Ooh step back, India Willoughby is going to penetrate the Mumsnet debate

[ALittleBitOfButter]

Just saw on twitter that IW says will do radio interview about Mumsnet. Sorry can't link as on phone.

Reddit put out a list last week of all the bot accounts they had culled.

Some users there started dissecting the information, most of the accounts as expected were being divisive with a left or right wing slant.

I saw one comment where someone said they couldn't work out why a few of the accounts were targeting LGBT subreddits.

I think I know exactly why.

Have you got a link to that Ova? Would like to read about it.

@OvaHere have you a link for those culled bots - I can only find Russian ones

twitter.com/YourAnonCentral/status/960813810041982976

This is the twitter thread from February

Anon etc don't like it because they link it to paedophilia. Various Amon accounts collate and expose child abuse accounts. That's what I thought.

Thx @BarrackerBarmer

some really thought provoking insights in that Twitter thread - I'll ponder...

Very interesting!

Interesting Barracker.

MN is such a mine of information!

[dons tinfoil hat]

This article in The Conversation wrt to the US election is vaguely relevant to allegations of Russian TRA bots. Aleksandr Dugin is a Russian political philosopher who's been described as 'Putin's Rasputin'. (They're not so close now, because he criticised Putin for not seizing more territory in Ukraine.)

“It is especially important to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity,” Dugin was advising Russian elites as early as the 1990s, laying out what looks like a blueprint for the kinds of activities presently under CIA investigation:

"encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics …"

/doffs tinfoil hat

Should add, this is a bit of a derail from the IW discussion. It's in answer to several posts above discussing Anonymous et al.

re. The girl guides leader moving to ActionForChildren.

Although this could be bad for ActionForChildren, can this be perceived as good for Girl Guides, as in they can now review the policy and blame the whole debacle on their ex leader?

(or have I misunderstood, only skim read).

@BarrackerBarmer Blimey... interesting indeed.

I think this is interesting as well, but would like to suggest that we be careful parsing the difference between the movement and transpeople.

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/if-mumsnet-can-stand-up-for-free-speech-why-cant-mps/

Instead, they talk via Mumsnet, where the “Feminist Chat” forum is heaving with women (and yes, some men) discussing reform of the Gender Recognition Act, single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act, the safeguarding policy of Guiding UK and other issues that arise when you let men take the right to be treated as women on the grounds that they say they feel like they’re female. I’ve learned an awful lot by following such conversations.

I find all these influential female advocates for trans inclusion in everything female really really puzzling. What's going on? They surely can't be of such low intelligence that they don't see the safeguarding issues, the possibility that parents will sue if it all goes horribly wrong and little Mimi gets impregnated by little Tarquin when they were exploring their differences?

The shit will hit the fan, it will all blow up in their oh-so-liberal faces.

It's creepy how involved it all is with children's charities and children's organisations.

Ereshkigal

womanformallyknownaswoman

This was the thread, it's very long and the comment about LGBT reddits was somewhere amongst them I think ( I might be wrong because there were a lot of separate discussions about this last week)

www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/8bb85p/reddits_2017_transparency_report_and_suspect/

@AnchorMum

AnchorMum

CircleSquareCircleSquare So in an emergency situation do I comply with the law or acquiesce to the biological facts that will save their life?

Obviously you would go with the biological facts. No one is claiming biology is being totally changed. A transman would have some of the physiology of a female. But being on testosterone and perhaps not having breasts they would not have the normal physiology of a female, or male.

It would require treating and respecting such a person as an individual and meeting their medical needs as appropriate. And the information you would have as a care provider would be confidential.

RosenbergW It is your loss. Thebewilderness has been posting feminist wisdom on the Internet for many years and we are privileged to have her experience here on these threads.

Oh right. Thanks for the clarification. I thought her response was a little pompous.

Sorry. I don't know why that posted about 50 times. Still getting the hang of this.

Barracker

Thanks. Just when you think this couldn't get any more batshit

That Sprout fucker is pure poison; he scares the living shit out of me and I don't scare easy

But the Anonymous account supporting feminists and children, well, now that is fucking 'woke'.

I'm going all mammy now and want to make him a fine pot of stew

I am only at pp26 so far but thought I should mention that we are already called non men. WO man means not man. Wife man is the etymology. FE male means non man.
So I guess the Greens are just using updated language to say the same thing men have always said about our half of the human population.

What shall we call ourselves, do you think? Let's pick a word we like for ourselves for a change that centers us instead of othering us.