The Sex topic - an update on moderation

[YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet]

Hi everyone.

Thanks for all your comments over the past week regarding the Sex board. It’s become clear from the discussion that we needed a rethink about our approach to this part of the site and so we’re going to introduce some rules to help ensure that posters can get the support and advice they need from the board and that everyone has clear expectations of the behaviour we expect.

Posters must be at least 18 years of age - Mumsnet has always been a site for adults but we want to be crystal clear about this for this board.

The board is text based - we don’t allow NSFW (not safe for work) images.

We don’t allow links to any NSFW sites or personal profiles on other sites

We will not tolerate creepy or harassing behaviour in particular from male posters

We’ve also had concerns raised about the ongoing ‘sex chat threads’ including the risks involved with allowing users to PM each other. Our approach has always been to allow consenting adults to make their own judgement when it comes to what they’ll share and, broadly, that is still the case across the site - but we acknowledge there are additional vulnerabilities here that we ought to consider.

With that in mind, we will no longer allow users to ask for or to offer to send PMs for the purposes of sex chat. For one thing, we can’t guarantee that the person you’re chatting with is who they say they are and we can’t realistically safeguard these kind of off-board discussions. We’ve looked at the moderation principles of similar boards on other sites and this is indeed the policy on several others.

We’d also like to address some of your other comments if we may. Last year we reduced the time required from joining to posting on Sex from 90 days to seven. We’ve no plans to change this at the moment because this timeframe has proved to be a sufficient deterrent to bad actors and we believe that 90 days is too long if you’re a new user with a genuine concern. We’d also like to be clear that our commercial partnerships have had zero bearing on any changes we’ve made (nor did anyone ask us to make changes) and MNHQ does not (and would never) post affiliate links to products under the guise of a regular MNer. We may be many things, but we are not underhand!

As with everything, we’ll continue to monitor the situation and we hope these new rules will go some way to reassure you. If anyone has further questions, please post here and we’ll do our best to answer them.

Thanks.

Tbf if I had the buttons I'd be doing some zapping. It's Saturday night, go grab a beer and chill or something.

I do worry sometimes that MNHQ would prefer for matters like this to remain under the radar but given the ethos of the company, I’d like to think I’m wrong. Would you be willing to ask wider members of the site how they feel about certain content remaining up until the “discussion is had” at HQ? Or is there a timescale for the discussion so no need to worry about such things?

I haven't seen the thread in question but it does sound like MNHQ could benefit from some safeguarding advice.

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet please revisit this thread where
@BenCoopersSupportWren outlined the problem with even brief descriptions of CSA, regardless of the intention of the poster:

“there is a reason most ‘mainstream’ dedicated end-user sex sites like Literotica, BDSMLR etc don’t allow stories or posts that are explicit about underage sex even when clearly written by adults, and will remove such posts when brought to the moderators’ attention. I used to work in the CJS and I’m afraid to say that such descriptions - even when expressed in short and simple terms - have currency among paedophiles. Part of my job was keeping the video testimony of CSA victims and any associated transcripts locked away so that they didn’t fall into the wrong hands. Unfortunately it’s not just explicit photos and videos that they get off to.”

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4749810-references-to-underage-sex-on-sex-board

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet forgive me if I have totally got this wrong but I feel your hesitation to be as explicit as @HaroldsHoodie is asking is because of the delicate balance required in making policies.

this is something I have to do for work and does involve children’s safeguarding. We have to be really careful about the knock on effect for every word written, because once it is in a policy it is enforceable. So for example, if mn were to state that no descriptive mention of csa is allowed in any form, this would mean a perfectly legitimate poster would not be able to talk about it at all. So a traumatised adult potentially having flash backs, needing to talk because they are suicidal wouldn’t be heard. They might inadvertently post too much detail because of their mental state and be deleted, leading to re trauma.

another poster, maybe @MeganTheeScallion ? Made a good point that trigger warnings etc could be added to posts, robust moderation etc. This would seem to be a good compromise. We shouldn’t be looking to silence victims, parents of victims etc on a parenting site that we all want to be a safe space.

apologies @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet @justine if I have this wrong.

@HaroldsHoodie I know you aren’t asking the victims to be silenced, I’m just trying to put another viewpoint across as to why it might be taking some time for them to come back with or they aren’t able to give you the answers you want.

I would also agree that mumsnet is a different place. I have been around since penis beaker, cancel the cheque but have deleted my old account and re joined so as to be untraceable. Not in the same way others have posted about, I have found a different type of poster dominates these days. I used to enjoy the funny posts (that usually end up in classics) and the odd foray in to support from the work or education boards. If I strayed in to relationships to look for a post on personal note I would have a mooch, find some good advice or validation in not being the only one and then sidle out. Now, most boards I go on I find the level of aggression and moderation from a lot of users to be too much. The threads get filled with people trying to get everyone else to agree with them or with a lot of judgement. You see it on Style and Beauty all of the time. Someone asking which trainers are “in” gets a barrage of “wear what you want etc”. It seems like forum etiquette has just gone out of the window. Surely the whole point of separate boards is so like minded people can chat? And if someone challenges it they are told they can post where they want, it’s a free country etc.

This obviously isn’t the same for the Sex forum as safety comes in to it. The above comments are just about mn in general.

And such is the nature of mn I will now don my hard hat and hide somewhere in wooly hugs until it’s safe to come out!

@OrchidOrchard your points make perfect sense, you don’t need armour today 😁 MN has been a haven for so many survivors seeking support, it would be an appalling disservice to inadvertently silence them.

Yes @OrchidOrchard I do get that and I understand it’s going to take careful consideration. That’s why I’m not pestering for updates - it’s only been a few days.

However. Mumsnet needs to consider its moderation style a bit more in this respect. This isn’t a therapy session. It’s not safe and confidential, first of all. People are ‘speaking’ in public. For that reason posters actually should be discouraged from posting too much personal detail in that vein. It can very quickly go wrong.

Your comment regarding deletions and so in does have some validity. But MN routinely delete posts discussing suicide, as they’ve been advised to for very good reason. Those people are suffering too, and likely want to be heard at that particular moment. But it’s just not within MNs remit to host that sort of thread. I think there are similarities here (although the two scenarios are not exactly the same).

On moderation style, this is where a thread should in my view not be deleted all together, nor comments be deleted all together (unless deemed to be entirely inappropriate). It is perfectly possible to redact certain descriptive sentences without silencing the victim’s voice all together, if it’s done sensitively. However that would require specifically trained mods, paid for their expertise. I doubt MNHQ will want to pay for that since they can’t be bothered to pay for overnight moderation.

(And, as I’ve said before, I’m well aware that MNHQ can do what they like - it’s their site. I’ve already decided it’s not for me anymore and that’s okay. I’m just staying a bit longer until I’ve heard back to my satisfaction, because that’s the sort of person I am. And once I de-register I’ll not be able to come back as a guest so it’s not as if I can have a cheeky peek in to see what transpires. I’ve also got one thread I’m on that my heart is telling me to stick with until there’s some good news. But ultimately this isn’t my fight anymore.)

@HaroldsHoodie your last paragraph sounds like a very good solution. Mn is clearly much bigger and different from how it started so things like moderation need to move with it.

I think the moderation, security (eg age verification for certain boards, membership limits before posting etc) and talk guidelines should be robust enough that it wouldn’t be required for something to happen and then mn need to specify we don’t allow that. I’m talking about the csa posts here. Although I haven’t read them so no idea of the context or the severity. Or for every single topic to be listed whether it’s allowed or not.

It’s a minefield and I don’t envy them the task of sorting this out.

Throwing my hat in here and saying the sex topic should stand, with moderation (while acknowledging moderation may need improvement across the site). A separate topic for sexual health and wellbeing would be good. I do think the sex topic is needed and should be the views of men and women but with caveats that if I ask for opinions from women only this should be respected and dealt with if any infringements occur. Keeping the sex topic separate keeps people from accidentally stumbling on a potentially triggering subject.

I know we can’t always guarantee that the people who we speak to are who they say they are but that is what we all accept when we use an anonymous board. If mn can put these safety measures in place then we should see how it develops and make our own judgements about whether we want to stay or not.

I could never ask rl friends for advice on relationships or sex so for me mn is a valuable source of support.

@HaroldsHoodie Im sorry to read they you may need to leave before that thread resolves. Those kinds of threads are what mn is/should be about. I say this whilst fully admiring your integrity

Thanks, I appreciate that although tbh sometimes having integrity feels like more trouble that it’s worth. If I didn’t give a shit I’d certainly have slept a lot better over the past week or so!

If you had seen the way some users of that topic spoke to and about women who were defending the rights of women using the sex topic for actual advice and support rather than as a Sex chat and hook up venue, and that Mumsnet let those comments stand, I think you’d understand why I’m leaving. I’m not going to support that kind of shitty, unacceptable behaviour and attitude on a site that’s supposed to be a haven for women.

I'm fed up of MNHQ disregarding the voices of the women who make up their core membership. I'm trying Femvox.

Femvox looks really good! Needs more people over there. No posts in 'relationships' yet. I think they might need some version of AIBU. I always think the U stands for Unusual, so maybe they should do that!

Seriously, MN may blunder onwards, but with a very different user base. If they won't commit to safeguarding then women won't stay. Sooner or later, we'll all be run off by the sex people.

How amusing that people keep desperately touting another site. Just post elsewhere! there's no clause that one must post solely on mn.

Mn won't 'blunder on', it will continue regardless of the odd site stuff strop. If half a dozen of you post elsewhere then so what.

I'm not desperate, Jonny, and I can post about whatever I like. Don't be so bloody rude.

Personally I don't think we need to/should 'tout'. The smaller it stays the better and word of mouth is enough, I think.

However @Janiie it isn't 'desperation' and your desperate attempts to paint it as such says a lot about you. It's no big deal, just some women no longer wish to hang out here.

Mind you, on balance you can say what you like - once I leave here I'll literally never think about you again, so why would I care what you think or say now?

Ah I know man, if people want to leave then leave.

Mumsnet is self moderated, it's been self moderated in the decade I've been on here and probably from its birth. If people want a moderated forum then there are plenty to choose from.

I'm not 'touting' for femvox, just joining in the conversation as a few people mentioned it.

@gamerchick I will leave when I've decided the matter is concluded for me. Until then I'm staying.

So you're just pretending to leave then? Gotcha.

I don't see a problem with talking about other fora but discussing how to format one on a board specifically to discuss MN site issues with MNHQ....?

'it isn't 'desperation' and your desperate attempts to paint it as such says a lot about you. It's no big deal, just some women no longer wish to hang out here.'

OK good, lovely hang out elsewhere just and your pals need to stop the ooh I'm trying femwah every 5 minutes <it looks desperate>.

You are starting to sound incredibly pompous - nobody cares if you stay or go and MN doesn’t owe you answers about any of it but you seem to think they do.

I never actually thought I’d agree with Janiie but some of you need to “touch grass” as the saying goes. It’s just an internet forum - I wanted the sex forum off active but now it’s gone, go on with your lives.

Sooner or later, we'll all be run off by the sex people.
They can't say I didn't warn them 😂

@Theyresexpeoplemn you were the harbinger! 🤣 you tried your best!!