To think that inviting primary children to witness erect penises, gang rape references and spikes up mens arses isn't artistic, it's pedophilia?

[ShouldIStayOrShouldIRun]

This art exhibition is being pushed by Gendered Intelligence, a group that works in schools:

www.transgendertrend.com/gendered-intelligence-training-teachers-kiss-my-genders/

The event is not age restricted, in fact children are being actively encouraged to go.

I have been informed by a very 'woke' friend that this is art and I am homophobic, kink shaming, and transphobic (because apparently even linking to the above website on my FB is, no matter what it says) and that maybe I should go with my own primary aged dc to 'broaden my mind'.

My mind has been broadened. That friend obviously shouldn't be let anywhere near my dc again.

AIBU?

• Opening post edited at OP's request

Not wanting to derail the thread but the people who designed the course causing the current conflict in the school in Birmingham are steeped in Queer theory. Definitely an agenda that is being actioned. I think you'll find the Girl Guides, NSPCC, City of London Corporation have all been got at, as well as most political parties.

Apollo440
Not a derail. There's a frightening connection between all of this with good people and institutions being unwitting enablers of a move to remove the boundaries that keep children safe from predators.

Someone sent me a link to a drag queen summer camp for primary aged children in Ames Iowa earlier. There was a clip of a child drag queen being offered money by under10s. This is sick.

“Let's not forget that the nspcc has tweeted that it won't tolerate homophobia after objections about a gay staff member who instagrammed himself masturbating in a rubber suit in one of the toilets at work.”

I missed this. Can you clarify whether the objections were about the behaviour per se, or whether some of the objections were homophobic in nature?

If a member of my staff did this I would sack but I would still challenge objections that targeted his sexuality rather than his behaviour.

The Hayward Gallery has a Facebook too, on which it is advertising the 'Kiss My Genders' exhibition. A few post could be helpful.

www.facebook.com/haywardgallery/

.

TheRedBarrows I've had a crash course in this today. As far as I can tell, the objections were that this man, regardless of his sexuality, wore his leather fetish wear under his work clothes. He then went into the bathroom, of the children's charity premises, wanked, filmed it (so made porn) and shared it online, even linked it to his LinkedIn profile AND titled it as being filmed in the children's charity premises.

The internet is a cesspit, I can't say for certain that not a single of the comments was homophobic.

But none of the ones I saw were. In fact I'd go further and say it is really homophobic to say that you can't challenge this behaviour. Surely that's implying all gay men do this? That they are all sexual deviants and if you object to one you object

I've seen a number of gay men complaining about it too.

If you object to one you object to all that should say.

It's an eye opener. I looked at the Feminist board about the NSPCC issue because of Owen Jones's article in the Guardian complaining of homophobia and transphobia but couldn't see anything of the sort. The concerns raised were 100% valid and frankly anyone who can't see this shouldn't be within a mile of children. I am very concerned about what the NSPCC think are their priorities

There's a frightening connection between all of this with good people and institutions being unwitting enablers of a move to remove the boundaries that keep children safe from predators

Could you expand on how they're "unwitting enablers" please?

I get that someone might be admitted to a group if they dissemble about their objectives, but you'd hope (sadly, often in vain) that they'd quickly dissociate themselves once the real agenda crawled into view

Sorry, but for me those who knew but attempted nothing don't get a pass by indulging in self-flagellation or excuses about "validating reports" and "little being known", as seen from the likes of Fairweather. Cutesy remarks about being "daft as a brush" at the time don't cut any ice either, though no doubt they're useful when applying for another turn at the left wing funding udder

You don't need a government directive to know children should be kept away from known abusers - you just need some sort of moral compass, or even simply a little common sense

I think they may have already been linked but this series of articles is very pertinent:

medium.com/@doctorEm/the-trojan-unicorn-queer-theory-and-paedophilia-part-i-a0cf30ef7bfa

So the exhibition is trying to normalise pornography. Isn't that what paedophiles do?

Utterly inexcusable. I despair for all our children and the future of society.

Oh bloody hell...

Right in plain sight. A 'childrens' charity that is inclusive of 'kinky' people.

I've never felt as sick as I have today.

Anyone liking or following this charity needs to be investigated. Like, look at their computer inside out investigated.

Following the concerns about general media silence, I've just read elsewhere that Ali Jeremy, Director of Marketing and Communications at NSPCC, previously worked for the BBC for 8 years. Neil Berkett, Chair-elect of the NSPCC trustees, is also chairman of Guardian Media Group

Hmmm ...

Puzzledandpissedoff
It's a fair question. My belief is that all the foolish teachers, social workers, lawyers etc are not bad people - they're not deliberately meaning to harm children. It's a combination of fear of probably the most openly oppressive and bullying movement that has ever been given traction in this society alongside an unthinking immersion in identity politics where powerful individuals have created a narrative that middle aged powerful males transitioning are the most oppressed group ever. They are openly skewing the public moral compass.

When you're older and experienced in safeguarding, coercive control bullying, it's easy to spot it. But fear and threats are being used to stop critical thinking and people are being actively bullied.
Sorry - this is a bit rambling and I do believe that institutions like the NSPCC must be held accountable as they know and have no excuse. But others are less well versed in safeguarding and are more easily influenced by these bullies??

So, this 'queer theory' denies objective reality?

So, "no, you're not an eight year old girl, you're really a grown woman called Lola if you believe you are" ? sort of thing. Interesting.

Showing children pornography is also a recognised grooming technique.

I completely get what you're saying, truth, and I fully agree about the oppression and bullying, but I struggle to sympathise with anyone allowing themselves to be influenced by such folk - for me, the need to protect the innocent is too important for that

To be clear, I'm not talking of those who've tried to raise these issues and been ignored; rather, my reference is to those who willingly buy into the evil spouted by apologists for perversion. They may not mean to cause harm, but where even a moment's thought should have made the potential harm obvious, I'd suggest they're fully to blame if they've avoided that thought for whatever reason

I'm really disturbed by the idea of children being exposed to porn or any sort of inappropriate behaviour by anyone, full stop.

As an aside I take massive issue with the disgraceful summary of queer theory on page one of this thread. Queer theory, and queer culture, does not support rape or paedophilia.

Queer communities don't house more sexual abusers than there are in heteronormative communities. Rape and abuse happens everywhere, and the focus must be on holding abusers accountable and making sure they don't have access to children/ vulnerable people.

ShouldIStayOrShouldIRun that Prostasia "child protection organization" looks a LOT like queer theory / sex positivity as a front for paedophilia.

The twitter blurb says A child protection organization combining an evidence-based approach to child sexual abuse prevention with its commitment to human rights and sex positivity. and its header says the stigma busting child protection organisation.

MASSIVE red flag for "stigma busting" when applied to child protection. As I said near the beginning of this thread (I think it was this one?) - many followers of queer theory think that the biggest problem with sexual abuse of children isn't the actual abuse but society's stigma shaming the child. So we should therefore remover the stigma of CSA, according to them.

Evidence based approach could mean anything - what do they think the evidence says exactly.

sex positivity applied to children is exactly how you end up inviting primary schools to a fetish exhibition.

(This organisation is in California, apparently).

twitter.com/ProstasiaInc

I think everyone has allowed themselves to be brainwashed into accepting the unacceptable because they're paranoid about being labelled a '.......phobic'.

It really is the emperor's new clothes.

Google 'bystander effect' as well. This is why freedom of speech is so important as well. By shutting down arguments, even those you disagree with, it means that valid arguments also get lost in amongst it all.

I hate, as a lesbian, being associated with the T. Or with the Q.

Jesus! That's horrific. I wouldn't even want to view it. Completely inappropriate for children. xxx

Agreed ineedaknttedhat
Bystanders are just not going to stand up if they fear they will be called a bigot - and that is precisely what is happening to those protesting about the selling of this exhibition to schools and children.

I don't want to view the images of men penetrated with with spikes - but if it is as graphic as it sounds, I'm interested what the legal take is on this?

As far as I know images of anything that looks to be doing damage beyond 'transient or trifling' is illegal? So - are these images online? Law for the gallery will be different but surely with an age restriction to protect those under 18?

PIE tried to present any attack on paedophiles as an attack on homosexuals generally; as Gay Left put it, “realistically, the moral Right wing cannot get much support out of campaigning against homosexuality as such… but they can hope to build up a new moral consensus [against gays] around the issue of protecting childhood”.

PIE’s members, mostly educated and middle-class, were good at finding “progressive” academics – some useful idiots, others rather more sinister – to fight their cause. As O’Carroll said: “We thought we could manipulate the Establishment and find allies within it.”

Sounds familiar...you know what? The left wing establishment fucking sicken me. It's very easy to dismiss the instincts of ordinary working people as knee jerk Sun reading homophobic blah blah blah. But these academics and policy makers are supposed to be educated. And yet they have no actual capability to make their own judgments, just follow the party line.
I have no faith whatsoever in the establishment any more, and think the education, charities, unions etc should all be run by 70 year old ex checkout operators and factory workers.

Women like that would never let shit like PIE or the Gendered Intelligence bollox past the front gate.