AIBU to think schools shouldn't promote breast binding to 11 year old girls?

[OhHolyJesus]

Article in the Times today about a top grammar school.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/913e7f94-b038-11eb-b844-593e41a4a1a5?shareToken=96489378584664b8e46495232a22b86a

From the comments you can see the parents weren't aware.

I'm so shocked to see all the pitchforks out. I'd completely underestimated how out of touch so many parents are.

For one minute, leave aside your self-righteous outrage about an issue that is clearly very polarising . Focus on the world we actually live in today.

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse. To think that you can protect your child against that is naive, because even if you don't give them a phone, their friends and classmates will all have one. Information about all this stuff is out there.

Secondly, they have friends and classmates who will talk about huge amounts of stuff that you will never find out. I was horrified to be hearing about sexual stuff from my kids aged 8 that I didn't know - they had no internet access or phones, but apparently the boys at school were all talking about it.

I ha e continued to find out about all kinds of (in my mind pretty weird) sexual stuff from them.

Yet the majority of our kids seem to be having real life sexual experiences later than we did.

Having read the original article, it actually advised girls that there were negative side effects of binding breasts unsafely. Maybe it's something that the students were concerned about, having heard of it going on in the school. We just don't know the context. Telling a teenager explicitly not to do something is usually counter productive, but pointing out the negatives and providing links to more information isn't promoting it.

And I genuinely do not think that transgender people are persuaded or talked into it. I think the risk of that us extremely low. Instead I worry about the risk of kids still growing up in this day and are with poor mental health and miserable lives because they feel they have to confirm to a narrow pigeonhole their parents want. I'd rather my kids were educated in a school where they are accepted for who they feel they are, rather than an oppressive one where they are constantly required to put on a mask to "fit in".

I feel sorry for the school, as they are damned if they do, damned if they don't.

We have to live in the real world, where this us happening, rather than trying to Bury our heads in the sand and pretend it's still the 1950s.

We have to live in the real world, where this us happening, rather than trying to Bury our heads in the sand and pretend it's still the 1950s.

At least when women were subjected to brutalising sexual experiences in the 1950s nobody pretended it was empowering. Small mercies

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse. To think that you can protect your child against that is naive, because even if you don't give them a phone, their friends and classmates will all have one. Information about all this stuff is out there

All the more reason to not teach In a way which basically frames abuse and exploitation as a legit sexual practice

Having read the original article, it actually advised girls that there were negative side effects of binding breasts unsafely. Maybe it's something that the students were concerned about, having heard of it going on in the school. We just don't know the context. Telling a teenager explicitly not to do something is usually counter productive, but pointing out the negatives and providing links to more information isn't promoting it.*

Sorry anon666 but i don’t think you can have read the article. The “article” the students produced didn’t say anything at all - it provided links in a sidebar entitled “How do I bind safely?” with no context at all - certainly nothing that says “Whether to breast bind is a topic trans people often ask about but there are some important health implications to consider”. The question they pose just presents it as a fact - that it is indeed possible to “bind safely” and I’d be unhappy just on that score, let alone the links being unsuitable. So there’s the context - the newsletter they produced introduced it as a topic with no nuance at all.

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse. To think that you can protect your child against that is naive, because even if you don't give them a phone, their friends and classmates will all have one. Information about all this stuff is out there.

With all due respect, their friends showing them stuff is entirely different to a school promoting it to their educational email address. It’s a safeguarding issue.

I live in the real world and I’m not naive. And in my real world 11 year olds aren’t finding out about chemsex and fisting from their educational establishments. That’s not wanting a return to the 50s, it’s wanting safeguarding.

I can’t believe there are people defending this. If this was sent out to my daughter when she was 11 I would be absolutely livid. I hope the parents give the head hell tomorrow. It is the school’s responsibility that it was sent out in the first place. They must check these things.

You'd have to go some to just happen upon information on fisting and chem sex on the internet. Really doubt it's just "one click away".

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse

This is why parents and schools need to exert more boundaries, so that 11 year olds know that chemsex and fisting and whatever is not something everyone is doing and not something that is expected of them. They need to know that consent is paramount and binding is harmful.

Not just sigh and say, “Well, all the information is on line, let’s just give you some more”.

Exactly.

I'm so shocked to see all the pitchforks out. I'd completely underestimated how out of touch so many parents are.

Umm. no. I don't think any person posting on this thread is actually 'out of touch' except maybe you being 'out of touch' with safeguarding.

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse. To think that you can protect your child against that is naive, because even if you don't give them a phone, their friends and classmates will all have one. Information about all this stuff is out there.

You either have not put boundaries in place for your 11 year olds or you overestimate their interest or even having the knowledge on what key words to use to search these things at 11 years old, unless they are watching YouTube or getting taught from inappropriate 'tool kits' at school. My 11 year old told me just how little their class actually knew about sex during sex education classes. I had discussed sex with them and they said that they knew far more than anyone else in class.

Having read the original article, it actually advised girls that there were negative side effects of binding breasts unsafely.

This is where you show you are out of touch. There is NO way to 'bind' breasts safely. Ultimately, it will cause harm.

I have read the links. Maybe you can tell us exactly where the point is made in each thread that any binding can cause harm and what the actual damage is from the three links. Particularly the one 'from a physician' - where does it go into detail about the effects other than "That said, even a dedicated binder is not without risk, and binding improperly or for too long can lead to chest and back pain, rib bruising and fractures, shortness of breath, overheating, and skin damage."

And I genuinely do not think that transgender people are persuaded or talked into it. I think the risk of that us extremely low.

Do you have a teenage girl at school at the moment? I can assure you after watching a group of 7 girls where five of them 'come out' one by one over a 6 month period and seeing this replicated across quite a number of groups, you tend to understand there is something more happening here.

I'd rather my kids were educated in a school where they are accepted for who they feel they are, rather than an oppressive one where they are constantly required to put on a mask to "fit in".

Great. I think we all want that for our children. I would just rather not have information that leads to decisions that are actually causing physical bodily harm through lack of balance and actual facts. That is why this is a safeguarding issue. Whether you believe it or not. It would not stand up to the Department of Educations guidance released in October 2020. Because that particular section (and others too actually) fail on delivering facts in a balanced and non-political manner.

We have to live in the real world, where this us happening, rather than trying to Bury our heads in the sand and pretend it's still the 1950s.

I suggest you might consider that some parents on this thread are very much living in the 'real world' and dealing with situations just like this binder situation - right now, in real time.

Perhaps then you might understand what the significance of most of the posts on this thread rather than portraying them as parents 'out of touch', 'still in the 1950s', and 'burying our heads'.

In the meantime, I would appreciate you letting us know the details about those negative effects that you say you read all about, because all I saw was minimising, glossing over and no detail at all. But, maybe I read it expecting health warnings to be explicit and stating things like 'talk to your doctor about these potentially life threatening, certainly life changing effects.' Rather than the physicians message about double mastectomies.

‘Breast binding’ is misogynist self-harm and whether school or pupils produced it, it should not have been circulated at school.

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse

Your 11 year old has a smart phone? You don't have parental controls?

Schools, at least where I am, don't allow mobile phones in school and don't allow children to access their already strictly locked down internet via WiFi. Schools have e-safety policies and if a child learnt about drug induced sex on the premises the parent or parents should but rights go nuclear.

Why do 11 year olds need a mobile phone?

More and more reasons, every single day to say no.

Most 11 year olds at secondary school have a smart phone. The Internet is available on these devices and therefore they are already one click away from any amount of porn or information about "chemsex" or whatever and much worse. To think that you can protect your child against that is naive, because even if you don't give them a phone, their friends and classmates will all have one. Information about all this stuff is out there.

You are aware, presumably, that you can set limits on your child's phone use? The fact that smartphones exist doesn't mean that you hand 11 year old instructions on how to find PornHub, and a credit card.

I'm afraid it actually sounds like you are being naive if your attitude to parenting and safeguarding is 'it's all out there, why try to stop them'.

Until your children are old enough to understand informed consent you have responsibility for them. A school shares responsibility. For that reason, this school has an e-safety policy, which they don't seem to have followed, for some reason.

Not just sigh and say, “Well, all the information is on line, let’s just give you some more”

I mean there was that TikTok video of a suicide right, or was that you tube? Wasn't there a man who shared videos of him killing kittens, shall we show kids that and all the other completely horrific soul destroying stuff you can find in the internet with 'just one click'.

Remember how that over 18s Child's Play film featured in the court case and subsequent news stories around the murder of Jamie Bulger?

I am always a little suspicious of posters who are eager to tell parents to stop parenting kids

@MarshaBradyo

Content distributed by a school should always be checked. So it doesn’t matter who created it.

Otherwise you could have anything goes, racism etc

This!

I was horrified to be hearing about sexual stuff from my kids aged 8 that I didn't know - they had no internet access or phones, but apparently the boys at school were all talking about it.

If my 8 year olds were talking about extreme sexual practices, I'd be on the phone to the DSL at my kids' primary like a shot. That is a massive red flag for abuse.

Are you saying you just said "oh that's interesting dear. Nuggets or pizza for tea?'

That's pretty bloody negligent.

Oh god. I was actually thinking of sending my girls to that school until I read this. We live in the area and have been prepping for the 11+ But I’m afraid this is a dealbreaker. Not just that the newsletter went out, but that the school has defended it.

Same. My kids are young so there may be a change of leadership but I won't go near this school if it is the same head by the time we're looking.

An oversight where it was not picked up on is one thing, but for a school to think this is OK is not an ethos I'm comfortable with.

My 13yo DD doesn't have a smartphone. She has a brick. As do many of her friends. And she can only access the internet from a computer in the main living room. So no, she's not accessing this sort of hardcore material. Boundaries are possible.

@clymene

There's really no need to be so nasty and personal. I'm definitely not "pretty bloody negligent" at all. That's an excessive response.

I'm referencing the most shocking and extreme events during my kids lives that have been eye openers. When that happened I went into the school, told them about what I was hearing and handled it in a sensitive way. I didnt march into the Head's office and demand her resignation though. The school aren't the thought police, they can't control everything the kids say in the playground.

All I'm saying is that at times our kids do come into contact with external influences that we can't control, no matter how protective we are. And in some cases, like the recent BLM stuff, I think that has been a good thing. My kids have talked to me about issues like racism and homophobia, advocating their friends views. I have felt lucky to have been exposed to that wider set of viewpoints.

I guess that I assumed transgender issues were becoming more mainstream and moving out of the taboo realm, but this thread and the reaction to my post has made me think it's not yet acceptable to the mainstream, which makes me sad for the transgender sons/daughters of friends of mine.

I understand that it's a complex issue, but that understanding has made me try to be compassionate and empathetic, instead of simplistic and reactionary.

I'm very saddened and surprised by the vitriol on here, but I take responsibility for provoking it.

I do have teenage daughters, I listen to them with an open mind, and most of all, I understand that they are growing up in a different world and a different time to the one I grew up in. I've made peace with that for their sakes.

@Locheart
“I'm not in favour of breast binding in any way but your post and the headline of that paper is dogwhistle alarmist rubbish.”

No it isn’t alarmist rubbish and the breast binding was just one concerning aspect of what was in that newsletter which went out to girls as young as 11.

I have not read the full thread so maybe another person has already mentioned that there is a long thread with all sorts of details related to this on ‘Feminist Chat’.

In a statement, the school said the newsletter, written by the LGBTQ+ student society, aims to “inform and promote understanding of LGBTQ+ issues

Why are they using the word “promote”

Promote is about persuasion.

Are they saying that to be lesbian or trans isn’t about who a person is but who a person can be persuaded to be.

I guess that I assumed transgender issues were becoming more mainstream and moving out of the taboo realm

Again you are implying that people are taking issue with ‘transgender issues’. Do you understand the difference between answering a question about binding with a balanced answer that actually refers to the harm binding can, and after long term use, does and recommending seeking medical advice vs including three links with NO context about balance.

You stated you read the information on binding contained in those links. If this is so, please point me in the direction of the sections detailing the negative side effects which ARE harmful and can be life changing and even worse. Because I really only saw a minimizing general statement that there are some negative effects on the first link, nothing on the second and one sentence glossing over the effect on the one posed as a ‘physician’s advice’ page and closely followed by a section on double mastectomies.

@Bythemillpond

In a statement, the school said the newsletter, written by the LGBTQ+ student society, aims to “inform and promote understanding of LGBTQ+ issues

Why are they using the word “promote”

Promote is about persuasion.

Are they saying that to be lesbian or trans isn’t about who a person is but who a person can be persuaded to be.

"to promote UNDERSTANDING of LGBTQ+ issues"

Not to promote lesbianism or trans s a lifestyle or decision. Just to understand the issues around LGBTQ+

but this thread and the reaction to my post has made me think it's not yet acceptable to the mainstream, which makes me sad for the transgender sons/daughters of friends of mine.

If you read the posts about safeguarding and ensuring that the information given showed no political bias and was factual (as required by the Department of Education guidance issued Oct 2020) you would also realise that the motivation of many posters here is actually to improve the lives of young people who identify as trans. Not hate or any phobia.

There are posters on this very thread with children who identify as trans. Surely they don’t hate their children and even may have experience as to how best to communicate information to this cohort.

Perhaps you believe that providing 11 year olds or even older teens with these links and nothing else was ‘best practice’ for caring for young people who identify as trans. I disagree and I have explained why. This newsletter was approved by adults with safeguarding responsibilities and they have failed.

Your attitude in your previous post was that parents who pointed out the issues were ‘behind the times’, burying the heads and living in the 1950s. Your next post implies ‘closed minds’ and you say posters are vitriolic and ‘simplistic and reactionary’ compared to your empathy and compassion.

Maybe instead of shaming parents because you believe that pointing out this lapse in safeguarding is based on hate, you take the time to understand why this is a safeguarding failure.

And really understand that parents who have children who are living each day dealing with these very issues would find the way thIs was handled very irresponsible when it could have been used to inform of the dangers of binding.

The teens doing this are NOT getting the full information about the harms of binders. From personal experience, they are telling each other that they are just like corsets , they are getting them delivered to their friend’s houses. If you have teenaged daughters as you say, you probably have already experienced this yourself even indirectly.

We know from teachers that they need extra accommodations to be made in PE and the list goes on. Because they are NOT getting the information on the dangers of wearing them. They are getting the glossed over information about it. They are getting affirming only information about it.

What is responsible about that?

What parent wanting that information balanced with the facts about harm to be presented is coming from a place of hate, of ignorance or phobia?

You don’t promote understanding by posting instructions about breast binding.