Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Autism and MNHQ moderation

326 replies

HypocrisyHere · 04/01/2022 10:24

I am starting this thread as suggested by @HebeMumsnet following the other thread I started last week

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4439585-MN-and-their-approach-to-autism?pg=1

The point was the lack of consistency in moderation (the screenshots contained two threads in my watchlist - one deleted due to its title, the other - the “support” thread - allowed to stand despite what many to believe to be a far, far more offensive title).

From the linked above thread you will see many autistic people who feel that MNHQ allow many posts which are based on outdated, inaccurate and harmful stereotypes of autistic people. Further, on the support thread, the majority of posters have self-diagnosed Their partners and many of us view this as extremely offensive as again, this self diagnosis is based on these outdated stereotypes (please note an individual self-diagnosing themselves is a totally different issue and though an important discussion, not one I intended to raise on my original thread). I have summarised my thoughts on that thread in my post I made on 31/12/21 at 12:09.

I also made it clear from my opening post that I think parents of autistic children also need a space to seek support (hence me questioning why first thread was deleted). I know that many parents need this. But you will also see that many of these parents often accuse autistic adults without learning difficulties of trying to advocate for their children. I can state that in my case this is absolutely untrue and I did not see any others in the thread doing so. But I want to be clear that I absolutely support the need for this but it is not fair for these parents to refer to our autism as “mild” which they frequently do. This is a very outdated term which many of us find very offensive as it is based in a neurotypical person’s view of us and not on our actual “lived experience”. Spending the majority of your school years as an outcast and a person who can be mocked is not a mild experience for a child.

On the linked thread you will also see that we have been subjected to a whole load of ableist comments - that there’s something wrong with is, that we need to realise how negatively we impact people, that we are selfish for wanting to centre the discussion on us etc. this highlights the deep misunderstanding, ignorance and downright prejudice many people have towards us.

I think many of us would welcome a productive dialogue with MNHQ where we could address these issues as well as discussing the harm threads about autistic people cause (which includes the support thread). Many of us have acknowledged that we understand our behaviours may seem “difficult” but for us many, many neurotypical behaviours, which we need to accommodate every day, are difficult for us. This is a two-way street and we won’t make progress until BOTH “sides” respect each other.

One final clarification. I am in no way attempting to speak for all autistic people here. I started the thread sharing my own opinion and many people supported me (when I last looked 65% supported me). What I have written here are my own feelings on the subject.

Thank you for asking me to post here and I very much hope we can make progress on this issue and that MN (and society in general) can become a place where autism is understood and accepted.

OP posts:
Thoosa · 17/01/2022 22:53

Yes I think you need to go and lurk on Black MNers board @Innocenta to see a working model.

BarrowInFurnessRailwayStation · 17/01/2022 23:09

And it's not a case of not being 'allowed' to post, it's a case of respecting other people's areas. I wouldn't go into the Adoption area and go dictating to adopters all about their issues. I respect their space as I don't know anything about adoption.

Innocenta · 17/01/2022 23:12

I know how that board works and I fully support it. Sorry, I don't think I was very clear! What I meant was not that it's wrong per se to have spaces that are primarily focused on disabled people or on ND people. I am in both of these groups myself and would welcome this.

What I'm referring to is how some specific posters are quite 'gatekeepy' about which views are acceptable and who is or isn't allowed to post. I do think this is problematic, and it's a very different issue from supporting focused boards. So what I was asking was: how do the contributors to this thread think this problem ought to be handled?

Innocenta · 17/01/2022 23:13

@BarrowInFurnessRailwayStation

And it's not a case of not being 'allowed' to post, it's a case of respecting other people's areas. I wouldn't go into the Adoption area and go dictating to adopters all about their issues. I respect their space as I don't know anything about adoption.
But I am referring to ND people. People who should be included.
LilyRed · 17/01/2022 23:30

Following as a member of the ND women with NT partners group.

I stated this on the original threadCome on Mumsnet, Women with SN are one thing; Women with Adult (or other) diagnosis of Autism and/or ADHD (and NT partners or not) is another; whilst there may be an intersection for some in all sets, it does not make us the same thing. Some of us have other illnesses or disabilities to, but we want to focus on our neurodiversity.

Or should that be neurodiversities? The saying is that "you meet one person with Autism - and you will have met ONE person with autism".

The subject is complex. Our thoughts, needs and behaviours may make no sense or be hard to understand to NT members - as we have already found, and we need our own area.

Thoosa · 18/01/2022 00:11

@Innocenta

I know how that board works and I fully support it. Sorry, I don't think I was very clear! What I meant was not that it's wrong per se to have spaces that are primarily focused on disabled people or on ND people. I am in both of these groups myself and would welcome this.

What I'm referring to is how some specific posters are quite 'gatekeepy' about which views are acceptable and who is or isn't allowed to post. I do think this is problematic, and it's a very different issue from supporting focused boards. So what I was asking was: how do the contributors to this thread think this problem ought to be handled?

Who is “gatekeepey” and in what way?

I’m not following you.

Posters either have a diagnosis of a neurodiverse condition or they don’t. There isn’t really a situation of degrees.

Sometimes people lie on the Internet, but we all deal with that daily.

Innocenta · 18/01/2022 07:00

@Thoosa Feels a bit like you're wilfully missing my point, here.

I accept that I didn't phrase it brilliantly first time round given that multiple people thought I was saying that forums like Black Mumsnetters shouldn't exist - which is not my opinion at all! But I have clarified, and I don't know if it's helpful to go round and round. As I've already said, I'm referring to some posters. Not going to name names, that's inappropriate.

Thoosa · 18/01/2022 07:17

I wish it was wilful. Grin Maybe I just missed an episode of the neverending aspie wars? Smile

I’ll go back through the thread this evening and try to decode what you’re alluding to. Of course you can’t name names. I wondered if you could name a faction or stance but maybe it’s delicate?

meteoric · 18/01/2022 07:26

@mnhq this feels like it's been requested and talked about for a long time now. I'm wondering what your plans are here for looking at this?

You could probably get a really good (virtual) usability or user group session set up from some of us as volunteers if that would help?

Innocenta · 18/01/2022 07:30

I apologise; I'm sure it's me expressing myself badly.

I definitely feel sensitive on this topic because of some prior responses I've received, but none of that is your fault.

What I'm talking about is my strong impression that some posters perceive disagreement as, essentially, tantamount to hate against ND people (usually autistic people), rather than accepting that it can just come from different viewpoints. I'm not only talking about my own interactions but others that I've witnessed too.

I am not saying I think there shouldn't be spaces on MN with a focus on ND and disabled women's experiences. That's something I'd support - and actually have said similar things downthread!

The concern I was raising, is this: that people who do "qualify" in the broader sense of these terms (using an inclusive understanding of ND and disabled) will not actually be welcomed in practice. Because that is a risk, in my opinion.

Innocenta · 18/01/2022 07:31

Sorry, previous post was a reply to @Thoosa

Thoosa · 18/01/2022 07:40

Thanks for trying to clear it up @innocenta - I’m a bit tired and stupid since Christmas.

Are we talking about issues that crop up such as those of ND adults versus parents of ND children? Suspected dx versus confirmed dx? Dyslexia and similar being overlooked? Those kinds of disputes? Then everyone being opinionated?

Random789 · 18/01/2022 07:41

I think that some people expect FAR too much from Mumsnet moderation -- as if it existed to shape and nurture a perfectly correct attitude, to forge a perfect community and smooth away the ordinary imperfections of attitudes and self-expression.

They can't do that, and if they try to do it (usually in response to pressures from site users) they end up being massively inconsistent, as here.

The really troubling thing is that the chat forum dynamics that lead to these unreasonable expectations and erratic interventions have leaked out from the internet into real life, where everybody is busy performing virtuous self-expression in accordance with the values of one group or another, and/or getting called out for failing to perform the virtues of another group, or for performing their own group's virtues inadequately.

I wish we could get back to just talking to each other, interpreting one another's meanings realistically and compassionately and not calling on the authorities to reinforce our sense of being right about how to respect identities.

Thoosa · 18/01/2022 07:58

It would be quite nice to see all bigotry and stereotyping prohibited by hosting platforms (in line with hate speech generally not being seen as desirable) and also for a individuals to avoid intransigence and ideological purity spirals.

Obviously it’s not so simple, but it would be nice.

Innocenta · 18/01/2022 08:25

In theory that would be fab, but I fear we’d instantly run into all the same kinds of problems that surround modding the sex and gender debates. What one person sees as discussing facts, another perceived as bigotry - there is so much grey area that it’s hard to know where to fix the moderation lines. I’m not trying to say I have an answer! Smile

The are a handful of issues where I think people generally agree (e.g. extreme racial slurs), but beyond that it becomes so tricky. For example, the term “Asperger’s” being genuinely offensive and triggering to some ND people, while to others it is their legitimate diagnosis and/or preferred term. I have literally no idea how these issues should be handled beyond a vague sense that it shouldn’t be ‘who shouts the loudest’, as I fear that would lead to more marginalisation.

Thoosa · 18/01/2022 08:38

Personally I think anything along the lines of “all X people do Y and look like Z” formulations, should be banned from any polite conversation anywhere. Because that’s the definition of unreasonable prejudices, it’s dehumanising and it’s easily spotted, plus it’s a better guide to what’s unacceptable than whether anyone is claiming offence, IMHO.

Then everyone can happily argue the toss about the finer points and controversies forever more.

Innocenta · 18/01/2022 08:40

I see what you mean, @Thoosa ! It's certainly not something I would say, or ever want to read. Generally, all the things people bring up as offensive, are things I would normally also not be keen to see in the conversation - it's not that I support these things being said. I really don't. Just curious / concerned about how moderation could work in practice.

5zeds · 18/01/2022 10:05

“ I don’t think a thread/board where only some people are allowed to post some views can ever be described as inclusive”

@BarrowInFurnessRailwayStation
What about the Black Mumsnetters board? That is an area specifically where black people can discuss the issues and challenges they face.

Well, myself, I would say that a board for one race isn’t inclusive, BUT (and it’s big but), it’s inclusion as an option may (I would say does) make the forum more inclusive. It isn’t an insult to say something isn’t inclusive, it’s just the wrong ( so inaccurate) word.

I think if you want a board only for diagnosed neurodiverse people who can post without support, you should say that. I doubt anyone will have a problem with it, unless you dress that up as the only autistic experience.

Rather like the thread for the partners of nd I would give it a hard swerve (and I think I’m the demographic you don’t want).

Innocenta · 18/01/2022 10:20

@5zeds I wonder if a solution could be to have a disability and neurodiversity forum, open to anyone falling into those wider groups, and within it, a subforum only for people with established, formal diagnoses of autism? (If that's something that some autistic people on MN feel would be lacking in a more inclusive forum.) Obviously I'm not trying to say that autistic people shouldn't post in the inclusive disability and neurodiversity forum! But the stricter one would exist for those who don't want to interact with other disabled or ND people.

BertieBotts · 18/01/2022 12:24

Innocenta I know what you mean, I have also seen this.

5zeds · 18/01/2022 12:37

So at the moment we have a section called SPECIAL NEEDS that is split into

Mumsnetters with SN
SN Chat
SN Children
SN teens and young adults
SN undiagnosed genetic conditions

5zeds · 18/01/2022 12:40

I personally prefer disabled to SN as a descriptor but I think most prefer SN so that’s how it was phrased.

Thoosa · 18/01/2022 13:03

@5zeds

I personally prefer disabled to SN as a descriptor but I think most prefer SN so that’s how it was phrased.
Do you think? I would have thought otherwise, but it’s so hard to second guess everyone and I’m often surprised on this issue, so maybe I’m no judge.

To me ‘SN’ has a distinct undertone of intellectual impairment, which comes under the disability umbrella OFC, but it wouldn’t really occur to me that that was supposed to include me —but for the fact that MNHQ seem to think it does— 🤔

DinosaurOfFire · 18/01/2022 13:54

@Thoosa I agree, re the connotations of SN. I don't see myself as having "special needs". Here in Wales we don't have SEN anymore in schools as a term as it was deemed problematic, we have Additional Learning Needs.

I think we need a board for neurodiversity, there are so many topics that are useful to chat about that can't be covered in one ongoing thread- from fashion when you have sensory needs, to relationships, to how to interact well with professionals for your autistic kids when you yourself are also autistic, to parenting, to executive dysfunction. Its important that we have a space to be ourselves without having to mask and hide ourselves even online. Then there could be a thread that's only for diagnosed people if thats something someone wants to start, different threads for different neurodiversities etc. I am surprised that MNHQ haven't actually come back, when I commented at the start of the thread I was hopeful that we would see change happen.

BarrowInFurnessRailwayStation · 18/01/2022 14:01

What I find uncomfortable are NTs who repeatedly try to explain the issues to me and insist on wading in to the debate.

It's not about having a diagnosis or not having a diagnosis, it's about respecting others spaces and, at the moment, we don't have our own space.

I would love a space to discuss clothing, food, interacting with health care and education personnel etc.

Where is this supposed to take place MNHQ? Please explain.