Bunbury’s Eighth- Sealion training for beginners

[SophocIestheFox]

Old thread nearly full!

————————————-

The useful Bunbury Guide to Spotting Community Disruptors is constantly evolving.

The best research and advice is not to engage with community disruptors and trolls. As ever, if you suspect troll activity, report it to MNHQ.

Remember there are people out there who would like to silence us by fair means or foul.

This is a continuation of the Public Service Announcement thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3944572-Bunburys-guide-to-community-disruptors-part-5?pg=40

If and when you see threads plopped into FWR, especially a curious repeat of well worn topics, maybe check for poster history before engaging. AS is your friend.

There are a number of posts/posters/threads that are reproduced on Twitter or Facebook to foment controversy using screen shots & flagging to either MNHQ to have threads or posters deleted.. Sometimes, it’s used to approach commissioning editors with ideas for articles. It’s a tiresome tactic that we always have community disruptor posters who themselves post the comments that they then highlight elsewhere as purported evidence of racism, religious intolerance, anti-men sentiments, or transphobia.

Some helpful links can be found in the ‘Break it Down for me’ and ‘It never happens’ threads but in essence FermatsTheorem recommended “that in the absence of a block/hide poster button, I suggest the following strategy (given that you're talking to the lurkers).

Do not name check the sealion. Instead, respond to a depersonalised paraphrase:

"It is sometimes erroneously suggested that blah. Blah is wrong for the following reasons (short and pithy). If you need more information re. debunking blah, here's a link."

Then (this next step is important to combat derailment) go back up thread to the last useful contribution to the discussion, make sure you do name check that contributor, and pick up the discussion from that point.”

I didn't engage with the thread you're referring to, so may have missed some subtleties.
But it's bloody 'uncivil' for someone who is objectively not a female to take a place meant for women. And it's 'uncivil' for such a person to insist on a feminism board that they are a 'female'. Appropriating terms which uniquely define protected characteristics of a group you don't belong to is 'uncivil' in the extreme. Surely it breaks the general MN guidelines against inflammatory behaviour?

Exactly Errol.
By all means allow it, but the current system is deeply unfair. Posters are allowed to say that (some) men are women, but no one is allowed to refute it in equally blunt language.

I am bemused by how heavily this section is moderated, but also heavily inspired.

If it weren't for all the deletions, I would assume that our discussions on here were irrelevant to the wider world.

Someone posted elsewhere they've got a weeks suspension. Can't be sure who they are on here exactly but I think CaraDuneRedux is a possibility.

The dissonance between 'this section is so heavily moderated' and is rapidly growing in posters must be high in those that keep stating 'it is such a small number of women who disagree, you are all in the minority'.

I am not sure when the political parties other than the conservatives will realise that this lie has been told to them constantly soothing them into accepting with no debate allowed.

It must be very worrisome for people's political aspirations to have clear push back like this. There will come a time when it will simply be forced into the electorates and decided there. And of course, past social media interactions will be become a huge burden for some.

Fortunately, for every head that's cut from the hydra of feminism, two seem to spring up in its place.

Some posters are curiously oblivious to how good they are at winning hearts and minds...for us.

That is very much the case, Errol

For those in the know, a deletion or a strike is less 'that was unacceptable and shouldn't be allowed' to those in the know now than an admission of 'that was something that was too acute to be allowed to be seen'.

Sorry that was totally incoherent

Thankfully confused cat/toddler/dog-interfered with posts are not a deleting offence, or I'd have been banned years ago.

I thought your cat/dog/toddler was very clear, Michelle!

Well between them possibly I could leave them to FWR and they'd fix it for us

I'd vote for that triumvirate. I'll throw in a tweenager, too.

The Staniland thread is a fascinating insight into how male socialised people think of women, its like a cross between St Trinians and Confessions of a Window Cleaner. I wonder if they realise how much they show themselves?

I'm doing my best not to comment on it.

There are some threads which sound so temptiungly hilarious that I have to go and look for them...

I was suspended for using two words which I DIDN'T KNOW WERE VERBOTEN!

I cannot comprehend my evilness at times...

Fatblack if it's any consolation both strikes I've had in the past have been for a word I had no idea was not allowed, had been freely used before without problem across the board, has never been mentioned as unacceptable, and which I gladly would have changed if a) I'd known and b) been given the chance.

Posting is rather like that mythical fountain in the shape of a mouth where you stick your hand in and hope it doesn't go yunk and bite your hand off.

I've seen people deleted for words which are not in the banned list, but which can become "problematic" when viewed "in context". I assumed this meant that it's when someone, or many someone's, report a post for being too accurate and the mods not having time/energy to tell them "no". I'm beginning to think that "no" may be the next of these words.....

I don't mean to criticise anyone by this comment but I have huge sympathy for MNHQ - they are caught in the sights of some of the most aggressively litigious organisations / individuals targeting them in an effort to stop women discussing our sex based rights. It appears that very few organisations ever say no to these groups demanding to change laws, language, schools, definitions, women's sex based rights etc.

I find the special rules exasperating at times BUT this is outweighed by my appreciation of them standing fast and not caving in to the pressure to silence women that, until recently, almost every other organisation has given into. For that reason I happily have a premium account and will continue to be open about how courageous they are. We know it is not without cost and sometimes I'm not sure that we always recognise this.

I think we do, but it's possible to appreciate the difficulties faced by businesses who support the continued opportunity to speak, albeit under significant and arbitrary constraints, while pointing out that the arbitrary constraints similarly place a very heavy burden on the women who post here, many of whom have provided, for many years, the content by which the company has made its name.

I will say thank you where it is merited, but when push comes to shove, my allegiance will always be with women, rather than business. I've made many strategic compromises, and I am pragmatic about the things necessary to protect the rights of women and girls. So I'm grateful for the continued opportunity to speak about that, all things considered, but permitting women to say no to repeated boundary violations is a pretty low bar as these things go.

@persistentwoman

I don't mean to criticise anyone by this comment but I have huge sympathy for MNHQ - they are caught in the sights of some of the most aggressively litigious organisations / individuals targeting them in an effort to stop women discussing our sex based rights. It appears that very few organisations ever say no to these groups demanding to change laws, language, schools, definitions, women's sex based rights etc.

I find the special rules exasperating at times BUT this is outweighed by my appreciation of them standing fast and not caving in to the pressure to silence women that, until recently, almost every other organisation has given into. For that reason I happily have a premium account and will continue to be open about how courageous they are. We know it is not without cost and sometimes I'm not sure that we always recognise this.

Well said. I also took out a Premium Account for the same reason.

I fqind the special rules exasperating at times BUT this is outweighed by my appreciation of them standing fast and not caving in to the pressure to silence women that, until recently, almost every other organisation has given into. For that reason I happily have a premium account and will continue to be open about how courageous they are. We know it is not without cost and sometimes I'm not sure that we always recognise this

This👆

I came to that thread late. The sheer amount of deletions was extraordinary.

And I know full well that the deleted posts would have been very well thought-out, very astute posts that would have made excellent points. It's a real shame.

I'm afraid I somewhat disagree however I'm unable to article exactly why because the things I would like to say would almost certainly have me deleted or banned.

Which is kind of ironic.

persistentwoman

Yup.
And I'm pleased that despite the best efforts of community disrupters, FWR is still here and seems to become ever more populous. The restrictions on language throw into sharp relief what's going on.

@persistentwoman

I don't mean to criticise anyone by this comment but I have huge sympathy for MNHQ - they are caught in the sights of some of the most aggressively litigious organisations / individuals targeting them in an effort to stop women discussing our sex based rights. It appears that very few organisations ever say no to these groups demanding to change laws, language, schools, definitions, women's sex based rights etc.

I find the special rules exasperating at times BUT this is outweighed by my appreciation of them standing fast and not caving in to the pressure to silence women that, until recently, almost every other organisation has given into. For that reason I happily have a premium account and will continue to be open about how courageous they are. We know it is not without cost and sometimes I'm not sure that we always recognise this.

I do agree with you but not in the weeks I've been banned and it is on my list of things to do is sign up for premium for this reason

now do I go and look at the thread that has porno in the title or do I look at wombats?