The departure of dittany

[Pan]

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?

Beachcomber - I don't think it is normal feminist views that have led to some people being told they sound unhinged and under the influence of a past trauma.

Exactly - the next time someone says hey can we stop with the irrelevant and offensive rape myths on this thread about rape (in a section about feminism), we can refer them to the header which makes it clear that rape myths are welcomed to the discussion.

My only problem is that I don't know what a section about feminism is. You see that just sounds really contradictory and pointless to me.

What exactly does it mean?

Stop eating yourselves. It's madness.

As you all know, I spent ages campaigning for kindness to all (a campaign seen, as we also know, as undermining and attacking), but ultimately the divide seems clear.

There is a core group of posters who feel that the Fem Section is FOR fems and should therefore operate solely under that aegis (with some lack of clarity as to what exactly constitutes the acceptable Fem Line), and then there are other posters who are bemused when they wander in, express an opinion and are berated for not respecting the sistas and the Fem Line.

Then, of course, there are the trolls but they are a class apart.

Why not have a closed group, here or elsewhere (don't know if it's poss on MN) for those who want to operate solely on their agreed Fem Line?

The rest carry on on th eopen forum?

Wouldn't that stop the conflict?

"It's not real"

Actually it is.

Lots of people know each other, they meet up, there are real people at the end of these keyboards. I even believe you exist SM.

We're real people, with real feelings, real experience and real arguments.

People are real enough to have stalked and been stalked. We are so real, that politicians on election trails want to come and talk to us. It is bizarre to claim this is not a real space with real people.

Tautological, surely?

mn as real as you allow it to be
if you arent circumspect, get too emotionally involved or hold mumsnet grudges and gripes,then thats your boundaries issue

right. So people who have been stalked, have boundaries issues.

Just so we know.

working mums atttract a hard core of biddulph tambourines and oj fans
this habitual feeling of being got at on fem topics its paranoiac
mn everyone can be fair game,mil,formula feeders,bugaboo prams

lose the got at attitude ladies

I nearly started an AIBU about that the other day (and may yet). I am not an internet sprite nor yet words on a screen. I am a living, breathing human being and I have spent some of my actual time typing out those words because I have thought about them and feel I have something to contribute (even if it's something dead silly, which it often is). I had enough of being regarded as a cypher by XH. Damned if I'll be dismissed as not real by the entire internet.

Not getting too emotionally involved nor holding grudges is good advice though.

Hully - Why can't that core group of feminists find themselves a hardcore feminist website where they won't risk seeing a non-hardcore viewpoint? It seems strange for any group to ask MN to create a section only for themselves, where other MNers will not be allowed unless they are vetted and checked by this core group. Like a Moldies corner.

SM didn't say that TBX...you're playing push penny with semantics.

And you're generalising.

Really - I have been told that I am a liar, insane, damaged by the men in my life, an extremist, etc for doing stuff like discussing manifestations of male entitlement, being against porn and not finding bikini car washes a laugh a fucking minute.

Hardly 'abnormal' views for a feminist.

Anyway I think it would be nice if posters could discuss some if the less mainstream aspects of feminist thinking without having their mental health questioned. Calling someone insane because their argument is beyond your comfort zone and/or level of understanding is pathetic behaviour. I don't like to encourage it myself.

dont paraphrase erroneously,if anyone needs a hide button,then Yes they need to set some boundaries to protect selves and not let online bibble babble irk so much.by all means use a fantasy hide function of you cannot tolerate an unknown,unseen,unmet other

SM isn't interested in addressing that SWC. Or the point about whether people who go on those sections to do those things are unhinged.

She just wants to turn the conversation, to the reaction of the regulars on those sections, in order to turn the focus away from the behaviour of the gadflies and trolls.

Wonder why that might be?

It's not about being hardcore CoteDAzur. Feminists disagreeing, great stuff.

Cote - I think there is a genuine fundamental disagreement about what the section means.

I can see both sides, but mostly I think the madness has to stop and a practical solution has to be found.

Or does everyone just really like arguing?!

dont be presumptious or bumptious to speak for me TBX
makes you look foolish when youre wrong

arf @ bumptious

Oh sorry SM, seeing as how you have not addressed the points about the behaviour of the posters who would be unhinged, if they constantly told chicken keepers that they were wasting their time with worm-eating dinosaur-descendents, told lone parents that marriage is really important, told stepmothers that they are fools to take up with other women's leftovers, told home educators that they are idiots for not sending their DC's to school, etc., I thought you weren't interested in addressing that behaviour?

Are you then? I'm sure we'd all be interested to know what you think might motivate someone to behave in this way. I'm more interested in that behaviour, than I am in the reaction of the regulars in these sections to that behaviour. I got the impression that your interest is the other way round, but of course I don't wish to speak for you. So please, do tell, I'd really like to know what you think of such behaviour. I think it's attention-seeking, needy and toolish. What do you think?

Beachcomber - Fwiw, I don't think any of those things about you and I have not seen you being called those things. Then again, I don't come to the Feminist section often because I find myself irritated by some bizarre views portrayed as "Feminism".

If this is now to be a section where people of all points of view can discuss subjects about women & women's rights, I would be glad to come back more often.