Lang Cleg 2

[TiredofthisBSbutIstandwithLang]

New thread as we got to 1000.

Sigh.

Accusing us of abusive behaviour - repeatedly, and after we have explained many times that we don't think it's acceptable to accuse us of this - falls pretty clearly into the 'rudeness' category, we think.

Thats not what LangCleg has been saying, @MichaelMumsnet. Not what any of us are saying. Victims of coercive control. Not abusers.

I have seen LangCleg recommend the Freedom Prgramme for the community team multiple times. No feminist would ever direct abusers onto the Freedom programme.

Why would it just be male mods when female ones on the thread have said exactly the same?!
I think you've just answered the poster up thread who said "where are the posts accusing of being abusive?"
There's always lots of insinuations even if not outright accusations.

Hello everyone.

I'm not actually working now but wanted to quickly come in and clarify the accusations made on Twitter today. Thanks to those of you who instantly doubted the story, it meant a lot, truly.

We think we've been in contact with most of you enough times for you to know that those aren't the sort of chats we have with members, and certainly not with a PBP.

That said, if a member reports a concern and we say we will keep an eye on things, then sure, that's what we'd do. That's our job.
Sorry for the delay in responding today, but thanks for the support, those of you who did.

I’m sorry you’ve been caught up in this HebeMN because of the very common turn of phrase you use in replies to reports.
Only the malicious would have taken that innocuous phrase and run with it.

Hebe

Thanks for the clarification Hebe. This is DARVO and gasliighting in action.

I hope you’re ok, Hebe.

But this can’t go on can it? Not for your sake, not for ours. Prior & friends can’t spell it out any more clearly now that they’re on a mission to sabotage Mumsnet - just like what went on with Jeffrey and the MRAs.

Thank you Hebe, I didn't think those claims were true at all.

Hebe no one has ever had an email exchange with you would ever think that. You're always right on the money.

I agree with what many others have said, Lang's posts were pointing out that the moderation system, under the new rules, was being used as a tool of coercive control by transactivists.
I always saw it as a plea to the moderators to understand they were being used and not a personal attack.
I would always agree with her suggestion that the moderators undergo training on coercive control so they can see this and tackle it

Exactly this. I've been away from the boards for a while because life took over, but to come back and find that LangCleg, of all people, has been banned beggars belief. Joining the chorus of the many asking that this decision be reconsidered.

Many people & organisations are unwittingly used as 'proxies' for abuse.
For example, Lundy Bancroft in Why Does He Do That describes how many relationship therapists / marriage counsellors without specific training to recognise these subtle dynamics will have contributed to abuse 'by proxy'

'Flying Monkeys (The Narcissist’s Tool for the Smear Campaign)'
(extract)
So the role of these flying monkeys is first of all abuse by proxy.
Abuse by proxy is when the narcissist gets other people to abuse you. That way the narcissist gets to abuse you but through these people. They’ll reject you, they’ll make you feel not good enough, they’ll shame you, maybe they’ll put you in a bad situation, they’ll tell you that you’re crazy, things like that. This way the narcissist looks like the one that’s clean. They’re not involved." continues

So who can become flying monkeys?
There are two different categories of people.
The first category is the naive.
The naive are people who are just clueless. They can’t see it, they can’t fathom it, they’ve never been through anything like that, so they can’t even imagine that somebody would do such a thing to just make up all these lies about you and spread them across town. They just can’t even fathom that a human would do that or maybe the naive is also the fawning type." (continues)

The second category of people who can become flying monkeys are the toxic.
These are the people with no boundaries. They love gossip and drama, they’re addicted to that stuff. They have an integrity problem and usually they want something from the narcissist. They want status, they want flattery, they want favours. (continues)
medium.com/@OwnYourReality/flying-monkeys-the-narcissists-tool-for-the-smear-campaign-798daf7a59c0

Thank you for replying in your time off, @HebeMumsnet, and so sorry you were dragged into it in this way. I don't think many MNers believed there was any truth to the smear about you, especially with many of us having been on the receiving end of false allegations from the same source ourselves.

This is a timely example of the kind of abuse we are concerned is ramping up against MN staff (esecially moderators).

Let’s look at this impartially.

@JustineMumsnet @MichaelMumsnet

Coercive control is an act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten their victim.

That is straight from women’s aid.

TRAs have done all of that IRL. But let’s look at a Mumsnet.

TRAs have tried to harm/punish/frighten Mumsnet through campaigns to have sponsorship and advertising withdrawn because Mumsnet permitted the FWR boards to exist. They have doxxed posters and threatened to take Mumsnet and/or the posters to court - that can only be described as intimidatory, both for the site and for posters.

Has Mumsnet changed in response to this? Yes, that is why there are moderation guidelines for FWR regarding the use of pronouns etc.

The next question - has Mumsnet tried to harm/punish/threaten users?

Well, the users of the FWR boards have often spoken about walking on eggshells not knowing or understanding the rules of moderation. (Eggshells are usually considered a red flag). There have been emails, suspensions and bans to get us to alter our behaviour and to toe the line. To coerce us into not posting what we want to post, not saying what we want to say.

Ultimately, this is Justine’s playground and she gets to make the rules. If we want to play here, we have to follow her rules.

But I agree with LangCleg.

And I think there is a degree of ‘shooting the messenger’ going on here. Can you imagine telling your sister that she is in an abusive relationship and needs to LTB? How would she take the news? She would protest that she is happy to live this way and it is her choice, really. She just has to be nicer to him. You don’t understand what he is really like. It is not what it looks like. Undoubtably, telling your sister she is in abusive relationship would affect your relationship with her. Most likely, she would last out and shoot the messenger.

LangCleg was the messenger.

Bring back LangCleg

Can I ask, did you give any warnings or temporary suspensions?

If not, why not?

Could this happen to any of us without warning?

I wonder what is more stressful in the workplace, being lied about on twitter or being given details of a training course.
It's taken me bloody ages to work out how to name change, I am a bit useless, I will never cope on spinster.

Hebe

It's less about doubting MN, HQ and their policies than bitter experience, much of it RL based, about how easily a business and front line workers in it can be vacuumed up by difficult people who don't operate on standard social behaviours and ethics, game systems and will use who and what they want without conscience. Got that t shirt, several times over. That I'm keen to flag up to HQ to double check any time it arises, to give them and their staff the best chance to protect themselves.

So, have I understood this...

Lang pointed out that mumsnet moderators were being manipulated by outside sources into banning members or curtailing our speech by deleting posts. This was referred to by lang as coercive control.

Lang was banned because the moderators either misunderstood what Lang was saying (even though she went to great lengths to iterate it was not the mods she was accusing of anything) or she was bang on the money and so had to go.

Either way it's a complete rort.

Sorry you were dragged into this via Twitter Hebe. I have no animosity towards individual mods.

The system is clearly not working though when users of a social media site can cause havoc for a completely unrelated site.

MNHQ, there are a group of women here saying what is happening to your team is awful, we are gutted for Hebe. Can you hear us.

Can one imagine any of us signing up to Angels or Susan's Place and asking their forum users not to use the word 'terf' because we find it triggering? Or not to pronounce that TWAW, because it offends our deeply held GC beliefs? You'd need a microscope to measure the shortness of the shrift you'd be given before you were bounced out the door.

Meanwhile on Twitter the monitors are discussing a list of future targets.

I know I'd find constantly being accused of being manipulated by outside elements and being too foolish to realise it, rude and possibly distressing in a work environment.

Mumsnet are perfectly entitled to protect their moderators and have made it very clear that ongoing rudeness to the mods is grounds for banning.

You only have to look at what has happened to Hebe to see why measures to protect staff are necessary.

Meanwhile on Twitter the monitors are discussing a list of future targets.

I think that definitely bears repeating.

I don't think many MNers believed there was any truth to the smear about you, especially with many of us having been on the receiving end of false allegations from the same source ourselves.
Have to admit I am actually surprised at the length they have gone to, explicitly naming a mod, and now apparently it’s all fine because it was a joke? It’s sick. I don’t know why I’m surprised.
Hebe I really think you & @MNHQ as your employer should challenge Twitter, they’re being used to troll you.

They (Twitter bullshitters) wouldn't bloody do it if everyone would just bloody ignore them