Official Complaint to Mumsnet

I was less than thrilled to see a thread about rimming appear in my active threads.

I was surprised to suddenly see so many discussions about what kind of sex people like.

Is MNHQ trying to persuade potential new advertisers we are all desperately trying sex toys & new positions and are MILFs?

It definitely was before. Or are you denying that?

The mention of cats etc. also being "womb owners" thus qualifying for one of these apparently taboo-busting vibrators really highlights the ridiculousness of such language use. These vibrators are for WOMEN.

Humans are animals, mammals, primates... nothing more. Literally any other animal we will regard as male or female if it has the characteristics of that sex. Udders = cow, not bull; mane = lion, not lioness. Why are humans these special creatures who choose? Utter madness.

Honestly do MN think we’re thick or something - that we wouldnt notice this shit, or the sex topic being switched back onto active, it being unhidden from everyone who had previously hidden it so they’d see shrek’s ear being advertised?

but they’re sorry so it’s ok

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet thank you for having the (I want to say balls, but in light of everything else on the thread it feels glib) to come back on and at least try and address some of this.

However, MN has to take on board that 'reviewing' the sex board suddenly being in active and suddenly visible even to people who had the topic hidden has potentially caused sincere distress to some. For all the falling over yourselves to be inclusive, MN felt it worth the risk even though they were warned yesterday in site stuff.

It's clear that it was to make sure Shrek's ear got in front of as many users as possible on launch day.

It's a poor show, and I'm very much couching my language there.

The timing of allowing the sex topic in active is obvious and shows a lack of care to women, the ones who make your forum a success. You should be ashamed.

And the sex topic is full of pervy men, you know that. You should address that.

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet , thank you for coming back to us. I do however find your assertion of “FYI this thread isn’t excluded from Active” thoroughly disingenuous. It might not be now but I had plenty of time whilst waiting for my car to be MOT’d earlier to ascertain that it was very much no longer on Active, even immediately after I posted, which was then confirmed by many others. I don’t think anyone takes kindly to being gaslit.

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet

Looking at it objectively can you see that the use of baby bottles as bullet points listing the benefits of a vibrator in your shared Instagram post is at best icky AF? Genuinely curious.

"This is completely irrelevant to this discussion and I'm not at all surprised to see it here given how ridiculous many of you are.

Adam Graham is a man posing as a trans woman to try and escape his incarceration with men."

@discobrain It's not at all irrelevant given the whole point of the discussion of the language here (as well as the Shrek ears part) includes the definition of the word "woman". If the word "woman" was could only be used correctly ie adult human female, then IB and other men wouldn't even be able to pose as them! "Trans woman" as a term is also meaningless as woman cannot have a descriptive adjective (sorry I can't think of the exact word, ironically). There are no categories of women. You are one or you aren't. We are biological human females and this should not be "opened up" to give men an opportunity to exploit it. I'm glad you agree IB is a man doing exactly this, as it proves my point.

IB isn't a woman and no other man can be a woman. Language is hugely relevant which is exactly why so many women are objecting to it here. You can call us ridiculous and frothers if you like, I don't give a fuck. You and all the predictable dismissive and minimising insults won't stop us speaking out.

The fact it was ever signed off by your content team, if you have one, is ridiculous. Absolutely dreadful that nobody at MN thought that might be picked up by us, vile TERFS that we are.

Still, it's money in the bank eh.

Back on active After we changed the wording....

I'd still like to know why sex was added to active without any announcement yesterday @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet and whether MN will be addressing concerns about that.

It definitely was earlier on though.

Their website says that green is their most requested vibrator colour. I’m trying to fathom where this comes from! Do people (with wombs) message them ad-hoc asking for Shrek’s ear vibrators or have they asked 10 people in a focus group what colour they like?

"The wording is perfectly fine, it's inclusive and those offended really do need to get a grip.

-non binary person with a womb"

Use your damn brain. The wording is not totally fine and it is definitely not inclusive.

-woman without a womb

It's interesting the 'he's not a real TW' argument. They shoot themselves in the foot here. First, denying a person's identity is 'transphobic', so disco is being transphobic here. With self-ID, a person is as they say they are. So if a person says they are a TW, then, they ARE! It's not up to you to say who they are, while at the same time talking out the other side of your mother and saying be inclusive and validate them. Either self-ID is self-ID, or it's not. Make up your mind. You can't have it both ways, and it's not up to you to say who is or isn't a 'real' TW.

Is this device actually on sale anywhere or is this just a marketing department exercise to find out how many people they can offend all at once? Or are the people who commissioned the add campaign looking to get their money back?

If it helps- I am offended by ads that avoid using the word woman and by the mangled language. The colour would have made me think of vomit but now I can only think of Shrek's ears. I feel patronised as well as insulted by the add and I dont buy from companies who think they can patronise me.

You could use this as an example of how not to advertise a product. Sadly it doesnt reach the so bad it's funny level, it's just too bad to talk about except here..

I agree with all of the previous comments. What were you thinking mumsnet?

Frothers? You’ll be saying we are all suffering from hysteria next! @discobrain

An inclusive sex toy could easily be marketed as ‘unisex’ ‘for everyone’ ‘for use anywhere’. I have no issue with that.

But when you are specifically marketing a product at MOTHERS who are WOMEN and advertising it on a site called MUMSNET, but you can’t even bring yourself to use the word ‘woman’….it’s extremely fucking problematic for a lot of women. It’s not on any way inclusive. And giving us a lecture on gender woo to boot? No. Women don’t want to be patronised and educated in the course of buying something to aid wanking.

And language IS important. It’s precisely because of the ridiculous ‘inclusion’ of people with penises in the definition of ‘woman’, pushed by TRAs, that people like Isla Bryson gain access to female single sex spaces. Wake the fuck up and put your ‘be kind’ banner down (maybe next to the ‘decapitate TERFs’ banners some of these charmers have been waving about recently).

Mary Palmer and her 5 daughters don't count as 'sex' or positive 'relationships', sir, do try harder.

Yeah they’ve done a dirty delete on the people with wombs thing. The vulva owners thing is all over the product description

@IAmWomanHearMeRoar1 I'm in my OWN basement thank you very much.

I've also had far too much sex, and positive relationships with people to be an incel, do try harder.