Deeply concerned about Child Safety in Bristol

[MatthewJTaylor]

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

@Qazwsxefv

I normally agree with most posters on here about too much too soon and I think the age range for this is too large to cover in one show and the glossary is more than a bit concerning.

However

1. Adults that want to get kit off infront of kids must be paedophiles - no adults that want to get kit off infront of kids for sexual pleasure are paedophiles.

One of the major issues with porn is that young people never see normal naked bodies only Botox filled hairless perversions. Young people need to see more normal naked bodies so they know that they are normal. Other cultures have much more open relationships with nudity (even other reserved cultures like japan have naked hot springs) and so children get to see many many normal naked bodies.

There is nothing erotic or perverted about the human form. When teaching children about anatomy real photos and videos are of actual humans are so much better than a diagram- the actors and models aren’t all peadophiles. Using cartoons or diagrams or not showing children what normal genital anatomy looks has lead to the crisis in designer vaginas etc.

1. Posters saying five year olds shouldn’t know about clitorises. HIf a five year old is female why on Earth wouldn’t you tell her the name for her clitoris? Do you not tell her the name for her toes or eyes? I’m assuming most people tell their sons they have a penis? Testicles? Why would a child knowing the name of one of their own body parts be a safeguarding risk?

I’m a HCP and the amount of adult women who do not know what is normal anatomy or the names for their own genitals is astonishing. Backed up by things on social media and here about women thinking they need to remove there tampon to pee (because they think the urethra and the vagina are the same)! People don’t come to see healthcare professionals about genital issues because they are too ashamed to discuss them. I was bought up that you didn’t discuss genitals at all, had someone abused me I don’t think I would have been able to tell my parents due to deep deep shame about discussing genitalia.

1. Posters saying that children shouldn’t be told about sexual pleasure. I hate to break it to most of you but the vast majority of five year olds have found out that touching their own penis or clitoris feels nice. I DO NOT think it needs to be in a theatre show or even bought up proactively. However when you find your kid with their hand down their pants you say “yes, it can feel nice to touch yourself under your pants but that is something you only do in private” and then follow up with a discussion about not showing anyone else what’s in your pants a’la NSPCC “pantasorus”

(Have had a 3year old boy bought to see me by a mother who wanted to know what was “wrong with him” as he “keeps on playing with it”. After some detailed discussion to ensure that no one else was touching his penis or asking him to etc I was reassured no abuse, talk about normal self exploration. Mother utterly horrified as she could not accept that it was normal for it to be enjoyable to touch one’s own genitals prior to puberty. I was also bought up like this - infact taught that females could not masturbate

1. Posters saying that sex Ed and diagrams of genitals shouldn’t be shown to children before y6/7. Girls start puberty at 8 boys at 9. Bloody (hah) lot of good it will do telling them about menstruation 3 years after they have started their periods.

1. From the website “Use pleasure as a vehicle for consent - knowing why we might say yes so we know when to say no."

Reads to me as “we explain that sexual acts can feel nice and so you might want to say yes but you actually need to say no”

this would have been a helpful message for me as a teen. Brought up that sex was PIV only and only done in marriage for the purposes of procreation I was certain I wasn’t going to do any of that horrid sex stuff and couldn’t see why anyone would want to unless they wanted a child . Got a boyfriend and discovered that kissing felt nice - and the other stuff felt nice too (and I had no idea that there was other sex than PIV) and then I got carried away and had regrets later. Someone telling me that sexual contact was pleasurable and so I might want to do it and that there other sexual actions as well as PIV it’s easy to get carried away and so should have hard limits E.g no touching under clothes would have been very very helpful. I couldn’t conceive of why I might want to have sex so I was extremely unprepared to be able to turn it down.

In conclusion I think the show sounds like a bad idea for far to big an age range. But I reject the idea that talking about these things with children is grooming. The more children can know what is normal the easier they can express fears or concerns about something abnormal

I agree with a lot of the things you've written, but the one of the key things for me is privacy. A conversation like you describe, with the parent telling the child that touching yourself can feel nice but it's something to do in private, is not obviously not grooming. I also don't think it's particularly inappropriate for a child to know what a clitoris is- it's a body part. But the issue with this show is that it gives children the impression that genitals and sex acts are not private, because it's being performed for them on stage. Children need clear messages, or their understanding of boundaries becomes blurred. Adults need to model these boundaries.

I have no issues with children being taught the correct names for body parts, I totally support this.

I have no issues with children being taught that self stimulation is normal but it needs to happen in private.

I have no issue with dc from late primary age being shown videos like the fantastic tea video to try and explain how consent works.

By tweens we have to have conversations about porn, what normal bodies look like etc because the stats show that that is when dc start looking.

Once dc have a phone they need to know about naked photographs and the basics of mature content.

I have spent hours, hundreds of hours listening to children describing their sexual assaults. I am not a pearl clutching prude.

I can't see this show is teaching dc any of this stuff.
One of the reasons I can't see it is that they haven't put any relevant information up for me to see.

I don't think they are sexually attracted to children so much as totally incompetent people with an ill thought agenda and very poor safeguarding skills.

Most of the stuff I have discussed above isn't suitable for five year olds.

@shreddednips that is so right. There is a reason why topics that should be discussed with children by appropriate known trusted adults in private or in educational settings, are now seen as part of public entertainment.

@backtobusy I, like you, have spent countless hours listening to people describe their experiences of childhood sexual abuse, and its precursors, grooming, enablers etc. The whole picture, and in my case always from the point of view of the adult survivor. Who often has very clear understanding and opinion on who and what facilitated/enabled/legitimised the abuse.

I see this piece of art very clearly as societal grooming, sanctioned at a very high level, and enabled by a combination of malign influences and well-meaning misguided incompetence. I think my point of view is valid.

@Perfect28

I am well versed in safeguarding. I'm a mum and a teacher. This is not grooming, in fact it's an absolute corruption of that word. Bodies are not shameful. I'm curious as to where you all draw the line in terms of ages, would this show be OK for a 10 year old? A 14 year old? 16plus? 18?

I think this comment and others you have made on this thread show you have been groomed yourself and the shows that safeguarding training in education is not up to scratch.

Have you read the words on here from women who were subjected to long term CSA? How abusers blur boundaries between pleasure and consent. How these kind of activities serve as an abusers charter. What is the impact of these kind of events on children who are experiencing/have experienced sexual abuse. Where is their protection when society is telling them this is all fun and great?

There are adults getting naked and at some point stimulate sex on stage in front of 5 year olds. They then sing a song about putting your hands in your pants and play with your penis. And as a teacher you think this is fine. If a child came into your class on Monday morning and said that he had watched such a thing at home your first call should be to raise a safeguarding concern.

No bodies are not shameful, no sex is not shameful, no 5 year olds do not need to understand the concept of sexual pleasure, they do need to know the name of body parts, why do they need this show to teach them that.

What is shameful is the lack of protection afforded to children in the face of the so called "sex positive" movement.

And in a later post you mention that the agencies who "look after children" would have deemed this ok. do you mean the same agency who thought that having a man dressed in rubber wanking in their toilets to share on his social media was also fine and any criticism was bigoted homophobia.

You have been groomed. You just can't see it.

[quote theDudesmummy]@backtobusy I, like you, have spent countless hours listening to people describe their experiences of childhood sexual abuse, and its precursors, grooming, enablers etc. The whole picture, and in my case always from the point of view of the adult survivor. Who often has very clear understanding and opinion on who and what facilitated/enabled/legitimised the abuse.

I see this piece of art very clearly as societal grooming, sanctioned at a very high level, and enabled by a combination of malign influences and well-meaning misguided incompetence. I think my point of view is valid.[/quote]
Yes to all of this.

[quote theDudesmummy]@shreddednips that is so right. There is a reason why topics that should be discussed with children by appropriate known trusted adults in private or in educational settings, are now seen as part of public entertainment.[/quote]
And this. It never fails to shock me how compliant and complicit people have become.

2fallsfromSSA Well said. That poster has clearly been groomed, and is so very clearly brainwashed.

@FuckeryOmbudsman

It's taking the school PSHE curriculum for that age group and turning it into a show for families.

Those who think it's outrageous/grooming, do you actually know what is on that age group's curriculum and how your school delivers it?

Yes, I do. I teach part of this age group: I teach 4-7 year olds. I know what we teach to those age groups. We use accurate terminology to name parts of the body. We talk about relationships and different types of family set ups.

We don't get naked in front of the children and we don't invite other adults in to be naked in front of the children.

We don't talk about sex and sexual relationships at the ages I teach.
We also don't talk about sexual development at this point. We don't really talk much about puberty at that age either.

A theatre show really doesn't seem to be the right type of place for children to learn about this stuff. A classroom, being taught by teachers they know well (who are dressed) and have a trusting relationship with, is a very different set up to a theatre surrounded by strangers (adults and children) and unknown naked adults on stage.

It just sounds strange and I can't imagine what type of people are likely to take their children to it 🤷‍♀️

Excellent, excellent post from 2fallsfromSSA. It's very clear that some people cannot see the problems with this "show".

You have been groomed. You just can't see it.

Thank you. Why do adults think they are immune to grooming?

Agree that this is societal grooming, breaking down boundaries. In plain sight. 5 year olds!

The thing is, the most moderate approach is usually the most sensible. I agree with many of the posters who have said that sex education can be of low quality, or not consistently high-quality, but that's no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water and opt for explicit, inappropriate sex 'education' to counteract feelings of sex-related or body shame in adulthood.

There's a huge amount of middle ground between refusing to provide sex education at all or teach, at the right age, that sex isn't just for making babies, and...this. There's no need to be extreme in either direction.

Designing an appropriate sex education programme that meets the needs and level of understanding of every child is really challenging. And it should be done by people with a detailed understanding of human sexual development, child development, and safeguarding. It still may not be perfect, but we shouldn't be permitting anyone who fancies having a go to do so. Educating children about sex and relationships is a responsibility.

This is the introduction:

A fun and silly performance about the painfully AWKWARD subject of sex, exploring names and functions, boundaries, consent, pleasure, queerness, sex, gender and relationships. Using real life bodies, personal stories, songs and movement, The Family Sex Show puts the good stuff at the forefront of conversation and imagines a future where there is no shame; but a celebration of difference, equality and liberation.

What five year old needs to know about queerness and gender. I’m all more teaching little ones about boundaries but there’s no way I need my child to see some random adult naked in the name of entertainment or education.

Depicting "a future where there is no shame", combined with celebration of "liberation", in the context of public discussion of sex. Can people really really not see the problem where these statements are being applied to tiny children?

Interesting, isn't it, how different the articulate and well-reasoned posts are by people who clearly know what they are talking about and have read the website, the Guardian article, and the thread - who pretty much all seem to have at least some reservations about this entertainment show for children...

...and those who say "I've got kids and teach sex ed and naked strangers talking to primary kids about masturbation is fine, normal, and within guidelines actually so there"

The glossary has the following in it, amongst others:

BDSM, Dildo, Frottage, Hand-Job, Kink, Pegging, Play Parties, Pornography, Sex Work, Squirting

Are these appropriate for a 5 year old?

@Abraxan

“We also don't talk about sexual development at this point. We don't really talk much about puberty at that age either.”

I think it’s a real shame that 7 year olds are not told about sexual development and puberty. Girls start puberty at 8, it’s an admittedly younger but normal variant to start periods at 8. Children need to be taught this stuff before they have their first period or it will be a big shock.

Again not saying it should or needs to be a theatre show. But pre pubertal children need to know puberty is coming before it does.

@stimpyyouidiot

The glossary has the following in it, amongst others:

BDSM, Dildo, Frottage, Hand-Job, Kink, Pegging, Play Parties, Pornography, Sex Work, Squirting

Are these appropriate for a 5 year old?

If 'squirting' is plastic bath animals, yes.

Otherwise, I'm going with 'fucking not in a million years'.

@Qazwsxefv

I normally agree with most posters on here about too much too soon and I think the age range for this is too large to cover in one show and the glossary is more than a bit concerning.

However

1. Adults that want to get kit off infront of kids must be paedophiles - no adults that want to get kit off infront of kids for sexual pleasure are paedophiles.

One of the major issues with porn is that young people never see normal naked bodies only Botox filled hairless perversions. Young people need to see more normal naked bodies so they know that they are normal. Other cultures have much more open relationships with nudity (even other reserved cultures like japan have naked hot springs) and so children get to see many many normal naked bodies.

There is nothing erotic or perverted about the human form. When teaching children about anatomy real photos and videos are of actual humans are so much better than a diagram- the actors and models aren’t all peadophiles. Using cartoons or diagrams or not showing children what normal genital anatomy looks has lead to the crisis in designer vaginas etc.

1. Posters saying five year olds shouldn’t know about clitorises. HIf a five year old is female why on Earth wouldn’t you tell her the name for her clitoris? Do you not tell her the name for her toes or eyes? I’m assuming most people tell their sons they have a penis? Testicles? Why would a child knowing the name of one of their own body parts be a safeguarding risk?

I’m a HCP and the amount of adult women who do not know what is normal anatomy or the names for their own genitals is astonishing. Backed up by things on social media and here about women thinking they need to remove there tampon to pee (because they think the urethra and the vagina are the same)! People don’t come to see healthcare professionals about genital issues because they are too ashamed to discuss them. I was bought up that you didn’t discuss genitals at all, had someone abused me I don’t think I would have been able to tell my parents due to deep deep shame about discussing genitalia.

1. Posters saying that children shouldn’t be told about sexual pleasure. I hate to break it to most of you but the vast majority of five year olds have found out that touching their own penis or clitoris feels nice. I DO NOT think it needs to be in a theatre show or even bought up proactively. However when you find your kid with their hand down their pants you say “yes, it can feel nice to touch yourself under your pants but that is something you only do in private” and then follow up with a discussion about not showing anyone else what’s in your pants a’la NSPCC “pantasorus”

(Have had a 3year old boy bought to see me by a mother who wanted to know what was “wrong with him” as he “keeps on playing with it”. After some detailed discussion to ensure that no one else was touching his penis or asking him to etc I was reassured no abuse, talk about normal self exploration. Mother utterly horrified as she could not accept that it was normal for it to be enjoyable to touch one’s own genitals prior to puberty. I was also bought up like this - infact taught that females could not masturbate

1. Posters saying that sex Ed and diagrams of genitals shouldn’t be shown to children before y6/7. Girls start puberty at 8 boys at 9. Bloody (hah) lot of good it will do telling them about menstruation 3 years after they have started their periods.

1. From the website “Use pleasure as a vehicle for consent - knowing why we might say yes so we know when to say no."

Reads to me as “we explain that sexual acts can feel nice and so you might want to say yes but you actually need to say no”

this would have been a helpful message for me as a teen. Brought up that sex was PIV only and only done in marriage for the purposes of procreation I was certain I wasn’t going to do any of that horrid sex stuff and couldn’t see why anyone would want to unless they wanted a child . Got a boyfriend and discovered that kissing felt nice - and the other stuff felt nice too (and I had no idea that there was other sex than PIV) and then I got carried away and had regrets later. Someone telling me that sexual contact was pleasurable and so I might want to do it and that there other sexual actions as well as PIV it’s easy to get carried away and so should have hard limits E.g no touching under clothes would have been very very helpful. I couldn’t conceive of why I might want to have sex so I was extremely unprepared to be able to turn it down.

In conclusion I think the show sounds like a bad idea for far to big an age range. But I reject the idea that talking about these things with children is grooming. The more children can know what is normal the easier they can express fears or concerns about something abnormal

I do agree with this post.

And like the author, I don't think the conclusion is "Therefore The Family Sex Show" is the ideal half term outing - far from it.

No words

Responsible and child-centred adults talking to children privately at home (or in their own-age groups at school) in an age-appropriate way about bodily functions, which include menstruation, is a million miles away from what we are talking about in the context of this theatre production.

@stimpyyouidiot

The glossary has the following in it, amongst others:

BDSM, Dildo, Frottage, Hand-Job, Kink, Pegging, Play Parties, Pornography, Sex Work, Squirting

Are these appropriate for a 5 year old?

Oh good bloody God. I have no idea what some of those are and absolutely no desire to learn about them.

Whatever happened to just ambling through life and finding your own way from your teens onwards at your own pace, with support and advice from peers when you ask for it?

When did this change to young people/ CHILDREN having a mountain of NON age appropriate information about sex being dumped on them by adults? And so much detail?

I’m horrified by this.

[quote theDudesmummy]@backtobusy I, like you, have spent countless hours listening to people describe their experiences of childhood sexual abuse, and its precursors, grooming, enablers etc. The whole picture, and in my case always from the point of view of the adult survivor. Who often has very clear understanding and opinion on who and what facilitated/enabled/legitimised the abuse.

I see this piece of art very clearly as societal grooming, sanctioned at a very high level, and enabled by a combination of malign influences and well-meaning misguided incompetence. I think my point of view is valid.[/quote]
Yes to all of this