Langcleg is vindicated

[Namechangex5]

Mumsnet thought that Langcleg was wrong to state safeguarding regarding children who thought they were trans. When langcleg argued for our kids Mumsnet didn’t like it. Mumsnet caved to the men. Instead of champion safeguarding, Mumsnet got rid of an expertise on this. Well, Langcleg was right and the Tavistock judicial review shows this.
Langcleg kept me sane in a world where others tried to gaslight me for my refusal to believe that my child was born in the wrong body.
Shame on you Mumsnet for cancelling the very people who help us parents. The voice of sanity. More importantly the voice of support. Do you really think langcleg did this for her own gain? No. She did this to protect us all. Gonna report this post now to bring it to the attention of the monitors.
Langcleg if you are still reading these posts I thank you so much for you help. I wish you were here now to comment on the Tavistock review and feel vindicated.

I'd say I agree with you DeaconBoo but wouldn't want to be accused of a pile on!

Occasionally I disagreed with her and I do remember wincing once or twice when she wrote something that felt a bit patronising.

But that's very distinct from this image which some people seem to want to convey about her, like she was some merciless tyrant who set out to destroy anyone.

She was correct in her analyses, and she was ruthlessly targeted by outside reports (and some "insiders") for a reason.

I've never been in a pile on, but willing to give it a shot

@DialSquare

I'd say I agree with you DeaconBoo but wouldn't want to be accused of a pile on!

I agree too.

Not "piling" just agreeing.

Safeguarding is something that is targeted. We've seen that this week with the scumsnet algorithms. And yesterday the court hearing of the lack of safeguarding at the Tavistock. Even their own safeguarding lead is taking them to court ffs.

Safeguarding is quite complex, and interacts with several other disciplines. Lang was an invaluable source of information.

And she was never wrong.

That's why she was targeted and reported.

It's always interesting to note who actually contributes to safeguarding issues on these threads, and who just wants to diss.

Fortunately Lang's expertise is being sought elsewhere, and those who want to target her have no way of doing so, nor keep track of what she's doing.

You would've thought they'd have learnt by now.

you would think by now that only allowing reports from people who are members, have been for a qualifying period and who post would be a given....

Fortunately Lang's expertise is being sought elsewhere, and those who want to target her have no way of doing so, nor keep track of what she's doing.

That's good to know, thanks!

@Quaagars

Who said I wasn't here at the time?

Do you name change then?

If you agree with me about something we've both repeatedly seen happen it's proof that FWR is an echo chamber. So please could you disagree with me, dial?

No wait, disagreement is bullying...

I miss LangCleg.

It's only bullying if I strongly disagree!

I found Lang deeply empathic when I spoke about the experience of having a loved one who was extremely vulnerable.

I think there's always a kickback against safeguarding. We see it with how poorly whistleblowers are treated. There's always some who take it personally. It's just at the moment we also have large organisations who should know better (hello NSPCC and Tavistock) buy into the false notion that it would be offensive to practice safeguarding in certain areas.

I'd like to think society will one day learn. But I'm no longer convinced in the forward motion of genuine progressiveness so perhaps it won't.

Lots of people name change - this demonstrates one of the problems with doing so, even if it's for good reason.

Lots of people name change on MN, it is allowed
Lots of GC posters do too

Is anyone in touch with these women in real life? I'd love to be in touch with them and happy to DM someone my real credentials so that I can be vetted. I learned so much and wish to keep learning.

How could I trust the person I DM though? It's so confusing. If anyone here knows how you've managed to stay in touch offline please let me know how.

It is understandable that people name change once they have been targeted and deleted a few times. Why wait for the ban hammer.

@SciFiScream

Is anyone in touch with these women in real life? I'd love to be in touch with them and happy to DM someone my real credentials so that I can be vetted. I learned so much and wish to keep learning.

How could I trust the person I DM though? It's so confusing. If anyone here knows how you've managed to stay in touch offline please let me know how.

It was easier in the beginning Sci, before women realised the lengths to which certain people will go to shut women up.

I'm not sure it's as easy to form groups now, everyone's too wary from what I can tell.

Course, if mumsnet decided to have an amnesty, Lang could be invited back!

@ErrolTheDragon

Lots of people name change - this demonstrates one of the problems with doing so, even if it's for good reason.

I'm not sure I understand? Doesn't what happened to Langcleg demonstrate the importance of name-changing, so it's harder for TRAs to target individuals?

I change names every few months and use a VPN. After security breaches, I delete my account and re-register with a new one, using an email address not used for other purposes. This is all primarily for personal security, because of MN's woeful record on data breaches, but it has the additional effect of making it harder to target me though vexatious reporting.

It's a pity that name changes make it harder to follow particular individuals with expertise, like Langcleg, but they are a price worth paying for security.

I'm not sure I understand? Doesn't what happened to Langcleg demonstrate the importance of name-changing, so it's harder for TRAs to target individuals?

Yes - this came up on the scumsnet threads. There's good reason for many to do it but it's at a price.

Name changing dilutes the power of what women have to say, stops alliances being formed and stops expertise being recognised.

Those who try and coercively control this board by reporting women here will be well aware of that.

I don't judge women for feeling the need to name change but I think this should be acknowledged as an effect if it.

There was an interesting discussion recently about that at the end of this thread.

'Scumsnet' web crawler trawling Mumsnet/FWR www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/4041044-Scumsnet-web-crawler-trawling-Mumsnet-FWR

I really miss Lang. I am still angry that she was banned. I have lost faith in Mumsnet over this.

What tinsel said.
I don't judge anyone for changing name, including quagaars - but if you do so then you cant blame other people if they assume you're new here.

Anyway, yes, re Lang I can usually see some logic to MNs moderation but I think they badly miscalled this one. Admitting when you've got something wrong isn't a weakness.

The only brutal thing about LangCleg's posts was the clarity of her logic. That's what some people couldn't handle. The posts themselves were always civil but it was that pesky commitment to truth and fact that did for her.

I owe a great deal to LangCleg for opening my eyes and for encouraging me to speak up and speak out, especially to my elected representatives.

If you are reading, LC - thank you.

I miss Lang too. She spoke sense and truth. At times this meant her posts could be sharp and to the point and I think some people misunderstand this lack of "niceties" as aggression, especially as us wimmin should of course be nice

Lang didn't give a shit about that in the face of how certain practices and ideology could harm our kids. As a mum I'm so glad of this.