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'm generally a lurker on FWR, I rarely post, but it seems to me from MNHQ's replies here, like the articulate and knowledgeable women of FWR are being scolded (naicely, of course) for not being naice - which the responses themselves make out as being a moveable feast (or a set of frantically galloping goalposts).

P/S. Personally I can't think of anything naicer or more ladylike than sharing some lovely recipes, unless perhaps Mums ought to be sharing some lovely nappy-folding techniques?

RedToothBrush I agree with everything you say and haven't posted on FWR for ages, partly because of this and partly because I don't log in that often and by the time I do, I don't have anything to add to the - pretty much always - interesting, robust and thought-provoking discussion.

I do appreciate the fine lines that MNHQ are treading. I do appreciate why they decided to create a specific 'guidelines for trans posts moderation' document. I do appreciate that it must sometimes be easier to delete a post then stand up to pressure.

BUT

If posters can't name reality, then what on earth is 'moderating' trying to achieve? If posters have to pretend, for example, that a person with a male user name with a very male posting style isn't a man so as to not get deleted/a strike towards being banned, what is driving the moderation?

Of course moderation should be bound by external legal frameworks, but its central purpose on a discussion forum should be to facilitate debate. Of course there should be 'rules' about personal attacks, racist/homophobic/transphobic content etc, but for what reason is the bar for 'transphobic' set so much lower than any other potentially offended group?

And as ever, how can a discussion forum make parent's lives easier if it forbids, obscures or obfuscates issues of safeguarding, grooming, age of consent, medication for minors etc etc

Don't know what the answer is, but I also miss LangCleg.

Views such as believing that (any specific trans woman) are still a man aren't tolerated though. Not logical to say that views are tolerated which will possibly leading to a strike for disabled autistic people if they take the post logically and at face value.

Also some viewpoints should not be tolerated...(eg any that think terrorism or CSA are ok)

Logic also dictates that Lang's view that coercive control training for moderators were not tolerated.

Post from mnhq above does not make any sense at all to someone who may be autistic.

I concur BabyItsAWildWorld.

LangCleg's views on safeguarding were clearly too hot to handle.

And the ban was over a misunderstanding, though Lang's points were very poignant at the time.

Spinster.xyz is a safeguarding friendly place btw.

Excellent post red

I bloody miss her.

There's not a lot of logic to it Susan.

If posters have to pretend, for example, that a person with a male user name with a very male posting style isn't a man so as to not get deleted/a strike towards being banned

People having"male" user names, doesn't necessarily mean they're a man!
Plus, actual women get told they must be men too.
Not quite gettng what you mean by "men's posting style" either?
What is a woman "supposed" to write like?

The knowledge I have gained from LangCleg and others on this board about safeguarding and coercive control gave me self belief and courage when dealing with a safeguarding issue in an organisation. Whilst most were being kind and getting groomed or manipulated, what I had learnt let me see clearly what was happening and deal with it appropriately and without taking personal offence, grey rock and all that.

I agree there is very little logic to all this stuff. It went a long way without it though. It was also allowed to damage children's lives, influence policy (in back room deals, as we discovered) and shove safeguarding aside. It is quite liberating when the veil falls away and you see the manipulation in pursuit of bankrupt selfish interests for what it is.

@Quaagars

If posters have to pretend, for example, that a person with a male user name with a very male posting style isn't a man so as to not get deleted/a strike towards being banned

People having"male" user names, doesn't necessarily mean they're a man!
Plus, actual women get told they must be men too.
Not quite gettng what you mean by "men's posting style" either?
What is a woman "supposed" to write like?

I don't generally consider there to be "male" or "female" posting styles, but then again there were OPs a few days ago in FWR about "women belong in the kitchen" and have "hairy vaginas" which tbh I would class as male content if not style.

I don't generally consider there to be "male" or "female" posting styles, but then again there were OPs a few days ago in FWR about "women belong in the kitchen" and have "hairy vaginas" which tbh I would class as male content if not style.

Oh, I remember that thread - is that the one who said all feminists are stinky or something?
If so, yeah kind of gave self away there!
I got told to shut up and go iron his shirts which just made me laugh

There was Miss Popoff of Rentaghost, I think.

Nadia Popov, who teleported when she sneezed! I’d completely forgotten.

Well now we all know what sneezes are...

🤣

Is deacon being rude?

I feel deacon may be being rude

I knew someone who sneezed like this...

Choo, choo,choo,choo,choo.choo

For about 10 mins

I miss Lang, The Bewilderness, AAK and so many other wise women who were targeted. FWR still stands, is regularly targeted by posters who are looking for screenshots who then attempt to have other posters banned, The recent revelation about scumsnet makes it clear how a certain group of people do not like certain posters providing clarity about issues.

There are still so many wise women posting, like Red, Datun and others but it is hard not to miss Lang and her clear insight into areas of concern.

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

I knew someone who sneezed like this...

Choo, choo,choo,choo,choo.choo

For about 10 mins

Had you trained them?

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

I knew someone who sneezed like this...

Choo, choo,choo,choo,choo.choo

For about 10 mins

Now wondering if you know me or have met me in RL as you've just described me and my sneezing fits If so soz about that, I do around 10 non stop in a row and they do come out a bit machine gun like

Why weren't you interested in this stuff before your daughters/nieces were part of your life?

Who says I wasn't?

I like to keep up to date and mumsnet is a good place to do so, even if often unfriendly to men (whilst claiming to fight sexism).

MNHQ needs to apologize and invite Langcleg back.

That's what you do when you were wrong.

Creepy.

Nobody's going to acknowledge my hilarious pun then?

Creepy

?