AIBU to say that if you work in child protection you shouldn't post pictures of yourself wanking at work in fetish gear?

[ArcheryAnnie]

People do all kinds of things in their private life, and - as long as it's all consensual, and involving adults, in private - that's absolutely fine with me. Even if it involves fetish stuff that I find deeply unsexy. It's your private time and your business.

But if you bring your fetish into work, that's really inappropriate. Involving other people in your kink without their consent is not OK.

If you bring your fetish into work and take time to entertain yourself in the loos with it, that's way, way beyond really inappropriate.

If you work in child protection campaigning, and bring your fetish into work, and take time to entertain yourself in the loos with it, and take a photo of yourself while doing it, and upload that photo onto the internet, then you probably need to consider whether a career in child protection is really for you.

(And if you are doing this while working on campaigns about abused and neglected children, you should not be surprised when people ask what made you so aroused.)

And dear NSPCC - who I used to have a direct debit to, and who used to be in my will - people objecting to this are not being homophobic or "bullying". Many of who are objecting to your staff member's actions are ourselves gay. We just seem to have a better grasp of safeguarding than you do.

To add, I'm reporting because it's an unsubstantiated claim.

I saw quite a few comments on Twitter along the lines of “so he had a danger wank, what’s the problem?”. Which just further goes to show why many (most?) women would prefer not to share toilets with men - because while NAMALT, even one man wanking in the toilets at work is one too many.

This push for everything sexual that anyone wants to do, anywhere, to be accepted and not “shamed” is quite frankly dangerous.

I don’t care what people get up to in their homes/private clubs etc with consenting adults. I don’t want to see it, hear it or even have to wonder if it might be happening in public places or the workplace.

Yes, people will do illicit things to get a thrill, just like people will always commit crime - but it should not become the norm.

Some of the weirdest takes on it I've seen are:

"How do we know it was at work? Even if he said so, who labels their amateur porn accurately?"

• he said in his own video that it was at work. Either he was telling the truth, in which case he was wanking at work in fetish gear, or he was telling a lie, in which case he wanted other people to believe he was wanking at work in fetish gear. Why would you want other people to think that, if you work at the NSPCC?

"He was doxxed"

• doxxing is when other people link up your offline and online lives. He himself linked his offline and myriad online lives. Therefore not doxxing.

"He's entitled to a private life"

• this wasn't private. It was in a communal place of work, and he was the one who made it even more public by filming it and uploading the video, where people could link his work and private lives together.

I'm just amazed at the hoops people are jumping through to establish that men can do exactly what they like, wherever they like, when they like.

‘Wankers Rights are Human Rights!’

🤦‍♀️

It seems like there's an epidemic going around of, 'sex is cool, I'm cool,' - rest of brain shuts down.

Who is MB?

MB is Munroe Bergdorf.

This is a great part one of the NSPCC story: blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/munroe-bergdorfs-sacking-and-the-failure-of-the-media/

Wanky rubberman was the person who actually hired MB.

Munroe Bergdorf

The Spectator article is excellent

Obviously there are a lot of men who regularly wank at work and get a real kick out of it.

I had absolutely no idea

So we all know about number 1s and number 2s. Is wanking the new number 3?

I'm shocked beyond belief that the NSPCC seem to think there's no case to answer and also that this story hasn't been reported in any newspaper. I'm guessing there's some truth and lies mixed up in all the rumours, but surely someone at the charity should make an official comment? Instead they demonise the lifelong supporters who express concern and bewilderment, calling them 'bullies'. This can't be helping the charity, or the employee concerned.

Another question: why did they backtrack on sacking MB? The sacking was due to MB's unapologetic calls for young people to contact her, against NSPCC safeguarding procedure.

The sacking was due to MB's unapologetic calls for young people to contact her, against NSPCC safeguarding procedure.

When NSPCC refused to engage with MN members last year they issued this statement, whilst wholely inadequate & incorrect in part, it has relevence in what it does say:

"MN statement, "However, in view of the questions asked in this thread, we asked the NSPCC for a statement:

The NSPCC doesn’t consider there to be specific child protection concerns in relation to trans-inclusive policies. Any space and activity involving children should have strong safeguarding policies in place, with a proper risk assessment to minimise the risks to all children involved. And every adult working with children should undergo rigorous safety checks and vetting procedures to ensure that young people are safe in their care.

Trans young people are at particular risk of physical, sexual and emotional abuse from peers. This can heighten the risk of abuse by adults as children turn online for support and access to networks of those sharing similar views and feelings. There should be high-quality, statutory relationships and sex education, alongside strong school safeguarding policies, to ensure that all children are kept safe in schools."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3353658-AIBU-to-be-shocked-that-the-NSPCC-cancelled-their-Facebook-Live-session-with-Mumsnetters-because-they-didnt-like-the-questions-That-they-cant-explain-why-they-arent-putting-children-in-danger

thread with Safeguarding questions which NSPCC refused to engage with:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_facebook_live/a3343961-Facebook-Live-about-talking-to-kids-about-staying-safe-from-abuse-with-NSPCC

NSPCC is now no longer fit for purpose.

More evidence of systemic Safeguarding failure as kink & fetish is pushed at Primary School teachers by Gendered Intelligence.

Report of Hayward Gallery’s 'Kiss My Genders' event by TRansgender Trend

(extract)
Gendered Intelligence has been delivering training in schools, including primary schools, since 2008. In itself, confusing young children about biological sex and eroding boundaries between the sexes through pretending that sex is not real, should be something that rings alarm bells for anyone concerned with safeguarding and child protection.

This exhibition though, and Gendered Intelligence’s involvement with it, is yet more evidence that ‘gender identity’ ideology is queer theory, which normalises kink, BDSM, fetish, porn and extreme sexual practices. In practice, this means that many young people who identify as part of the queer community, are being pressured to accept kink and paraphilia through fear of being accused of ‘kink shaming’ if they don’t. Once children are trained not to trust their intuition and to believe that having sexual boundaries is ‘bigoted’ they may be more easily manipulated into accepting further erasure of boundaries through a lack of confidence in their own judgment and a fear of being ‘non-inclusive.’ (continues)
www.transgendertrend.com/gendered-intelligence-training-teachers-kiss-my-genders/

Dear god. A kid being kicked out of class for saying there are only two sexes (although he uses the word gender).

twitter.com/lporiginalg/status/1139572227307794432?s=19

You know that time when you thought the pissing, wanking, filming and linking was the worst...all the way back yesterday...welllll..you ain't seen nothing yet. Evidently,

James Kirkup in that Spectator article is brilliant as usual!

That video of that kid being kicked out of class... Is that for real?! It can't be! Do we know where it has come from?

I know a lot of people will think that thee only thing of interest is that they agree with what the kid is saying, but blimey wasn't he recalcitrant and disrespectful.

I don't think I would have got away with talking back to a teacher like that. There are ways of doing things and ways of doing things. Even if you disagree with a school policy, there is still such a thing as being disruptive in class, talking back etc.

That was a film of what happened when the teacher came to talk to him later- basically warning him to toe the line or else. Do we know what actually happened in the class room?

but blimey wasn't he recalcitrant and disrespectful.

Really?

I thought the opposite. He's been kicked out of class for recognising reality. He seems remarkably restrained to me.

Do we know what actually happened in the class room?

I don't know the background at all. So context is missing. Although the teacher is a science teacher apparently.

Perhaps more will be forthcoming as it gets more circulation.

No, apparently it was PSHE and the teacher brought it up himself, complaining that there were only male and female options on a website sign up.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3612524-Student-kicked-out-of-classroom-as-believes-there-are-only-male-and-female?msgid=87825679#87825679

Yes, I agree. I thought he was polite and restrained in the circumstances. And if I was going to speculate, I reckon the teacher was basically warning him to keep his head down for the sake of his exams.

The work toilets should be off limits to any sexual activity, solo or with colleagues, end of. What you wear under your work clothes however is your business as long as it doesn't show. If his postings were from outside work time (eg in hotel room after hours) then whilst seedy its not exactly wrong whereas the loos is 100% unacceptable (and would be if it was a straight woman too