Late night surprise about reputation of FWR

[IwantToRetire]

I was on Site Stuff to report back on ongoing freezing and noticed another thread about whether Mumsnet should apologise about deleting threads about ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

And there were some comments about there being a border line between legitimate criticism of Israel's policies and anti semitism. And it is this last that get these threads deleted.

So was surprised to see some comment on this thread saying it was as bad as some threads on FWR, and those particularly at fault are thos with a GC view point.

(Funnily enough AI suggested a title for this thread along the lines of "Are FWR debates judged differently ..... " but now it has hidden its suggestion, just when I was going to use it.)

Oh its come back

"Are sex and gender debates on FWR judged by different standards?"

Yes, it reminds me of the 'First they came for.....' poem.

At the end, if you don't care about others, no one will be left to defend you.

I'm not 'tagging' you (you should be able to turn that off in your settings though), I am late coming across the thread and am replying to your posts as I go through the thread, reading. That is how a discussion forum is.

So now you are saying a person merely replying to you is 'aggressive'? If you don't want anyone replying to you, why are you on a message forum? And it's late afternoon on Sunday (5:15pm) where I am. I am able to cook some dinner.

Yep, that's exactly what I'm doing.

But apparently daring to even reply, at all, is 'aggressive'. Silly me for thinking this was a discussion forum.

I didn’t actually mean the core debate (women’s rights), but the debate about the how hostile to other women this board is.

It’s an interesting @ThatBlackCat , there’s another poster in the FWR thread in site stuff also complaining about all the aggressive notifications from people replying to them. I’d never considered before the perspective that simply engaging with someone on a discussion forum could be seen as aggressive, but you live and learn.

And to answer the OP, I’m surprised that a regular MN user is unaware of the reputation of this particular board as a hell pit of nasty transphobia from posters who regard it as the naughty corner. Usually from the same people who say that JKR is evil but are unable to articulate why beyond she’s “not kind”.

As previously observed, the claims of “hostility” fall flat when you read some of the rude comments of the people complaining about it. IME the “aggression” is more than matched.

@DrBlackbird

First of all, what are those views that you’ve not changed one bit in 15 years?

Oddly, my views are fairly much the same as the majority of this board re: gender issues. They were that way when I found the board and have remained the same to this day.

🎵It ain’t what you do…..🎵

Gosh I do hope that the scolders are reporting all the transphobia they claim to be here as it's against the guidelines to be transphobic

though of course I expect what they really mean by transphobia is pointing out that no one can change sex, men are not women, women are allowed single sex spaces, that AGP is a thing et etc

Ie. “No-one is allowed to push back or defend themselves robustly even a little bit or I will complain about it endlessly and inflate the claims far beyond the actual original comments. If this sounds abusive, that’s because it is.”

We of course they.

Who is stopping you post your point of view?

Oh sure, when people you agree with are rude it’s just “pushing back”, but not other people.

When people push back against being called “hysterical”, “aggressive” or “childish” for eg.

The point is, @ItsNotOrwell is that some other people on this thread you are criticising don’t see these exchanges like you do, they think you’re biased. And you think the same about them. So I’m not sure what the point of constantly scolding people is. They simply don’t agree.

Indeed 🎵 the last resort of people with zero argument.

I'm not even sure it's the replying which is 'aggressive', it's the notifications from MN! If that's the case, people need to learn how to use MN settings and turn them off.

Blaming the responder for how MN works, unless settings are changed, is totally nonsensical.

I’ve been welcomed with open arms. Maybe it’s the women not coming in here in good faith, and wanting to scold others that are getting challenged. If you’re used to the love ins on Reddit and bluesky, sure, the direct questions and disagreement can seem aggressive, but I was taught in high school, don’t say anything you can’t back up. Edited for spelling.

Well when people are told words are violence, surely notify someone about saying some words is doubly violent, because you’ve got the words in the notification and the words themselves!

Quite incredible to see a poster frantically accusing someone of repeatedly "tagging her" when everyone can see that ThatBlackCat has done nothing of the sort.

Falsely accusing someone of aggression because you're unable to work out how to turn notifications off is really not in the spirit of reasonable debate is it.

Tagging can be perceived as rude on MN. Especially if you ask not to. But I wouldn't call it aggressive.

Falsely accusing someone of aggression because you're unable to work out how to turn notifications off is really not in the spirit of reasonable debate is it.

Nope. I did temper my post to not say exactly what I really think about people using such tactics. I didn't want a deletion! 🤣

That poster actually meant replying, however, which also sends an email notification if you've not bothered to change your settings.

She was quoted, rather than tagged. That notifies as well I think. Given that it’s not easy to copy and paste any more, it would be difficult to respond to the posts any other way.

Quoting is regarding differently to @ tagging.

There is @ tagging going on.

Its the singling out that isn't always viewed favourably, but quoting has never been regarded as rude.