Coping with Trolls and Derailers

[ElephantsAndMiasmas]

There have been some very persistent posters on here recently - some of them funny (unintentionally), and some of them not - dragging threads off track so we have to go back and explain something over and over again. I'm all for a lively debate, but there always comes a point when you realise that they are not listening at all, are on a blatant wind-up mission, or are just insulting posters with no intention of debating the original issues.

If we don't want this to happen, and bearing in mind that some people spot the pattern quicker than others, I was going to suggest that we have something like a warning word/phrase that could alert other posters to the fact that they are wasting their time. What do you think? Is this a stupid idea?

Saying "ah, a troll" just adds fuel to the fire you see. But if you were to say "I blame Princess Michael of Kent" or something, and then everyone disappears...well it might work?

It is interesting how threatened RL people are by the feminist section of MN, isn't it. I mean we're all here by default of the the fact we're mums, but they actually come on here because they feel threatened by our opinions.

Yes, Faludi mentions this and says they up the antse when the women's movement appears to be making inroads in some way.

I get totally sucked in. NO willpower at all. I've just accepted that's part of my personality.

But bring it on, I say. We always win anyway.

Actually, just realized not everyone on here are mums, and I wasn't actually when I joined . BUt I meant that normal people wouldn't join a site called mumsnet spoiling for a fight, and coming on specifically to fight.

That's very good to hear, SGM and sprogger. I would hate people to be scared off because of the idiots.

I don't mind debating them, and every now and then I get an actual concession from them (including on the fosh thread!) before they remember I'm female and go back to trying to dismiss me. I don't like when it totally derails the original conversation, but to be honest we don't need outside trolls for that; there was a thread recently which turned into people arguing with daftpunk because she came in and said, apropros of nothing, that men were demonstrably superior to women. And everyone stopped what they were talking about to rebut that.

SO I guess it's just an individual choice to decide at what level you're going to bother rebutting. I'll spend a lot of energy arguing subjectivity and privilege. I'll engage women who think they're doing the responsible thing by teaching their daughters that rape can be avoided by their behaviour. I am not going to bother arguing Do Women Actually Just Suck? Discuss.

There are trolls on every forum on the internet.
I know of one who is constantly banned from a specific forum - at least once a day, but still comes back with the same.
He can be spotted very easily, because his posts are usually aimed at the same posters who have committed the crime of disagreeing with him.
He claims to post on 29 other forums.
He isn't one of the funny ones - he appears harmless sometimes, but, in effect, is very spiteful.
Some advise that trolls should be ignored, but he is actually one of the few whom it's impossible to ignore. He just ups the anti.
He posts here under a female name.

I think it's just trying to know where to draw the line. I think on the Mad.Thread. the problem is when people address the trolls. You can talk about them if you must but don't respond to them, that's what I'm trying to do anyway. They hate that.

I know what you mean about talking about them and not to them.
It really pisses them off when you don't address them.
Some of them appear very plausible at first and manage to rack up a few posts and get dialogue going and then strike.
Then it can be difficult to shake them off.

It's true thay they just want a reaction. You can hear the delight when someone responds to some of their crap "Oh, [poster]"!

It seems terribly rude to talk about someone but not to them. But it kind of works.

Also don't show you're offended. They're insulting you for a reason. Mind you it's hard to draw the line as some posters/trolls start off normal (as you have said) and then start in with something personal and rude - it's hard not to try to get them to backtrack (as you would with a normal person) at least once.

The other thing that I find interesting about the trolls on the feminist threads specifically, and also the ones that appeared on the Facebook/Pepsi porn threads, is that they're often American.

Several of the FOSH admitted they were overseasian, and because I do the night shift (in Australia) I'm often the only one left talking to them if I choose to.

So, what, is there an organised cabal of American misogynists, who picket sites even if they're English, or what? Do UK men not bother? It seems odd.

(It's interesting watching how long it takes for someone to stop talking to themselves, when talked around, isn't it?)

It seems to me that although America used to be more egalitarian than the UK (more women's universities etc), that has really switched around. You seem to get American politicians (right wing ones, of which there are loads of course) coming out with some eye-watering stuff. Def seems more anti-choice as well. Not sure why this should be though. Can't just be the religious side surely? (though didn't know whether to rofl or feel sorry for the poster who assumed that the biblical reference would have us all quaking)

Ah, you're talking about the Overton window, one of my favourite concepts.

I don't even need to click on that link - it's going to be P Robertson talking about how feminism is a lesbian cult designed to promote witches and destroy the family or whatever it is, right? i've always wanted that on a t-shirt.

tell me more about this window?

"people get away with substantially less overt sexism"?

re American, well, there's more of them for a start.

THen they've got all those right wing Christian fundamentalists

Not sure what exactly it is but American feminists have always had big problems European feminists haven't had (that whole scary 1950s deal).
European feminism is more socialist on the whole, concerned with daycare etc, and American feminism is more about making inroads in the public sphere, law, finance etc.

I have never fallen for the myth that the US is friendlier for women.

Oooh, I'm glad you asked.

It describes a 'window' in public opinion, which shifts around. Ideas range from unthinkable through acceptable to accepted/policy. Unthinkable ideas are unthinkable, and so not worth debating. I suppose this is like that feminism quote above - "first they dismiss us..."- so by the time they bother fighting us, we're closer to being Accepted Policy, right?

There is a concept of moving the window, such as deliberately promoting ideas even less acceptable than the previous "outer fringe" ideas, with the intention of making the current fringe ideas acceptable by comparison

So, like, we're all discussing social policy around rape prevention programs. Debate is about whether to change offender behaviour (feminist perspective) or potential-victim-behaviour (everyone else perspective), short skirts, minicabs, blah blah, that's the Overton window.

And then someone comes along and says "I think most of the time it's made up, women want sex and then change their mind" and AS SOON as people start putting their energies into disproving this, the Window has shifted. All of a sudden, the idea that you don't need rape prevention programs but rather rape-accuser-prevention programs becomes part of the window. And because the window is always about the same size, it means that an idea on the other side - usually, the idea that we should focus on the rapists - gets edged out. The new window is "should we police female behaviour to stop accusations, or police female behaviour to stop them being vulnerable".

Again, I'm reminded of that thread recently, where everyone was debating something sensible (no idea what, maybe it was the how has feminism improved your life thread) and daftpunk came along and said, literally, that men were demonstrably clever and superior to women. And people debated this, like it was worth debating! All of a sudden the Window included that idea.

gosh, tortoise, you are quite clever aintcha ?

< unworthy >

< tries to put an intellectual slant on her "twats will always be twats" theory >

I do think the dominance of religion in America (illustrated by the fact that English politicians have to leave religion at the door if they want to be taken seriously but American politicians can't be without it to be taken seriously) is why they seem to be more sexist than in the UK. IMO the bible is sexist, they're just regurgitating that.