advice on a male teacher at DDs school please

This teacher fucked up.

He's lost the trust of the girls he teaches, and likely some of their parents. His own fault.

Does it matter what was on his SM available for all to see? YES.

Because those of us with daughters of that age do not want them to believe that the current objectification of the female body is right or acceptable in civilised society. We don't want them to feel inadequate or less than because they don't look that way or want to expose themselves similarly.

Absolutely he shouldn’t have his SM available to view. That has been addressed. And the head has dealt with that.

The second paragraph. Keep your daughters off social media then. It is what it is on social media and is very common.

You don’t know if those young women are just friends of his. It may be, on his part, entirely innocent.

There needs to be a more genuine engagement with the individuals to determine whether this has grounding. Not squeals that either are innocent, or either is beyond reproach.

The op has not done any of this. She went to the head solely about the SM and hasn’t even informed the parents of the children who came to her that there are concerns. She has kept that from the parents. Which is wrong in my view.

You asked for validation of your opinion and actions repeatedly.

Mine don't!

Because those of us with daughters of that age do not want them to believe that the current objectification of the female body is right or acceptable in civilised society. We don't want them to feel inadequate or less than because they don't look that way or want to expose themselves similarly

Don't let them have social media then! Fgs!

This thread has become really toxic.

Was the OP correct to tell the HT that the teachers SM was open to view? YES

Does it matter what was on his SM available for all to see? YES.

Because those of us with daughters of that age do not want them to believe that the current objectification of the female body is right or acceptable in civilised society. We don't want them to feel inadequate or less than because they don't look that way or want to expose themselves similarly.

It might be "normal" to you, living in a patriarchal society, but it is not desirable for those who feel that there is more to being female than appealing to men as a sexual object.

Did they stalk the teacher's SM? NO.

Because professional standards should have applied and it should not have been available. Full stop.

So we have a young man, who appreciates publicly the objectification of the female form, teaching young girls in PE kit. No crime here.

But if the girls feel uncomfortable, and that discomfort came before the SM finding, this is a valid point.

I refuse to pick apart insults and statements from the OP to try to discredit either. I have been insulted on this thread, but to be honest, this isnt about me. I consider far more important, the lurkers, who might just think all year 9 girls are bitches, not to trust intuition etc.

There needs to be a more genuine engagement with the individuals to determine whether this has grounding. Not squeals that either are innocent, or either is beyond reproach.

So far what we do know is that he had his SM open.
The SM had sexualised images of non sporting young women.
The teacher is now teaching young vulnerable girls PE.
The girls feel uncomfortable with the way he looks at them.

Insufficient to conclude saint or sinner, but enough to get many parents asking for details. Correctly so.

So if the subject of this thread is not safeguarding what exactly is it?

It's not, though is it? Because any criticism of the OP's motives or methods and the possibility the OP herself didn't apply good safeguarding principles is being ignored and/or ridiculed.

This is pathetic. I stated my view, there's nothing to explain if you have a clear understanding of safeguarding. WHY the unqualified endorsement.???
I see no one is allowed to disagree with you are they?*

By the time you posted several posters had queried what the OP had done. The direct question to you was a fair point. I didn’t read the question as ambiguous but your answer certainly was.

Your comment about "no one is allowed to disagree with you" makes very little sense given I've said nothing along those lines.
The rest of your post is simply more examples of the type of posting you pretend to deplore including the "give it a rest" comment. So far as "no one being allowed to disagree with you" - try taking the plank out of your own eye.

As for safeguarding, I'm firmly of the view that a person who chose to behave in the OP did- discussing this in the way she did, with other people's children without discussing it with their parents has breached good safeguarding principles.

It's no- one's business said the OP- Why post on here then? It is most certainly the business of the other parents- far more than it is anyone's on here.

And for the record. All I meant by saying he could go on holiday and look at women in bikinis was that it’s a normal thing for young women to wear bikinis. It’s not as if he was following anyone inappropriate.

Fuckssake. No wonder people are put off posting in feminism.

No concern over why the girls felt uncomfortable or how to deal with that?

Well great! Problem solved then. You told the head,the head reminded staff about SM privacy setting and everyone's happy and settled now.

Right?

The OP’s story of who told her what has changed through the thread.

The who told her is important as if it was one of the girls the op could have asked them what made them feel uncomfortable. Instead of which it was a boy telling the op who had been told by one of the girls and who then went looking for the teacher on SM.

It’s all a bit Chinese whispers.

The op is not “in discussions” with the head. There’s nothing to discuss. She complained, the head told the teacher to tighten up his privacy. What’s to discuss?

I am very uncomfortable with the op not making the parents of the children aware of what has been going on. I think she has a duty to tell the other parents.

And quite honestly the vile accusations at me are what is of gargantuan proportions and that poster who insinuated that I was a paedophile with a prurient interest in looking at young girls is absolutely goading and trolling and completely and utterly wrong.

DidoLamenting
I read the question as "why did you say that?" "Why the unqualified endorsement?"
This is pathetic. I stated my view, there's nothing to explain if you have a clear understanding of safeguarding. WHY the unqualified endorsement.???
I see no one is allowed to disagree with you are they?

For all your people are entitled to disagree, have a different opinion platitudes you demand that other people have to justify their opinions to your satisfaction. You are even insisting the person who started this thread is somehow accountable to you. Give it a rest.

Oh and nice use of hyperbole there and a good example of exactly the sort of post you were criticising earlier.

[quote DownThePlath]@Imnobody4
Jesus, I said "why's that" to your comment "I am pleased to hear the Head's response was sensible and proportional unlike a number of the posters whose responses are anything but". As in, why are other poster's comments not proportional. You then replied asking me if I knew was safeguarding was.[/quote]
There was nothing ambiguous in DownThePlath's question. You gave an enthusiastic approval of what the OP did. I read the question as "why did you say that?" "Why the unqualified endorsement?"

If anything was ambiguous, it was your response which comes down to "it's safeguarding innit"? as if nothing more needed to be said.

DidoLamenting
However your refusal to answer tells me what I asked. You didn't discuss this with the other parents.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I wouldn't answer you either, your sense of entitlement is pretty gargantuan.

DownThePlath

Jesus - maybe don't ask ambiguous questions, it wastes everyone's time. I was addressing the OP. Are you really expecting me to go through this entire thread itemising all the disproportionate comments that have been made.

I have no wish to be trapped in one a Dante's circles of hell for the rest of the day.

It’s total BS

I find it quite extraordinary that you feel you have rights over this mans SM.

It really is nothing to do with you.

Some questions I'm not answering because its not anyones business. I don't know you

You don't know anyone here- why bother posting at all? As for no-one's business?. It's often said on here "safeguarding is everyone's business"

However your refusal to answer tells me what I asked. You didn't discuss this with the other parents. In my view that is a safeguarding issue. I would not be at all happy with you speaking to my child behind my back.

.