when you engage with the trolls

[MitchiestInge]

. . . is it a personal thing (actually engaging emotionally) or are you communicating with a wider, more silent audience or are there other motivations?

I can't work out why more people don't ignore them, but every now and then the exchanges are unintentionally funny or interesting - although mostly it gets very dull very quickly. Wondering what's in it for them too.

Well, of course Dittany, and I agree completely, but MNHQ are not appearing to agree unfortunately.

So I suppose the answer is not to engage with them at all. For example, I won't be responding to any poster who speaks to me like I'm a piece of shit, or who has a victim mentality or is just, frankly, a bit of a turd.

Did you know that some people get off on having people despise them on the internet? I wonder what sort a terrible childhood such people must have had to enjoy being publicly flaggelated day after day. It's sad really.

Anyway.

Feminists with a problem.
Why don't you set up your own closed forum like the Moldies did? They got fed up with MN so fucked off and started their own private club, and one of the reasons they did that was so they had complete control over who joined and the content of the site, & they were never bothered by Trolls again. Or, even easier, set up a facebook group for MN feminists so you can discuss feminist issues in private. As HQ have said, this is an open forum, therefore you will get lots of different opinions and the FS is no exception. I have been shocked at the behaviour of Anyfucker, pan, and Beachcomber, how they are getting away with the constant personal attacks on two posters who aren't doing anything wrong, I just don't know. I'm not too sure what a troll is, but if it's being a trouble making annoying & abusive poster, then those three fit the bill.

Someone searched Bobs posting history and found he only posts on women's issues, so what? I'm sure if you searched Dittany's history you'll find that's all she posts on, but it's ok for her isn't it. Most people stick to a couple of subjects they're intersted in, hardly suspicious behaviour. and why should this section be given special treatment? the posters on here are no more 'vulnerable' than women on the relationships board, mental health, or other boards dealing with emotional issues.

Bob,Ed, I hope you continue to stand your ground and not allow a small minority to bully you off MN. If you do leave they'll only have the claws out for someone else if a few months.

Good Luck.

Somebody's washload is missing a few socks today...

Ooh, no, dittany. Didn't you hear? Feminism acheived everything it's meant to, so misogyny doesn't exist any more...

Anyway. Off to finish housework, will be back later.

Thanks. I think I said earlier than MN has high traffic with it's feminist forum and is moderated by neutrals. If I went to a feminist forum modded by feminists i'd be banned outright

I like the idea of a self-moderated site for feminists. But I dislike the idea of winding up this section of mumsnet because it had been subject to a concerted campaign of MRA trolls, as referred to the other week. This is all quite deliberate.

So like Shirley, I will post around them, or (in dire circumstances, hide threads they have hijacked) until they bugger off. They bloody live the audience.

I'm going to hide this now.

I find it very peculiar that again you, Bob, deduce from my post that I was talking about you!

My, what an inflated sense of your importance to me you appear to have.

I really think we should just ignore their posts. Mind you sooner or later they will mix up which sock is doing the talking which could be mildly entertaining.

Dittany - Thinking that rape victims are liars, that women "trick" men into getting them pregnant, attacking single mothers etc is all misogyny.

Leaving aside the questions of how often it happens, or what attitude one should have to it - Are you seriously suggesting that there are NO WOMEN, ANYWHERE, who EVER trick men into getting them pregnant? And that if a man therefore appears to IMAGINE that this has ever happened, it must be because he's a misogynist?

That's extraordinary. One wonders then what a man is supposed to do when he hears of specific cases among people he knows where this has happened. Not being a misogynist, by your definition, basically requires that he deny the evidence of reality in front of him.

If a man does not want to get a woman pregnant, then he should ensure that his sperm do not meet her eggs. How complicated is that?

But Aye, they is entitled to sex 'n boobiez and that. It is The Law.

I wouldn't trust my DH (who I love and respect) if a new male pill was invented. If some men are so stupid to place all their contraceptive choice with someone else then, frankly, it is hard to muster sympathy for them.

Also, the pill and coil are only 99% effective. 1 woman in 100 will get pregnant within the year so this isn't about tricking men into becoming fathers but a statistical fact. If men don't like the odds they can always have a wank instead.

Well, I read through this thread over the weekend If a Woman Doesn't Have Sex With Her Partner/Husband for 5 Years . . . and can only say that I personally felt an increasing sense of unease reading posts from a contributor who said his wife unilaterally decided to stop having sex many years before but stayed in the marriage. I will stress that this is not a personal attack on the individual. It is my opinion on what I read only.

However, what I did strongly sense from that contributor was that he was someone who wanted to "get off the feminist bus," - stressing that he supported feminism, but picking out any snippets of evidence that he was being personally victimised by feminists, that the views of feminists were extreme, unacceptable and anti-men and that he was being hounded-out. Amass enough evidence that feminism is a bad thing? Well, you've got the excuse to reject the concept, AND say that you were forced to do that, by those nasty feminists! Again, this is my observation from what I read and not a personal attack.

Anti-feminist derailers? I suppose the term could catch on. I think it covers both the "C'mon, give me an excuse to get off the bus" crowd, the general shit stirrers and the MRA crowd. They may all have different motivations for causing a fuss here, but the negative impact of their involvement here is what they have in common, and why I struggle to see why site management are so tolerant of them, but hey ho.