Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think that the NSPCC should not have tweeted this...

118 replies

ChickenonaMug · 22/07/2020 11:37

The NSPCC tweeted last night "Consent means actively saying yes, using both words and body language. You should explain to your child that they should always check to ensure the other person is happy to have sex or take part in sexual activity of any kind.

AIBU to think that this is an extremely badly worded tweet and the NSPCC really should know better. This tweet seems to demonstrates a really poor understanding of the grooming and sexual abuse of children. Many abusers will aim to convince a child that she or he consented to 'sex' (rape/sexual abuse) and I expect that it is relatively easy for an abuser to groom a child to say the word 'yes'.

I was groomed and sexually abused for many years of my childhood and my abuser always tried to convince me that the abuse was something I had consented to and that I wanted. Nowhere in the NSPCC's tweet about consent do they point out that children cannot consent to sex with an "other person'.

Children who have been sexually abused will often blame themselves or feel as though they will be blamed by others for what they have been subjected to and the shame that they are feeling stops them being able to talk to anyone about it. The attitude behind the tweet by the NSPCC really concerns me and it is not the only thing they have worded badly. Another example is the definition of sexual abuse they teach children in the Speak Out, Stay Safe assemblies which is "when a child is being made, asked or rewarded for doing anything with their body that frightens or worries them - or being made to do this to someone else." (my bolding). learning.nspcc.org.uk/services/speak-out-stay-safe#article-top . Again this wording does not seem to take into account the grooming of children into believing that they have wanted or consented to the sexual abuse nor does the NSPCC seem to recognise that a sexually abused child may absorb this definition and then think that it is she (or he) who is the problem because she did not react with fear like a 'normal' child is supposed to. This will then back up what the abuser is telling her, which is that she wanted or consented to the abuse and will lead her to not disclosing her abuse for fear of being seen as sexually deviant or stupid for not reacting with fear.

Even the title of the NSPCC "Speak Out, Stay Safe campaign is deeply problematic because it places the responsibility on the child to keep themselves safe from abuse.

The NSPCC are also describing kissing and hugging by young children as normal 'sexual behaviours'. I think it is wrong and very unwise to see young children as sexual beings especially as this is an attitude shared with abusers, for example the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) lobbied to have children seen as sexual beings with sexual rights and the ability to consent from a very young age. IMO the NSPCC need to undertake a serious review of their recent practice.

This tweet by Safe Schools Alliance UK describes what I am trying to say: twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1285868833891377152

AIBU to think that the NSPCC should not have tweeted this...
OP posts:
RunningFromInsanity · 22/07/2020 11:45

The use of the word ‘child’ when talking about sex is really weird.
Children shouldn’t be having sexual activity, consensual or not.

PlanDeRaccordement · 22/07/2020 11:47

100% agree with you OP. It’s a terrible tweet.

Binterested · 22/07/2020 11:48

NSPCC is a disaster.

Children shouldn’t be having sex and cannot consent to sex.

blurpityblurp · 22/07/2020 11:49

They’ve removed the tweet and apologised.

Very poorly worded!

justanotherneighinparadise · 22/07/2020 11:50

Are they getting shit for it? I bloody well hope so Confused

Nottherealslimshady · 22/07/2020 11:50

YABU it's not a tweet about abuse from an adult to the focus child. It's about teaching children to ensure they have consent from a partner when engaging in sexual activity.

Nottherealslimshady · 22/07/2020 11:51

Under 16s do regularly engage in sexual activity with eachother.

MagicMojito · 22/07/2020 11:55

@Nottherealslimshady, thats the point a child ABSOLUTELY cannot consent to sex. I get that children (I personally think from about ages 13+) should learn what a healthy sexual relationship entails but the tweet worded it as if sex underage (again as a child) is OK so long as it is consensual iyswim?

Soph88888 · 22/07/2020 11:56

If they're talking about young adults then they should make that clear.
It's a very creepy way of putting it.. imagine sitting your child down to have that chat, shocking

VaginalTarantula · 22/07/2020 11:57

Children can legally have sex. If you are under 18, you are legally a child. The age of consent is 16, ergo children can legally have sex. Also, 16 year olds can legally have sex with adults, like 40 year olds even, so... The wording is correct.

Also children do have sex. I was having sex at 14/15 with another person my own age.

This clearly wasn't about abuse, this was about teenage children having consensual sex. And yeah "14 year olds can't consent to one another" but I'm sorry, try taking two 14 year olds who both say they consented and love each other to the police Hmm you won't generally get far

VaginalTarantula · 22/07/2020 12:00

thats the point a child ABSOLUTELY cannot consent to sex

Yes they can. In England, a 16 year old is a child who can consent to sex. This 16 year old, who is a child, can date adults of any age. Legal adult/child relationships.

Trust me, people in America often think the above is shocking.

AudacityOfHope · 22/07/2020 12:00

Surely they were talking about having discussions with your children around consent, so that when they do become sexually active, consent is seen as standard?

Badly worded maybe, but I don't see anything to overreact about.

I would talk about it with my ten year old. Someone at school asked her to take her trousers down so we had a chat about how nobody is entitled to any of her body, etc. You talk about this stuff in small, age appropriate ways so that it becomes part of how they view themselves and their bodies once they're out in the world.

Sharkerr · 22/07/2020 12:01

I think it’s fine.

It’s referring to sexual activity between underage children. Which happens frequently, whether you agree with it or not. Better to encourage people to have those discussions around consent.

I agree with your point re the definition that includes ‘frightens or worries’ though, that’s awful and poorly thought out. Surely we need to teach kids that if you’re having sexual relations with someone older than the age of consent, whether you believe you want it and are consenting or not it could well be abuse?

ChickenonaMug · 22/07/2020 12:08

Sharkerr that definition is taught to primary school children so anything aimed at this age should inform them that it is always abuse.

OP posts:
Rwoolley · 22/07/2020 12:12

What is wrong with this tweet?

Children should be taught about consent

The image clearly mentions young people

Also children do have sex, you're an adult when you're 18, therefore many children have sex as the age of consent is 16

ThatsHowWeRowl · 22/07/2020 12:20

I see what they were trying to do, but for a children's charity to put this out there without any reference to the fact that the age of consent is 16 or that if an adult has sex with a child it doesn't matter if the child is OK with it, is very poorly judged. We have all seen Peter Tatchell's letter, it's important for a children's charity to always emphasise that sex with kids is not OK, even if the child 'wants to'.

The NSPCC has been on shaky ground for a while now though, what with the 'wanking in a rubber suit in the toilets' incident and the employment as 'ambassadors' of people who had invited minors to privately message them on SM. So I am generally a bit more skeptical of them these days...

BaronessSnippyPantsofCroneArmy · 22/07/2020 12:43

@ThatsHowWeRowl

I see what they were trying to do, but for a children's charity to put this out there without any reference to the fact that the age of consent is 16 or that if an adult has sex with a child it doesn't matter if the child is OK with it, is very poorly judged. We have all seen Peter Tatchell's letter, it's important for a children's charity to always emphasise that sex with kids is not OK, even if the child 'wants to'.

The NSPCC has been on shaky ground for a while now though, what with the 'wanking in a rubber suit in the toilets' incident and the employment as 'ambassadors' of people who had invited minors to privately message them on SM. So I am generally a bit more skeptical of them these days...

THIS.
Gatehouse77 · 22/07/2020 12:44

@VaginalTarantula

Trust me, people in America often think the above is shocking.

Having just done a quick Google, the age of consent in the USA is from 16-18 depending on the state.

VaginalTarantula · 22/07/2020 12:46

that if an adult has sex with a child it doesn't matter if the child is OK with

But this is false. People always miss that 16 year olds are children and that they can have sex with adults. That if your 16 year old child who hasn't even sat their GCSE exams yet wanted to sleep with a 50 year old man, there'd be nothing you could legally do (unless he was a professional violating boundaries)...

If you want it so that only adults have sex, raise the age of consent to 18.
If you want it so that children can't have sex with adults, introduce a law similar to what they have in other countries - 16/17 year olds can only consent to other 16/17 year olds.

MilleniumHallsWalledGarden · 22/07/2020 12:47

@ThatsHowWeRowl

I see what they were trying to do, but for a children's charity to put this out there without any reference to the fact that the age of consent is 16 or that if an adult has sex with a child it doesn't matter if the child is OK with it, is very poorly judged. We have all seen Peter Tatchell's letter, it's important for a children's charity to always emphasise that sex with kids is not OK, even if the child 'wants to'.

The NSPCC has been on shaky ground for a while now though, what with the 'wanking in a rubber suit in the toilets' incident and the employment as 'ambassadors' of people who had invited minors to privately message them on SM. So I am generally a bit more skeptical of them these days...

I agree. The NSPCC does not have leeway for badly-worded posts on social media or elsewhere. Their credibility is very poor at the moment.

VaginalTarantula · 22/07/2020 12:48

Having just done a quick Google, the age of consent in the USA is from 16-18 depending on the state.

Yes but in a lot of states it is illegal for under 18s (minors) to sleep with over 18s (adults) or they at least have an age barrier where you can only sleep with someone so many years your senior of you are 16/17. We don't.

HoneysuckIejasmine · 22/07/2020 12:48

@VaginalTarantula

thats the point a child ABSOLUTELY cannot consent to sex

Yes they can. In England, a 16 year old is a child who can consent to sex. This 16 year old, who is a child, can date adults of any age. Legal adult/child relationships.

Trust me, people in America often think the above is shocking.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p072qyrb#:~:text=Watch%20now-,America's%20Child%20Brides,reconsider%20their%20child%20marriage%20laws.

And yet child brides are acceptable in the US.

HoneysuckIejasmine · 22/07/2020 12:49

Eugh, link fail. Here's the program description:

An investigation into the US laws letting older men marry girls under the age of 16.

Ellie Flynn travels to the USA to visit states poised to reconsider their child marriage laws. South Carolina is considering closing its 'marry-your-rapist' loophole that allows girls under 16 to marry if they are pregnant and have a parent’s consent. Visiting the record office in Spartanburg County, Ellie finds 16 child marriages in the county in the last decade. In ten of those cases, the groom could have been prosecuted under statutory rape laws.

One of these marriages was between teenager Keri, then 15, and Paul, then 24. When Keri became pregnant, Paul agreed to marry her and help look after the baby in order to avoid prison. This raises a central question for Ellie: whose rights are more important: the underage, pregnant girl or the unborn, potentially fatherless baby?

Ellie also travels to Georgia to meet 17-year-old Zion. She married at 16, and her groom David was just two years older than her, so Zion didn’t need to use the marry-your-rapist loophole, and nor was her groom at risk of prosecution for statutory rape. Many campaigners want to change Georgia’s minimum marriage age to 18, but Zion is convinced that this would have meant the end of her and David’s family, as they would have been forced to live apart for two years.

But not all child marriages end in family harmony. Often it breaks families apart, as Ellie finds out in Idaho. Here, a case involving conflicting laws, religious beliefs and ideas of parental responsibility left two men in prison and a family at war. In Idaho, child marriage laws require a court order from a judge, but in the state of Missouri only the consent of one parent is needed. So when Heather became pregnant at 14, and without consulting her mother, Heather's father drove her across the USA to marry her 24-year-old rapist.

VaginalTarantula · 22/07/2020 12:51

In a few states hold brides are acceptable. I'm talking about who children can legally consent to sex with. Plenty of times I've said I met my partner when I was 17 and he was 21, and I've had Americans saying it would be illegal in their state as adults are prohibited from having sex with minors.

Gatehouse77 · 22/07/2020 12:54

Yes but in a lot of states it is illegal for under 18s (minors) to sleep with over 18s (adults)

I don't think I follow.
Once you're 16 here you can sleep with whomever you choose but not somebody under 16 as that's age of consent.
Are you saying that if you were in a state with a 16 years age on consent they can only sleep with 16-18 year olds?

Swipe left for the next trending thread