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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Heads up to all ManFriday members

443 replies

SwearyG · 29/06/2018 23:08

Our membership list has been leaked online.

Please do what you need to in order to keep yourselves safe.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
LassWiADelicateAir · 30/06/2018 22:48

This may or may not be connected but please read these threads and check your in boxes and sent boxes. Someone is deleting pms without either the senders or the recipients knowing or asking for it.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3288763-Private-Messages-Deleted

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3293270-MN-and-access-to-our-PMs?msgid=79069581#79069581

R0wantrees · 30/06/2018 23:10

twitter.com/akmd87/status/1013178460926341120

BeyondRaggydoll · 30/06/2018 23:20

😂

ItIsOnlyAnOpinion · 01/07/2018 00:25

They believe she is cursing them? #LegoGate

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 05:31

So no one to do with manfriday ever messaged via messenger for example? All chats were all hosted on the facebook platform by posting open comments? No one ever used their phones to send a text and swapped numbers? No one ever sent an email?

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 05:34

(Because I don't believe that)

OrchidInTheSun · 01/07/2018 05:36

How and why is that relevant, revealing?

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 05:41

Because if they did any of that, without a data protection policy in place, without being able to demonstrate legitimate reason for processing and if they were lax in what they shared via those methods they are, quite frankly, naive in the extreme and more worryingly potentially (depending on what was shared) in breach of GDPR. They should have had a data protection policy and they should have had safeguards in place and they should have been keeping records to show what data they held the reason they held it and how long they were going to keep it.

I hope they were.

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 05:44

If you are in the group for activist purposes and given that you have to use your real name for facebook, and the group is a secret or closed group that only those in the group have any knowledge of who is in the group do FB or the group admin have liability, is an interesting question and why, prior to GDPR even, I would never do that role. I don't want to be the test case.

R0wantrees · 01/07/2018 06:00

revealing I think you may be slightly over egging the custard here!

Its a bit strange given you private messaged me yesterday saying you wanted to help Manfriday with regards GDPR (I'm not involved)

I do though observe that they all seem very capable women (and men on Fridays) so if you are worried for them, try not to.

& if by chance you're trying to cause worry... please desist.

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 06:10

Oh for goodness sake. I do want to help but they haven't exactly helped themselves by not having clear policies in place. One is allowed to point that out. ManFriday need to be able to take criticism.

I'm not over egging anything - they've left themselves wide open to report to the ICO. And that alone will cause them a massive headache.

I don't think the situation re facebook is entirely clear and I suspect it will take a test case to decide where liability sits in the case of a closed or secret group.

Can ManFriday show clear and explicit consent to process data BEFORE they started processing it for example? I hope so. And using someone's name is processing. Even just storing data is processing.

My big worry with GDPR was never the business side, businesses can pay for help and there was enough info out there for businesses to be able to figure out what they needed to do. My worry was always the small kitchen table activist and support groups that aren't businesses aren't charities but aren't totally private either. (Because holding personal data in a purely private capacity like your personal address book is outwith the scope of the GDPR) ManFriday call themselves a campaign group. They have a media officer. They should have had policies in place.

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 06:16

And if manfriday didn't think they were ever going to be targeted by infiltrators for want of a better word they were bloody deluded. They had every reason to know and should have known given the type of activism they were doing and given their high profile on social media etc and the very real risks of threats to their "members" (as they call them) they should have done everything possible to cover themselves legally. I hope they did and I hope the statement up there re facebook is wrong and that they weren't just relying on facebook t&cs.

SimplySteve · 01/07/2018 06:17

Could someone DM me a link to the list, I'm rather worried.

R0wantrees · 01/07/2018 06:20

As Hannah explained in her speech in Basingstoke,
"I’ve called ManFriday a movement, I think a better word might be concept. We are a loosely organised group of women who are horrified by the implications of self identification and the resultant erasure of women. We are making a stand against what is happening by self identifying as men on Fridays."

Back in March not long after the first #ManFriday Hadley Freeman wrote:

(extract)
"There is understandable concern about being on the wrong side of history. But I’ll tell you what has never put anyone on the right side of history: shouting women down

By a man-sized margin, my favourite recent news story is the one about two feminists who went to a men-only swimming session in Dulwich, south London, because, as they explained, they now self-identify as men. An elderly gentleman was initially confused. “I told him I was a man and he said, ‘Oh really?’” one woman later told reporters. “It was a very British response.” Other men at the pool were less sanguine, and complained to reception.

This protest was announced on Mumsnet, a pleasing hotbed of radical feminism these days, as part of a campaign against proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act. Currently, anyone who wants to change gender needs to have lived in their chosen gender for two years and been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. If the changes go through, anyone will be able to declare they are a man or woman, regardless of whether they have made any actual changes to their lifestyle or body. This is known as “self-identification” and the reactions have borne out that Margaret Atwood line, “Men are afraid women will laugh at them while women are afraid men will kill them.” Men have largely ignored the issue, until it comes charging into their changing room, while a lot of women have argued that predatory men could now come into female-only spaces unchallenged.

You might have thought that the #MeToo campaign, in which women have been speaking out about the universality of sexual assault and rape, would make people more sympathetic to concerns about female safety. You would be wrong: nothing makes you look more liberal these days than shouting at women who express anxiety based on their experiences.

But then, as with experts, apparently we’ve all had enough of lived experience now. When a 19-year-old trans woman was elected a Labour woman’s officer last year, a Labour councillor explained that “lived experience as a woman” was not a pre-requisite to be a woman’s officer. Biology, too, has been deemed terribly passe. “Inclusive feminism,” Plaid Cymru’s Leanne Wood wrote when considering why self-identifying trans women should be allowed into women’s refuges, understands that “gender is a complex and deeply personal thing, and is about so much more than outdated ideas of biology.” On the day of this year’s Women’s March, trans model Munroe Bergdorf tweeted that to “center reproductive systems” at the demonstrations was “reductive and exclusionary”.

I’m trying to think of anything more patriarchal than telling women to stop fussing about vaginas at a Women’s March. A biopic about the Old Testament God starring Mike Pence? Because none of this is about making feminism inclusive; it’s about policing the way women talk about their lives. No one – male, female, trans or not – has the right to do this... (continues)

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/mar/31/man-explains-what-means-be-woman?

CosmicCanary · 01/07/2018 06:21

So no one to do with manfriday ever messaged via messenger for example? All chats were all hosted on the facebook platform by posting open comments? No one ever used their phones to send a text and swapped numbers? No one ever sent an email?

If individuals chose to share their telephone number or email address with each other then that is their choice. It would only be a GDPR breach if that info was then shared again without consent to another party. Or if unsolicited texts and emails were sent.
As for messenger it is part of FB so anyone on FB can send you a message that is what you agree to when you sign up to FB.
Sending each other texts and messages is totally allowed.

Because if they did any of that, without a data protection policy in place, without being able to demonstrate legitimate reason for processing and if they were lax in what they shared via those methods they are, quite frankly, naive in the extreme and more worryingly potentially (depending on what was shared) in breach of GDPR.

Wrong.

The MF facebook group did not hold any personal data that was not already shared by the indivuduals on FB. When individuals joined the FB group they did so under its GDPR policy.
What was leaked was the "people in this group" list which is part of FB not MF.

R0wantrees · 01/07/2018 06:26

SimplySteve see page 12 for advice and update from Sweary & Yes

Yes said specifically,

"If anyone is worried in particular, please do send me a FB message and I’ll try to respond ASAP."

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 06:27

Oh for goodness sake- did you miss the bit where i said "depending on what was shared" before you definitively stated "wrong"

Given that the group in question have a media officer and call themselves "organised" can they demonstrate that they have clear and explicit consent for that data to be held?

As I said, the situation re group admins and joint liability in the event of a data breach for campaigning groups is not clear, and I personally wouldn't touch that role with a barge pole.

Did members have to sign up to manfriday specific terms and conditions or was there a statement on the top of the group as an admin sticky for example to say that info from the group should not be shared outside the group?

revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 06:28

And the info has in fact been shared without consent to another party - it's been put all over fucking twitter.

CosmicCanary · 01/07/2018 06:31

you have to use your real name for facebook,

Wrong. You can have an anon facebook page that has info the public see which is totally made up.

I have 2 FB pages. One as me and one "false" one that I use when I joined GC groups.

CosmicCanary · 01/07/2018 06:35

And the info has in fact been shared without consent to another party - it's been put all over fucking twitter.

The facebook members list was shared. This then comes under Facebooks GDPR policy not Man Fridays. Plus the info shared is public info anyway which everyone who signed up to FB already agreed could be publicly accessable.

The data shared was name and area they live which each individual had already agreed to via signing up to FB.

Man Friday have not breeched any GDPR rules.

Ataterf · 01/07/2018 06:37

Using a false name on Facebook is against their terms & conditions, and the account could be deleted. See section 3 here: m.facebook.com/terms.php

R0wantrees · 01/07/2018 06:38

revealing If it helps to reassure you or alleviate your concerns, I think Sweary was with the police yesterday. I remember seeing a tweet that she was on her way to report the doxxing and then saw the Pimms O'clock update.

Hope that helps a little.

Heads up to all ManFriday members
revealingnothingfuckinpersonal · 01/07/2018 06:40

So manfriday have a GDPR policy and it's all good that it was hosted on FB so it's all their responsibility and manfriday aren't liable at all?

I disagree.

Why and how was that person able to get that membership list?
ManFriday are a campaigning group they should have had GDPR policies in place to manage a situation like this.

And the you can give out your own number thing - yes of course you can, but a campaigning organisation, a business, a charity - anyone who isn't using that information for purely personal purposes - is supposed to have a record of your clear and explicit expression of consent to that data being used. I hope manfriday have that.

CosmicCanary · 01/07/2018 06:41

Using a false name on Facebook is against their terms & conditions, and the account could be deleted. See section 3 here:m.facebook.com/terms.php

And?
Doesnt mean its impossible or cannot be done though.
My second account is 3 years old and abviously false due to the name however because I dont breach any other of their rules ( I dont send abusive messages or posts and I am not pretending to be a celeb or other individual) i go unnoticed.

R0wantrees · 01/07/2018 06:44

revealing
Not sure of your involvement but as above in my reply to SimplySteve,

see page 12 for advice and update from Sweary & Yes

Yes said specifically,

"If anyone is worried in particular, please do send me a FB message and I’ll try to respond ASAP."

They may though be enjoying a Sunday morning lie-in...

Swipe left for the next trending thread