Lang Cleg 2

[TiredofthisBSbutIstandwithLang]

New thread as we got to 1000.

So Lang spends much of her time, for months, if not years, helping women and children.
I have seen no evidence ever of her being aggressive or rude.
In thanks for all her work, she is now smeared in the most revolting terms by a low-life shit stirrer on Twitter. Just had a look.
This person is not fit to speak of Lang.

Wading through both threads, still highly annoyed but ever looking for silver linings, we will not let this go, more lurkers are joining and the wonderful R0 is back!!

And LangCleg's bang on posts remain for ever in the ether:

What is insignificance?
Is it relative to the thread, to this board to MN in general.
Out of two threads and 1367 (and counting) posts and posters, regulars, lurkers and readers who have posted a little or never posted before and some have even rejoined to support Lang and to support Feminism and Womens rights.
I'll tell you this,
I love weetabix, chopped banana and hot milk. When I get to the last few pieces in the packet I crunch it all up. Favourite breakfast in this house.

What should happen:
An end to reporting from non-members.
Reinstate the right to correctly sex the people being talked about.
Reinstate the right to tell the truth and not have to pretend that other people's fantasies are reality.

Oh snow has no idea what they're talking about.

Snow, FYI, this board has almost the biggest pull, certainly in the top two or three, of the entire site. Justine was asked for, and provided, stats.

Interestingly, access through this board, to the entire site, increased exponentially in the last few years.

@MsMcWibble

This

I have seen no evidence ever of her being aggressive or rude.

MNHQ have said she has been, to them. Do you disbelieve them?

Just because you have not witnessed a behaviour does not mean that it didn’t happen.

This is a tenet of safeguarding, and also that we should believe people who tell us they are being harmed by another person’s behaviour, and not insist that they continue to spend time with that person because “we haven’t seen them behave badly”.

Just read through both threads and I'm another who will miss Lang enormously. I think it's a bad decision and the stuff on Twitter shows how the reporting system is being gamed by those with a not-so-hidden agenda. This was always going to be the outcome of allowing non-members to report posts.

@HebeMumsnet, sympathies what a horrible thing to have done to you.

Right, off to dust down my Spinster account and spend even more time speaking up about women's rights......

From an outsider’s perspective it seems like Mumsnet mods are insulted by the suggestion that they are being coercively controlled by 3rd parties. That seems like a misconception of LangCleg’s arguments and unreasonable to attribute malicious intent to her because of it.

Hundreds of women have posted in support of Lang, a hugely respected poster. I personally have learned so much from her.

Keep digging, Justine, but you'll need a bigger spade. I'm massively disappointed in you.

Right. Name Changed for this to show my total support. Formerly ChristmassySpice. I've joined Spinster but it's hard to follow. Will get there though because I really can't stomach this passive woke MNHQ shit much more.

Actually, Hebe, as nice as you always seem when you moderate here, the idea that mods will agree to 'keep an eye on posters' at the behest of other posters (whose motivations you cannot adequately assess) gives me the shivers.

The ROGD mums here, and the trans widows in particular - we're all sharing sensitive information for the purposes of providing support and information to others in the same situation - really sensitive information, in fact.

And while we make that choice to post publicly (albeit in an anonymised way) we absolutely do have to trust that Mumsnet keeps our actual details secure, and treats us the same way it treats any other user, say, someone who only posts about dog care.

Are there back channel discussions of any nature in which mods promise to keep an eye on particular posters on FWR ? Because if so (and it seems that the responses leave room for that to be the case, so long as the initiating complainant is a 'member'), I do not feel reassured that my information is safe, nor my privacy protected.

Are users safety, dignity, privacy, mental wellbeing valued too ? Or only employees ?

Do you disbelieve them

Currently, yes.

I can easily see LangCleg accused of persistence - because she saw a dynamic she thought was important (as does almost every other poster here. Aggression ? No.

And in a context where words are literal violence, but TRA's can get away with death threats, I do doubt the labelling of persistent communication as 'aggression'.

MNHQ have said she has been, to them. Do you disbelieve them?
I believe in the person I have been following on Mumsnet for years and that this would be extremely out of character.
Now, here for example, are you trying to goad people to say that they disagree with the MN mods, and thereby get them banned?
Surely this would be an example of exactly what we are talking about?
Still no answer to my point about the silencing tactics used by TRAs. Why is that, I wonder?

How many more posts in support of reality can a person / owner of a huge site ignore?

I think this is bit of a strawman as I don’t think this is what has happened

Respectfully, you asked me to walk though my feelings about a specific statement by another poster. If you now feel that statement is a strawman, then it's not one of my making.

Actually, no, if I thought the ‘accusation was bullshit I’d find it annoying, inconvenient, but not ‘deeply distressing’ because I wouldn’t believe it was true. Especially in a work context. Resilience is an important quality to build when dealing with the public in a professional context.

And I think it's victim blaming to tell people they should toughen up and you wouldn't be distressed in their position. If someone tells us that they have suffered harm as a result of someone else's behaviour I think it's very damaging to knee-jerk disbelieve them.

I don’t think it implies anything of the kind tbh, of course victims of coercive control are not all foolish and stupid, quit victim blaming.

I've said nothing of the kind. I think you need to give much more consideration to the harassment MN moderators feel themselves to have been the victim of and your belief that they should just develop resilience.

Do you disbelieve them

Currently, yes

Well. What happened to the usual "We believe you?" or is that only reserved for people you (general you) agree with?

How many more posts in support of reality can a person / owner of a huge site ignore?

Did you miss where she's been posting in response?
Mods have been responding inc Justine.
It doesn't matter what they say, people will still twist and moan.
I sometimes think some posters on here think they own the site

This is not going to go away.
There is a reason women on here are trying to make their voices heard.
Justine, you need to make a decision.

I can remember previous threads where Lang was talking about coercive control and the mods were mixing up mods/ monitors. And then it being pointed out that monitors were the TRAs, not mnhq. From the mnhq responses on here it’s pretty obvious this misunderstanding is part of the reason for Lang’s permanent ban. What would be great is if this would be acknowledged and Lang reinstated. I’m pretty sure this won’t happy though

Well. What happened to the usual "We believe you?" or is that only reserved for people you (general you) agree with?
I believe in Lang.

I think it's a bad decision and the stuff on Twitter shows how the reporting system is being gamed by those with a not-so-hidden agenda.

Yes, this is the bottom line for me. We've had long conversations on here about our twitter monitors, the mod rules, and how inconsistently they are applied (I understand was deleted on one thread), and how easy it is for women to fall foul of them, even when going to the trouble of incredible verbal gymnastics trying to stay within the guidelines.

But the bottom line is that twitter TRAs are laughing about this, gaming the moderation system and gloating about it. That should tell MNHQ who the aggressors are - and it's not the feminist posters talking about the definition a woman, women's rights, children's safeguarding, biological reality, and all the rest of it.

Justine, you need to make a decision.

I think she's made it clear that she already has with the fact that she's already commented on the thread.
This is all bonkers.
As in all bonkers that a poster has been banned for apparently persistently breaking TGs and making it intolerable for mods by accusing them of being victims/don't know their own minds etc (how patronising if so?)
and I've experienced first hand dismissive, sneering, bullying to posters if they post in disagreement with her. So I have no reason to think that the mods would be lying too which some are insinuating, as it HAS been happening whether people want to admit that or not.
Why should any one poster (not referring to anyone in particular here) just in general - be beyond reach and untouchable if they persistently make it unbearable/toxic?