Bunbury’s Public Service Announcement 2

[arranbubonicplague]

The useful Bunbury Guide to Spotting Community Disruptors is constantly evolving.

The best research and advice is not to engage with community disruptors and trolls. As ever, if you suspect troll activity, report it to MNHQ.

This is a continuation of the first Public Service Announcement thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3321127-public-service-announcement

If and when you see threads plopped into FWR, especially a curious repeat of well worn topics, maybe check for poster history before engaging.

There are a number of posts/posters/threads that are reproduced on Twitter or Facebook to foment controversy using screen shots & flagging to either MNHQ to have threads or posters deleted. Sometimes, it’s used to approach commissioning editors with ideas for articles. It’s a tiresome tactic that we’ve had several community disruptor posters who themselves post the comments that they then highlight elsewhere as purported evidence of racism, religious intolerance, anti-men sentiments, or transphobia.

Some helpful links in following posts.

I'm honestly not sure how anyone can avoid seeing the glaringly obvious role personality disorders are playing in the way some commenters interact with people here. Which leads me to assume that everyone does see it, and from there to wonder why they're handling it in exactly the opposite way than any psychiatrist would recommend.

Despite it being time-consuming, those threads are incredibly effective for demonstrating every single point that women are making.

You can say it until the cows come home, but seeing it in action is always the clincher.

Jesus. Just caught up on the women's gym thread

MNHQ are seriously considering deleting a thread because a controlling person made a prat of themselves all over the thread and got called out for it?

How the fuck do they square that with their shiny coercive control video?

Maybe they're interpreting the behavior as vulnerable person rather than controlling, abusive person, which is why I suggested that availing themselves of the Freedom Program training would be a great investment.

Let them delete it. More will come in their place. And knowing that one has already been deleted, it will start to dawn on them.

Despite it being time-consuming, those threads are incredibly effective for demonstrating every single point that women are making.

It would interesting to know if they're read by lurkers or mostly the people who participate in the thread.

Been out most of the morning - somebody PM me with synopsis of what's gone down? As Bunbury's archivist, I feel the need to know...

No need, I've read the relevant thread and am up to speed!

ok, now got it.

Just caught up a bit of it.

Brilliant link Materialist thank you. And get you for getting in with that last post!

I just read that thread - even though its been locked I'm pretty pleased that MNHQ didn't immediately delete it.

I am glad the thread is still up and sorry if I inadvertently contributed to it nearly being taken down.

Speaking to MN....

vulnerable person rather than controlling, abusive person

Thing is a person can be vulnerable in terms of having poor MH, a personality disorder, impulsivity, emotional lability etc etc, and their behaviour can be abusive.. intentionally or unintentionally. BPD, NPD etc. OCD even.

Severe anxiety for example can be extremely controlling of others with the (all encompassing) aim of alleviating the sufferer's symptoms. They may have or not have the awareness to see how that harms and manipulates other people in the process. Elaborate beliefs systems can be created unconsciously to explain, justify, feed, normalise the disordered behaviour. It is part of the illness. And then you have the person's own moral compass and behaviours, misogyny etc, outside the illness.

The complexity of this needs looking at even on these boards - it is on all the other boards in various AIBUs and relationships etc. It is what families, wives and carers, doctors have to deal with. It shouldn't be masked.

Women have to deal with exactly this in the real world, and apparently these are the same people we should feel quite happy to have in our female spaces because there is no problem at all so long as you walk on eggshells and don't upset them by saying no, disagreeing, or pointing out something else they don't like, like perhaps the fact that women can tell they are transwomen

Not really of huge consequence here; wasn't sure where to put it and not sure it's worth its own thread but apparently TES community are censoring and shutting down debate. I reactivated my ancient log on and it seems they are being rather heavy handed.

Buckets of misinformation on that site too. Plus a few who appear to be trying very hard to get the message through.

Entertaining in a way but I've just seen some of the more recent posts in the Corby-May stupid woman/people thread.

And somebody arguing that the comment was factual not sexist. It so strongly put me in mind of Steve Allen who attempted to explain the etymology of cis to JHB and didn't know when to stop digging...

talkradio.co.uk/news/julia-hartley-brewer-im-not-cis-woman-there-are-only-women-or-trans-women-18113029022#1v1TzgjsrhO6Zhhq.99

I'm not sure what's going on with the sexual fetishism thread but it's not right.

A horrible cynic like me might think there are attempts to shut it down using methods that are very hard to challenge

In similar situations, I'd be alert to the possibility of:

screenshot harvesting;
perceived 'unkindness' and appeals to socialisation/acquiescence in oppression olympics;
the complexities of discussion around sensitive topics where "Speaking as a " is deployed/weaponised.

www.nytimes.com/2018/12/03/opinion/what-does-it-mean-to-speak-as-a-woman.html

I find it intriguing that according to MNHQ the thread had "scores" of reports - that seems disproportionate to me?

I wasn't on the thread so have missed the message - however, given that MNHQ accepts reports outside of MN then perhaps "scores" is not that implausible?

They might have had score of reports ItsAllGoingToBeFine but their response, at least for the moment, has been to leave the thread up. Suggesting that the subject of the discussion itself wasn't the problem.

Oh great, now that I've finally found a statistic analysis the thread is closed.

Would you mind posting the analysis here, DWS ?

I didn't see it but as it's relevant there's a reasonable chance that it will be relevant in the future?

Sure,
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1079063214525645
'Responses to most paraphilic activities were low to moderately positively correlated with responses to other paraphilic activities for both sexes, with responses to sadistic and masochistic acts exhibiting the strongest association.' (Table 2).

I didn't expect the 'caption generator' thread to be taken down.

'but this pocket of online resistance is a major headache.' ...

Lucky I saw it before it was taken down.