Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Deleted for calling someone out on gender stereotyping

137 replies

Feenie · 06/04/2018 11:16

Absolutely appalled. I called a poster out for posting the worst kind of gender stereotyping bollocks (possibly exact words) and was deleted.

Wtaf?

I didn't contravene any guidelines, unless we 're adding swearing now. I merely said that the post was 'a load of gender stereotyping bollocks'. Which it was. That was it. Which guidelines does that contravene? I'm very happy to be deleted if required, but come on!

OP posts:
MNHQ
SophieLMumsnet · 06/04/2018 11:21

Hi @feenie, we're always happy to explain deletions. Could you drop us a line about this at [email protected] with a link to the thread you're referring to, please? Then we can get back to you and chat through it.

Thanks Flowers

Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 11:37

Thank you - I've done exactly that.

OP posts:
MNHQ
YetAnotherHelenMumsnet · 06/04/2018 12:20

Thanks, Feenie, we have replied!

Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 12:22

As have I!

Thanks for the reply, but far from happy, as you know.

OP posts:
CoteDAzur · 06/04/2018 12:26

Why could the answer not be public?

I would also be interested in understanding how exactly Talk Guidelines are now being interpreted at present.

Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 12:29

We had been asked to take a look at your post by the person who had written their advice on educating boys, and when we read it we did agree with them that your post was a bit much. We did swither a bit, to be fair, but the 'bollocks' tipped us over the edge. Not because it's swearing (as you know we are pretty lax about that sort of thing) just because it struck an unusually aggressive tone under the circumstances, given the other poster was just trying to support a child's learning. So, not in the spirit, really, hence the deletion.

We hope that explains our thinking.

OP posts:
Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 12:33

The advice was v good. The accompanying 'boy learners' inevitably do this, that and the other was awful, and has no place in education today.

The post is from an ex-teacher.

OP posts:
shakeyourcaboose · 06/04/2018 12:35

Bollocks is aggressive? I see it as as providing emphasis when something is particularly ridiculous!

PalePinkSwan · 06/04/2018 12:41

MNHQ, have you been drinking the kool-aid? When did it become unacceptable to challenge gender stereotyping on here? That’s not an aggressive sounding post at all, I see much worse on here.

PalePinkSwan · 06/04/2018 12:44

There is a thread title using the phrase “load of bollocks” in active conversations - no issue with that?

Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 12:50

So pissed off. Have reposted my feelings on said thread, sans bollocks.

Reads much worse and is much less succinct, imo.

OP posts:
paxillin · 06/04/2018 12:56

Stereotyping is bollocks though, and that should be said.

Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 12:59

First line:

He's a boy and sadly for you, boys tend to treat this test as being very dull.

OP posts:
CoteDAzur · 06/04/2018 13:13

MNHQ - I'm honestly very confused by your recent stance on interpreting the Talk Guidelines. "Your post was a bit much" means nothing at all to me Confused What does "a bit much" mean?

Also, is "bollocks" a word that shall not be mentioned on here from now on? It seems an arbitrary line in the sand on a site where far more graphic words are routinely posted.

paxillin · 06/04/2018 13:42

The talk guidelines need updating. The most important one is missing: "don't out other mnetters in RL". It should be a given, but also be said.

Guidelines are fine as long as a forum has 200 members, one can get away with "don't be an arse". They are very hazy:

  1. No personal attacks
  2. No posts that break the law
  3. No trolling, misleading or deliberately inflammatory behaviour
  4. No trollhunting
  5. No spamming

2 and 5 are clear. 1 can be open to interpretation, attacking gender stereotyping isn't personal in my opinion. 3 should by my interpretation include nc to goadyfuck and reverses. 4 is tolerated at times, earns lifetime bans for others.

CoteDAzur · 06/04/2018 13:44

"That's bollocks" is not a personal attack, either. I would really like some clarification on what constitutes "a bit much" and why we are now not allowed to be this "a bit much".

Original poster
Feenie · 06/04/2018 13:45

For clarification, my exact words were 'What a load of gender stereotyping bollocks!'

It was.

OP posts:
AndhowcouldIeverrefuse · 06/04/2018 13:48

"It's a bit much" and "it's not really in the spirit" can cover pretty much anything.

paxillin · 06/04/2018 13:50

Yes, it can. It leaves the possibility of deleting anything at will.

AndhowcouldIeverrefuse · 06/04/2018 13:52

Exactly paxilin

himalayansalt · 06/04/2018 13:58

I would say you got it wrong on this occasion MN.

shakeyourcaboose · 06/04/2018 14:48

Agree himalaya and feenie 'what a load of bollocks' is an opinion, (rightly so here!) l am v confused as to how this is aggressive when posts on other threads where someone is being directly called a cunt stands?

CaptainKirkssparetupee · 06/04/2018 14:56

HQ are currently about as crap as they have ever been, this isn't new.

BIWI · 06/04/2018 20:12

I wonder how many of the MNHQ community team have ever been MNetters?

There seems to be an increasing divide between what goes on with them and the decisions that are made, and what posters think is acceptable.

CrochetBelle · 06/04/2018 20:26

Was it a known poster who reported your comment?