the Sex topic on MN

[beastlyslumber]

I couldn't see a thread in FWR, though there are plenty in Site Stuff and AIBU. I thought it would be good to hear what women here think, especially about the safeguarding fails. MN hosting discussion of people graphically describing CSA and a 'sex chat' for people to find hook ups. Justine's response was to say that maybe they underestimated the negative impact, but they're going to carry on anyway. Posters who've reported threads and comments have been ignored.

I don't see how MN can keep going as a parenting site if it is failing on very basic safeguarding. Someone on another thread pointed out that sex forums at least have a bare minimum of safeguards, such as age verification, a list of banned topics, and active moderation (rather than the after-the-fact reports and deletions MN usually do.)

There are also concerns that it changes the nature of the people coming to post on MN and generally makes women less able to access the help and advice they need. I've noticed for a while that there's more victim blaming and misogyny in the relationships topic - apparently MN changed the posting rules last year so that new users only have to wait 7 days to post in the sex topic, where it was previously 90. So it's possible that the change there is related to that.

Sorry for the long OP! Just really wondering what women here think.

I've had a PM about a new forum starting up apparently because of the sex topic. I've not followed the link given but it's femvox or something. I'm fed up of seeing the threads and there's loads of them popping up.

I misread a heading on one of them and didn't notice the topic. I hid the topic after that! But no I dint think it's appropriate and I do think they will lose many posters.

I don't think MN is the place for a hook-up thread - there are plenty of other places people can go for that, which have at least some controls and verification in place.

I saw something only fleetingly on one of the active threads. They've changed the rules about how long you have to be a member to post there? Why? Surely the longer period was the safeguard? I may have misunderstood but that was my quick impression.

Didn't know that about CSA. I wonder if MN is under some kind of bizarre attack. Trash the site to get it losing revenue/taken down kind of thing? There have been concerted efforts over the years to have a go at MN after all.

But if they changed their own rules then who knows. Very odd.

I always assumed the sex topic was for "educational" purposes - to discuss issues that women have with sex, etc. not for hookups or Herbert's to get their jollies 🤢

I had noticed the topic appearing more in active which bothers me. I don’t think it helps the people who use that forum for advice. It’s really not appropriate to have a hook-up thread.

As already mentioned, many forums which host those sort of discussions have strict rules regarding no private chats, no discussion of underage sex and are very actively moderated to remove troublesome posts and posters.

MN’s usual style of moderation is far too lax to deal with the issues that forum could throw up.

The safeguarding element is really troublesome.

I find it so so gross and such a loss.

Justine created the site to support new mums. It became popular and created a community that’s important to many. Great!

The users created a huge amount of valuable content that Justine owns the copyright to and sometimes sells in book format. Bit cheeky, but ok with me.

Then she wanted to monetise it and put adverts all over it. Fair enough.

Then she used it to get herself lots of interviews with top level politicians. Respect!

Then she massively increased the amount of adverts and paid surveys etc etc etc. Meh, bit annoying but fair enough I guess.

Then suddenly it’s a sex chat site where men can come to get off with mums? And trying to sell us ‘special’ vibrators to fix our apparently dodgy mum parts? Wtf? No - that is the line where I stop enjoying Mumsnet. If its full of creepy men and teens getting off in sending unsolicited sexual messages then I’m outta here.

Then suddenly [MN is] a sex chat site where men can come to get off with mums?

Given that there are so many more professionally run 'sex chat' and 'hook up' sites out there, what could possibly attract certain men to MN, a site with apparently fewer safeguards and where the vast majority of the women available for their attentions are likely to have children?

Apparently it's been lurking quietly in its pervy corner for a while. It seems to be a hub for all kinds of 'sex chat'. Previously it wasn't shown in active - you had to seek it out. There was a commitment from MN that posters couldn't post in there until they'd been registered on the site for 90 days. They've now reduced that to 7 days. There's a sticky on the threads saying "you're adults, share whatever you like, but be respectful." That's their idea of safeguarding!

A quote from one of the other threads:

I’m not happy to have a sex chat thread here, period. I’m not happy for new mothers to be aggressively targeted with sex toy ads using nasty, dehumanising and ideologically motivated wording, I’m not happy with the Ann Summers collab, and I’m incensed that there wasn’t a team of specifically savvy moderators appointed to oversee the sex chat thread/sex topic as soon as the change was made to registration time, if they were so determined to let it stand.

Is that a direct quote from the sticky? How do they know posters are adults? It’s just an email address to sign up, isn’t it.

Seven days isn’t much of a disincentive to bad faith posters. I saw speculation on another thread that the change might be associated with an advertising campaign by a sex toy and underwear retailer.

That's what happens when you [as Bill Hicks RIP used to say] 'go into marketing' [aka Suck Satan's Cock].

You lose all actual principles and focus as you race after the big bucks.

Because a lot of ‘people’ get off on being ‘shocking’ and causing embarrassment and distress, especially to women who are making themselves vulnerable by discussing their problems or troubles.

It’s a very disappointing development. I opened the site today and was met with ‘what makes a good rimming’. 🤮really.

I suppose the owners want to make as much money as possible, before swanning off into the sunset. Sad.

Other threads I've been following on this:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4749810-references-to-underage-sex-on-sex-board?page=1

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4749185-safeguarding-on-the-sex-chat-thread-on-the-sex-board?page=1

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4749282-posters-hiding-the-sex-board-wont-change-mn-dynamics?page=1

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4749472-no-sex-board-on-active-please-comment-if-you-agree?page=1

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4748840-sex-board-in-active-and-ann-summers?page=1

There are loads of other threads, but I can't keep up with them all!

I don't mind there being a Sex Topic, just much like sex it should be behind closed doors. I used to breastfeed in cafes scrolling through MN, I don't really to be exposed to threads called 'Rimming Techniques' in public.

It's not a direct quote but that's what it says.

They have no idea who's an adult or not. They have no idea who's a 'good faith' poster and who's an MRA or a predator or a perve.

Yes, they've done a deal with Ann Summers and the Shrek's Ear people. They haven't admitted that's the reason why they've made these changes, though.

Good morning @beastlyslumber I just came to see if anyone had started a thread in here. The sex topic problems are a feminist issue and furthermore are going to have an impact on the entire tone, content and purpose of Mumsnet going forward. There are already some longtime posters who have de-registered and many others threatening to, and looking for other places to go.

Yes, the sex board reads like a fetishists wet dream. Blatantly obvious that most are enjoying displaying their kink publicly. It being in active means it now does so to people who don't consent.

Justine is being naive at best, here and disingenuous (if I'm being kind) at worst.

It's just another nail in the coffin really. We've witnessed how much women and childrens safe spaces have been eroded, invaded and trampled all over in recent years.

EXACTLY THIS.

X 100

I've posted with my other username on some of the other threads about this.

The idea that "just hide the thread" is the answer is sickening.

Next up there'll be a corner where the Webberly duo can ply their trade. As long as they pay enough commission. I'm not even joking.

I can't understand why someone with as much internet involvement as Justine must have, for years, hasn't understood that this is a major safeguarding issue.

This is a disappointment. The consequences will be felt across the boards as the influence filters into all the topics.

There's already a site-wide protest. I've been on MN for at least ten years and never seen people so upset. It's awful.

I see there has been another update from Justine on the site stuff thread (the one referencing the underage sex issue)

Thankfully, she seems to be seeing sense.

I'm not renewing my premium subscription.
Is there appetite for a virtual walkout/day's boycott?

Justine just posted: www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4749810-references-to-underage-sex-on-sex-board?reply=124186283&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share&utm_source=copylink

I came here to see if there was a thread

Quite honestly, it looks as if someone created a business challenge to turn a parenting site into a site about sex.

I was aware the topic existed but thought perhaps it was a hangover, as there are several sections that no one seems to know about. It looks as if they have seen sense though. Is Justine running several businesses? I am surprised by her comment on not fully understanding the issue. It seems like the sort of misunderstanding that happens when you are not really working in the business that bears your name.