Active discussions

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

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

The departure of dittany

1002 replies

Pan · 15/09/2011 21:20

I only know that she has left, and in her post she didn't say much as to why, though some people can speculate and imagine why.

Quite a few days ago (last weekend I think) there were threads that pinpointed the lack of consideration that MNHQ has toward the sort of trolls that infest the FS section from time to time - different in nature and purpose to your average troll that infects MN from time to time.

It may well be that d. is in contact with regular posters whom she trusts. I don't know.

What I do know is that d. was a fabulous source of invigoration and illumination to a lot of posters, myself included, though we didn't always agree with her.

I would like a review from MNHQ of their current "talk guidlines" policy, in order that the FS is provided with a consideration that recognises the particular vulnerability that it experiences.

D. left for her own reasons - but this presents itself as a sort of 'test case' for MN to respond sensitively.

Would anyone agree and post here in support of this?

OP posts:
LeBOF · 17/09/2011 17:47

Whoops! And there she goes Sad

LRDTheFeministDragon · 17/09/2011 17:47

I think Wamster is trying to show what it feels like for male posters when their posts are discounted. This would work very cleverly, except for the fact that Pan's posts could have been written by any of us and do not smack of entitlement. Which kind of destroys that argument.

swallowedAfly · 17/09/2011 17:47

can i post now or am i still disappearing? Confused

swallowedAfly · 17/09/2011 17:49

the other odd thing is that pan is saying what a lot of us are saying and yet seems to be being singled out by wamster. how strange!

AnyFucker · 17/09/2011 17:49

oh heck

isn't there a cut off from where you wanted all your posts to disappear ? Confused

swallowedAfly · 17/09/2011 18:04

i said as of yesterday so that today's at least would still stand but it doesn't matter.

MNHQ
RowanMumsnet · 17/09/2011 18:33

Sorry SAF Blush - it's all or nothing up until the point that the deletions are made, I'm afraid. Should have made that clear - apologies.

swallowedAfly · 17/09/2011 18:36

no worries. thank you.

HereBeBolloX · 18/09/2011 23:04

Wamster's sudden conversion to the idea thta male entitlement is a Bad Thing, having so assiduously defending the parading of it by trolls on other threads, would be touching if s/he didn't appear to believe that the definition of male entitlement is men saying anything anywhere.

Does anyone here think that? IME only anti-feminists who have a rabid belief that feminists are man haters, make the mistake of thinking that anything a man ever says, however reasonable, would be dismissed as "entitled" by female feminists.

It would be funny if we weren't all such humourless feminists who couldn't see the joke.

Original poster
Pan · 18/09/2011 23:43

of course HerB - it's a bit bollocks, and of course anything I said could have been said by a whole host of people. Wamsters argument isn't with me, or my gender, really - it's the notion of active, effective feminism, I think. My gender was just a soft target to work her resistant idea.

OP posts:
IWouldNotCouldNotWithAGoat · 21/09/2011 04:51

I am sorry that anybody feels they have to leave Mumsnet

But I appear to be in a minority. I found dittany's posts singularly arrogant and generally pretty obnoxious. She seemed determined to close down debate if anyone failed to toe the Feminism 101 line.

Just my opinion.

swallowedAfly · 21/09/2011 07:14

we're generally aiming above 101 actually. 101 is short hand for the basic principles and tenets such as one would learn in a first semester course as a simple intro. not sure why that would be a line to be toed? feminist discussion is pretty impossible when people don't even accept the absolute basics and so conversation has to keep degrading to arguing over the most simple and accepted points.

i think maybe your statement is confused.

Beachcomber · 21/09/2011 07:36

Yes, dittany would get pretty frustrated by posters who would claim to be feminists whilst propping up misogyny or disagreeing with basic tenets of feminism (in a feminist section!).

Not saying you did this IWouldNot, but I did see it a lot.

It is hard to step out of mainstream thinking and apply feminist analysis. Well, I think it is anyway. I think it is a shame that that fact isn't discussed a bit more because it could help stop discussions from becoming adversarial.

Lots of people seem a bit confused about what feminism is and then take the hump when it is pointed out to them that certain views are not consistent with feminist values.

I think patriarchy has done a brilliant 'divide and conquer' job by spreading the idea that feminism is women doing what they want and making choices. So then any women who has absorbed this idea, will be in conflict with women who have explored feminism in a bit more depth. Unfortunately it works - we see it here all the time.

IWouldNotCouldNotWithAGoat · 21/09/2011 08:14

My point was more that Feminism 101 is the 'Women's Studies' strain of feminism which might be considered by some to be fairly extreme. eg dittany's assertion that men should not go on anti-rape marches because men are statistically more likely to be rapists. Apologies for confusion.
Smile

swallowedAfly · 21/09/2011 08:26

women's studies extreme? Confused

i think that point makes sense doesn't it? i'd say she was trying to say that it's all very well for women to march but it is men who need the real sea change given that it's men who rape women. i'd imagine she was saying good, decent men need to speak up against rape.

swallowedAfly · 21/09/2011 08:27

rapists may listen better to men protesting their behaviour than women given they don't really see women as real human beings or have respect for their wishes (otherwise they wouldn't be able to rape them).

UsingMainlySpoons · 21/09/2011 08:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ChristinedePizan · 21/09/2011 08:34

I am on another site and the hide poster option works really well there. They don't delete posts either which means that offensive stuff stays but you also get all the challenge. If it turns into too much of a bunfight, the whole thing goes in the bin.

One of the things that is so frustrating about deleting individual posts is that each one individually may not seem a big deal. It's the cumulative effect that's so damaging. And MNHQ cannot possibly read each and every thread so they can't see it

Beachcomber · 21/09/2011 08:42

I'm afraid I don't really understand then. Perhaps we mean different things by feminism 101.

I tend to use the term to mean an exploration of the basic tenets of feminism; for example we live in a male dominated society and men as a group benefit from male privilege. Neither of these notions are extreme and it is pretty well impossible to have a discussion from a feminist perspective unless one includes these principals in one's thought process.

I don't think the idea that men are not welcomed to some anti-rape/rape awareness marches is extreme. On marches such as these, there will be women who do not wish to be around men in that particular context and moment of vulnerability. (Not all rape marches make this request of men of course).

I would have thought that men who genuinely care about rape issues would understand that their place is not always right alongside women, but that they can be hugely supportive and helpful elsewhere. Empathy and respect of boundaries being key here.

Personally I agree with the notion that men and men only can stop rape happening - that being because in the vast vast majority of cases, it is men who are raping. If they would just stop doing it the problem would disappear.

swallowedAfly · 21/09/2011 08:59

oh! should NOT go on marches. sorry i totally misread that. my response was in thinking you were saying it was ridiculous for men to march against rape. i would love it if men organised anti rape action and would cheer them on. i can however understand totally having women only marches if that's what organisers and participants want them to be.

i'm thinking men should organise action too rather than see it as whether they are allowed to take part in women's events. sadly they don't seem much inclined to tackle this problem even though it is them that rapists give a bad name to and their wives, daughters, sisters, colleagues etc that they rape.

Beachcomber · 21/09/2011 12:44

I've just remembered a bit more about you IWouldNot - your name does stand out!

You have been pretty adversarial yourself on the feminist section IIRC, so your opinion of dittany is hardly a surprise.

I think it is a bit shoddy really to make posts which attack her when she isn't here to defend herself - the point of the thread was not to discuss dittany personally anyway.

The phrase put the boot in comes to mind yet again.

scottishmummy · 21/09/2011 18:54

fem topics are not a feminist section,and mnhq are the moderators
its a topic about feminism not a feminist section or baord. i dont particularly recall dittanty psors but i do recall a very much cant say that here an
caacophony of troll,mra,whar about enz to any pov not liked

and in a way baech pst of has hit nail on the head
"Yes, dittany would get pretty frustrated by posters who would claim to be feminists whilst propping up misogyny or disagreeing with basic tenets of feminism (in a feminist section!)"

ChristinedePizan · 21/09/2011 19:01

What do you mean scottishmummy, the topics aren't a section? They are - there are three topics within it.

I don't see why feminism is singled out as fair play for rubbishing. Like me going into the doghouse and posting 'dogs are shit' all over it. Or in the SN section extolling the virtues of euthanasia for the disabled.

How fucking sad that some people think that it's acceptable to troll one small section of MN because they don't agree with it. Threatened much?

scottishmummy · 21/09/2011 19:03

incomplete post
and this differentiation about what can be said,what dittanty or others chose to challenge was a lot of source of contention on fem topics. a cacophony of people too ready to name call and deride others deemed not feminsit enough or to be "propping up misogyny" or disagreeing with basic tenets of feminism (in a feminist section!).

the moderators are mnhq,not other posters

and i did participate in a post were someone claimed felt let down and got at by mnhq,failure to treat fem topics as safe space.imo,this is a bitty got at and unfounded

what would be good is a range of posters and a decrease in what about the menz,and a robust lively debate

imo,it is not pertinent for anyone to opine whether anyone is feminist enough knowledge debate and difference yes but no ore cant say that here

scottishmummy · 21/09/2011 19:10

is "threatened much?" a direct comment to me? i have never trolled or changed name on mn. i presume if it is you a troll slur can substantiate with examples...

i have however been called troll etc plenty on fem topics

do peruse some previous threads about how othres find fem topics harsh also.it has come up numerous times

i post here planrty and will contine to do so
regardless of whether anyione thinks i prop up patriarchy or am a troll

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.