In light of MNHQ's recent statement that the feminism section is in fact not a feminism section but a section 'about' feminism, perhaps we need to be warning people about this up front?

[Beachcomber]

I'm of the opinion that it needs to made clear that whilst the title may be 'feminism/women's rights', this section is quite different to other boards that deal with feminism/women's rights.

It isn't fair to mislead - lots of posters expect the section to be a place where feminist views can be freely explored without fear of posters' mental health being questioned, and a zone where misogyny is unwelcome. In reality, pretty much anything goes here and whilst it is, of course, MNHQ's prerogative to run their site as they see fit, some sort of disclaimer about the section seems only fair in order to forewarn posters (especially posters looking for support or exploration of sensitive issues).

Perhaps it would be an idea for there to be a header at the top of the section stating MNHQ's position?

All suggestions welcomed .

SwallowedAFly, are you implying that I've come from an MRA board? Because I think I'm the only fwr non-reg who has joined this thread recently. You're very wrong if so - lots of you know me well under my previous MN name.

I have clicked on some of the links. They look like obnoxious, name-calling arses to me, but that's it. I think (tho it hasn't happened to me) that I could just discount abuse directed at me on there.

Haven't seen anything that implied a threat, but that doesn't mean they're not there - may have missed those ones.

have just remembered who LW is. definitely not a troll. in with the bricks, more like.

I'm really glad to see the about-turn in views - I worried posting those links was scary but I'm glad I did now.

You see, it's not just feminists of various stripes disagreeing, or established posters being mean to newbies, or roughly equal numbers of posters on either side of an ideology, each side wanting a voice - it's a nasty, vicious little group of trolls who have cared enough to post this stuff off MN. And it is horrible stuff on all three sites I've seen. Maybe, I don't know, 30-50 people involved (tops?). But still scary, and really deserving of bans when they come on here.

Oh my goodness people can anyone really be upset by a forum of 12 members? Who make silly comments about Lesbians a pubic hair as if they've never had oral sex in their lives?

Who cares if they're writing your names, MN names, on their piss poor website with dismal graphics, dreadful content and pointless traffic....sorry not pointless non existent. These boys may as well write their views on their homework diaries and then at least their mothers would read it, making it more read than it is right now.

Anyone on this earth who talks about 'wicked' women, well one, who made up a rape story and makes no reference at all to the vast numbers of rape victims are wankers.

The question is why these boys feel so threatened by feminism, in whatever form, even if Mumsnet was a haven for man hating (which it's not) why is that so threatening to anyone? I'm not sure I understand.

Well, absolutely LRD (re yr post of 10:06). My beef has only been with the idea of FWR having distinctive posting guidelines or moderation (and with associated ideas and practices around conversations between dissenting people posting in good faith). Of course there are trollish wankers that need dealing with under the existing sitewide rules. If that sometimes hasn't been done effectively I guess it is because moderating the site has become vastly more difficult as it has grown so quickly (and presumably because stalking across sites is a more difficult thing to investigate than behaviour solely on MN.

sure. and if they come on and admit that they are the same person, then i'm confident HQ would take that line. and then they would just all make sure never to use names that linked them to other sites in future while continuing to have their wierdo fun at our expense.

(Just to clarify, I haven't made any about turn)

posie - I brought it up because HelenMN and SGM were discussing whether there is a legal issue - given our posts are property of MN and not to be reproduced. That was the context.

I was surprised (and sad, for AF) at the shock, since I've known about these people for a while, and they've been linked to before, and I though people knew.

But why are they threatening? Well, would you be threatened by someone - a stranger - heard talking about you in the pub? Would it be creepy? If so, it's creepy here. Don't make the mistake of thinking we're all untraceable on here so long as we're careful, so long as we don't post personal information. That only limits how easy we are to find.

I'm sure I'd find plenty of convinced criminals equally sad, pathetic and childish. Doesn't mean they're not dangerous or nasty.

I don't know whether to be concerned or gobsmacked by the cavalier attitude to cyber stalking and verbal abuse shown here.

You are on there too Posie. I'm glad it doesn't bother you though.

Re 'what can be done'. It's about kultcha innit.

IMO MNHQ have, through their various clarifications, created a culture where it's OK to post misogynistic things. They have said, as has been chirped back, that all views are welcome. Which as SAF has highlighted, is what the people who want to bring this board down were aiming at. We all know everyone can't be banned all the time, and that people will crop up. But a culture has been created now where that is OK and tolerated. That's what needs to change, and can only be done by MNHQ clarifying that their spectrum does not include people wanting to get rid of feminism, and that they are broadly supportive of women's rights. The clarifications thus far do not do this, and whilst this might be considered to be obvious due to the nature of the forum, that is not how it is being interpreted and used.

And re the perceived difficulty re including 'sexism', 'misogyny' solves that.

Well, you're agreeing with me and it's good, anyhow. I assumed you disagreed before.

Just to clarify I'm not saying that's all that needs to be done, but in terms of all the 'it's impossible', 'there is no solution' stuff, that is my take on that.

me neither.

of course my position is that i don't know what's to be done. i wouldn't be that relaxed about being targeted even by a site with 12 people on it (although i think that was on the thread rather than entire membership?) just because a few nasty people can do a lot of damage should they choose to.

I think most people are pretty shocked actually Beachcomber judging from most of the posts on here.

Seriously though, they are a forum of 12. I'm not sure how I'd feel, they seem pretty pathetic little boys, I'm sure they are sappy vanilla weirdos.

Posie, do you want links to the other forums, or do you just think 12 people never hurt anyone?

i think the idea that suddenly HQ aren't feminists is just utterly ridiculous. whether they find the idea of paying for staff 24/7 to moderate the boards for misogyny, and the inevitable debates over what that means on here etc etc etc might be more relevant.

LRD, we agree on some matters and not on others. Isn't that always the way?

But Aitch if their "weirdo fun" breaks site guidelines it will be thrown off. If it doesn't, I don't know how any new guidelines can stop people using unconnected names to slate FM feminists on other sites, no matter how extremely nasty and frightening it undoubtedly is. I don't dispiute of course that it is a serious problem.

We have already been told on here that it would be easy to find any one of us.

Lovely stuff.

I'm not surprised that AF wants to be careful with regards to her job. I'm in a similar position - can't elaborate for reasons I'm sure most of you can understand.

It may be the way, but it'd have been nice if you'd bothered to admit it earlier. If that sounds hostile, sorry, it is how I feel.

someone told you that as a threat? that would be bannable, imo.

and yes, catalilie re current rules but at the same time, we should be able to discuss feminism without some arsehole pulling the old 'women who are raped are asking for it' crap. i mean, this bit of the board is being targeted in an unusual way, it seems.

Gah there a couple of big fallacies here - eg. do you think 12 ppl never hurt anyone/the convicted crims thing.
It's just not a productive way to communicate.

That's not a fallacy LW.

I know the official line seems to be "turn the other cheek," but someone I know in RL was followed around a small social networking site by 2 or 3 people who had been banned, but kept coming back with false profiles. They then set up a "hate group" on Bookface, posting c & p's and similar stuff to what's on Misandry 101. Okay, that was annoying, but could be dismissed as just silly tittle tattle.

Until one of the "hate group" managed to piece things together from cyberspace, found the real name and personal details of their victim, found out their employer, and contacted them with allegations that the guy was involved in selling drugs. His job involves working with children and vulnerable adults, so the employers had to take it seriously and launched an investigation. He was cleared completely, but it was a hairy few months for him and his wife. His accusors? Still spewing filth in the Bookface hate group, still turning up with false profiles on the original social networking site, although their victim left there years ago. Still looking for new victims.

Knowing about this guy's experience, I can understand why folks aren't best pleased with "persistent, provocative derailers" stalking them round the web.

i think catalilie has posted in a moderate fashion throughout, don't know why you'd be feeling hostile towards her lrd.