So now Mumsnet deletes posts on the grounds that they're offensive to people with religious beliefs and MRA's

[FastidiaBlueberry]

On the circumcision thread a post of mine was deleted and when I asked mumsnet why, this was the response:

"While it is true that posts we don't tend to delete posts on the grounds of being in poor taste because it would be really hard to draw the line; we do as in this case remove posts that, in our judgement, are simply beyond the pale.

Your post was reported to us and tbh we felt that * (an offensive acronym for MRA's) was beyond the pale tbh, especially when added to the rest of your post which was also incredibly offensive to anyone with religious beliefs."

So basically, we are not allowed to post things which offend people's religious beliefs in conjunction with offending MRA's.

Just thought I'd let you all know. I'm not even annoyed about this, after last week's targeting I think it's obvious that MN really don't want radical feminism represented here.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Was the original thread in FWR then? Which one is it?

[scottishmummy]

What don't you get bubbles,this is atopic about feminism, on mn site
It's not a feminism forum.it's a topic hosted on mn
This was debated extensively while back, mnhq clarified there no feminist section on mn. There are subject topics globally hosted by mn

[SigmundFraude]

I remember that debate SM. MNHQ were very clear about it.

[BubblesOfBliss]

"There was a rad fem topic set up on mnhq after last hoo haa,don't know how that went"

I was going to mention that -

• but didn't because penning in the radical feminists is just offensive. I wonder if MN planned to moderate that any differently or would have taken the 'this isn't a radical feminist forum, it is just a forum to chat about radical feminism' line when the MRA's would start their crap up to hound them out..

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

If anyone had somehow missed that debate, scottish, your shoehorning it into every thread since might have tipped them off, you know.

What's your point? It's not relevant and no-one was thinking about it until you dragged it up, were they?

[BubblesOfBliss]

I don't know how you can be clear about something that doesn't actually make sense

[SigmundFraude]

I don't know how to explain it any other way. It's a section for the 'discussion of feminism'...not for feminists. Ask MNHQ to clarify it.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Everyone knows that. We're just wondering why you think it's a revelation, or how it relates to the actual topic in hand, which bubbles has already explained to you in conveniently small words.

'Perhaps there's an antifeminist bias throughout MN (reflecting the world outside MN) and it only becomes problematic in the FWR section where it is specifically targeted by antifeminist trolls?'

[FastidiaBlueberry]

LRD - it was the circumcision thread.

Rowanmumsnet has just confirmed that it was started by a persistent troll who has been banned several times but always comes back.

He was hoping that we'd all say we were in favour of men being circumcised and in fact for two pins we wouldn't stop at the foreskin, we'd lop the whole penis off and cook it in red wine, but the discussion didn't go as he'd anticipated so he desperately tried to get indignant about us all agreeing with him that we weren't in favour of male circumcision. It was quite funny.

So now he's started another one but I think MN are on to him.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Oh, that's really unpleasant, but thanks for letting me know which thread it was.

So effectively this is about how trolls go on the wind-up. Again.

[scottishmummy]

Bubbles,maybe you missed the last debacle.in nutshell some felt mnhq unfeminist,flounced
Mnhq clarified position,this is topic about feminism.it's nit a feminist forum
Lrd,point has been made on tonight mnhq antifeminist seeing as this is "feminist forum" and should moderate this better. Is it uncomfortable for you to recall last debacle about this topic?

[SigmundFraude]

It's always uncomfortable for them to recall something that didn't go entirely their way.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Not remotely, scottish.

I know you seem to get off on it in some peculiar and faintly unsavoury way, but I just find it boring since it is now, what, a year ago, and you bring it up every time.

Here's a newsflash: sometimes, we discuss how feminist MN is just because we want to discuss how feminist MN is. Sometimes we discuss the moderation because we want to discuss the moderation. Just occasionally, we're not actually doing it so you can bring up your favourite row again.

Why do you care so much?

[FastidiaBlueberry]

It's not uncomfortable for me to recall anything actually SF.

I was expecting MN to come down the way they did.

I never had them down as radical sisters tbh.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Pity, though. I think MN is generally pretty feminist and a good place for women. That's why it gets targeted by MRA trolls so much. They wouldn't bother if they didn't feel threatened by it.

[runningforthebusinheels]

MNHQ have now posted on that circumcision thread that the OP was a previously banned user - they also apologised for being 'slow on the uptake' so I do think Fastidia has a point.

MRA trolls seem to freely move around in FWR - being goady fuckers - and getting feminists deleted or even banned. There was a thread the other week where a longterm MNetter was banned after an FWR thread got out of control - she's now been re-instated. But, lo and behold - 2 proper goady fuckers trolls were later perm-banned and deleted - it seems to take MN an awfully long time to actually realise who the trolls are.

[runningforthebusinheels]

mega x-post - must refresh page more!

[Tortoiseonthehalfshell]

SM likes to tell people that everything they want to discuss is boring and pointless, I think.

FWIW, going back to the OP, I too have only ever read "rapey" as a shorthand for "promoting rape culture", and it is used in some fairly hardcore feminist spaces.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Good on HQ for apologizing, then.

[scottishmummy]

Who you battling with lrd?
You're shadow boxing yourself,and huffy about mnhq moderation
You can dispute past mnhq moderation or decisions,if you dislike their decision.but it doesn't make it topic one must not recall,simply case you no likey

[BubblesOfBliss]

"It's a section for the 'discussion of feminism'...not for feminists. Ask MNHQ to clarify it."

Hang on a minute - 'discussion[s] of feminism' are pretty rare in FWR. The topics discussed are overwhelmingly topics that are pertinent to feminism. Therefore it would suggest it is a 'feminist forum' - since in order to judge that something is pertinent to feminism and women's rights then there has to be an admission of a feminist stance somewhere. Although HQ aren't going to boot off people who are not feminist (because of their all-embracing aims), this feminism is inherent to the definition of the topics posted.

If it were true it were chat about feminism, the threads would all be 'which feminist writers addressed objectification' or 'is such and such the definition of feminism' - though these kind of 'about' threads occur, they are by no means the bulk.

I think antifeminists just use this 'hoo ha' as a way of crowing 'we won' as a way to silence further discussion of this rather strange take.

[SigmundFraude]

Well I'm glad Fastidia.

I think MN have been very biased in favour of the feminists really, when you think how vocal the feminists (well, a handful) were in their displeasure at MNHQ. Considering this is supposed to be a parenting forum, after all.

[MechanicalTheatre]

Is this all about the word "rapey"? Because I do think that's a horrible word. It is frivolous and beyond which it is really unpleasant to describe someone as being a rapist when they are just a bit of a twat.

Other than that, hurrah for the feminists and FWR and so on! Boo to the twats that constantly try to derail us! We will never let you win!

[FastidiaBlueberry]

"Who you battling with lrd?
You're shadow boxing yourself"

Arf.

Projection, I think that's called.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I was replying to you, scottish. That's why I referenced your post. Too hard to work that out?

I was wondering why you've got such a thing for arguments. Personally, if other people had a row a year ago, and no longer give a flying fuck, I would find someone else verbally wanking about it on every possible opportunity a bit, well, creepy.

What do you get out of it?