Please tell me what you think about this letter sent home by DCs school

[Namechange100000]

Sent to all parents at DCs secondary school:
'Dear Parent/ Guardian/ Carer
As part of our continuing work with schools and other partners, aimed at helping safeguard young people, we would like to take this opportunity to remind you that your children can be at risk whenever they attend parties where alcohol is freely available. Some people with a sexual predatory nature can seek to take advantage whenever they find youngsters who are at all vulnerable in those circumstances. We urge you to remind your children to take reasonable steps and use common sense to keep themselves and their friends safe; and encourage them to talk to you.

This isn't an issue for any one community or area. It can affect all young people, and with summer approaching, and celebrations at the end of the exam period, children are ever keener to get out and about. we thought it would be useful to remind you of some potential risks they could face, alongside the many obvious positive activities and opportunities available to them.
Sincerely

(signed) Chief Inspector X Headteacher Y
'
So, sensible warning, or outrageous victim blaming?

In some school somewhere in the UK some poor sod is sitting at a PC composing draft 360 of a letter warning parents of a potential danger to their teenagers. And rocking backwards and forwards on their chair while crying quietly to themselves. Knowing that MN will be on to it with its political theorists deconstructing it for hidden messages.

People of a sexually predatory nature is gender neutral and includes all people, known and unknown to the victim. It is pretty precise language and carefully phrased

Clearly it isn't that precise given a few people think it means specifically strange males who prey on teenage girls.

I would be amazed if the majority of people, particularly teenagers, would read "Some people with a sexual predatory nature can seek to take advantage whenever they find youngsters who are at all vulnerable in those circumstances" and think that it might refer to Jake who sits next to her in maths. Or, indeed, Sophie who sits next to him in English.

Agree with your post of 16:00 yesterday Hak.

I have ten boys and have spoken to them about all of those risks that you mention there, and how to mitigate against them

I think the letter is a lost opportunity to do that, in focussing only on the risk of sexual assault

Hahaha

Wish I had ten boys!

Teen boys

You cannot legislate for people who read one thing and translate it onto something completely different.
The letter was a starting point for discussions between patents and children about risks. Nothing more.
However, I would be very surprised to learn that it's teens do not know that sexual abuse and sexual grooming (rather than sexual assault) is often carried out by persons known to the victim. By keeping the language neutral the letter is able to cover all of the above sexual crimes rather than restricting to one .

"By keeping the language neutral the letter is able to cover all of the above sexual crimes rather than restricting to one"

But that's what I'm saying- the language is not neutral. Nobody is going to think the person sitting next to them in class is a "person of a sexually predatory nature"!

Hak, Sexual predator is not the same as stranger. Sending the letter to all parents asking th to speak to their children is not the same as telling the parents of girls to speak to them.

However I have noticed that you sometimes read things differently to how they are written in order to fit what ever point/ argument that you are trying to make.

Do you think that this letter is victim blaming or gender specific? Have you spoken to your own DS about the dangers of sexual predators?

That is why the letter is sent to the adults not the children who might be immature enough and isolated from the real world not to know that sexual predators are often people they know although the teens I know are all very clued up that way. But maybe that is because the adults in their life have spoken to them about this?
Anyway, as the letter is sent to an adult not the child the adult should be Able to clear up any misapprehensions because they will not perpetrate that misunderstanding and will help their DC develop the knowledge and understanding to keep themselves safe.

Neither victim blaming nor sensible advice. Just a pointless exercise in stating the bleeding obvious.

Exactly, SoldierBear - I can't understand the fuss - use it as a starting point.

Hmm- not entirely sure that a "starting point" should be at 16!

Use the points raised in the letter as a starting point for a discussion with your DC about life, the universe and everything, which would include although not be restricted to a range of topics which may include the following:

taking responsibility for oneself
safeguarding oneself
looking out for friends
danger signs to look for
the appropriate precautions to take

etcetera etcetera etcetera.

or as the letter put it "We urge you to remind your children to take reasonable steps and use common sense to keep themselves and their friends safe; and encourage them to talk to you." That is exceptionally clear and not easily misunderstood.

And of course these sorts of discussions between parents and children should not begin at 16. that is why the letter clearly states "urge you to REMIND your children".

I will say it again SoldierBear - exactly.
The parent's job- not the schools. It is a good starting point from the school ( and a wake up call if the parent hasn't bothered before 16 yrs)

Sensible warning.

Victim-blaming is a thing, but victim-blaming is where you put the moral responsibility for a crime on the victim. When you take agency away from the attacker. For example, to the extent of even saying that something is a "victimless crime", about a serious act of sexual violence, as I have seen.

This letter has not claimed that paralytic men and women make criminals attack them, but it has highlighted that rapists seek vulnerable victims. Which they do. Because they have agency and free will, and they choose to use it by being rapist bastards and doing it in a way that means they're as unlikely to be caught as possible.

I think that the wording, which differentiates between 'some people' and 'youngsters' does signal adult predators rather than other youngsters getting involved in risky peer behaviour.

As it happens, because of projects I have been involved in I am fully aware of predatory abuse of vulnerable teen boys, and see this letter about a specific instance, rather than a general warning, and in that context agree with Hak.