I’m a massive name changer, btw. Not because I’m committing thought crimes or avoiding a violent ex but because I realised several years ago that a Social Media presence with a name and an image attached is absolutely fucking over the mental health of those who participate in it, especially those who start using it when their brains are still developing. I quit posting anything on social media for both my own sake and to be a better role model for my children.
I like Mumsnet and I like not having a permanent username because here our words, our (robust!) discussions, our expressions of support are our focus.
We value our interactions and the lack of a block button or a predatory algorithm means we aren’t silo’d from each other the way we are elsewhere.
We aren’t elevating the pretty, or those with the highest follower count, here the quality of the discussion is Queen (and also: the inventive sweariness).
The ‘group’ is created by the board topic.
Jonathon Haidt’s new book re: the damage social media is causing to teens is an excellent, if scary read.
He observes that increasingly the Silicon Valley elite types are turning away from the inventions they created, they aren’t allowing their own children to access social media and they themselves are switching to ‘dumb’ phones outside of work.
It’s the less well-off kids who are spending the most time being warped by algorithms (because single parents and working class parents have less quality time to spend with their kids and fewer resources, making it harder to replace screens with activities).
Part of my giving up on social media meant moving back to the old school parts of the internet, the ones that don’t make us so anxious and depressed, including text based chat forums, like Mumsnet.
Mumsnet is one of the few OG discussion forums that has weathered the big changes that happened to the internet after the invention of the smart phone.
It hasn’t been easy, I’m sure, especially when anti woman activists started targeting advertisers.
Haidt says that the mental health of women and girls has been more affected by social media than that of men (boys have a different set of challenges mostly related to gaming).
I believe that Mumsnet’s great longevity has been precisely because it does not have the features that trigger anxiety and depression in women. You don’t have to worry about being socially ostracised for saying something daft/misguided on Mumsnet, you can just name change and start over, still access the same support, the same jokes, the same resources.
You can’t be ‘cancelled’ for something you say on Mumsnet, because no one knows who you are.
Even the mean gossipy-doxy websites aren’t particularly interested in us, the lack of selfies, the jumble of usernames and the inability to become a celeb tier user (no follower counts, no total posts tally) makes us rather dull to casual observers.
Plus a lot of people just ignore us because they are sexist and assume all mums talk about is mumsy things.
Justine’s commitment to free speech (within UK law and with the need for the business to remain financially viable!) and MN’s general ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ attitude to stuff like site functions and layout design have created a British institution far more valuable than perhaps any other website in British history.
Obviously Aston have cottoned onto this value and won’t give up their giant, secretly appropriated data stash (“license: Unsure”) without a fight.
I wonder how various UK politicians feel about their disastrous webchats (and biscuit preferences) being held on a Secret Special Server in Birmingham, funded by the US government? 