AIBU to be shocked that the NSPCC cancelled their Facebook Live session with Mumsnetters, because they didn't like the questions? That they can't explain why they aren't putting children in danger?

[loveyouradvice]

I am reeling from this - Mumsnet promoted a Facebook Live for Thursday 12.30... to talk about keeping Kids safe from Abuse, and to publicise their PANTS and SpeakOut StaySafe campaigns.

NSPCC just didn't turn up - and only 4 hours later published a brief statement that said nothing!!!! So lots of people waiting for a no show.

It is fine for them to have the policies they have - IF THEY CAN EXPLAIN that they really are in all children's best interests and that they aren't putting girls at risk..... They haven't even tried to do that... Just ignored us and run. Ignored MUMSNET - which is full of people who raise or give money to the NSPCC, and who use it.

HOW??? I am bewildered beyond words.....

Oh ... and hopefully clicky link here of the questions Mumsnetters asked - really thoughtful cogent ones!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_facebook_live/a3343961-Facebook-Live-about-talking-to-kids-about-staying-safe-from-abuse-with-NSPCC

Lisa Muggeridge,
'Social work training: Ever present risk of predatory behaviour'

What on earth are you talking about. If Oxfam came on here to promote any campaign however virtuous I very well might ask about the revelations about their staff. They do not get a free pass whatever wonderful work that they do. Why on earth would you want to stop people asking questions. I am not hindering their work by asking questions. And organisations that think like that are not one's I would have any faith in. Asking questions does not equate to stealing blankets.

Still waiting for Rat to come back with how they are getting on with their contact with MNHQ about that pre recorded content.

No idea what you're talking about. Don't think I agreed to be at your disposal, did I? No. Thought not.

Thank you rat. I am not delicate but its starting to seem personal.
I disagree that those questions did not help children.

No idea what you're talking about. Don't think I agreed to be at your disposal, did I? No. Thought not.

Well then, like I said, you are complicit in fucking over the children. If you don't sort this out, then all those parents won't see the NSPCC content and thousands of children will be abused and it will be all your fault.

ShrodingersSturdyPyjamas

You must be in need help this afternoon Shrodingers, I have specifically said the questions asked were the hinderance to the work of the NSPCC.

The exact questions asked.

My not having asked a question did not HINDER their work.

Do you need a coffee or is the usual speed of your mental processing?

It's precisely because they're not happy to answer those questions that people must keep asking them. It is a massive safeguarding risk, people should be able to ask uncomfortable questions without fear of being labelled 'anti' or a bigot Yes lots of people asked questions on this topic, it is a new issue and is causing concern for a lot of people and therefore should be urgently addressed by an organisation which is supposed to have some standing in safeguarding and should be staying ahead of emerging trends where child safety is concerned.

So you are happy to berate everyone else for ‘derailing’ but not actually willing to do anything about it yourself then rat?
Just like you didn’t think it was important to post on the original thread? But it’s all the nasty transphobes fault that nspcc were not willing to answer perfectly valid and important questions

The genitals question is especially important for all types of sex abuse including that in the home. If children can name their genitalia accurately it is believed to have a protective effect. How can children name their body parts if a clitoris is being renamed a ‘short penis’ by the trans lobby??

That all seems convoluted and quite tenuous. How about - if they answered some of the questions it would have been helpful. We don't understand what the issue was with answering the questions.
Gordon brown managed to squeeze in an answer to his favourite biscuit.

rat if a trans child went missing and you had to report to the police knowing full well the kidnapper could shave head or make them wear different clothes what description would you tell the police so they could put word out to look for the child?

Because if you would use boy or male to describe even in secret to the police then you know taht that chikd is in fact a bit and that there is a mixed sex safe Guarding issue

Thank you rat. I am not delicate but its starting to seem personal.

Oh, I'm sorry! To be honest I stopped being so liberal with the cusses when I first started on MN years ago because I realised I was far coarser than most on here and I did come across as aggressive (in real life the delivery is far more one of emphasis than aggression). I promise it's not personal!

I disagree that those questions did not help children.

I know you do, that's okay. I really very much feel that the cumulative effect of all those questions was very bad for both the NSPCC and the children they aim to reach. I was very angry about it from the off. But I know you disagree, despite us having hashed it out, and of course you're quite entitled to your perspective.

You. Did. Not. Help. Children by asking those aggressive, lengthy, accusatory and completely off-topic questions en masse on that thread

Saying things doesn't make them true. I am helping children by calling the NSPCC to account.

When they are launching a campaign that says speak out, stay safe. But the culture surrounding this issue is one of intimidation bullying and silencing tactics. Not to mention that questions are impossible to answer.

The NSPCC need to explain why they advocate separate, sex segregated sleeping arrangements for children over 10, unless they identify as the same gender.

What is the safeguarding basis of that distinction?

It's an incredibly important question. You know it, I know it.

And you would rather deflect by criticising the question, rather than inability to answer.

Well then, like I said, you are complicit in fucking over the children. If you don't sort this out, then all those parents won't see the NSPCC content and thousands of children will be abused and it will be all your fault.

Oh my, another one who needs assistance.

Not doing something good is not the same as actively doing something bad.

Basic lessons in morality and responsibility here people.

Why can't anti-woman posters focus on substance rather than style?

Good question. Hmmm I do wonder why that it is. Racking my brains.

I actually can't keep up with all the posts on this thread - I think I'm about 5 or 6 posts behind at any one time so by the time I've typed something it's pretty obsolete. So on that basis I'm going to leave it until the volume is a bit more manageable or until you lot stop repeating the same inane and ignorant crap and I have to keep repeating the same rebukes So I probably haven't read the last 6 posts, but hey ho.

The questions are fair ones that the NSPCC should be answering.

So convenient.
Cone on what woukd you say to the police.

Rebukes ?

Basic lessons in morality. Asking questions is bad.

Saying things doesn't make them true.

I'm saying them BECAUSE they are true.

I am helping children by calling the NSPCC to account.

You keep telling yourself that, love.

And you would rather deflect by criticising the question, rather than inability to answer.

Yep. As it ever was. We can go round and round a million times but you'll never get any answer of substance from certain posters. Because they cannot answer. Like the NSPCC.

What datun said up there very important

Why does safeguarding policy change gender is changed

How does that work and how will children know ?

Rat, you're losing it. Lecturing women in morality, offering to rebuke them (🤣), swearing, and the patronising terminology?

Stick with the content.

Or are you aiming to get this thread pulled?

Perhaps, rat and anyone else who'd like a stab at it, could answer the question?

Sex segregation for over 10s is deemed necessary in terms of safeguarding by the NSPCC, unless one child identifies as the opposite sex.

Why?

I can’t datun

It’s bonkers policiy and the nspcc should have answered that question

After it’s their policy