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)

I'm finding that if you're familiar with Twitter then Spinster is very similar to navigate, with just a few differences (one of the big positive differences being that you have many more characters, I think it's around 3000?) If you're not a Twitter user then it will be more of a leap as it is a very different platform to MN and conversations do appear more fragmented, but it can be worth persevering as there are some eloquent and interesting voices on there (not least Lang, of course).

Lovely to see you back R0wan

We know why Twitter mods try to erase difficult women, but this site? It's such an own goal, honestly.
The Walking on Eggshells campaign - did Mumsnet pick it up just because it was topical and 'on trend' at the time?

What?! Just caught up on all this. Can’t believe it.
Off over to spinster now to make sure I’m not going to lose touch with everyone if there’s a ban-hammer frenzy.

So uh, what do you click on, on spinster to read replies?

People who will lurk here, go on the baby names board for a bit, maybe AIBU, look completely normal, and then send a faux innocent report.

Yeah, I've noticed this and then mysteriously you never hear from them again. How daft does a mod have to be to fall for this obvious tactic?

@SlightlyWizened click on the original 'spin' same as Twitter. :)

Another one who is investigating other options where I might keep informed of sensible safeguarding advice from women like Lang

Also, any top tips for ad blockers? I mostly use my phone but am a bit sick of them. Ahem.

At least we know that threads on safeguarding of children / coercive control need to be increased on here, because apparently that's a problem for some people.

Absolutely.

I've heard it so often the three things that stick out for me, parent alienation is dangerous, promising confidentiality is dangerous, not informing other key parties, is dangerous.

And, of course, the realisation that if certain castes become protected, like children's entertainers, priests, racial groups, etc, they will be targeted by predators who use their protection.

Which means no group is above suspicion or criticism.

As we have seen, there are plenty of men, in prison, claiming to be women, in order to access victims. The prison service itself talks about this.

Safeguarding requires transparency and should not be subject to silencing, in any way.

longtime lurker, never posted but felt I had to say how sad and angry I was about this silencing of lang

I also struggle with the Spinster format, it's not that similar to Twatter in how it threads but there are a lot of great names there and no special rules so you can actually communicate in clear English. Lots of cat pix too (or that just might be my follows...)

It is very distasteful that you would allow a banned poster to have any influence on your policies if that has taken place.

Even if it hasn't taken place in the way described by that icky person, it's obvious that the ban of a highly respected, popular, and appreciated poster happened because of the influence of people who have an interest in dismantling safeguards for women and children, and in silencing women and concerned parents. Distasteful. I hope that's mild enough to not get censored for.

I haven't RTFT but just had to come on to say - LangCleg is someone I have come to hugely respect, admire and trust. She always, always, always put the safeguarding of children first. ALWAYS. Unlike this site.

She was constantly pointing out when safeguarding was being breached and it seems to me it's for that she's been banned. Yes, sometimes she was sarcastic - but that was largely because of the moderation environment on this board. Are the moderators really so thin skinned that they're banning a woman for being sarcastic when she's talking about the safety of children?

Who are these people reporting who want to ban women talking about safety of children. Who are they?

I am completely disgusted. I'm only here now really because of the lurkers, because of the army of women out there who have kids, who want their kids to be safe and see increasingly in so many ways that the state and businesses (yes like MN) are not only failing to protect children but in some cases actively undermining their safety.

How many Manchesters do we need.

Banning LangCleg only benefits a very few people, let's think about who benefits when a woman whose clear priority is the safeguarding of kids is banned. Who benefits? Not women, not kids.

Luckily I think she's on spinster. I'm going to have to get off MN and go onto spinster aren't I....

Oh, and bloody hell lurkers, welcome! And, yet again, I'm gobsmacked by those who haven't even registered.

And.

R0!

Yay.

Who are these people reporting who want to ban women talking about safety of children Who are they?

Abusive men*

*General comment, not thinking of any one person in particular.

Really sorry to hear this, Lang's posts were always so insightful. I hope MNHQ will reconsider this ban, especially in view of Joss Prior's tweets - it really isn't a good look for them.

So Joss Prior, who is gloating about this, thinks safeguarding children and pointing out coercive control are transphobic? I don't think Joss is doing transpeople any favours.

Nearly 1000 posts and no response from MNHQ. They can't bury you head in the sand and hope it will go away. It's stirred the proverbial vipers nest.

Luckily I think she's on spinster. I'm going to have to get off MN and go onto spinster aren't I

Don't leave Ineed.

There aren't a finite number of women. The number of women being concerned over this is increasing, not decreasing.

Their not you 🙄

No response from MN? Yes there is, and the thread even says "MNHQ have commented on this thread"

I’ve just joined Spinster to try and express solidarity with Langcleg, but I’m struggling with how to use the site. I’ve never been on Twitter, so comparisons don’t help! Any tips for new users on how to access threads, post on specific ones etc?

Wasn't it TRAs who got Posie banned on here and Twitter?
How's that working out for them? .

Just seemed to fire her up to go bigger really.

Just adding my voice. I'm so saddened and disappointed lately. And angry too. I'm heading over to spinster as soon as I've got some time. Something needs to change. This is just bloody depressing!

The response was “we don’t know....as a rule....contact us in private”

Not exactly a robust denial or distancing from the allegation.

Or even admitting that yes they do discuss this stuff with non-members. Just some direct reference and honesty would be appreciated!

Do you mean the non-response from Michael on the Site board? I haven't seen a proper response from Mumsnet on this thread. Not one that addresses what posters complaints. If I've missed it then I hold my hands up and it's my error.