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)

Just got to the end of this and had hoped that MNHQ might have come along to address this, but not yet. LangCleg is one of the posters that you want on a thread, always managing to get straight to the heart of the issues, straight to the truth, and drench it in sunlight. I hope she can come back. In the meantime I will continue to contribute, continue to wonder why my sentences don't come out on paper like they are in my head and continue to mess it up sometimes. I am trying to live as I am teaching my daughter to live.

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

I'm sorry but with all due respect for Lang, this is going a step too far. I didn't approve of the WBH when Lang was still here. Sure as hell won't be eating it now.

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

I would do anything for Lang, but I won't do that. No I won't do that.

Yet another mostly lurker and avid reader of MN threads delurking to say how saddened I am by this decision. I know moderating these discussions must give MN an almighty headache due to the amount of abuse I'm guessing they get from those who want to silence all dissent but I've mostly been thankful for how much you all have been able to say here in contrast to other forums. It's been civil, intelligent and informative and LangCleg has been at the forefront of that. And it's VITAL that we keep talking about this. Please reinstate LangCleg, MN. One day the tide will turn on this madness. It'll happen sooner the more we talk about it.

Noooo! Lang Cleg was brilliant at explaining the intricacies of safeguarding. This is a really bad decision Mumsnet!

Sorry to lose her & hope to see her back soon, if she wants to come back.

Really poor show, mod team.

HQ will NEVER go back on this.

There is however nothing to stop Lang signing up with a new email address, trolls do it all the time....

@Datun - I think my message was more akin to us being able to see the wood for the trees. If we move outside of acceptable boundaries when we discuss such emotive issues we run the risk of having all of the legitimate points raised dismissed and as a result leaving us no further along. At the same time a valuable and respected poster is silenced. This cannot be the best path to take.

I am yet to see anywhere what the actual transgressions committed by Lang were but I suspect something was said, perhaps in a moment of haste, that contravened the guidelines we all have to operate by. More than happy to stand corrected but this would then leave us in a position where we are expected to believe that MN has completely fabricated this which seems most unlikely.

Hopefully common sense will prevail and Lang can return if this is still desirable. I am sure an email to MN after a cooling off period would suffice but this of course is somewhat dependent on what was actually done to get us into this rather sorry and confusing state

What’s the spinster thing? Can’t find it.

This decision is incomprehensible and also shit. Who knows what the rules mean if LangCleg fell foul of them

So, let me get this straight @MNHQ. Men who hate women and want to erode safeguarding, come onto Mumsnet and claim to be 'offended' by it's content? They target members who are the most articulate and intelligent in the area of safeguarding and child protection. But rather than recognising that something sinister is going on, you actually delete women like Lang from your site?! It's utter madness. Your complicity in this shows an alarming disregard for safeguarding, it is horrifying to witness.

WTF?

Very poor show, MN

Lang Cleg was brilliant at explaining the intricacies of safeguarding.

Absolutely Stella. I'm gutted.

Have @mnhq commented at all yet??

I signed up for spinster at the last major loss, but couldn't get on with it. It seems to be just one long line of threads with no categories or ways to search, therefore you just had to be lucky that a thread on the screen was one you were interested in. If anyone is willing to enlighten me as to what I am doing wrong, please do!

But in truth I want to be here.

spinster.xyz/

You need to make an account to see anything on there. It's a bit like twitter but you can write longer posts. It's not as easy to follow discussions as it is on a forum. I haven't been on for ages but I might start spending more time there now.

Here to echo what so many are saying, LangCleg has been, and should continue to be, a priceless resource for child protection and safeguarding on Mumsnet. The only people who want her silenced do not have even an ounce of her integrity. Heartbroken 💔

Hirsutefirs spinster.xyz

No way. She is the voice of reason and helped me (along with all of you) to navigate my way through my hopeless despair of being a key carer with a friend's child going through ROGD. She ironically helped me put me on a moderate and empathic path than I was going to take. Lang, sorry. @Mnhq .. I understand you might think this forum is concentrated on gender issues so we may be perceived as being xxphobic. Just look on reddit etc and you'll see what xxphobic really looks like. We are not it.

Have @mnhq commented at all yet??

They won’t on this thread. They have commented on the thread in site stuff stating that they don’t discuss individual bans.

As well as the expertise mentioned by others, Lang is unfailingly kind. Not everybody sees the support she gives to other women behind the scenes.

This is so true. @MNHQ this is an appalling decision. Look at what you are enabling. Look at the abusive gloating people on Twitter who don't think women should be allowed to have a voice unless it benefits them. Their actions to prevent women speaking up by weaponising the ill thought out moderation policy here is the very meaning of coercive control.

Lang

The xx I xxphobic not being anything to do with chromosomes. Replace that with 'abc'.

Another one here saying
@MNHQ
@JustineMumsnet

Please think about this.
You're being controlled by anonymous monitors who contribute nothing to the site, who seem to exist only to mass report, targeting certain users and certain types of posts, and you have caved in, much to the detriment of the FWR community.

One of them (man who reports but does not contribute) is gleefully rubbing his hands in satisfaction openly on Twitter.

It's exactly this type of coercive control that feminists are good at recognising and LangCleg was an expert in this area.

Was it LangCleg who said a few times the staff at MNHQ should all go on compulsory Freedom Program training?
Whoever said that, had a point.