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 just wanted to share my experience so individuals could make a a balanced opinion.

LOL! Sure mate.

What other reason would I have?

????? Eh???? Child sexual abuse?..... I never see the sex topic in active I don't know what u mean but as a woman having a sex topic doesn't bother me.

What do u mean about csa coming up in sex topic? Like adults discussing trauma from childhood? Or peados ??? I have an issue with the latter obviously but not the former.

Derailing yet another thread of women talking about safeguarding, maybe?

You don't see the sex topic in active because we campaigned to get it out.

CSA being discussed in graphic detail in the sex topic.

There have been countless threads about this all over MN for weeks now.

I resent that accusation. I don’t want to force my opinion on anyone either, but I thought it was fine to present a differing view. I will go though, I don’t wish to be accused of purposely derailing.

Haven't seen any.

I cannot imagine pedophiles openly discussing csa on mumsnet .... dont they use the dark Web for that? If indeed what you are saying is true yes this is a huge safeguarding fail - shouldn't this info be with the police to investigate ?

Don’t bang the door on your way out.

Sorry but I'm not going to trawl back through the numerous threads and discussions for you. Many of them in site stuff trying to persuade MN they were breaking the law by hosting graphic CSA chat. Feel free to have a look about in the threads of past few weeks but I'm not going to do it for you.

Chill out. Not once have I asked you to look through and present the threads to me. I have no interest in reading them. I am shocked if what you are saying is true. More so that mumsnet is allowing it than anything else. If I came across it it would make me probably reconsider using this website I haven't seen anything like that hence me being here and still using it.

And lots of people have left the site over it.

Ahh @beastlyslumber good on you for keeping on with this. I literally had to stop as the cheery chirpy man pleaser and her mate just dominated everything, gushing (probs quite literally) about just how super the sex board is and how very welcoming it is. Ugh

Cute. that's how you interpreted what I wrote. Not what I "sounded" like.

Mind you wouldn't speak to me like that in real life. 😆 that's FOR SURE.

PEACE OUT 😘

Why, would you punch me? Funny how you people tell on yourself.

No fighting in the war room !

‘You people’ 🤣 we’re a breed of our own

I didn't even know about this. I enter the site via FWR and rarely stray further, sometimes I go to books, health or TV and very occasionally I peek at AIBU, so this has passed me by. Unlike a lot of people I was on a different parenting site so when I came to MN (years ago now when my kids were little) I came for FWR and it is why I stayed. So I'm really glad this thread is here, it has been very informative as are the further links provided. I have archived a few of the threads on this subject (just in case).

I used to post a lot, now I barely do (free speech issues, breaches etc) but I find this particular direction of the site concerning particularly considering the demonizing of the FWR board in recent years and considering historical issues of punter mansplainers piling on every thread about so called 'sex work' (prostitution). Now apparently we are just inviting these men here to have a shot at mothers, nice. I am a bit pissed off that FWR has been considered so problematic but apparently all this with the Sex topic is A-ok. Mind boggling and a great example as someone said upthread (or on another on this topic) of Bill Hick's monologue on marketing, very appropriate.

Thanks for the heads up OP, I'll be keeping an eye on this along with (I suspect) others from this thread.

I’ve really noticed recently how the incel/MRA/TRA types seem to get away with behaviour that would get other threads deleted because either made up or not posted in good faith (I’m no expert compared to long time users and posters having mostly lurked for years until I found FWR)

I have just emailed MNHQ about it for all the good it will do

If there are threads about women asserting even minor forms of independence like what family names they call themselves or the titles they use; if they object to being told to 'smile, love!'; or (especially) if they are victims of VAWG, domestic abuse or sexual violence/abuse, the MRAs will smell it through cyberspace from a million miles away and swoop on in like crows to carrion.

That's without the ones who pervade FWR to tell women off for daring to assert their rights.

It's noticeably worse lately and is causing a more combative dynamic across the whole site.

So last night I couldn't sleep and was skimming through MN. A thread appeared from a woman saying she felt violated after her partner came inside her against her wishes and consent. Almost every comment was calling the woman out as overreacting and some said hysterical. Pp were saying that it was offensive to use the word violation when her husband hadn't done anything wrong, etc etc. You get the picture.

Then I looked at a thread in FWR about religious women being prostituted and there are actual punters on there, defending women's "choice" to do "sex work".

I'm really pissed off with MN for turning a woman-centred, sensible site into a magnet for rape apologists and actual rapists.

I read the thread from last night too, you haven’t given a full synopsis of the story, have you? About how they had been discussing having another child etc. Also the pull out method isn’t exactly a decent form of contraception. Not according to science/ medicine.

It wasn't about contraception ffs. It was about him doing a sexual act against his partner's consent.

Just take your rape apologetics somewhere else.

You’re so very rude. You have no idea of my background or personal history. I still don’t believe that man was a rapist. Especially given his reaction when he realised his partner was upset.

Beastly isn’t rude.

Whether that man is a rapist or not is not decided by your belief.