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

Because otherwise it looks like you've seen the glossary and made up a load of bollocks.

@lockheart so if its in the shows glossary you are confirming it happens? Why on earth are you so defensive of this horrific sounding show?!

I think there is an age appropriate way to handle most topics.

Yet you refuse to answer specific questions on what specifically is or isn't age-appropriate.

"I think teaching about sex should be age-appropriate"
"Is ABC appropriate?"
"You made that up so I'm not answering"
"Is XYZ appropriate?"
"You made that up so I'm not answering".

It's all very well repeating 'age-appropriate' over and over but to not even be able to assert "Yes, this is appropriate for age 6" or "No, this isn't appropriate for age 5" suggests you don't actually know yourself what is and isn't harmful. Maybe this isn't the thread for you?

I was exposed to porn and inappropriate language by a friend when I was 7.
It turned out she was being abused by her stepfather.
Why the fuck anyone thinks this should be normalised?

I think you are judging this as bad because like most individuals you have probably had an inadequate sex education. Please be open about anyone trying to improve it. Saying it’s grooming just illustrates the point if you are equating nakedness and pleasure with shame, grooming and your own fear.

@MichelleScarn

Because otherwise it looks like you've seen the glossary and made up a load of bollocks.

@lockheart so if its in the shows glossary you are confirming it happens? Why on earth are you so defensive of this horrific sounding show?!

I'm not confirming anything - as I've said several times (but will repeat again), I haven't seen it. I can only go by what's on the website (as can we all). But since others seem so sure of what happens, I'm asking.

[quote Teesht]@sacredfeminina lets organise. This is insane, I can't sit back and watch this happen and not do anything about it.

E-mail the papers to make some noise: [email protected]
More contact details here: www.bristolpost.co.uk/contact-us/

Tabloids: [email protected]
[email protected]

E-mail the MP for that area:
[email protected]

The NSPCC: [email protected]

E-mail the mayor: [email protected]

If you can find contact details for the board of trustees than that'd be great: tobaccofactorytheatres.com/our-trustees/[/quote]
I am quoting this again so everyone can see it, as there seems to be some posters who want to distract us.

@Janesy123

I think you are judging this as bad because like most individuals you have probably had an inadequate sex education. Please be open about anyone trying to improve it. Saying it’s grooming just illustrates the point if you are equating nakedness and pleasure with shame, grooming and your own fear.

Insightful first post ever Janesy!

@QuattroFormaggi

OMG ThisEgg, who have devised the show, is the creation of a young woman who is the daughter of a guy in my class at school in the 80s. I have seen him in the last 5 years and he seemed quite normal (for a theatrical person!)

The whole show looks wrong. They've either made a big error in the targeted age group or they've made the description misleading. The two just don't tally.

Wasn't there an exhibition a while ago that caused a similar uproar? And I think it turned out they had - accidentally or "accidentally" - put the wrong minimum age on the website/ programme. Anyone remember this? It was similarly groomy and supposedly aimed at kids.

It's interesting, the other sort of morality police who have arrived, who want to tell us that child safeguarding is based in shame. Take it back to the church!

@FOJN

Early and precocious language about sex is a massive red flag for abuse.

Teach them the words early enough as part of "educating" them and you can start to claim precocious language is not a red flag.

Normalise adults they are not related to getting naked in front of them and they won't see the red flag.

Talk to them about using pleasure as a vehicle for consent and you prime them to blame themselves for any abuse they may suffer.

How is this sort of thing not sounding a national safeguarding alarm? It is endangering children not protecting them, 5 years old is too young to understand the complexities around sex, relationships and consent. They need to understand the basics about types of families and what behaviour is normal between adults and children. They need to know they should tell someone and are NEVER responsible when an adult breeches those behaviour boundaries.

Just repeating this for the hard-of-thinking.

There is plenty of good stuff on the PSHE curriculum for primary ages.
This is not it.

I think you are judging this as bad because like most individuals you have probably had an inadequate sex education. Please be open about anyone trying to improve it. Saying it’s grooming just illustrates the point if you are equating nakedness and pleasure with shame, grooming and your own fear.

Stop it. No one is trying to prevent children receiving sex education. We are concerned that the themes of this show may not be appropriate for children as young as 5 years of age and it is a safeguarding concern for adults, not related to the children, getting naked and talking about sex in a fairly explicit way in front of children.

It is grooming and grooming works by first eroding the boundaries of adults who would otherwise protect children.

God, I've just read the podcast transcripts and there's some horrible stuff on there.
The song about saying no, unless you want to say yes, no child can consent to sex, they don't have the legal capacity to until they are 16.

This is absolutely mind-boggling. I've taught the PSHE curriculum across KS1 and 2 and this is a million miles away from what's taught in schools.

Of course children shouldn't grow up feeling ashamed of their bodies or feelings, but this is not the way to deliver that message. It's incredibly dangerous to give children the idea that it's normal for adults to talk to them about sexual pleasure and show them their naked bodies. Furthermore, the way the show is described makes it sound like it's being presented as a good thing.

It's not the same as age-appropriate discussions and sex education taking place in the context of a safe family unit. Outside of that context, or the context of sex education delivered by a teacher in a class trained to teach these topics appropriately, it's not acceptable for adults to discuss sex with children AT ALL. Otherwise, how can children be expected to tell the difference between factual conversations with safe adults and grooming. If it's normalised, children may not find it odd or uncomfortable when someone has nefarious intentions.

Finally, I can make a decision about whether this is something I want to go and see because I am an adult and I have a full understanding of what to expect. Five year olds, and any child for that matter, are not able to consent. If somebody wanted to get naked in front of me while talking about sex, I would expect them to obtain my consent first. Non-sexual nudity, like in the context of seeing a parent in the bathroom or someone getting changed at the beach, is not the same as this- because the entire premise is around sexual acts and feelings.

@StScholastica

God, I've just read the podcast transcripts and there's some horrible stuff on there. The song about saying no, unless you want to say yes, no child can consent to sex, they don't have the legal capacity to until they are 16.

The website says quite clearly the podcast is aimed at 16+

Intriguing that I’m seeing the same names sea-lioning away on this thread as on the thread about the Prime Ministers very sensible statement yesterday regarding the safeguarding of women and children.

Most intriguing (twirls moustache).

@EvilGoldfish

Intriguing that I’m seeing the same names sea-lioning away on this thread as on the thread about the Prime Ministers very sensible statement yesterday regarding the safeguarding of women and children.

Most intriguing (twirls moustache).

What, you mean the posts where I said I agreed with the statement but it was a useless soundbite which doesn't have any real world impact, that the Tories aren't effecting any demonstrable change, and that their policies of austerity have been disproportionately harder on women? I still stand by every word, not going to apologise for that!

Intriguing that I’m seeing the same names sea-lioning away on this thread as on the thread about the Prime Ministers very sensible statement yesterday regarding the safeguarding of women and children.

You are not the only one who's noticed.

Imagine trying to convince mothers that their safeguarding worries are invalid. There is no good person that would do that. If a parent says 'this rings alarms for me' you just respect that, you don't repeatedly try to change their mind. Unless you have a vested interest.

I also can't agree that this is a case of 'reserve judgement until you've seen it.' Delivering sex education is a grave responsibility, and as a teacher, I took it incredibly seriously. If you're offering sex education to children in any capacity, you should be absolutely transparent about EXACTLY what the content will be and how the topics will be covered. There should be no room for speculating about what this show might contain, because the organisers should have it published, in detail, on their website. The very fact that the show's content isn't crystal clear is incredibly worrying.

This is one of the reasons that schools invite parents in to view sex education resources to be used in class, ask questions about how it will be taught, so that they can prepare for any questions at home and feel reassured that the curriculum will be delivered appropriately. It's no good saying well, leave if you don't like it. It's too late once you're there, sitting with your child, realising that they're watching something inappropriate.

OK.

I am not generally one to get aerated about a show before I have seen it, and have no in principle objection to people of any age seeing bodies without clothes on stage. And disclaimer, I have had some small former dealings with this company.

These are the things that make me feel that I need more convincing that this company know what they are doing:

There is lots of jolly 're-assurance' on the website - but the first 'ask more' that I clicked on, the pre-info document for parents - wasn't ready. t's the bit that this thread focuses on: nakedness n the show. So FGS why wasn't this ready in time for the marketing and publicity being launched? Have the company prioritised this...or not?

There is much earnest but fake referencing - they don't say this has the approval of the NSPCC but they like to make it sound as if it is somehow affiliated (they don't actually say that of course).

They trumpet the work of the School of Sexuality Education and say it is based on their curriculum, but that organisation's support for the RSHE curriculum starts at KS3 so not sure how this gives any credibility to a show for 5 year olds?

One of the FAQs is 'Is It Theatre n Education?'. Their answer to this shows that actually they have no idea what genuine TIE is - good TIE is exactly what they aspire to be. Which makes them sound like over-eager but somewhat arrogant know it alls.

The glossary is somewhat eyebrow raising for a family show...I hope that it is not a list of terms that crop up in the show - I very much doubt it. But if it ISN'T show specific, why pick on a random list of, let's say, kink-friendly terms, rather than others. For e.g Including Dildo but not vibrator, Pegging but not Dogging ...I mean if you don't need specific words for the show, why pick random words...when dictionaries and google exist. The glossary, by the way, is compiled form glossaries from Mermaids, Stonewall and Purple Rain . So all specifically LBGTQ orientated organisations. Of course any approach to sex and sexuality for young people must be properly inclusive and non-discriminatory, but to be exclusively from that angle suggests an agenda. Which they may or may not have.

The company is a small young company, with a good 'theatre' reputation. Maybe the show is great. Maybe it isn't. But they haven't got the right professionals and experience in the team to create the credibility they need to create the security for families to take 5 year olds to a show like this.

IMO.

I was hoping it was website error, but no - it is intended for age 5+.

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

"With a team of eight performers, Dale-Jones is making a show about sex and relationships for ages five and above. Accompanied by workshops and panel talks, The Family Sex Show tackles topics including boundaries, gender, relationships and masturbation. Through a series of artistic responses and conversations, the group want to help make it easier for anyone, of any age, to talk about these sticky, tricky topics. “I don’t know another subject that we only talk about once and then we tick it off as if it’s done,” Dale-Jones says. “The learning is never over.”"

@sacredfeminina

I think the ones who dont see a problem are just a big ole slice of PIE

This 👆👆🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩