NSPCC again

I would expect a children's charity to word this far, far more carefully.

A children's charity that is specifically concerned with preventing child abuse, at that! Who is in charge of their social media? I wonder if the person who posted this is the same person who accused all the people concerned about rubberpissworktoiletwankman of homophobia.

I would expect a children's charity to word this far, far more carefully.

England and Wales does have statutory rape, it just isn't called that. Sex with someone under the age of 13 is rape because there is legislation (statute) whereby putting a penis in the mouth, vagina or anus of a child under 13 is "Rape of a child under 13". That's statutory rape.

Crimes against children 13 > 16 are sexual offences but not rape (though, obviously, children 13 > 16 can be raped, but that would be under the regular law against rape, not one that depends specifically on their age).

No England and Wales don't have statutory rape.

Under 13 is (supposed to be) no excuses, consent cannot be given.

13-16 underage but more nuanced. EG CPS say not in public interest to prosecute teens in s consensual relationship.

Over 16 there are restrictions for eg teacher student

Does "statutory rape" exist in English law? I thought it was an American thing and the offence here was "sexual activity with a child" or something.

16 year olds are not children. There is a range of ages where a person becomes entitled to carry out certain activities.

NSPCC

"Definitions of a child
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) defines a child as everyone under 18 unless, "under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".

England
In England a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached their 18th birthday. Child protection guidance points out that even if a child has reached 16 years of age and is:

living independently
in further education
a member of the armed forces
in hospital; or
in custody in the secure estate
they are still legally children and should be given the same protection and entitlements as any other child (Department for Education, 2018a).

Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland the The Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 defines a 'child' as a person under the age of 18.

Scotland
In Scotland, a child legally becomes an adult when they turn 16, but statutory guidance which supports the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, includes all children and young people up to the age of 18." (continues)
learning.nspcc.org.uk/child-protection-system/children-the-law#heading-top

i saw this all over twitter, have you seen their article on their saying children hugging, kissing or swearing behaviour is sexual behaviour?

I read it as saying a parent should educate their child how to both request and convey consent to sexual activity.
The problem with this is - child - to me personally, this is a young child, my older children I would call young people or something similar. Given the subject, the age of the child is really important.
A tweet is just not a good way to try and cover such a wide scope.
Is it implying teach your children early about consent when hugging and kissing and make sure that the other person is happy with that too? or is it saying to a child (10, 11 older/younger) that when you have sex with someone (age unspecified) you have a responsibility to ensure consent. Which is dreadful!
Children can't consent to sex, even if they are willing. Tis the law.
Or. Children can learn really good skills around boundaries at an early age.
It's just not clear, thus leaving it wide open for misinterpretation.

This is really disturbing. Why are they talking about children consenting to sex? With adults? With other children? Wtf.

I also don't agree that children masturbate. Why would they, when sexual feelings don't evolve until puberty? I think the idea of claiming that they masturbate is to suggest they have sexual desires and then the next step is to say it's wrong to deny them fulfilment of those desires.

It's abusive. The NSPCC needs to be stopped.

Safe Schools Alliance have posted this thread in response on Twitter. I find this NSPCC statement incredibly worrying. Especially given their staff previous sexualised behaviour and the fact that they don't see how inappropriate that was!

twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1285868833891377152?s=19

Children need to be taught that their own boundaries are important. That's the foundation of understanding that other's boundaries also matter and from there comes consent.

Children shouldn't be having sex and there is nothing in this tweet that implies the NSPCC is talking about future sex lives, it seems to be talking about sex in the present tense.

The NSPCC has repeatedly shown itself not fit for purpose

When I first read that I was at once confused and horrified. With "child" I understood a real child, and it confused me that the CHILD should ensure that the other person (an adult? another child?) should be happy the other one must consent.
Never mind that a child cannot consent to sex anyway -- it sounded like the person driving the action was the child; that it was the child who wants sex.

I am anyway not happy with the rumour I keep hearing that "children masturbate too", which is not my experience at all, and that we should educate ourselves on this and not be so prudish.

But also I have no idea of the context of this tweet- maybe earlier tweets had mentioned this and this particular one refers to older kids?

It’s a good idea to teach children about boundaries, but there’s better ways of phrasing the tweet, maybe?

I mistyped my first post here yesterday. My second one was a correction, not a suggestion that proof was lacking.

It's harsh to blame the NSPCC for accepting money raised by a friend of Epstein. I am no apologist for them but the woman organised an annual event. The funds would mostly have come from attendees.

I don't see bad intent with this? Isn't there a big push on this board for consent to be taught from an early age?

Like a pp I would take this to mean talking about it with a child about their future sex life.

And FWIW the global standard by various orgs for age of consent is 18. UK is out of step on this (not saying I think we should change it, just for info).

Christ.. that coming from NSPCC looks very bad indeed.

As PP said Twitter is definitely not the medium for nuanced conversations directed at parents like this.

but in any case, for those wanting to give NSPCC the benefit of the doubt, the only possible acceptable phrase here would be ‘your teenager’. Even then that would be inappropriate, because that would cover 13 year olds who should not be having sex even with ‘consent’ and with a partner of same age, because they are too young. So actually there isn’t any wording that works with what NSPCC have written there.

‘Child’ is totally wrong. Children under age of 13 can’t legally consent to sex, sexual activity with 12 year olds or under-12s is statutory rape. The wording of ‘your child’ that the NSPCC have used is massively inappropriate within a very sketchy premise.

This charity also has statutory powers...

A 16 year old can leave home and get married without parental permission.

Aren't they under investigation from a year ago? Re: rubber-wank-piss-fetish-at-work-when-you-work-with-kids-man?

https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-barrister-forces-charity-commission-probe-nspcc-over-workplace-porn-shoot

Or am I kink-shaming?

So many safeguarding red flags around this charity, including:

Rubber wankman
Epstein Link
This Tweet
Other Tweet saying children can use whatever toilet they like (they replied to a TRA when asked)
Munro Bergdorf

They've been captured. When will they be investigated?

Concerns were raised ages ago now when Lisa (sorry can't recall surname) a safeguarding expert and former social worker, who was banned from Twitter (and possibly MN?) wrote to the NSPCC about safeguarding concerns.

If they were talking about 16+ year olds then they need to make that abundantly clear, which they did not. The vast, vast, vast majority of who is understood to be "children" cannot consent to sex.

Agreed. As the tweet reads - it states that my role as parent is to ensure my 10 yr old knows what to do to consent to sex. Otherwise known in law as RAPE.

One off horrendous tweet might be forgivable (just) but this is in a long line of utter F### ups.

Wasn't into it*