Dad ogling pg 3 girls in playground

[anotherglass]

Strolled into school this morning with DS1 (6) to find a dad "reading" pg 3 of the Sun ( norks were in full view of the Year 2 line up ).

I thought this a tad inappropriate and asked him to turn the page, but he was really put out and huffed and puffed at me.

Tell me I was not being unreasonable.

And you would know this how PosieParker? Breast crusader and champion mind reader, or a whole other thread?

I think you will find the words " Tell me I was not being unreasonable" are indeed the words asking for agreement and approval, ergo validation.

"herbeatitude you assume because I don't agree with you, that I haven't read the thread I have read all of the thread"

Well actually, I was being polite. Either you hadn't read the thread, or you hadn't understood the arguments. Or you were choosing to simply ignore the arguments. The most polite option was to assume you hadn't read the thread, but I accept that you may not have understood the very simple point that women's bodies and women's bodies as playthings are different things, or that were deliberately choosing to ignore that particular argument.

Why? Why keep dragging the thread back to the same old argument which has been dealt with time and time again? No-one here objects to the sight of women's breasts. We have explained what we object to, over and over again.

"but how do you explain someone staring at page 3 for ages and ages if they are reading? There are not many words on it."

SSA - they're Sun-readers?

HerBeatitude lol but probably right

HerBeatitude, exactly what I've been thinking.

But what is the reading age of the Sun? I've heard the Guardian is 12.

The Sun's reading age used to be 6, many years ago.

I don't know whether that's gone up or down in the intervening time. What with SATs and that...

can we also ban the gossip mags as well while we are at it?

HerBeatitude not understand and not agreeing are not the same thing. I understand what you are whittering on about, I just don't agree with you. What part of that is so hard to understand?

yes, actually we feminists are campaigning to ban every magazine which isn't 100% free from sexism. Mother and Baby will have to go of course, as will Angling Times, Private Eye and Cross-stitch Weekly. In the end all you will be left with to read are The Ecologist and a few women's studies journals.

ha ha, had you going there for a minute

"The Sun's reading age used to be 6, many years ago."

What, that high?

LOLOL HB!

Of course no-one has yet posted the standard MN response, 'How do you know he hasn't got special needs?'

dyslexia would actually be a perfectly innocent and plausible explanation for why it was taking him so long - maybe he hadn't even got round to noticing the picture

What don't you agree with?

My remark was in response to this post of your's:

"OMG - bare breasts - I do hope you don't have the discovery channel at home or the home births one! Do your children never see you naked"

This post presupposes that those of us objecting to the notion that it is OK to read porn/ smoke/ swear in kid's playgrounds just becuase it's legal, are objecting to the sun reader because we don't like our children seeing breasts. It is an extremely unsophisticated argument which had been dealt with ad nauseum on this thread. But you had chosen to ignore that, which led me to believe that either you were deliberately ignoring it, or you didn't grasp it, or you hadn't read it. You didn't say you didn't agree with it, you simply repeated a position which had already been dealt with. That's not debate.

Clearly they should only let Guardian Readers into the school playground, preferably dressed in Boden clothes.

do Guardian readers wear Boden? I thought they wore organic fair trade eco handwoven hemp?

seriously, this isn't about class. i know plenty of tabloid readers who wouldn't behave like this man. It is about him being an arsehole and there are plenty of those in Boden too.

man, taking his child to school, so far so modern and approved. Opens the Sun and suddenly he is an arsehole.

My mother reads the sun and the news of the screws. She wouldn't dream of taking them into her grandchildren's school.

Why on earth not HerBeatitude? Surely if she buys and reads them she shouldn't be ashamed?

man, taking his child to school, so far so modern and approved. Behaves like an arsehole by ogling page 3 in view of children and huffing and puffing when asked to turn over, and suddenly he is an arsehole.

this thread contains plenty of evidence that the pornification of our society continues unchecked, with the complicity of otherwise intelligent women.

PL,

Full points for recognising elements of doubt; I said I was unnerved/rattled by the dad's reaction and that's why I posted on AIBU. You take someone on and you do feel shaken and go home and want some perspective. I had no one else to talk to other than 3-year-old. So the post was framed "tell me I was not being unreasonable". I was still a little shaken.

Is must be irritating that so many posters believe - many, quite emphatically, that inthe end I was not being unreasonable?

Someone who did not agree with my actions might however see this as "seeking validation". I can see that.

HerBeatitude Wed 22-Sep-10 19:23:03
What don't you agree with?

My remark was in response to this post of your's:

"OMG - bare breasts - I do hope you don't have the discovery channel at home or the home births one! Do your children never see you naked"

This post presupposes that those of us objecting to the notion that it is OK to read porn/ smoke/ swear in kid's playgrounds just becuase it's legal, are objecting to the sun reader because we don't like our children seeing breasts. It is an extremely unsophisticated argument which had been dealt with ad nauseum on this thread. But you had chosen to ignore that, which led me to believe that either you were deliberately ignoring it, or you didn't grasp it, or you hadn't read it. You didn't say you didn't agree with it, you simply repeated a position which had already been dealt with. That's not debate

I'm sorry if my POV isn't sophisticated enough you

Just because you have stated your position, doesn't mean I have to agree with it - funnily enough I am allowed my own 'position'.

anotherglass, I don't feel irritated in the slightest by your supporters. They are quite right to stick by their opinions, I certainly do mine.

You sound a very reasonable woman, and on the issue of porn I am in complete agreement with you. I, however, think it needs to be tackled from the top down. I think censorship is not the way to deal with this, or the best way to teach our children. My ds is 6 and asks pertinent questions all the time. Tonight he saw animals killing and eating each other. We deal with it, as it arises. But I know there is so much on the outside world I cannot control, and so the way I deal with this is teach him what is appropriate and what is not, at home. His father and I set him a good example. We equip him with the tools to deal with issues, such as porn, and how to turn the other cheek.

I see Sun readers every day at school. I just don't look at them for any length of time, but if my son and his friends saw a page 3, I know they would laugh, as boys do,and move on. If he asked, I would put him in the picture of where I stand on porn, in child friendly terms. That is what kids need, to be taught the tools to deal with what life throws at them, and to make informed decisions.

Of course it's not nice if the man is carelessly leaving it open on page 3, but asking him to turn the page is just not the way forward. In my opinion. But you know this, and so i shall leave it there.

All the best.

ChippingIn.....Do you swear in the playground?