Let's talk about sex toys (well, ads for them on Mumsnet), please

< loves > Blackcurrant's post.

I never even noticed the site had ads until a thread talked about it. Personally I wouldn't mind because I'm oblivious but I think the offence such ads might cause is more damaging than the lack of ads. No one is sat at home thinking how much better their life would be if they only knew where to buy a sex toy.

< likes > blackcurrant's post

I like sex. Lots. And even sometimes have sex, with my DH who is ever so fit and really fancies me.

[preens smugly]

That disclaimer aside, NO, MNHQ, please no. Because I browse MN at work sometimes during lunch, and that banner ad could block my access.. forever! How would I cope? And because I browse MN at home sometimes and leave the PC on and I don't want DS mashing the keyboard and opening the site, and when I browse on my tablet thingy on the train the ads can easily be opened by my sausagefingers accident. Which would give the poor person sitting next to me quite a shock, I imagine.

If I want sex toys, I will seek them out, I know where to look. Frankly I don't care if someone needs a butt plug, a plastic arsehole, five live weasels and a photo of Rick Astley to get them groovin' (as long as the weasels are bought dinner and treated respectful, like) but I really would think a lot less of MN if they advertised that stuff.

I'm not a prude, heck, most parents have had sex at least once or twice, right? I'm just classy, really. I wouldn't take my toddler running through the red light district on holiday, and for the same reason I wouldn't ask weaning, relationship, or even sex-based questions on MN under the banner of "get yer plastic arsehole here."

Not for me. Not for me at all.

No. It is not right.

Yes we are grown ups, yes we have sex. It does not mean I want to experiment with a toy that look like a washing up brush. Neither do I want ads for them thrown in my face.

However, it means I most likely have young children around me, and I would want to be able to leave my pc to attend to said child, even if he is 9 and knows it all, without having to worry about the ads that might show up on my screen in my absence.

Naturally I dont read sensitive threads when they are around, I leave that till after their bedtime. But I have no control over what ads are showing.

This means I dont want adds for alcohol, or guns, or EMINEMS latest album either.....

Just as I dont go to Youtuve to check out Justin Timberlakes "motherlover" when the kids are around.

What PenguinsArethePoint said.

Using MN on my phone, the banner ads just seem to come up above the mumsnet logo. Your brand is just going to look so blinking stupid when the first thing you see is a silhouette of a baby pointing to a sex product ad.

I worry about the MN brand. So far, for me, it has been one of those brilliant brands that I can forgive when it makes mistakes, but I couldn't forgive this one.

now this is the kind of discussion about sex toys on Mumsnet that I like. Apologies for frivolity on serious thread, but it is v funny.

Exactly Uppity and that was what was so very upsetting when the ad did appear. I have seen numerous threads where people chat about lurvehoney and various sexual activities. Not a problem, as there's a chance to discuss. Just an ad thrown in your face with no warning, not fine.

Exactly Alys - it's the one perspective thing isn't it.

If they feel 'wrong' then a thread discussing it would be great, where then likeminded people can all say 'whoopie doo', and people who aren't likeminded could say 'what about...'. All the shades of gray can be discussed.

An ad is not. It is black and white and divisive. Some people would like that stuff to be normalised, some people would fight to stop that. Some people think being put in a straightjacket with blacked eyes and a doll is the bee's knees, some people have had such stuff done to them as abuse. The latter should not be sold out to suit the former.

And a separate sex forum should also be able to encompass those who just lurve anal speculums and those who are working out how to cope with sex following abuse with speculums, so ads promoting one perspective would still not be appropriate.

Oh yes and a big fat no to Ann Summers as well, if only from a pure style and beauty snob aspect.

If I want nylon scratchy knickers I will get myself down to Peacocks.

Oh Oldlady, the rest of the world is telling women that there's nothing wrong or deviant with being tied up.

The rest of the world tells women that sex is all about dressing up, games, sex toys, props, role play etc.

Mumsnet has been a safe space where women can come and say "I don't want to do xyz" and with the exception of the handmaidens and the trolls, they have been told: "if you don't want to, you have the right not to. Your feelings about this are valid". As well as a space where women can ask about BDSM and not be told they're dirty or deviant.

The acceptance of this sort of advertising, tells those who don't want to do sex toys, porn, gimp masks etc., that they're now in a space where their feelings as usual, as in the rest of the world, aren't valid. A few individual posters will carry on giving them good advice, telling them that they have a right to their feelings, while the space itself is a space where the opinions of the trolls and the handmaidens are endorsed. It's a completely different dynamic.

Whereas a woman coming on and feeling a bit worried about wanting to try BDSM, isn't going to be disadvantaged by the fact that there are no ads for it. It is about power balance.

Honestly, the rest of the world is full of stuff that tells women they should try everything at least once, however unappealing. I just don't see why it's MN's job to come down on the side of the experimental, mainstream-approved unsure BDSM-er, against the unsure, not wanting to do something her DP wants her to do vanilla woman, when not having any ads would be neutral. IMO.

A agree with soupdragon in that we are very fortunate that MN listen to their membership pretty much 100% of the time wrt their advertising - just thinking of removing ads for news international products, and Iwantgreatcare, just in the last 6 months.

I don't know if any other forum genuinely listens to their reader's opinions when it relates to cold, hard revenue. I have faith that they will listen to the majority view with this as well.

But also - this is a business to them, not a social enterprise. There will be commercial links that not everyone will approve of.

But I hope that they will listen to us on this - I don't give a monkeys if someone wants to shove a glass zigzag up their jacksie, really, but I dislike the fact that this has become somewhat normal, and I think the link to hardcore porn is inextricably linked. So - no thanks. Porn is vile and so is a lot of this stuff.

I agree oldlady and said so earlier, but everyone ignored me :( lots of women on the s&m scene and we they certainly aren't demeaned! also quite like the idea of a seperate sex forum - a compromise mumsnet ?

I'd support a separate "sex" forum, the ads could be there.

I'm not sure if I'm playing devil's advocate here, but surely there are some women who do enjoy being trussed up in a straightjacket for sex, so there will be some women who are toying with the idea. They may already feel "wrong" about this, especially if they've read posts on this thread and/or the other about how "demeaning" women is doing wrong to all women... Wouldn't it be good for such women to click on links which shown they are not in fact total deviant weirdos? If this equipment is so readily available, it's because there's a market for it, and I can't believe that every piece of bondage gear is sold to abusive men, to be used on unwilling women.

Fab post Uppity

yy uppity

Good point, Reaper.

I've not yet read the whole tread but imo you can't campaign to let girls be girls at the same time as allowing advertising for a site that sells sexy school girl outfits.

"I do doubt if having such ads would result in an increase in sexually abusive practices"

I can't remember anyone suggesting that.

What I do think it would do, is inhibit anyone asking for support. And undermine them when they do. As others have said, it turns this place from a "safe space", into the same old space women inhabit in the rest of the world - the space where our needs, desires, wants, feelings and concerns, are automatically considered less important than those of men.

The thing that makes me sad about the dumbing down of MN, is that it's the first place outside of my all girls secondary school, where I have found that the world revolves around what women think and say and do and feel and the discussion and insights revolve around that. Which of course, is why large parts of the media despise it. And now MNHQ appear to be trying to counter that contempt by turning this space into a space like every other one on the internet - a space where women are constantly reminded, that they should not expect their feelings and needs to be treated with the same respect and consideration as those of men.

Ah well.

I think the messages coming out of MNHQ are very confused. On one hand, they are pushing the whole family-friendly message with the hall of fame and then asking about ads for sex toys. It doesn't really sound like they've thought it through at all.

I can't see many of the companies in the hall of fame wanting to see their brands muddied by an association with a site that advertises sites like LoveHoney.

I wouldn't want to see these sort of ads on MN, for lots of reasons. It might well be enough to drive me permanently onto Twitter. I've definitely used MN less since I got into Twitter in any case.