Effective measures against threads that encourage racism and misogyny

[rockingchaircandle]

I posted yesterday about the series of threads on Meghan Markle. In emails MN have acknowledged that they struggle with the subtle and not-so-subtle racism these threads bring.

The post led to discussions where many women, especially women of colour, explained how these threads made them feel.

Posters who have formed a clique around anti-Meghan threads, used another thread to organised the spamming of the thread to derail it. MN have also said they are going to take a longer, overall look at the posters who we feel are not here with good intentions. However the entire thread was deleted, as the posters intended and the debate was shut down, and those voices lost.

Unfortunately the thread degenerated to the point it was no longer salvageable, and so we had no option but to delete it. We want to allow free discussion as much as possible, especially on such an important topic as anti-racism, but sometimes when we have to make lots of deletions, threads end up with so many holes that it makes no sense to keep them up. We hope you understand where we're coming from. The derailing posts were obvious - they were either personal attacks or reference to TV shows etc. They could have deleted them. There are now another 2 threads up about Meghan Markle.

So, I know this will probably get deleted, but to the people who posted yesterday I just wanted a message to show that not everyone agrees with this. I'm sorry, MN have heard - I hope they will do something more effective if they truly think anti-racism is an important topic.

Meghan rarely if ever talks about the environment. Where are your posts calling out Charles, William and Kate, who have all made climate change a pet cause, yet who all travel by private jet far more than Meghan, and by objective standards are far bigger hypocrites?

Just because you’ve not “seen racism” doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Where are your posts calling out Charles, Charles has been criticised for this for decades. He's been portrayed as a loony who talks to plants, a cruel adulterer, a patrician who's incredibly pampered. This has been written about in countless books and articles. Meghan is new on the royal scene. It's not a surprise that people are interested in her. We want to know more about her. That's not racism.

That’s dissembling. No one is talking about plant-loving, and no one is talking about stuff in the press decades ago.

We’re talking about this specific forum, and the clear hypocrisy and double standards shown by posters here over the past three years.

I think some of the criticism of Meghan is racist and misogynistic, some of it is fine and some of it is laughable

And a large majority of it is just plain nasty. As I said on the deleted thread, since this time last year there's been 91 threads with Meghan in the title, of which 4 are referred to as the happy threads.
So that's 89 in just one year, there will be far more with just stupid negative thread titles directed at MM.

Imagine that many threads about any other famous person?

Yes some of the posts have been racist (that is not saying everyone who posts on them is a racist) but a lot of them are just horrible bitchy nastiness. She (and Harry) have been called every single name under the sun. Every derogatory term imaginable has been used about them.

It is completely and utterly out of hand. Challenging is very difficult. Especially when going onto one of these threads and trying to question what is being said. You are either rounded on, or... because a lot of threads are being zapped... you are just ignored. Oh, and of course you are accused of trying to get the thread zapped. That sends a message to me... this is our corner of nastiness about MM and you can't come in here and question anything we say.

Also these threads start off all nicey nicey, marvellous support for each other, fine. However, what draws this group of posters together (sometimes with something penguin in the name) is to dig the dirt on MM, so that theme starts up again. That is what they have in common. Dislike of MM and any minor bit of news is jumped on with glee and I'll give them their due... they do manage to find something negative in everything. If they're stuck on the thread to find anyting, they do manage to dredge the bottom of the media pool, blind gossip and the like.

We’re talking about this specific forum, and the clear hypocrisy and double standards shown by posters here over the past three years.
You tell me what to discuss then I'll discuss it. What do you want to talk about? I'm not responsible for every other poster's views by the way. I can only speak for myself.

@derxa

We’re talking about this specific forum, and the clear hypocrisy and double standards shown by posters here over the past three years. You tell me what to discuss then I'll discuss it. What do you want to talk about? I'm not responsible for every other poster's views by the way. I can only speak for myself.

The OP is clear. I hope you're not trying to derail the thread.

I think the best thing would be to hear from @MNHQ

I can only speak for myself.

Then why insert yourself into a conversation about posters other than yourself?

There’s clear hypocrisy and double standards present on MN royal threads, where Meghan is regularly bashed for doing things other royals are ignored or even praised for doing. Don’t defend other posters then do a 180 and say “I can’t talk about other posters.”

Dan Wootton denies everything as does the publicist, so you are peddling gossip the same as anyone else who quotes from Blind Gossip. What was the website where you gleaned this information? I don’t think it was The Law Society Gazette.

Byline Times, probably one of the most highly respected investigative journalism outlets publishing today, a publication best known for their expose into fraud in the US stock market, and for their coverage of Russia and China.

Their investigative reporters spent months investigating and have evidence (including bank statements showing payments from bank account numbers which can be proven belong to the Sun) which they are prepared to present in court.

Not quite at the same level of Blind “Meghan three a tantrum because avocados aren’t sold in Britain” Gossip/

@LaundryBasketOfHell

Dan Wootton denies everything as does the publicist, so you are peddling gossip the same as anyone else who quotes from Blind Gossip. What was the website where you gleaned this information? I don’t think it was The Law Society Gazette.

I’ve seen very little coverage of that here.

The comparison is being made - that people are only interested in one side of the 'gossip'.

But start a thread if you want to debate the story itself. The OP here is about @MNHQ can address the racism that has been acknowledged. So far, only one regular poster on the anti-Meghan threads has tried to help with that.

It was Byline Times, @ChocolatelyAsFuck? I've no idea about the story itself, but yes their methods are the opposite of Blind Gossip!

But start a thread if you want to debate the story itself. The OP here is about @MNHQ can address the racism that has been acknowledged.

Yes fair enough. I apologise. I was trying to point out hypocrisy, I’ll ask for my post to be deleted to reduce ammunition to those trying to derail it.

If anyone wants to see more positive threads about Harry, Meghan or any other member of the royal family, no-one is stopping them from starting one.

Whether anyone bothers to read/respond is likely to be the problem because the other royals are simply getting on with their lives as per usual, and most of it is quite mundane, especially now.

Whereas H&M's current actions are like watching a real life soap story unfold, where no-one is in control of the script, hence the seemingly unending interest.

If anyone wants to see more positive threads about Harry, Meghan or any other member of the royal family, no-one is stopping them from starting one.

People have. They usually get invaded by the Meghan bashers.

the other royals are simply getting on with their lives

Yes, sheltering accused rapists, refusing to answer questions from the FBI over your links to convicted pedophiles, multiple allegations of dodgy financial fraud, rifling charity money got dodgy payoffs, weddings to dubious men, all kinds of sex rumours, ignoring lockdown rules, endangering NHS staff and people living in vulnerable areas, forcing workmen back to work before the government permitted, and plenty of alleged stuff I don’t dare mention here... so mundane and definitely nothing as gossip-worthy as not forcing small children to wear tights.

H&M are only a soap opera because the press obsessively stalk them and because they can’t even fart without the press trying to blow it into a scandal, while the far more outrageous antics of other royals are squashed and downplayed.

@TimeLady

What current actions would those b?
What current actions are these that justify speculation of the most unpleasant and downright risible kind? How do these current actions justify the racism, specific instances of which many examples have been given?

Most of the meghan bashers have slunk off to the other site where they are happily chatting away to Tommy Robinson supporters.

Says it all really.

and plenty of alleged stuff I don’t dare mention here

Who's stopping you? It's a discussion site.

i am annoyed the the OP has been accused of bullying.
are we talking about the couple of posters who have flounced? if so do remember one deliberately derailed a thread about racism will silly pictures.
so its fine to bully M on line. but get called out on it and your the victim.
\strange days

@TimeLady nobody has claimed you can't start positive threads about Meghan. They are there so anyone can check out how well they go and see the familiar names appearing.

It does seem goady to be still arguing that Meghan's actions means she deserves the attention and/or abuse.

The thread is about how @MNHQ can address the racism that has been acknowledged. An important discussion to focus on.

Still here, thank you.

Positive only threads are dull. That's why people watch Eastenders and read about sheltering accused rapists, refusing to answer questions from the FBI over your links to convicted pedophiles, multiple allegations of dodgy financial fraud, rifling charity money got dodgy payoffs, weddings to dubious men, all kinds of sex rumours, ignoring lockdown rules, endangering NHS staff and people living in vulnerable areas, forcing workmen back to work before the government permitted

I must admit much of the above, other than the PA stories, is news to me and discussion on it would no doubt lead to lots of extra clicks for MN.

Weddings to dubious men especially.

?????

Who's stopping you? It's a discussion site. Excellent.

Can you keep the childish tactics off here, please. It's easy to spot the posters who are acting in bad faith.