Woman’s Hour presents the porn-for-children slot

Ah, ok, Jaysmith. That makes sense. But all the same, I’d like to know what the actual proposal was.

Pornography is sexualised imagery or prose with the specific purpose of inciting sexual arousal. The term derives from the Greek word for whore.

If you are showing sexualised images to children designed for good PSHE curricular purposes it is, by definition, not porn.

But showing adults - not children.

‘In what world is child porn - which is rape in reality - worthy of discussion?’

Of course not, but where did anything say that they were suggesting showing porn featuring children?

Very young children get offered (or used to!) a sort of cartoon showing how a penis can go into a vagina. Couldn’t ‘age appropriate porn’ mean a more teenage friendly version of the same, with realistic graphics or live film, including same sex relationships, and showing a respectful consenting storyline?

And did I see the new Dr Who sporting a super rainbow scarf? I give up...

In what world is child porn - which is rape in reality - worthy of discussion? Don’t we discuss things to see if we can reach some sort of consensus? The only consensus we should reach on child rape is that there is no situation where it should every be allowed to happen. Some subjects should never be given a voice to.

What do they mean by it?

Giving the kids an animated version of The Joy of Sex? Or getting them to watch actual, all too common, exploitative porn scenes?

How can you teach things without referring to the things you are teaching

Referring to something is not the same as showing it. Children know that murder is wrong without being shown a murder

Children need to be taught consent, boundaries and basic safety. They need to be taught that porn isn't real and is actively harmful, and the reasons why. They need to know about pregnancy and STDs. Teenagers can figure out the mechanics and experiment on their own - that's half the fun!

This is the start of getting us all to “discuss” it Minor attracted people aka pedophiles (this is their term, not mine.) . should be allowed to have relationships with kids. This is the slippery slope into us accepting paedophilia.

No.. there is so such thing as age appropriate porn. It is not for children. And in my opinion it is detrimental to adults.

This person and people who are ok with this are sexual predators and/or ok with paedophilia. We need to call this out when we see it. This is disgusting.

For fucks sake.

Can we do them under the trades description act? Please re name this repulsive idiocy and stop force teaming it with women, we want no involvement with it.

I’ll just come on here to also mention the radio 1 day of drag on Saturday.

I mean. Why are we trying to mainstream a very valid, fun adult subculture and embed it into youth culture. Is nothing off limits? Drag is subculture, and all the better for it. It’s comic, provocative, satirical and amazing. For adults.

Radio one is the youth channel. It’s the middle of the school summer holidays.

Wtf

Ah. I'm not surprised. All those calls on Twitter to defund BBC. Felt as if they were being set up for a pile-on. I'm not currently a fan of the BBC and its wokeness, but I don't want to see it defunded.

Just in case posters are unaware, the Woman's Hour involvement was to look into the furore that had been caused by Flora Gill's tweet. They were being reactive rather than proactive.

If you look at the www.conservativewoman.co.uk article, this illuminating part of context has been omitted. I think that's dishonest.

But it should not be provided by porn.

You make it sound as if they are going to be shown hours of random porn and I'm pretty sure they are not. How can you teach things without referring to the things you are teaching?

My immediate response was similar to yours, then I stopped to think about it.

We weren't taught about boundaries or the predatory nature of so many men, we were just left to find out the hard way for ourselves.

I agree there should be far more education around this. But it should not be provided by porn. What next on Women's Hour "Should 15 year old boys be given a woman to stop them becoming incels?"

I was born in 1961 and my sex education consisted of a few embarrassed theory lessons and the occasional (very mild) porn magazine found in a street or park. We weren't taught about boundaries or the predatory nature of so many men, we were just left to find out the hard way for ourselves.

You really think we need to doscuss whether porn for children is a good idea?

If the idea is being floated elsewhere, which it seems that it is then why not doscuss it and give it sunlight?

Oh and your 'they can't possibly have any legitimate take on this as they are right wing and if they say the sky is blue we must disagree' comment is very revealing

I never actually said that :)

And revealing of what exactly?

My goodness.

Its almost as if nothing has changed since saville and the Beeb think they are untouchable/in plain sight

Yes. I think some of his old friends could still be working there.

Oh and your 'they can't possibly have any legitimate take on this as they are right wing and if they say the sky is blue we must disagree' comment is very revealing.

You really think we need to doscuss whether porn for children is a good idea? And it requires anymore time to discuss than it takes to say 'no'? Should we also have long discussions about whether murder is a good idea or whether we should up networks to traffic children for sex?

Really? So we should not ask questions or challenge ideas that have been floated - instead we should stay quiet about them? If the best way to expose an idea is to let sunshine in then let it in - debate this. Clearly, it is a silly idea and so it should not be hard.

Oh, and the Daily Signal is the product of a very right-wing US think tank.