Thread on twitter. The paedophilia plan.

There are very few situations in which actively withholding from parents information about their children is justified, and any group that advocates that should be subject to enormous amounts of scrutiny.

I will homeschool my children before they are exposed to porn in school. My DH and I are absolutely against pornography in all its forms. It is a plague in our society. I will never, ever accept it as normal.

At what point are parents collectively going to say nope, we've had enough of this shit being forced on our children at school, no more?

Will the parents even know? I imagine it'll be hidden in a vague letter nobody reads about "improvements to the curriculum" and will call it something other than porn. We were shown a video, aged about 14, of an adult man getting an erection as part of our (all-girls) sex ed classes. We giggled about it later but I don't think any of us realised it was inappropriate or told our parents. I wouldn't class it as porn but that was almost 20 years ago; I wouldn't be surprised if the materials have become more pornified since then. Children often don't question what they're taught / shown at school and I suspect the parents won't find out until it's already a well established part of the curriculum :(

But once you remove the legal right to consent, the protection afforded by 'age of consent', parent's rights to have information shared with them then children are exposed and vulnerable.

Exactly.

To add - and if paedophiles can exploit transactivism by copying and appropriating language and tactic, they will. Transactivism needs its own safeguarding procedures and protocols to avoid this happening and protect themselves.

Shouting transphobe at feminists pointing this out is a spectacular own goal.

This is not about Trans. This is about groups and individuals eroding accepted boundaries for children (girls and boys) and women. These boundaries are being challenged and actively undermined.
Society was in a position where it was accepted that to keep everyone safe parents were of critical importance, the age of consent (Gillick / Fraser competency) was critical and the right to consent (and say no) were established norms. Suddenly this is no longer the case.
We know how fragile these 'norms' have been - you only have to look at statistics and organised abuse to see how easy it is to circumvent them. But once you remove the legal right to consent, the protection afforded by 'age of consent', parent's rights to have information shared with them then children are exposed and vulnerable.

RedHoodGirl

The point is that the paedophile MO is to infiltrate any vulnerability. One of the reasons feminists are so keen to oppose the self-ID agenda of transactivism is that self-ID dilutes safeguarding in all manner of ways - from the process of getting a DBS check to mixed sex overnight accommodation on guide trips and all the dozens of other examples that have been discussed here. The transactivist agenda creates vulnerabilities and paedophiles will exploit them, just as they always have.

In fact, almost all of the safeguarding frameworks we have evolved over the last century have come in the wake of various abuse crises.

That transactivists refuse to acknowledge this and have no response but to shriek TERF! TRANSPHOBIA! throws vulnerable groups under the bus. And those vulnerable groups include themselves as well women and children because when those vulnerabilities are exploited by paedophiles, as will inevitably happen, society will blame all trans not just the fake paedophile exploiters - in the same way all Muslim men are being blamed for on street grooming.

Institutions that allow the dilution of safeguarding on behalf of the political demands of any group, trans or otherwise, will be held to account when the unavoidable crises happen. Better to prevent any dilution of safeguarding long before anyone has been harmed.

Here: excellent thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3228447-Transing-children

Is it only me who finds the linking between paedophilia and the ‘trans narrative’ grossly offensive?

I think we need to be careful about linking being trans per se with paedophilia- that’s a step too far and yes, that’s not ok.

At the same time, the more vocal end of the TRA lobby has some unpleasant views on children amd pornography. And that does need to be tackled.

Last week there was a thread about ‘transing children.’ If you’d like to take a look at it it’s interesting. I among others raised a point that by targeting non gender conforming children and by pushing them down an affirmative treatment route (rather than a wait and see route) which ends in hormonal and surgical methods, you create a class of what are effectively ‘permanent children.’ They will not have been through puberty. I find this extremely disturbing. Who’s interest is this in?

You also look at several very vocal voices in this movement and they are against censorship of underage child abuse (what they call porn.)

So yes, there is a link with one group within the TRA lobby. If I was a trans person I would be distancing myself from that section of my class pretty sharpish.

The last thread I posted, contemporarypankhurst posts a post linking to some particularly awful things about the porn industry, especially how hetro sex is now on porn hub, around 12:50.

That post really opened my eyes (I hope contemporary doesn't mind me reposting).

This #TransAge is extremely concerning - especially in the wake of this massive push to accep all things trans.

There is a picture of a little girl, inside a grown man, holding hands with a little boy.

"Stefonknee" is paving the way already.

Porn in schools - well I'm speechless. They will dress this up to make us sound like Mary Whitehouse or something - they are gradual breaking down society's barriers and boundaries - this is a men's sexual rights revolution.

Thread that inspired the previous thread:

19 year old DD tells me ALL boys want to throttle.www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3165779-19-year-old-DD-tells-me-ALL-boys-want-to-throttle

Absolutely stomach turning.

This was a useful recent thread:

Discussion thread regarding porn www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3172324-Discussion-thread-regarding-porn-trigger-warning-contains-distressing-content-links

One issue I should say.

From a recent thread:

Are there resources to educate our sons about porn? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3151070-are-there-resources-to-educate-our-sons-about-porn

The issue with bringing porn into schools will be that you can bet your bottom dollar the woman will have shaved under arms etc. Perpetuating how women should be.
http://theweek.com/articles/749978/female-price-male-pleasure

Women are constantly and specifically trained out of noticing or responding to their bodily discomfort, particularly if they want to be sexually "viable." Have you looked at how women are "supposed" to present themselves as sexually attractive? High heels? Trainers? Spanx? These are things designed to wrench bodies. Men can be appealing in comfy clothes. They walk in shoes that don't shorten their Achilles tendons. They don't need to get the hair ripped off their genitals or take needles to the face to be perceived as "conventionally" attractive. They can just as women can opt out of all this, but the baseline expectations are simply different, and it's ludicrous to pretend they aren't.

Reddit, for example, is awash with people jumping to the defence of 'poor paedophiles'.

Tumblr/Deviant Art is full of 'sexual art' depicting young anime style children, young furries, My Little Pony and other underage cartoon characters from popular kids shows.

I would presume the same for the likes of Twitter and FB.

At what point are parents collectively going to say nope, we've had enough of this shit being forced on our children at school, no more?

Porn in schools should do it. Showing children porn is child sexual abuse. From the NSPCC website (bold mine)

"How do you define child sexual abuse:
There are 2 different types of child sexual abuse. These are called contact abuse and non-contact abuse.

Non-contact abuse involves non-touching activities, such as grooming, exploitation, persuading children to perform sexual acts over the internet and flashing. It includes:

encouraging a child to watch or hear sexual acts
not taking proper measures to prevent a child being exposed to sexual activities by others
meeting a child following sexual grooming with the intent of abusing them
online abuse including making, viewing or distributing child abuse images
allowing someone else to make, view or distribute child abuse images
showing pornography to a child

I'm not sure where that article was.

I wonder if it's worth posting that blog article comparing heterosexual porn on porn hub with gay porn; women being shamed and subjected to violence, no kissing or affection verses the affection and kissing in the gay porn - on the Wright stuff thread - to highlight that porn that teens could access is not what people think it is.

There was a porn resources thread not so long ago.

Safeguarding principles are being undermined. Organisations actively promote not sharing information with parents, eg the Guides - don't tell parents about boys in girls dorms / showers etc. Keep secrets, undermine the age of consent and set up responsible adults as 'old fashioned' hateful', 'bigoted', 'out of touch'.
If organisations actively promote the above then it's no surprise that paedophiles will piggy back on them as this is their modus operandi.