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)

The thing is, the site is not pre-moderated. So any reports, or rather all the reports, are made by other people.

Appalling decision

LangCleg I salute you.

@MNHQ what are you playing at? Why are you letting a PBP tell you what to do? Which part of "coercive control" don't you understand?

Take the Freedom Programme, all of you. And reinstate LangCleg.

I have never in my life been on a website or forum where posters (the people who make the cash by being advertised to) are simply told the site no longer suits them and are dismissed.

Ridiculous.

Dishonest.

I agree popehilarious it's shit stirring to the nth degree. I think we need to exercise a bit of caution reacting to it. I suspect (but cannot prove) there's a bit bullshit being flung about as bait. Just like the faux medical scripts with a tenuous link to Harrop. I think we will be seeing a lot more of this type of thing. All possibly planned at their most important meetings.

Good news is this sort of thing exposes the state of panic they are in. Sheer desperate tactics. Stand strong 💪🏻.

Agreeing with ProdigalKittens

the user base is making it very clear that a. we're not happy that Lang was banned, b, we want her reinstated, and c. if that's not going to happen the least MNHQ can do is explain why.

BTW I suspect any comments sharing communications to Lang from MNHQ will probably be deleted, as they don't seem to like us sharing information about mod decisions with each other.

MNHQ, just look at the sheer number of posts here supporting Langcleg and castigating your decision to ban her - over 600 of them.
How many of us does it take before you will reconsider your capitulation to anti feminist, misogynist pressure and start supporting your core demographic on this site again- i.e. women?

TheProdigalKittensReturn

Nappies. Prams. Biscuits. Possibly we're allowed to discuss period poverty if we're careful not to mention who gets periods and who does not?

Goodness, no! Nappies might bother certain fetishists, and biscuits are ever so goady. Certain people are allowed to talk about period poverty because they are honest and true feminist activists, not gross boring old mummies tho, they just need to accept their irrelevance and go back to reverently kissing the world's booboos*

*not a euphemism.

The monitors are going to be out for some of the posts on here. Don't play into their hands.

That's an insult to apples, honestly.

Another one adding that i have, under various usernames, frequented the FWR boards as a lurker and occasional poster and would like an explanation from @MNHQ. Really disappointed with the decision as it appears.

I've rtft and even though I mostly lurk I couldn't not lend my voice to this discussion!

I'm outraged MN has allowed this to happen!

#langcleg4ever

Out of interest, @MNHQ, what is the record the shortest time for an FWR thread to reach the maximum number of posts?

janeskettle

Perhaps we could repost a Lang post every day for a while ?

I like it.

Just dropping in to express my disgust at Lang being banned and the reasons for it. Lang was bang on about the coercive control and gas lighting behind the external reporting and moderation.

I can barely be bothered to post here at the minute but just wanted to add my support for Lang and all the other fantastic, articulate posters who have been culled or are next on the list for targeting.

Thanks for the reports.

Doyoumind, we appreciate you flagging this up to us. We don’t know what discussion this is referring to, exactly - but as a rule we don’t discuss our moderation decisions relating to individual posters with anyone else.

Please do get in touch with us directly if you have any more questions.

I don't post too often, but adding my voice. Women won't be silenced. Really feels like this time those hidden in plain sight have been seen by quite a few of us.

Just another delurker chipping in. Lang has helped me understand what’s happening and given me confidence to spread the word elsewhere. Really disappointing news MNHQ.

The monitors are going to be out for some of the posts on here

Don't care.

If Mumsnet are at the beck and call of abusive male persons who don't want their male abusiveness to be mentioned (and they don't, because I've had two posts deleted already for that Grand Crime - funny how moderation can be so fast when it matters to TRA's and so slow when it matters to women - then it's good to know that.

At a certain point, you just can't pretend that some people aren't male, don't display male socialisation patterns, and don't abuse social media and the ability of outsiders to engage in targeted reporting against women.

You lose your mind if you are forced to ignore all that.

Another lurker and Lang supporter here. Shocked and disgusted. I've gained so much knowledge from all the clever and patient women on here. I intend to keep lurking and learning.

Seriously, Mumsnet, how hard it is to say 'anyone boasting on Twitter that they collaborated with Mumsnet moderators to shut down women in targeted action is lying'.

There aren't a wide variety of conclusions to be drawn from the fact there's no transparency on the claims made by JP.

At a certain point, you just can't pretend that some people aren't male

The point, in a nutsack.

@LouMumsnet

My questions (apart from the obvious 'why'?)

Can we no longer discuss coercive control?
Or safeguarding?
(On a site mainly frequented by women and mothers)

Will you reinstate Lang?