Concerns about racism

[PandoraSocks]

Hi there Mumsnet HQ

Many of us are concerned about the uptick of hatred, xenophobia and racism on the site over the past couple of weeks. Most of the bigotry is focused on asylum seekers. MNHQ will of course delete racism etc. if reported, but this has gone way beyond a few hateful posts.

Links below to three examples of threads which have descended into real nastiness.

Cheers.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/in_the_news/5385273-civil-unrest-whats-really-going-on?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5385914-do-you-believe-there-will-be-a-civil-war?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5386073-to-be-so-fed-up-amd-disheartened-with-all-the-xenophobia?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

‘Hysterical’… ‘dramatic’… ‘racist’…

"Sealioning is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("i'm just trying to have a debate") and feigning ignorance of the subject matter...so that when the target is eventually provoked into an angry response, the sealioner can act as the aggrieved party, and the target can presented as closed minded and unreasonable. "

I didn’t say that, did I?

And I know you’re a woman, hence your response to me using the word ‘hysterical'

I don't know why anyone is engaging with that poster at all.

Nobody is asking for posts to be shut down because they disagree with them. Please keep up.

Of course a public opinion forum shouldn't be policed

MNHQ mods might disagree 😊

And the OP gave you a response last night

You didn't like the reply you got so keep on and on asking the same question again and again as tho' that will give you the answer you want

No wonder PP are posting recipes to drown out your nagging

Me too, and I would also like the proportions of that alternative flapjack recipe. Those sound like tasty healthy snacks.

It is policed now. It’s not a matter of opinion.

and it shouldn't be.

I don’t intend to. They’re currently sealioning me (thank you for that @Notonthestairs) elsewhere.

We have laws against hate speech and incitement. We do not have unconditional free speech in the UK.

Then MN - which has been moderated since the day it started - clearly isn’t for you.

Ah - Legally “isms” like racism do include any negative generalisations based on a protected characteristic . Every day a school day eh!

yes we can discuss problems but it needs to be done carefully with precision and without emotion or prejudice

you need evidence that helps us understand what type of men are significantly more abusive of women

having some attacks by immigrants isn’t enough - you need to show a statistically significant and easily measured notable increase in the rate of attacks compared to other groups of men. you must normalise for things like poverty and education levels ( there may be more factors in sexual abuse that need to included but that’s a good starting point )

and you need to narrow this down - attack rates by nationality might be reasonable - have you the analysis to hand as you seem quite interested in this topic and you imply that you have facts rather than just an emotive response ?

by working with data and facts and removing the emotion you can start to have a discussion about the potential problems

Well take that up with MNHQ. Personally I am glad there are mods. Though I wouldn't want their job.

Dear authority, please don’t allow free speech on your site. My world view is not built on evidence or my own experience and it’s hard to debate when challenged with evidence or people’s real experiences.

having some attacks by immigrants isn’t enough - you need to show a statistically significant and easily measured notable increase in the rate of attacks compared to other groups of men.

This data has not being reliably collected by any country but is allegedly now being done so. Crude studies based on the only available information suggests this is the case.

Equally I’m sure you’ve noticed the men come from terrifyingly misogynistic countries. Are you really not able to say that generally speaking men in highly misogynistic countries are more likely to be misogynistic? Otherwise who is abusing or supporting the abuse of the women?

We do have freedom of speech in the UK, but it comes with certain responsibilities:

What does the law say about freedom of speech?

The right to freedom of speech is protected under common law in the UK. It is also guaranteed under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), where “everyone has the right to freedom of expression”. This right is incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998, where the HRA requires the courts to interpret legislation in a way which is compatible with the Article 10 ECHR right so far as it is possible to do so.

Under the Article 10 right, freedom of expression includes the right “to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority”. This means that both the public and the press are able to share what they think, feel and believe without censorship, even where the expression of their views may shock, disturb or offend the deeply-held beliefs of others.

This is not, however, an absolute right. It carries with it duties and responsibilities, and can be “subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties”. Still, any limitations on the right to free speech must be both “prescribed by law” and “necessary in a democratic society”. These limitations must also be proportionate.

Subject to these conditions, Article 10 goes on to specify the limited circumstances in which the right to free speech can be legitimately curtailed. These include where it is in the interests of national security or public safety; for the prevention of crime and disorder; for the prevention of disclosure of information received in confidence; for the protection of health or morals; for the protection of the rights and reputation of others; as well as for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

From: https://www.lawble.co.uk/freedom-of-speech/

She didn’t give a reply, nobody ever does. They waffle in an indirect or irrelevant manner then say they’ve responded.

It’s also worth pointing out that Mumsnet is a limited company, so it’s up to them to decide what they believe to be acceptable when it comes to our posts.

I know- and we shouldn't. Anyone should be allowed to say what they want to. This leads to proper discourse and then issues are addressed, racists are shouted down, etc., rather than the growth of the 'silent majority' which is what is happening now. Hearing and understanding people opinions leads to discussion and resolution.

She did reply - she rightly said ask MNHQ - perhaps you missed it

Maybe go back and have another look

She started the thread so I thought her perception was the relevant one

I don’t think people should be able to say ‘whatever they want’. Do you think somebody should be able to phone you up at 3am and threaten to kill you? Do you think somebody should urge a suicidal person on a bridge to jump? Etc.

in short- yes.