A Detailed Look At “The Family Sex Show”

Exactly. How many times does it have to be said - children cannot consent.

A few people in theatre coming out with how ‘worrying’ it is to see this ‘censorship’.

They’re obviously not capable of understanding the difference between censorship and safeguarding.

Sexual content is legal on the stage in the UK. No censorship (although it could - I think - fall foul of the Obscenity Act?).

But generally knock yourself out. Sing about sex, do your naked dance. It’s fine.

But there are CHILD safeguarding laws and you fall foul of them - separately from any censorship laws - because children are legally protected in ways adults aren’t.

Why? Because young children don’t have adult agency. They can’t choose to be exposed to sexual content: adults are making those choices.

Which is CSA, and rightly illegal.

Loons.

I like that 'mainly middle aged' and 'mixed martial arts' have the same initialisms. 😀

twitter.com/Docstockk/status/1518200995855142913

I seem to be having a problem posting links. The strange one above seems to work, but in case it doesn't, a link to Kathleen Stock's twitter post.

kathleenstock.substack.com/p/know-your-enemy?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNTEwNzcyOSwiXyI6ImRicEdPIiwiaWF0IjoxNjUwODY3NTg2LCJleHAiOjE2NTA4NzExODYsImlzcyI6InB1Yi02MTg3ODciLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.1lGcIB67yEnC8dDJyLf70bxFLe_zR_S4bTZWwg0rEkM&s=r
This was a very good piece to read by Kathleen Stock on her substack.

Takes a wider view of where this theatre stuff is coming from.

Great article from The Guardian!

Oh, that is great from Catherine Bennet.

'It is naturally the fate of Mumsnet’s members, so many of them being female, intelligent, sexually unavailable and indifferent to male abuse, that their age should be considered ideologically telling in a way that, if it caught on generally, would mean reading repeatedly about “the mainly middle-aged shadow cabinet”, “the mainly middle-aged guests on The News Quiz”, “the mainly middle aged or older court of appeal”.'

@Sazzasez in case you haven't seen it, you are specifically quoted in the Guardian this morning!

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/24/beware-having-opinion-on-sexually-inappropriate-theatre-age-you-10-years?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Looks like it's been cancelled now

Yes I think the fear of looking transphobic and bigoted certainly plays into this - but equally I never cease to be surprised by how little those who work in safeguarding know about the issues that are being played out at the moment. And to a certain extent why would they? Any training they have received won't cover it. I'm doing my bit by sharing the Interim Cass report whenever I can, and various IICSA reports.

In my experience though it's probation officers who tend to be most finely attuned to concerning/escalating behaviours by people who pose a risk of harm to children. The www.lucyfaithfull.org.uk/ - is a useful source of information and materials that I point people too to help support any points I try to make. Led by a former probation officer.

Fear of looking homophobic/transphobic.

Yes. The fear of the perception of bigotry and what it will do to social reputations is justifiable and can have profound impacts (too many women: Allison Bailey, Maya Forstater, Sonia Appleby, Kathleen Stock, JKR).

The Spiegel article was eye-opening as to the way parents can be so ensorcelled by liberation ideology that they second-guess themselves and believe that they are harming their children if they, in their implicit and perhaps unconscious bigotry that they're told they have, don't go along with it.

It's Lifton's 8 Criteria for Thought Reform.

It's the fringe excesses of highly contested parts of academia being played out in real life. The idea that simply swinging dicks and tits about in front of kids will cure us all of our prudishness is fucking insane.

The knock-on effects are potentially highly damaging for LGB people. And for trans people. The ones we used to perhaps occasionally come across who simply went to work and lived their lives.

And of course boring old women who won't shut up about what's age appropriate and why they think protecting their kids might be quite high on their agenda, actually.

I have said elsewhere, or maybe on this thread, that gay people are being done a huge disservice by this organisation. All the rights they have fought for, and to be completely and unremarkable accepted in the mainstream. And now by implication they are being associated with and tarnished by this child abuse, which gay men in particular fought so hard to dissociate themselves from in the public eye.

Fear of looking homophobic/transphobic. 🤷🏼‍♀️

When I’m willing to bet there’s a lot of LGB people thoroughly pissed off with tfss and all involved.

I put this on my own thread in AIBU, but think it is worth putting this here as well, in case anyone is in any doubt...

"What can I do to make it hurt less"...

"Does it unnerve you if my body misbehaves?"

twitter.com/ThisEgg_/status/1481933166449672199?t=Oeb3uLodF9J-gp7bqneJjQ&s=19

@ResisterRex - not sure and I suspect any 'answer' is quite layered. One thing I would like to know as a starting point is whether anyone involved in this production holds an enhanced DBS, and if they do, for what role did they get it for? If anyone does hold an enhanced DBS then the LADO role becomes very significant.

I quoted that definition to the NSPCC in my email to them this morning.

@TulipsaremyFavourites see also the reports on here about the NSPCC who declined to get involved.

I wonder what it is about slapping the Q word on something that seems to make professionals stop all normal safeguarding thoughts and processes?

@ResisterRex - exactly. It just boggles my brain that despite what was openly written on their website, and then reviewing the government's own description of CSA that the Local Authority did not immediately step in.

You only have to look at the Bristol LADO page for example to see that the people working in this organisation could well meet the threshold required for a referral - link below.

bristolsafeguarding.org/children/lado-concerns-about-professionals/

Tulips. Also p107. The definition of child sexual abuse:

"Involves forcing or enticing a child or young person to take part in sexual activities, not necessarily involving a high level of violence, whether or not the child is aware of what is happening. The activities may involve physical contact, including assault by penetration (for example, rape or oral sex) or non-penetrative acts such as masturbation, kissing, rubbing and touching outside of clothing. They may also include non-contact activities, such as involving children in looking at, or in the production of, sexual images, watching sexual activities, encouraging children to behave in sexually inappropriate ways, or grooming a child in preparation for abuse. Sexual abuse can take place online, and technology can be used to facilitate offline abuse. Sexual abuse is not solely perpetrated by adult males. Women can also commit acts of sexual abuse, as can other children."

Frequent lurker - name changed today.

Been watching this thread with interest - I wonder if anyone has made a referral in the respective local authorities where this show was due to be held to the local LADO - see page 60 section of the linked document.

Working Together to Safeguard Children

Hipster edgelords is a brilliant term. Janice nails it as ever

I am no fan of The Times, but well done to them.

In today's Times:

The hipsters should know some taboos still matter

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ba66744e-c0db-11ec-b4e3-203ad1be3cbc?shareToken=8ce068aec4ee72893cf78cb8fcd49560

"Some saw a song with the lyrics “I have a penis in my pants . . . Touch it! Touch it!” (What child wouldn’t love to sing that beside their parents?) Others noted a website entry about the show’s coverage of masturbation. “All kinds of animals masturbate,” it says, “not just humans! Use the internet to find some examples of other animals that masturbate . . . and draw the animals you’ve found.” Imagine encouraging a child to google that, let alone asking them to crayon the images they found. Yes, let’s stick a self-pleasuring pig picture on the fridge door.

When theatres pulled out ThisEgg claimed it had been a victim of “violent and illegal threats . . . by a small group of people with extremist views”. One cast member blamed the “discomfort” of “older people”. In fact, those who have actually raised children hear alarm bells when hipster edgelords dismiss safeguarding as only for prudes. There are reasons for some taboos."

Thanks. I know they would have already been aware of this, especially the show. I just wanted to make sure that the online content is also highlighted in any police investigation.