Time to show if you care about women, Mana

It’s a bit shit for a political party to have a Facebook page, ostensibly to reach out to potential voters, and then leave it unmoderated so that said potential voters, when asking questions about your policy, can be called “whores” and “lezos” by your supporters, n’est-ce pas?

Your move, Mana.

PS. Please don’t just delete-and-pray, though, the screenshot finger is twitchy tonight.

PPS.  Just let Sue Bradford at him and all hope will be restored.

PPPS.  More thoughts at The Storyteller Project.


  1. Boganette

    Thanks for posting about this QoT! I sincerely hope Mana swoops in and makes their viewpoint clear. I was approaching this as a potential voter. This morning I was keen on Mana and that was a genuine question I posted.

    • QoT

      It’s cool! It’s not only a completely genuine and interesting question, it’s one I’d damn well like to hear the answer to as well. It’s weird, it’s like we’re interested in political issues relevant to our lives or something.

  2. toad

    Think we should give Mana some leeway here. After all, they are a new Party and probably don’t have the resources to immediately moderate everything that gets posted to their website or FB page.

    The Greens deliberately let quite a lot of offensive stuff through on their blogs too (but not usually without adverse reaction from the commentariat).

    I’m a fan of free speech. Often it is useful to see the rantings of misogynists and racists (I suspect often drunkenly) overtly revealing themselves as such. That way, we know who they are, and can treat them with appropriate contempt next time they post anything anywhere.

    • QoT

      The initial post was made 11 hours ago, toad. So at the very least, Mana doesn’t have an ability to respond to potential voters’ questions within one working day. And the first directly-vicious comment is three hours old.

      And I think there’s a big fucking difference between “oh, just let that stuff through to show the face of the enemy” and allowing genuine potential voters to be repeatedly and horribly abused by others claiming to speak for your party with nary a sign that you even know what’s going on on your own page.

      I really want to see our politicians engaging with social media and I was pretty flattering of Mana’s website when they launched (it remains a hell of a lot better than Labour’s). But not if it’s just about a token effort with no appreciation that what you allow on your pages speaks volumes about your attitudes.

      Being drunk? Neither an excuse nor as common as you might like to think, or the alcohol lobby would have formed a world government already.

      • Boganette

        Mana admin have responded to Bomber’s post made two hours ago. That essentially means they’ve seen the post. They know its there. They chose not to respond to me or the other women who also wanted to know if they had any policy on abortion and sexual health. If they have enough time to chat with Bomber they have enough time to respond to me and to moderate. Also, this has been on Twitter all day.

        And frankly, with all due respect Toad – you weren’t the one being called a whore and a bitch and abused. It’s easier to pull the ‘free speech’ card when someone else is copping the abuse. I did nothing to provoke that kind of hateful, homophobic, misogynistic abuse.

        Does it matter that I felt like I’d been verbally punched in the face by those comments? Or should I just cop it and be happy this person “revealed” themselves to be a man who hates women? Did I react in a way that was suitable? Did I treat him with enough contempt? Or maybe, should I be allowed to ask a question on a forum and not be abused based on my gender and sexuality?

    • muerknz

      I think that protecting outright abusive speech by labeling it as free speech is wrong. It essentially means that those with the power to be abusive have the floor because those who can not stomach being abused are silenced.

      I think that if political parties are going to take on social media then they have the responsibility to resource moderators to make sure that disagreements are aired in a civil manner.

      Free speech should ensure that everyone can engage on an issue, it doesn’t mean a free for all for bullies.

      • Mr Wainscotting

        Agreed. Shutting up the bullies, the abusers, the bigots and the derailers is essential to ensuring that freedom of speech is maintained. Freedom of speech is about protecting the right of ALL people to express their opinions. Many people (especially women and minorities) are not able to freely express themselves if arseholes keep shouting them (us) down.

  3. just saying

    Bitterly disappointed.
    I don’t know how many votes they have lost today, but they just lost mine. I had intended to join the party and do some donkey work for the cause. But now…..?
    I was hoping this would be different.
    But nah. Just more of the same shit.

  4. Dan

    I can’t honestly say I would have voted for them, but I sure as hell won’t be forgetting what went down today and how they responded to our complaints. Total bullshit.