Lang Cleg 2

[TiredofthisBSbutIstandwithLang]

New thread as we got to 1000.

Hundreds of posts. Little movement from
MNHQ. Final tally:

MNHQ - not happy
MN users - not happy
Random trolls on Twitter - happy.

Only MNHQ can make the necessary change.

No, AF. Just no. This is what I mean about nuance. You're read the response to my post rather than my post itself.

I said I interpreted that MN to have asked us to be kind in order to allow the debate.

I was going to say 'fuck kind', but actually I wouldn't mind a bit of kindness being shown to women.
Instead of, for example, being told that I should be raped with a barbed wire baseball bat because I believe that humans can't change sex.

'Nuance' is the new word for 'shut up women and do as you're told.

Blistory

I think what you're trying to say is can we be a bit more understanding, realise the pressure they're under, it's a business, etc.

And I'm sure most people will not disagree with that.

I'm on this board a lot. I see a lot. And there is no doubt, that the women here are held to a higher standard than elsewhere. Whereas you might be able to provide reasons why, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with those reasons, I don't think those reasons are justified. In another words, I know why, I want them to stop though.

For me, personally, the real dilemma is, mumsnet HQ don't really give a fuck what I think, or anyone else. They don't have to. They have all the power.

I genuinely think they could support the women on here more, with little impact to themselves. That's my honest opinion.

If there are things I don't know about happening behind the scenes, I can't help that. I have, in fact, asked. But of course, it's not something they want to impart.

But I know Lang, on here. I've read almost every post she's made. And the fact is, she is not a rude and aggressive person. She is insistent and blunt and very, very concerned.

To me, any of this moderation and posting should be subject to nuance. But when you have these chokingly tight rules, you are denied nuance. Except when it's inconvenient.

Kind is a matter of opinion. I only ask to be able to tell the truth. It’s not kind to ask me to lie yet by dancing around ‘misgendering’ and all that I am being forced to lie.

Thanks for the clarification, Tinsel

It's certainly the way I read her response, but I'll always defer to you guys. Sadly, no edit function. Consider me to have mentally adjusted my thought on what JP said to incorporate your thoughts.

I don't do nuance any more. Black and white is the only way to go.

I am not the only one to "misinterpret" your post @Blistory

Check your own "nuance"

actually I wouldn't mind a bit of kindness being shown to women

Would be nice.

I don't understand why a feminism board can't be at least a partially safe and understanding place for women, and I don't understand why, conversely, it gets to be made 'safe' for another group of people through control of language

Because Mumsnet is not a truly independent business.....nor a feminist collective, or a co-operative. However, this remains the main on-line place where GC people can meet and discuss issues that are of concern to them, However, it still remains an open and public forum, and subject to hostile actions.

I think we just have to be smarter and more clever, unfortunately. But that shouldn't be too difficult...... There is no point in expecting and relying on allegiance and loyalty in a place in which there is no automatic right to that.

Remember the importance of large stones which are the same colour as ash

In other words "grey rock anyone who says anything we don't like or agree with, they must be here with nefarious intentions"
This is exactly the type of shit on here people are talking about.

Reflecting some more, I think having Lang around made me feel safer.

You're not the only one. Other people have referred to her as authoritative, a grown-up.

The fact is, lang is unafraid She has clearly seen far too many instances where fear has led to safeguarding failures. It's a simple concept to understand, because it's present in every safeguarding scandal.

What stops the women here from talking about AGP, from actually naming the obvious fetishists, from talking about safeguarding failures, posting articles about how correctly sexing someone is critical, etc?

It's fear.

I agree that MNHQ have all the power here. It’s their site. But they have not used their power to good effect. They have brought in unworkable rules about who is and who isn’t a man in an attempt to appease the lobby. They have vanished legitimate questions to politicians - not even grouped them or deleted them and badged them repetitious but actively hidden them. They have used language about us which I would not expect to hear from a business like this - “haranguing” “shouting” “aggressive”. They’ve allowed themselves to be played by people who’d love to see the site fold altogether. They have alienated hundreds of users.

Yes it’s a difficult situation but they are just digging themselves a bigger and bigger hole here.

It’s just been poorly done and the outcomes are terrible. Hope the business brain kicks in soon because apart from anything else this is just no way to carry on.

And the fact is, she is not a rude and aggressive person.

It's not a fact though, that's the second time you've stated it as one.
It's an opinion.
It's not a sliding scale of "well they're threatening this and that so that means so and so isn't rude or aggressive..." it's not an either or.
People, including MN mods, are TELLING you that they have been on the receiving end of personal attacks/bullying/insinuating stuff/belittled and patronised if you ever disagree.
In response you get posters basically saying "don't believe you"
Um.... right, OK.

I have been lurking for a while. Arrived at FWR via Posie Parker and Glinner.
I don’t post, but I read everything ,learn a great deal from it and pass it on. I can’t be the only one who does this.
LangCleg’s contributions stand out for me because safeguarding is of obvious if not paramount importance .
Thank you to Mumsnet and all the knowledgeable posters for facilitating such varied debate, and in particular, the feminist chat forum for educating me on the challenges women face today.
I will continue to read and try to post on the forum because it has been really helpful so far.

It's fear

Yes.

I'm frightened.

Not enough to lie about something that crosses every single line I have, but enough to be fearful about everything else.

I'm frightened enough, currently, to only want a response from a female moderator.

I think we just have to be smarter and more clever, unfortunately

I just don't know if I can be. What if I'm just not smart and not clever, but care passionately that no more children get sucked into this body- destroying, gay-converting, family-smashing cult ? I mean, that's not smart, is it ? And yet it's the only way I can say it right now, because I don't have the cognitive know-how to do mental gymnastics over it.

@Retrofitted apologies if I've missed it in all the other posts, but I'd really like to know the details about MN moderation procedures that were implied in your earlier post. I would find it very helpful to know what the process of being listened to and heard out would be if I were miscommunicating to or about the mods.

I believe in Lang, too.

No its a well-respected method to protect oneself from narcissistic control attempts/abuse

Maybe so, but what about the times pictures of rocks are wheeled out just because one poster is disagreeing with the majority on a thread?