it would be far too complicated for me to moderate posts about autism like they already do posts about other disabilities, race etc.

I guess I'm just questioning why anyone with a wealth of experience dealing with the difficulties faced by those on the spectrum would be arguing they couldn't be protected like a 'real' disability.

I think if someone was arguing that it is not realistic or simple to moderate racist posts that they'd be laughed out if mumsnet.

Couch it in all the 'intellectual think' you want, it's still horseshit.

I'm not particularly upset, just quite annoyed, but thanks

My point exactly, dodgy

Dodgy I am simply saying, that Autism / Aspergers / Spectrum are complicated, that makes it difficult to moderate...

An example was given above about Downs Syndrome, that is something which is comparatively simple to diagnose, Autism... well, until you get the 'experts' to agree occasionally we have to accept that it is more complex!

That is not to deny its existence, or that Autism is a disability, it is though to recognise the complexities surrounding discussions...

Until there is general societal acceptance of definitions of some of the words, how could anyone expect MNHQ to moderate with 100% accuracy? The staff at MNHQ are all decent people who often show their compassion etc. but sometimes there seems to be an e or ration here of a level of perfection which perhaps might be a little unfair?

PolterGoose The only possible way it could have been more obvious is if they had 'Imagoadyfucker' as a username.

Until there is general societal acceptance of definitions of some of the words, how could anyone expect MNHQ to moderate with 100% accuracy?

Ffs.

General society only has to accept this.

Autism is a disability.

Everyone who has been diagnosed with autism is by definition disabled by it.

If you don't know much about it or understand 'the definitions' don't express cuntush, ignorant or disablist views about it on a public forum.

If they do post cuntish, ignorant or disablist views about it then mn will/should delete it.

(instead of suggesting it's not a 'real' disability like Down's syndrome, linking something about 'this is my child' and saying they think it is people and parents affected by autism who should take time out if already busy lives to 'educate' nasty fuckwits who don't want no educating.

A bit like those saying Muslims should spend all their time apologising and explaining to everyone else on the planet that they personally are not terrorists)

There were several disablist posts on that thread. But it is debatable about whether the OP was a GF, as I said earlier. Her later posts on the thread seem to me to point towards her not being one. I agree with MNHQ on this.

No one with any knowledge of autism could possibly argue that it isn't a disability in every definition of the word. But it's fine for individuals to say that they are on the spectrum and don't find it disabling. It isn't fine for people to tell those on the spectrum that they shouldn't find it disabling.

In the thread in question it was clear the OP was goady.
It was clear that other posters made comments minimising and questioning ASD (including MNHQ).
It was clear that parents of autistic people and parents of autistic people were unhappy with terminology used.

How are we still debating the whys and the wherefores?
MN's track record for dealing with this is not good. Despite parents educating over and over again. It's not this difficult, or at least, it shouldn't be.

veryproudvolleyballmum a person can feel how they want to about a diagnosis of autism. If they choose not to feel disabled by it then power to them.

But that doesn't change the fact that autism is a disability. It has to be having some effect on your life or a diagnosis wouldn't even happen.

I've been getting irritated by people saying my child has a certain disability but doesn't do this/ understands this in such a way that it implies that if their child is capable of this level of understanding or self control then all children are capable of it. I've seen it again this morning.