100 organisations ask Labour to abandon Tory revised guidelines on RSHE

I don't think anyone on this thread wants schools to show pornography to children, if that was what you're implying.

What specifically do you want to show primary age children?

Imagery, such as?

The logical result of this argument is not to tell kids what to do if they are being abused because not all kids get abused.

Actually pp is advocating primary age so earlier than 12

What exposure do they want? Their response earlier was to laugh about dick pics from their teens

So is it that? They are pushing for exposure in class?

We do the PANTs rule which is good and online safety which can include a broad remit of how to be safe. What exposure are they arguing for exactly

In practice it doesn't take much regulation for the pornography distributors to bow out of their accord, even just mandating actual confirmed age verification (not just clicking an "I Am Over 18" button) does the trick: https://www.newsweek.com/map-shows-states-where-pornhub-blocked-1879777

I ageee with you and would like to see the government do this as a bare minimum, with a view to more restrictions later on. Best we can do without this is harm reduction through education.

A model where sex is seen as shameful, harmful and discussions not allowed is regressive, harmful and one we know doesn't work.

No one is advocating this. But you know that.

I'm talking about age appropriate explanation of what children should do if they see porn. We manage to discuss the "pants rule" with very young children for example. I'm talking about that kind of thing.

I don't think its controversial. Banning schools teaching about porn altogether potentially leaves 25% of children distressed, upset and out of options if they see something upsetting. Especially if they come from a family where discussions about sex and bodies are seen as embarrassing or taboo.

Having seen bs having regularly watching porn is completely different. Even 1/4 is not enough to warrant the system should in anyway forcing those down the throat of all the other 3/4 children! It causes more damage than harm as a whole.

Well to me you are coming across as someone with no experience of teenagers at all and a very dogmatic and ideological approach.

16-18 year olds can legally have sex. The best way to protect them from predatory men is education about healthy relationships and open routes to discuss any worries and concerns.

A model where sex is seen as shameful, harmful and discussions not allowed is regressive, harmful and one we know doesn't work.

You try to shut me up with insults but it doesn't change reality.

So is your answer to the age question now 12 not 16?

Ate you including those ‘dick pics’ as you called them or what?

Yes. But unfortunately around 25% of children have seen porn by then.

If society is not going to adequately restrict Internet porn then really the only option is to teach children how to navigate it.

I'd love to see porn ideally banned but at least heavily regulated and access restricted but it appears there is no real appetite to do that.

A good friend of mine has an email from Mumsnet HQ suspending her account for saying this exact same thing back in 2018. I don't think she ever came back.

@CassieMaddox here's your whole post.

I have teenage boys. They think drawing "dick pics" as you call it, is hilarious.
Have you not seen the back of dirty white vans?
I also think getting teenage (I.e. year 10 ish) boys to model vulvas out of playdoh and understand what a clitoris is, is a good thing. They are legally old enough to have sex, might as well have at least some clue that women have clitorises and porn style banging isn't going to be that fun for their girlfriends.
Massive amount of pearl clutching going on, under the pretext of "the children". When really we are talking about young adults.

Very easy to read it that you're talking about your own sons. If indeed you are a mother, then I just hope you're nowhere near any other position of responsibility as regards children. Not "young adults" but children. Under 18s are children. You can like it or lump it but that is what they are. Chipping away at this makes it easier for predators to detect weaknesses and access children for - as you call it "porn style banging".

I didn't write it in the context of my children, which is what you altered my post to say.

Don't give a shit what you think about my language. My point, which you seem desperate to distract from, is that teenagers need other sources than porn to learn about sex. Porn is unrealistic and depicts sex that's at best not fun for women and at worst harmful, painful and degrading.

This isn't a controversial point at all

Year 7 is very early still. They are only 12!

Yes it's a really shocking insight into what teenagers have to navigate.

I like the ruler exercise too.

After reading the paper I feel that Safe Schools Alliance has got it wrong. This exercise was about helping teenage girls understand that online sexual abuse isn't okay and mustn't be normalised.

Thanks for sharing the paper. It's really interesting to read how this came about and what the educators were trying to do. Here's a bit about "dick pics"

^Across our research, there was a pattern of boys receiving messages of porn-style images of women saying they would exchange images, information, or money. Consistent with a pornified logic of male consumption, the boys almost universally said that responding to this would be “stupid” and they knew they were “bots” (robots) or organised groups seeking to exploit them via what they identified
as “sexualised” content (here we directly meet posthuman techno-sex and its wide-ranging spread and capacities).^

There was also a clear pattern of girls being sent unsolicited genital images from menthey did not know. This was often through message requests or group chats, where the girls clicked onto the image and saw a dick pic or a video of a man masturbating.

Girls, however, had a much harder time across our groups clearly identifying a motive or understanding these as digital group-organised activities; rather they positioned the senders as “paedos,” “desperate old men.” and “flashers”.
^We felt that the dynamics facing girls - of receiving and navigating such messages - was significantly different. For the girls, receipt of these images was almost always perceived as shocking, less expected, and individualized. We found that the majority of girls had received dick pics or masturbation videos from unknown senders, and by age 14, it had become “ubiquitous” (Ricciardelli & Adorjan, 2017). The focus group was, in all cases, the first time that girls had been asked to share their experiences of receiving “unsolicited content”. In nearly
every group, stories emerged about how girls were sent many images from “randoms” (unknown anonymous senders) on Instagram and Snapchat. These were old men (in their twenties!) from America, a range of people they didn’t know, but who sent messages that the girls clicked on and opened up to a dick pic.^

Yes. Also always instructive to see which threads get disrupted by posters who are either immature, or say and do as you set out. Got to be one of the two.

“Porn style banging” is what you wrote as well. I can’t believe you’re a mother, no. I can easily believe you are close to being both 16, and male, however.

I don’t think it’s a ‘good story’. The opposite

I can see how easily adults contribute to a culture that most try to avoid. Especially if they are pushing for it in schools.

Do they know about respecting girls and do they understand toxic masculinity?

Exact same tactics employed incidentally for the other goal of getting men in to women's spaces where women are undressed or doing intimate things.

Always interesting to note who is passionate about sexual freedoms and with what end in mind. And with whose benefit in mind.

😂

Always interesting when people don't quote a post and then alter what it says. I said "Boys might".

I said this:
I have teenage boys. They think drawing "dick pics" as you call it, is hilarious.

I think its pretty unremarkable to say/know this about their teenage son. But imply what you like, no need to let the truth get in the way of a good story.

I would be very suspicious of any group that is against age-appropriate sex education

Handily, now we have a great big list of who those groups are.