Feminist Pub XX - may the summer rains wash the patriarchy down the plughole

'ello all. Done a name change, and got a new job so haven't been on much.

Agree with it being about the key question of 'did she ask him to send a picture' and also with it being about someone's parents wanting some media time. I'm not entirely convinced though, that a 14 year old sending an unsolicited dick pic warrants a public shaming - I can imagine the type of dumb 14 year old thinking that would lead to such a thing in the current climate, and absent any other predatory behaviour previously I think some monitoring and some strong education about what is and isn't ok would be better than 'you're on The List'. But maybe that's what he got, and they're just making a big thing out of The List part.

Off topic: my new job is one of those ones with a bunch of egomaniacal old white men at the top and a majority female hugely smart and competent 'support' team who actually run things below. Everyone means well, and nobody's awful, but it's just a bit 'oh, right....' On the bright side I suspect I'll meet some excellent women. Sigh.

What I'm getting from the reporting is "This poor boy has had his future ruined because making and distributing indecent images of minors is illegal. Let's all pity the poor dear misunderstood lad." Which sort of implies that, for the sake of poor dear misunderstood lads, it shouldn't be illegal. And we're straight back to WTF territory.

I spotted the article about the protest over the be-penised person in the non-penis changing rooms too. I follow Richard Dawkins on there (because he talks good sense on religion and genetics even if I have since discovered that his views on women are a bit utterly screwed up) and it cropped up on there. It was a strange moment, because hanging round here and hearing the local opinions on RD has prompted me to mentally file him under "probably not going to align with my views in the general sphere of sex and gender".

Yy Ebear, his quotes and his mother's quotes will obviously be one sides.

Is Michelangelo's stone statue a living, breathing minor?

My understanding is that the three teens involved have all received the same treatment from the police, but it's only the boy's mother who's seen fit to talk to the media about it.

There's a bit of me that feels a bit sorry for them, because teenagers do this all the time, and it's bad luck that these actually got reported to the police and the police have taken it seriously. But they have broken the law, and I think it's a good thing that it is being taken seriously - hopefully if teenagers see they really might get into trouble over this sort of thing, they might stop doing it, and stop harassing each other, because it's not actually something which should be normal, and teenage girls are subjected to all sorts of crap those of us in earlier generations were, be it unsolicited dick pics, or being pressured to take naked selfies and send them on.

Elseboard, someone was going along the lines of, "Why should his life be ruined? What's next, I won't be able to take pictures of Michaelangelo's David?" Because a photo of a stone carving is just the same as taking a naked selfie and forwarding it on to people you know.

That's my take exactly slugs. The bbc report said at one point that this was just a teenage prank. Yes, 'cos sexual harassment is always just a joke and we need to lighten up don't we.

Do you think so, lightning? The reporting seemed ok up me though I can believe the comments were shitty.

It was wrong to send the image on, whether it was a solicited or unsolicited image.

This phrasing makes me wonder if they aren't sure which of the other two sent it on

"However, before the image disappeared, the girl saved it on her own phone and it was then sent to other pupils at the school."

Yonic, yes, it's the biased reporting I object to. All 'Oh poor boy, he's humiliated, got an undeserved punishment". If he sent naked images of himself to a girl who didn't ask for them he deserved a police warning I think. The girl texting them on, two wrongs don't make a right. But the BBC reporting is all on the boy's side.

- thanks Yonic

I'll try and keep up - I've been useless over the summer.

Welcome back oubliette!

Thought I should make an appearance - the pub had dropped off my 'I'm on' list

The phrasing of the article is passive - it's possible there's some doubt if she or the other teenager actually sent the pictureS.

"However, his mother was told her son's details - along with those of the girl involved and another teenager - had been added to a police intelligence database and could be stored for at least 10 year"

Spines like the outcome was the same for all

I don't think she's legally guilty ad the crime is distributing indecent images of a minor.

Fingles YES to being able to articulate! I have this board to thank for this - it really does save your sanity. Such a relief!

I'm wondering if it's worth complaining about actually, and how. Presented immediately as a story about 'oh poor boy got criminal record", talk about biased.

And once again, a bit of shit reporting from the BBC on sexual matters...

Hey anyone seen this
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34136388 "Sexting boys naked selfie recorded as crime by police"

The comments section has already been shut down, apparently after just 1 hour, in which it's attracted loads of 'oh so the girl got off scot free did she". It's being used as a story against criminalising kids.

I haven't started a thread on it because there's one crucial question not answered in the bbc story - did she actually ask him to send it? If she did, then yes, she's guilty of spreading indecent images herself. If not though, it was a typical male doing the online equivalent of flashing a girl in a park and deserves everything he gets. The mother is quoted as saying her son was humiliated, "he was "at best naive" and at worst was just being "a teenager"."

It's shit that so many weighed in on the side of the lad without pausing to consider that crucial first question.

Yep. Although on the plus side, at least I can articulate why it does my head in now, which is personal progress!

Does your head in, doesn't it?

Maybe that's why the whole thing rankles so much. We don't get to dictate how society treats us as individuals. And that's okay! If we all got to dictate such things, not only would we never get anything done, but we'd also be at odds with one another constantly. Possessors of female reproductive systems do not have the power to remove themselves from the class to which society denies bodily and sexual autonomy. If we could, we would, but we haven't, and so logically we are responsible for the violence inflicted upon us. Which is offensive, victim blaming bollocks, and I reject it utterly. And then I get people like XSIL explaining in a gently patronising tone that it's really important for trans people to be able to exist in some sort of solipsistic vacuum in which other people's understanding of material reality is irrelevant, because insisting that sexual dimorphism exists and that penises can be used as weapons is an intentional act of psychic violence.

Excuse me, I seem to have strayed into rant mode...

I know, it's bizarre, innit? It's almost like, I dunno, like individuals don't actually have the power to change how every other person in the world perceives them on a whim, or something. Crazy, innit?