Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Carolyn Farrow taken to police station

785 replies

ScreamingMeMe · 04/10/2022 08:10

Long twitter thread here. She's had her electronic devices seized too, and has been accused of being certain posters on Kiwi Farms and Mumsnet

@BernardBlacksWineIceLolly and @BreakWindandFire sorry to tag you but she's been accused of being you!

We all know who this will be, but as Caroline says, please don't speculate/discuss them.

twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1577092705154666496?t=Cv7tRv3YdqIogpXT_MSwZQ&s=19

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
MargaritaPie · 05/10/2022 16:48

Slightly off-topic but I wonder why the DM considers her religious beliefs to be important enough to be part of the headline?

Would it make any difference at all if she were atheist, agonist, or literally any other religion?

picklemewalnuts · 05/10/2022 16:57

It's a double whammy.
'Look at this poor harmless mumsy, old fashioned, conservative woman'
And
'Ooh, Look! A religious nutter!'

Can be read whichever way you like. Win win.

LaughingPriest · 05/10/2022 16:59

Slightly off-topic but I wonder why the DM considers her religious beliefs to be important enough to be part of the headline?

Right - the usual format is it should include the value of her house!

picklemewalnuts · 05/10/2022 17:03

Ok, the meme is too nasty to share. Sorry, I'm behind. So much to catch up on today!

TheClogLady · 05/10/2022 17:13

ComebackQueen · 05/10/2022 15:33

Sorry, what’s the back story to KF?

i am scared to Google, especially if people are posting nasty things about the holocaust. Why even think that’s acceptable?

Kiwi Farms is an old fashioned style Internet forum, same as mumsnet is.

It’s based in the USA and thus operates under the constitutional freedom of speech laws that exist there (we do not have the same legal protections).

It’s anonymous and like other interactive websites, different parts of the site have a different culture/character.

As social media has become increasingly censorious, various different groups, some of whom have absolutely nothing in common, have all ended up there, simply because it’s one of the few places on the internet where you can still type out what you are actually thinking.

This has the side effect of some posters using all the words that you can’t say elsewhere, often all at once, in a close to nonsensical way. It’s a bit shocking when you first happen across it.

The site was originally created as a place to document the online shenanigans of an internet ‘personality’ known as Chris Chan.

From there, other strange internet characters have also spawned their own threads. Site owner Josh has a self declared interest in people with unusual psychologies.

The main part of the site is the above. It’s gossiping about weird internet celebs that aren’t particularly well known in the mainstream. Posters screen shot what these characters put out via social media and share it on dedicated threads, mostly to laugh at them. These people are called ‘Lolcows’ because their online presence can be milked for laughs. One of the very few rules on the site is ‘don’t touch the poo’ - ie don’t interact or make personal contact with the ‘lolcows’ (people did historically interact with original lolcow Chris Chan but that began before kiwi farms was a thing).

The thing with serial internet oversharers is they often have mental health issues. A couple of former lolcows have sadly taken their own lives and people who don’t like KF have tried to blame the suicides on the site. However, suicide is multi faceted, it’s perfectly possible for the suicides to be entirely unrelated to the site, certainly the friends and loved ones of the deceased have not blamed the site, apart from one who was an abusive ex boyfriend, whose abuse of his former girlfriend had been documented by the Farmers (!)

It’s perfectly possible for a lolcow to know nothing at all about their KF thread (due to site rule ‘don’t touch the poo’) unless they go looking.

One of the suicides associated with the Farms seems to have been faked anyway (it was an internet persona without a person attached, so pretty easy, and sensible, to just reinvent oneself and leave that online persona behind).

All the swearing and random
slurs make it easy to mischaracterise the thread as a hate site, but actually some of threads are quite supportive and caring about the pet lolcows - farmers tend to be quite strident in support of children and have documented abuse and tried to stop it (farmers have contacted police and/or child protection after witnessing troubling things in a thread subject’s social media posts). The site has also been blamed for coordinating ‘swatting attacks’ but that is definitely not something that is in anyway endorsed (the owner of the site has been targeted this way, as has Mumsnet’s owner, Justine).

In 2020, Reddit kicked a load of subreddits off the site, some of these were on the MRA (Manosphere) end of the spectrum and some were right wing political (eg r/thedonald) some were radical/gender critical feminist.
Lots of now homeless redditors migrated to the farms, which is why you have some areas that seem pretty hardcore feminist and some that are alt right. The site owner has tried to accommodate both new sets of members and the main menu is colour coded, and the moderation is a little different in the different areas (eg a female lolcow in the ironically named beauty parlour area tends to have majority female followers who are annoyed by refugees from r/thedonald popping up regular to say things like ‘wow, she’s (insert insult here) but I’d still shag her’ so that kind of nonsense gets deleted by mods.

in the bottom area of the site menu, it’s a lot more of a free for all frenzy of insults and the site owner has admitted he doesn’t really like it much but tolerates it due to his belief in free speech.

As you can imagine a site where anonymous people can say whatever they like does attract some
bad actors, however there are a few rules and it is possible to get banned. Anything posted has to be legal under US freedom of speech laws (so no incitement to violence, no illegal images) or will be deleted and porn is discouraged (because it’s everywhere else on the internet, pretty much). Critics of KiwiFarms complain of ‘doxing’ (the publishing of a persons address) but to anyone over the age of about 30 who can remember telephone directories in every hallway it’s all a bit ¯\(ツ)

Every KF post has a member reacts function so anyone persistently posting idiotic stuff will end up with a negative member rating overall. Basically it’s like a stickers reward system and if you post stuff that horrifies other posters, even in jest, you’ll lose points from your overall score.

To my mind it’s what the early internet would’ve grown be if all the big tech owners were libertarians rather than authoritarians.

The site has a lot of enemies because the members are akin to being the librarians of people doing dickish things on the internet.

None of that is really relevant to Caroline’s story beyond that the site has a bad reputation (due to all the people who don’t want paedos and abusers and fetishists to be documented collectively smearing the site as ‘far right’) and that it’s anonymous, so Person X who has been harassing Caroline in various ways for some years could theoretically post something terrible and then go to the police claiming it was Caroline who posted it.

The police SHOULD have better things to do with their time but person x is of a special protected group who seem to be able to make the police jump to their tune at will, and Caroline is a boring old Catholic mother of five.

Mumsnet FWR posters are largely sympathetic to the Farms because ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ and the same people who harass and hack and launch DDOS attacks on the farms do exactly the same thing to Mumsnet.

The owner of KF has expressed solidarity with Justine of Mumsnet in the past.

You can go read it without signing up - you won’t catch cooties (but the language will probably make your eyebrows rise so high you’ll look like you’ve had a facelift).

(advance apologies for typos and poor grammar, I have mislead my reading spectacles and cannot be arsed to peer at these tiny letters I am typing any longer)

MargaritaPie · 05/10/2022 17:15

picklemewalnuts · 05/10/2022 16:57

It's a double whammy.
'Look at this poor harmless mumsy, old fashioned, conservative woman'
And
'Ooh, Look! A religious nutter!'

Can be read whichever way you like. Win win.

Could be interpreted either way depending on the reader.

I was thinking the DM probably made a point of saying she's Catholic to try and paint a picture of a little old Christian dear who reads her bible and attends Sunday service and therefore couldn't possibly do anything bad.

picklemewalnuts · 05/10/2022 17:18

Ah, you've read less on here than you think, @MargaritaPie . Christianity is one of the scourges of the world, according to many, and all those who believe in a sky fairy should be avoided and removed from positions of responsibility.

It's one of the places where people don't look away embarrassed at the funny religious person, but sharpen their swords and dig in.

<funny religious person here>

Ereshkigalangcleg · 05/10/2022 17:27

Obviously the meme won't be able to be posted here, I believe you can view it on the fruit site as they don't delete stuff and that's where it was posted originally.

MelodyPondsMum · 05/10/2022 17:38

Religion is a protected characteristic and can be an aggravating factor in harassment. So Caro's religion might have been mentioned in that context. She might be being harassed (either by the police or the complainant) because of her religious beliefs.

BernardBlacksWineIcelolly · 05/10/2022 17:39

great summary of KF @TheClogLady

in much the same way as people are often pretty horrified when they first come here at all the mean mothers, and behaviour which is pretty standard, like robustly demanding evidence and pissing yourself laughing if wikipedia or pink news are offered up can be taken as attacks, KF takes a bit of getting used to. I've come to realise that much of what they say, while it seems extreme to me, probably doesn't to people who've been operating in that environment for years.

I still don't like it much though.

ImherewithBoudica · 05/10/2022 17:40

I think we were less than 3 pages into this thread before someone had said accusingly "she's catholic!" to rhyme with "she eats kittens!" and intended as a justification for "we don't care what happens to people Like That do we ? Letting down the tone of the neighbourhood, rights are only for people Like Me'.

This was analysed in some depth.

But yes, even Catholics have equality of rights Virginia, they really do.

And you could have a fun time drawing lines between traditional Catholicism and the Gender Ideology beliefs.

Sacred leaders, faith based position, the miracle of transubstantiation, the outcasts and sinners, original sin of females, removing children from sinner families to be raised In the Faith, it's all there. In a heavily medieval form. We've had gulags suggested, I suspect the Magdalen Laundries would be very much approved of as an answer to T**fs.

nauticant · 05/10/2022 17:46

One difference between Catholicism and Gender Ideology beliefs is that it's now hundreds of years ago that in the UK adherence to Catholicism was compulsory and rigorously enforced with deviation from the faith punished.

TheClogLady · 05/10/2022 17:49

nauticant · 05/10/2022 17:46

One difference between Catholicism and Gender Ideology beliefs is that it's now hundreds of years ago that in the UK adherence to Catholicism was compulsory and rigorously enforced with deviation from the faith punished.

Well, quite!

The major difference between Catholicism and Transactivism is that Catholicism is no longer the ‘in thing’.

MelodyPondsMum · 05/10/2022 17:54

I'd have thought the major difference was that the Pope spoke out against gender identity.

TheClogLady · 05/10/2022 17:59

MelodyPondsMum · 05/10/2022 17:54

I'd have thought the major difference was that the Pope spoke out against gender identity.

Pretty certain that High Priests, Priestesses& NonbinaryFolx of Genderism speak out against Catholicism, so…

PronounssheRa · 05/10/2022 18:01

So the police in that Mail article said that Caroline was "requested to attend a voluntary interview"

IANAL however can the police force their way into your house to request you attend a voluntary interview.

The police had seemingly been presented with a number of well ordered and correctly numbered exhibits. It was almost as though they had been handed a pre-written case

That is interesting.............. though obviously I won't speculate

Pixiedust1234 · 05/10/2022 18:27

Thanks @TheClogLady that was an interesting read about the farms Smile

ScreamingMeMe · 05/10/2022 18:39

BernardBlacksWineIcelolly · 05/10/2022 17:39

great summary of KF @TheClogLady

in much the same way as people are often pretty horrified when they first come here at all the mean mothers, and behaviour which is pretty standard, like robustly demanding evidence and pissing yourself laughing if wikipedia or pink news are offered up can be taken as attacks, KF takes a bit of getting used to. I've come to realise that much of what they say, while it seems extreme to me, probably doesn't to people who've been operating in that environment for years.

I still don't like it much though.

AIBU still frightens me!

OP posts:
Womblesgash · 05/10/2022 18:41

The Police would not force their way into an address to get someone to comply with a voluntary procedure like a voluntary interview.

What often happens is that if someone refuses to take part in a voluntary interview which prevents an offence being investigated, then this gives a constable a power to enter an address to arrest someone - if the offence is what is called an either way or indictable offence.

Well ordered and correctly numbered exhibits is just how any evidence is seized and named. Nothing more than that. It needs to be referred to in an interview using a proper exhibit number.

MrsMorton · 05/10/2022 19:42

Womblesgash · 05/10/2022 18:41

The Police would not force their way into an address to get someone to comply with a voluntary procedure like a voluntary interview.

What often happens is that if someone refuses to take part in a voluntary interview which prevents an offence being investigated, then this gives a constable a power to enter an address to arrest someone - if the offence is what is called an either way or indictable offence.

Well ordered and correctly numbered exhibits is just how any evidence is seized and named. Nothing more than that. It needs to be referred to in an interview using a proper exhibit number.

What are you suggesting happened here? That the police didn't force their way in? Or that CF refused a voluntary interview?

SnapeAlways · 05/10/2022 19:43

Nobody offered me the opportunity of an interview. Mail has got this bit wrong.

beastlyslumber · 05/10/2022 19:45

It was a quote from the police, Snape. I think the police are the ones who are lying have got this wrong.

SnapeAlways · 05/10/2022 20:24

They said “there’s been an allegation….can we come in?”

I said no I’d rather not, have you got a warrant?

Leant over, grabbed door, we don’t need one you are under arrest.

picklemewalnuts · 05/10/2022 20:25

That's awful, Snape. So terrible.

I pray you and your household are able to find peace despite all this.

Are you and your husband supported by the diocese? (Does the Catholic church even organise by Diocese?)

Womblesgash · 05/10/2022 20:53

Mrs Morton

I obviously wasn’t there but what I can say is that the Police would not have the grounds to force their way into an address to request if someone would be interviewed voluntarily. It would be illegal, they would not have the grounds to do that and are liable to be sued. If the person had already refused then that is totally different.

The police are allowed to enter an address using reasonable force to arrest someone if the offence is not a summary offence (malicious communications is not a summary offence) and they believe the person who they need to arrest is inside the address.

So as the Officers believed that CF was inside the address as the picture shows them speaking to CF at the front door and as the offence CF was going to be arrested for is not a summary offence, this means the Officers can legally enter the address by grabbing the door and going inside to arrest her.

it’s under Section 17 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.