Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Deeply concerned about Child Safety in Bristol

1000 replies

MatthewJTaylor · 07/04/2022 21:28

From May 5th to May 8th 2022, the Tobacco Factory Theatres in Bristol is having performances of "The Family Sex Show".
This show is aimed at children 5 years old and up.
The performers involved get naked.
The discussion with the children is on sex, sexuality and sexual pleasure.

I cannot imagine brining a 5 year old child to a theatre where people will to to her/him about sex and show their naked bodies to her/him.

Am I the crazy one?

Sources:
The Family Sex Show website
Listing at The Tobacco Factory Theatres

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
2fallsfromSSA · 08/04/2022 09:11

Look at this happy little song everyone gets to sing.

Deeply concerned about Child Safety in Bristol
finebutfedup · 08/04/2022 09:11

I do wonder how they are able to share “quotes” about how great the show is, when it seems they haven’t even finished writing it? Confused Hmm

Lynnthesearesexnotgenderpeople · 08/04/2022 09:12

There is a lot to say about this but, hang on, that glossary......I think this is a police matter?

OutingHobby · 08/04/2022 09:13

@2fallsfromSSA

Look at this happy little song everyone gets to sing.
Is that in the show?! Can you imagine a 5 year old going into school the next day singing that?!!! Ffs stop the world I want to get off.
finebutfedup · 08/04/2022 09:13

@2fallsfromSSA

Look at this happy little song everyone gets to sing.
Okay yes. That is disturbing. I do think that is a safeguarding issue. Children are not sexual beings, and encouraging them to be is dangerous.
finebutfedup · 08/04/2022 09:14

Can you link to that @2fallsfromSSA ?

MrsOvertonsWindow · 08/04/2022 09:17

@Lynnthesearesexnotgenderpeople

There is a lot to say about this but, hang on, that glossary......I think this is a police matter?
There are a number of potential sexual offences in relation to children (Sexual Offences Act 2003) that could be breached by what's being proposed. Including indecent exposure. Can a 5 year old give informed consent to see a random adult's naked body in a discussion about sex? Can a parent give consent on behalf of the child for unknown adults to discuss sexual acts with a 5 year old?
DoorWasAJar · 08/04/2022 09:17

@ShepherdMoons

I can imagine the chat at school if children have been to see this. Children talking about dildos and masturbation at 5 or 6 years old will surely be something the teacher would see as worrying.
And abortion and bdsm? When I was little (around 5, coincidentally) I knew my mother had abortions and it was quite a scary thought.
Throughabushbackwards · 08/04/2022 09:18

Silly me @DoorWasAJar

2fallsfromSSA · 08/04/2022 09:18

It's on their website. Thefamilysexshow.com. I can't get to it at the moment as my internet filter has blocked it.

Floydthebarber · 08/04/2022 09:19

Looking over their website, the glossary does not say that the terms are all used in the show but the show, podcasts, literature and just useful to know. I do not like thir definition of feminism. And gatekeeping is described with a very negative tone; gatekeeping for a child can be positive and completely right.

But as many PPs have said, good sex and body education has to be targeted for ages, even the difference between a 5 and 8 year old would hugely change what you can discuss with them and how.

springsmiles · 08/04/2022 09:19

So interested to see this thread, I came across this show when looking at up coming theatre shows.

It's not been shown just in Bristol but across the country.

My thoughts were it's so sad that anyone thought this was needed for 5 years olds. I'm think I'm an open minded mum and talk openly to my kids about sex and their bodies but I don't see a need to discuss this in a public theatre

Lynnthesearesexnotgenderpeople · 08/04/2022 09:20

I am finding this quite upsetting actually. Surely this could be incredibly triggering for survivors of CSA?

Pluvia · 08/04/2022 09:20

The show is part of this organisation's work:

schoolofsexed.org

It describes itself as 'sex positive', so it's all about promoting sex as fun and nothing to get het up about. Sex positivity is the movement that is encouraging students to supplement their grants with what they describe as 'sex work', which is the modern twist on prostitution. If sex was really work (like working in a cafe or being a dentist) then the Department of Employment would be encouraging all unemployed people to prostitute themselves.

This is about breaking down boundaries and sexualising children. Major safeguarding concerns. I hope MNetters in the Bristol area will feel able to protest about it.

DoorWasAJar · 08/04/2022 09:20

@finebutfedup Kinsey started this, he sexualised infants and Judith Reisman exposed him as a criminal fraud but he is worshipped by sexologists as he is the grandfather of the whole ‘field’ or rather industry of normalising the abnormal.

2fallsfromSSA · 08/04/2022 09:21

@Lynnthesearesexnotgenderpeople

I am finding this quite upsetting actually. Surely this could be incredibly triggering for survivors of CSA?
Yes. See the quote on SSA thread from a survivor.
Rosscameasdoody · 08/04/2022 09:21

@Tilltheend99

You seem to be overreacting. From the website link you shared, everyone seems to be wearing clothes. It is described as Sesame Street meets Flight of the Concords. Sounds more like Horrible Histories for sex education trying to make it engaging.

So, if it is at a theatre then the content will have been examined for safeguarding already.

If you are five you will have your parents with you so parent has already given consent to talk to their child learning about bodies etc and can discuss the themes more after the show.

Unless you can prove with better links that something bad is in the show, then you are scare mongering at best.

I don’t believe talking to children about things like sexuality and inclusion is wrong if anything, those seeking to ban children from hearing words like gay are causing the damage.

You’re kidding yourself on a massive scale. Look at the links - the one to the Guardian talks about masturbation. In what (sane) world is it appropriate to talk to a 5 year old about such things. Children are not little adults, as some posters seem to think and this whole thing should be a massive red flag for any responsible parent. Let children be children - issues around sexuality are not age appropriate for a 5 year old because they haven’t developed the skills to be able to process the information.
OutingHobby · 08/04/2022 09:22

@2fallsfromSSA

It's on their website. Thefamilysexshow.com. I can't get to it at the moment as my internet filter has blocked it.
That says enough really!
PrelateChuckles · 08/04/2022 09:23

That clitoris song isn't in the show, it's in the podcast for older teens.
It says so in this article which I have linked several times in the thread. It doesn't really help any case for people to post misinformation - the info we DO have is bad enough!

"Alongside the performance, the team have created a podcast for older audiences, this time with the negative and messy bits included. As well as offcuts from the show – such as a reckoning with ableist language and an operatic song about the clitoris – it includes longer, more in-depth discussions about ideas of queerness, pleasure, friendships, and what they all mean to us as individuals."

www.theguardian.com/stage/2022/mar/08/and-now-for-a-song-about-the-clitoris-the-joy-of-sex-education

ResisterRex · 08/04/2022 09:23

I confess to not having RTFT but I have been through the website. It's covered in 🚩- or should be. The terms highlighted by @Throughabushbackwards go directly against the statutory safeguarding safeguarding guidance. In that guidance, sexual abuse is defined:

"Involves forcing or enticing a child or young person to take part in sexual activities, not necessarily involving a high level of violence, whether or not the child is aware of what is happening. The activities may involve physical contact, including assault by penetration (for example, rape or oral sex) or non-penetrative acts such as masturbation, kissing, rubbing and touching outside of clothing. They may also include non-contact activities, such as involving children in looking at, or in the production of, sexual images, watching sexual activities, encouraging children to behave in sexually inappropriate ways, or grooming a child in preparation for abuse. Sexual abuse can take place online, and technology can be used to facilitate offline abuse. Sexual abuse is not solely perpetrated by adult males. Women can also commit acts of sexual abuse, as can other children."

The people running the show seem to say that "boundaries" is defined as:

"The limits we set for ourselves and other people, which indicate what we find comfortable and uncomfortable"

This is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Politicians need to wake the fuck up. Handwringing over bekiiind and ignoring "difficult" issues is what's got us here.

FOJN · 08/04/2022 09:25

DoorWasAJar

Thread here which explains what happened. An NSPCC employee posted pictures of themselves wanking in fetish wear, in the work toilets at the NSPCC. The account with the pictures was linked to their LinkedIn profile. Women who thought this was a problem were branded as bigoted homophobes because we'd have been absolutely fine with it if the employee had been straight! There was more too it but that the gist.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3611125-AIBU-to-say-that-if-you-work-in-child-protection-you-shouldnt-post-pictures-of-yourself-wanking-at-work-in-fetish-gear

2fallsfromSSA · 08/04/2022 09:25

@Lynnthesearesexnotgenderpeople

twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1512077179839909892?s=20&t=IWmUkfHkPcagyGvJDvwJSA

theemperorhasnoclothes · 08/04/2022 09:25

@Believerinbiology

I cannot believe the number of people defending this...saying we all must be mistaken. Some appear to have had a quick glance at the website, swallowed a few soundbites and concluded everything's hunkydory. Open your eyes...look at the pop ups on the website, read all the sections - people, FAQs, glossary etc. Just because they've peppered the site with the letters NSPCC a few times does not mean its OK. They don't actually say the NSPCC supports the show just that they think they are following guidance. Even if the NSPCC support this they have shown a glaring lack of judgement in other areas (toilet incident, sex abuse definition changes). Read what they say about safeguarding (demonstrates a clear lack of understanding or is an attempt to obsfuscate) and read all it says the shoe contains. The detailed show content is still not available 2 weeks before the 1st show...so they don't know how the show will run but know its perfectly fine,...really?
This is exactly what happens when safeguarding fails. 'It must be ok' 'people are overreacting'. People looking the other way and assuming everything's fine. It's not their responsibility.

Safeguarding is EVERYONE'S responsibility - that's in every course I've done too.

Raising concerns should be fine, without repercussions. Who can we raise concerns to? Bristol social services?

ResisterRex · 08/04/2022 09:26

[quote DoorWasAJar]@finebutfedup Kinsey started this, he sexualised infants and Judith Reisman exposed him as a criminal fraud but he is worshipped by sexologists as he is the grandfather of the whole ‘field’ or rather industry of normalising the abnormal.[/quote]
100%. More should be known about Kinsey in the safeguarding world. Much more.

lydia2577 · 08/04/2022 09:26

Exactly this!!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread