LangCleg

[dragongirlx]

I am a long time lurker but infrequent poster here but I needed to bring this to everyone's attention.
I have found out that Mumsnet HQ have banned the fabulous LangCleg simply for repeatedly pointing out the repeated times coercive control has been used by the moderators to stop women talking.
I understand it started with a conversation when a post was deleted because she allegedly used a sweeping generalisation but they couldn't or wouldn't confirm the generalisation and when she challenged them they decided to ban her on the basis of previous comments.

So it now seems pointing out coercive control is now grounds for being banned, thus proving that coercive control is being used.

I for one would like @MumsnetHQ to provide an explanation here as this is really not on

(also taking bets on how long before the thread is deleted)

lang and thanks for all the fish.

I hope you're back soon.

Has HQ confirmed if it’s temporary or permanent yet?

They don’t confirm anything to do with specific cases so they will not comment on it.

You simply cannot make the Internet a safer place if you keep removing the people who advocate for safeguarding practice. It’s impossible. Each Langcleg that you remove makes the space a little less safe for its other users.

Quite

Censorship can be used against those who point this out.

And guess what the government intend to do...

All part of the same thing on different levels

Whoever has the power to censor...

... But censorship without transparency and proper regulation can be abused...

... And used against the very people who need protection by restricting debate of issues which protect people.

Which all sounds very much like the point Lang made about the subject not being a single issue but part of bigger larger issues too as well as simply being an example of them...

.... Joined up thinking is in short supply these days.

Lurker here, popping up to support Langcleg and say poor show, mumsnet. Genuinely thought you were better than this.

Over 450 message in less than 5 hours. That should tell MNHQ something.

Adding my voice to the throng. Not a good look @MNHQ. Who exactly banned her? How high up does the coercion go?

I don’t post very often, you’ll know that, I am here ALL the time though, but when you remove someone that expresses how very many of us feel about children’s safeguarding, I begin to wonder if you are the site for me.

Going to do it once more, for those joining after work/commute/starting a night shift/logging in for whatever reason.

LangCleg, a poster who championed safeguarding. Banned from Mumsnet.

These are the people who are rejoicing in Lang's ban (and who are likely complicit in the reports that got Lang banned)

twitter.com/joss_prior/status/1219682284623712256?s=21

twitter.com/sakuranoseirei/status/1219677162166476800?s=21

I want to add my voice as a (mostly) lurker. This decision is wrong on every level, @mnhq.

Fucking batshit decision @MNHQ

I am not even a fraction as articulate as LangCleg. But fuck me, banning Lang has validated her concerns, coercive control has been used by the moderators to stop women talking.

🦇💩

Another who has opened a spinster account. I am thinking about leaving this site - will see how it goes.

The removal of Lang is really not in the spirit of what the site purports to be.

Agree. Another one here who admired Lang. Why is Mumsnet silencing articulate women?

@TheBadorablesLangCleg - no personal attacks from me, not my style I am afraid, I have far too much respect for fellow posters than that. We know so little about the travails some of us have to endure that I find making personal attacks reveals far more about the attacker than the attacked. So if you would refrain from making such spurious claims it would be appreciated. I do understand this is an emotive issue, wrapped up in a whole host of other emotive issues but let’s try and keep things both cordial and constructive.

@pombear - indeed, when confronted with communication suggesting that the war had ended, at a time when such disingenuous communication was a oft used tactic by opposing forces, Hiroo refused to accept this at face value. Sadly the unnecessary loss of life was a consequence of this. Quite clearly I am not aligning myself to this sad loss of life, surely you don’t think it is this aspect I found appealing over and above the tale of refusing to give in and accept things you are told at face value? I will do me, I have done my entire life, despite a plethora of challenges over many years. I equally expect you to do you, we have nothing if we aren’t true to the things we all believe in.

In terms of Lang and some of the interesting things she espoused, I doubt many of us on here quite need me to regurgitate (in a less eloquent way I imagine!) but I found her thoughts on the premature transition of children and how this should likely be considered more of a mental health issue at such an age both really interesting and somewhat personally significant.

I won’t ask you to expand on the areas you found most enlightening because I am capable of taking you at face value. If only this level of respect was afforded to all posters then we would find the dialogue enriched greatly

Sorry it was me that said on the Site thread that I thought the ban was permanent, I thought that's what the OP on this thread said, so I might be wrong.

Actually I really hope I am wrong

These are the people who are rejoicing in Lang's ban (and who are likely complicit in the reports that got Lang banned)

twitter.com/joss_prior/status/1219682284623712256?s=21

twitter.com/sakuranoseirei/status/1219677162166476800?s=21

The people who got Lang banned are working to stop women talking about how to keep children safe.

I don’t think we can repeat that enough.

BiologyIsReal: Over 450 message in less than 5 hours. That should tell MNHQ something.

I have no faith at all that Mumsnet will reverse on this. They don't seem to give a shit that they are being openly manipulated into banning their best contributors. Most we can hope for is that new posters will step up and fill the gap. Which they are doing. Every day.

Another long time lurker delurking to say this is a ridiculous decision. Lang's posts were always really informative and will be a huge loss both to this board and to the wider discussion.

Another poster very sad at LangCleg going, yet another intelligent women targeted for that insightfulness. However each time that happens a few more lurkers emerge as they know this is a fight we cannot risk losing. I came here as a result of trans activists on twitter complaining about mumsnet. And stayed because of the wonderful intelligent articulate women like LangCleg. I've learnt so much from them and that can't be taken away by targeting someone and getting them banned.

hiroo there's a particular sort of man that talks a lot about hoping a woman has learnt her lesson...

We keep learning the lesson that it is more important than ever we continue

Dear Mumsnet, please reinstate LangCleg. She provided clear information and analysis on safeguarding — a crucial topic on a parenting forum. She didn’t post abuse or lies. So who could have complained, apart from those who don’t want truth told?

Very disappointed that MN was so easily played.

Makes them look a bit thick.

I think we should all raise a bowl of WBH to mark FWR's loss of Lang 🍌

I think we should all raise a bowl of WBH to mark FWR's loss of Lang

Eating it now (it helps that it's actually breakfast time for me).

I also started a thread on safeguarding in the transgenderism context in honor of Lang for a less soggy tribute.

I lurk here daily and want to add my support to Lang and her clear voice in the madness. I will continue to educate my friends and family on these safeguarding issues. Shame on mumsnet.

I have no faith at all that Mumsnet will reverse on this.

They won’t. They are firmly under the control of the TRAs. Lose too much money otherwise.