MN needs a closer watch of FWR

[BodegaSushi]

There is a concerning growth of posts with racist undertones cropping up on these boards, all under the guise of being proudly 'anti-woke'.

Apparently diversity is 'woke' and worthy of derision.

This is the thread I'm referring to here.

Disney went woke now they're going broke www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4836570-disney-went-woke-now-theyre-going-broke

Mumsnet needs to looks at why that board draws such types of posts, and why posters feel so comfortable openly airing their racism.

@Helleofabore

You said they were encouraging death threats and bomb threats so can you post links to where they did this. I did ask earlier but you must have missed it.

The article I posted stated this. The Twitter posts that Libsoftiktok made at the time were deliberately provocative. I'm not going to trawl through Twitter to find them for you.

Wrong. Someone else has decided that it's a Guardian thread I'm referring to which is not the case.

Have they. Well clear it up then by linking to this thread full of banned telegraph forum members.

I am probably a lot like you in that I need to ask constant questions to understand just what others are posting and why. You are not alone.

Often the abuse will come from people who have no real evidence to back up their statements.

Otherwise, I don't think anyone is really understanding what I'm trying to tell them, which is fine - keep on in the bubble.

Hahaha. Ok. I guess we will miss out on your superior insight on things we are dealing with frequently.

thanks helle - this is a particularly swirling thread!

I'll add, too, that Libsoftiktok is a paid alt-right wing shill. She creates controversies for clicks, dollars, and publicity. (She isn't 'left-wing' by any standard whatsoever.)

It’s pretty clear that @Socrateswasrightaboutvoting meant that they felt (or others felt) that they had been attacked/ridiculed for saying "x is being racist" with other FWR posters saying "don’t be ridiculous x isn’t being racist".

No, it wasn't clear. Three other people felt it wasn't clear.

That tone is definitely present. It is insidious, emboldening through it's normalisation; people feel entitled to express similar attitudes because of the culture that has been normalised.

//

Interestingly you could also use this paragraph to describe -

Women being doxed, no platformed and losing their jobs for stating sex is real and a woman does not have a penis,

Schoolgirls being told their opinion of reality is wrong and they should move schools unless they accept a lie as reality

People saying it's wrong to encourage young people onto a life of medicine and pretend new sex organs and

Women saying enough is enough to mediocre men stealing their hard fought sport opportunities.

TRAs actually physically assaulting women when they gather in public

I don't hate trans people at all but now I'm at the stage where if I don't see or hear them calling out the harm their "authentic lives" causes to women and kids, I have absolutely no respect for them.

I'll add, too, that Libsoftiktok is a paid alt-right wing shill. She creates controversies for clicks, dollars, and publicity. (She isn't 'left-wing' by any standard whatsoever.)

Did someone claim she was "left wing"? Must have missed that.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Hahaha. Ok. I guess we will miss out on your superior insight on things we are dealing with frequently.

It's not my insight you're missing out on. Never mind!

The suggestion in the thread title that FWR needs more strident modification than elsewhere on the site poses obvious historical problems. There are unique issues with these particular boards: one arising from many old MN members receiving bans for pointing out, long before others saw the light, the difficulties arising when the rights of two groups conflict. Another comes from the aggressive moderation of the threads from outside the site, resulting eventually in the splitting-off of ‘Sex and Gender’ from ‘Feminism Chat’ against the wishes of the majority of their posters. Then we have the influx of MRAs flooding onto the boards to tell women off for having the effrontery to discuss women, not to mention our resident PC Goon showing a dogged persistence in attempting to police the language and discussions of women. Threads are monitored excessively: the language that is and isn’t permissible turns on a sixpence and the deletions start with no notification to members as to what’s changed now. A ‘three strikes and you’re out’ model was then brought in and applied rigorously to this area of the site in particular.

Upthread we see how left and right ideological thinking is lazily and problematically lumped together, and how GCs are carelessly aligned with the US alt right and even Nazism. When you consider particularly given all angles have previously explored in getting FWR shut down – or at least shutting down as many of the debates it contains as possible - can you seriously expect people won’t be sceptical and will at the very least want to examine with some scrutiny the basis of the latest (of many) accusations levelled against them?

In view of the above, of course any suggestion that these boards need even more moderation and policing than the already-excessive proportion they currently get is going to be met with a degree of scepticism; as is any protestation that women should simply accept what we are told without room for debate or questioning.

We’ve seen before exactly where this stance has led. That ship has sailed.

It's not my insight you're missing out on. Never mind!

Oh, it's the Luxembourg press's? Or random Australian websites? Oh well.

So, that is a no then.

You don't have anything. You have taken other people's opinions as truth.

And you believe that the Libsoftiktok posted content calling for death threats and bomb threats?

Here I have attached the original.

Here is a screenshot of others.

https://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1605955667554181125?s=20

Could you please point out to us where Libsoftiktok called for death threats and bomb threats? Rather than for answers from the Boston Children's Hospital for their under age procedures?

It really seems to be that you are blaming a person for 'encouraging' outrageous actions by simply publicising a concern. That is an act of silencing.

In view of the above, of course any suggestion that these boards need even more moderation and policing than the already-excessive proportion they currently get is going to be met with a degree of scepticism; as is any protestation that women should simply accept what we are told without room for debate or questioning.

Quite. And yes I am sceptical about this thread, and several of its posters. Sorry.

Where is the op? , was this thread started to start an almighty bunfight?

My misunderstanding then. I thought (wrongly) that these posters we’re making a point. Apologies.

I'm particularly bemused by the use of "right-wing" as a slur. Being socially and/or economically conservative are valid, mainstream positions held by a rather large proportion of the population in western countries. Just as valid as being "left-wing", ie socially and/or economically progressive.

It's a rather lazy criticism to denounce some-one as right-wing because half the population will think - well so I am I, so what? Describing someone as intolerant or authoritarian is likely to be more accurate - and these characteristics are no more likely to be found on the "right" as they are the "left".

It is.

I am trying to sort out the truth of all the posts. It is what I need to do to make sense of it all - hence my posting style which really pisses some people off. But ultimately, I am after the truth amongst a whole heap of fuckwittery. Because sometimes in posts is a truth and a whole heap of dishonest tactics and misrepresentations (deliberate or not) and it plays on my mind until I sort out what is fact and what is not.

I am merely trying to assure you that you are not alone.

I asked for clarification as I was having a hard time following what that poster was trying to say. It seemed to me they were banging out a number of posts quickly without fully addressing the points. Some of the language wasn’t clear at all, but that one was the most egregious, hence the “did you really mean to say that”. I didn’t have a hidden meaning behind the question.

and?

Did Libsoftiktok lie about what had happened at the hospital?

Did Libsoftiktok post any words that encouraged others to send death threats or bomb threats, or did those people acting horrendously do that based on their own lack of respect for others and their inability to communicate as a rational adult?

Do you then hold every other media creator to the exact same standard that you have attempted to display here today? If so, how do you get by in life knowing that any news source needs to take responsibility and only ever report on something that cannot be used by a person to issue death threats and bomb threats? I mean, a new article about a rise in taxes could result in that activity?

Or is it just people you disagree with that you hold to that standard?

I believe it was meant to Jeff.

"I'm not going to trawl through Twitter to find them for you."

Amazing what a search engine can do these days.

I really recommend that you use it to look at the original sources of information in the future.

There’s a lot of obfuscation.

I know racism is an issue across the board on this site. I’ve seen it and taken issue with it myself in the past, and got excoriated by a small cluster of posters on those threads for doing so. Their objections were more or less along the line that no racism exists here anywhere, ever. This is obviously and patently untrue.

But I’m at a loss to glean the particular basis of the hostility toward PoC referred to in this thread. Is it language being used problematically; is discussion of surrogacy really directly analogous to racism because its transactional basis had been acknowledged; is the discussion of a conflict of rights between sex and gender racist because it excludes WoC specifically, and if so on what basis does that exclusion operate? What can site members do – aside from simply reporting – to address these problems?

The fuzziness surrounding a lot of posts in this thread makes it difficult to see past those grievances to actual, workable solutions. It’s not helped by some posters responding to points they allege have been made by previous posters, who never actually made them in the first place.

Not surprising that those who've attempted to engage are discombobulated. Me too. Some clarity would be welcome.

I looked yesterday. And couldn't find them. Hence asking.

Did you screenshot them at the time you saw them?

I point blank refuse to be part of a hate movement. It's completely shameful what this FWR board has become

I found this statement to be breathtakingly offensive. Absolutely amazingly offensive and derogatory. Smearing the whole of FWR as a ‘hate movement’. The accusations have gone from racism to this… really?

A group of women trying to protect single sex spaces, advocating for vulnerable and underrepresented women in prisons, in sport, in refuges? Trying to safeguard young vulnerable girls? Really? They are a hate group? Jesus. It’s as though a parallel FWR board exists.

The desperation and anger to close the board is very apparent.

All those examples of transphobia listed by @CandlelightGlow at 1259 would benefit from being validated by concrete examples. I would agree that those are examples of transphobia, but do not agree that those claims characterise discussions on FWR.

Those are all very sweeping claims eg not wanting trans people in society. I don’t recognise that at all on the FWR threads where, as illustrated here, posters go out of their way to be nuanced, contextual and conditional.