Dulwich College a “breeding ground for sexual predators”

[rosemary201]

Another day, another school
Interestingly, the first letter from a boy

Dulwich College is today accused of being a “breeding ground for sexual predators” in an open letter organised by a former schoolboy that contains more than 100 anonymous accounts of assault, harassment and sharing intimate photos online.

The letter, written by Samuel Schulenburg, 19, a former pupil at the south London private school, said “experiences of assault, revenge pornography and slut shaming were exacerbated by ... young men who ... laughed at stories of sexual violence”.

His letter includes about 100 anonymous testimonies written by girls who went to neighbouring schools, such as James Allen’s Girls’ School (Jags). One claims there was “an established rape culture” at the school.

Schnitzel I really feel for you. I feel close as someone who nearly applied but thought a different atmosphere would suit dc (Alleyn’s).

Tbh I regretted not applying as thought my reluctance was based on an unfounded idea of DC and that it could suit a wide range of boys, but I was too late and missed the deadline.

It’s heart sinking to read those testimonies and I can see it would be really worrying. I think DC will try really hard though to change it as it might make some think twice before choosing it.

thank you @MarshaBradyo. We had applied to Alleyns as I really like co-ed... but did not get a place, so that's that.

Schnitzel - likewise - I'm at the other end with a DS in the upper school. He and his mates are devasted to be tarred with the brush.

Is it just DC (don't know - but ask the other schools that have received similar letters)?

I didn't know DC had that reputation. The first I have heard of it is here - or in the press following the open letter - (and I do have friends with girls at Jags). But clearly some feel its there.

I do think it is a minority and more to do with porn and more societal issues than anything that DC did wrong let alone turning a blind eye which of course would be awful. Teachers send their DSs here and their DDs to Jags!! Are they really just ignoring this? Or cultivating a macho ethos. It beggars belief. But of course it is right that there ought to be an investigation.

I feel for the girls at Jags, but I also feel for the boys now tarred with the brush of being part of the "rape culture" when many (perhaps most) are not part of the "party set" (or whatever its called). The boys I know are caring, sensitive, geeky, academic, musicians, and so on - just like you will hope your son to be! Yes they are confident (as are all wealthy private school kids!), but most just do not engage in the behaviour described.

Of course I can hear the responses to follow that "I would say that wouldn't I?".

I genuinely (although from the area) didn't know that there was this reputation.

Parents often have a very different idea of schools to their teen children who actually attend them. A friend asked me the other week of what I thought of a school that one of my DD attended, as his DD had been offered a place, and I gave my thoughts. But DD, now at university, had some very different thoughts, which I had no idea of.

Why would anyone think co-Ed is better? The girls and boys are just closer to each other. Loads of opportunities. Parties and bad behaviour are found in a minority of pupils in most schools, co Ed or not.

Perhaps the rugby “Gods” should play football? Schools need to review the pedestals pupils are placed upon. Rugby boys walk on water in the top schools. This swaggering culture needs to go. But it’s in co-Ed schools too. Most schools know who the party types are. They do need to speak to parents too.

Yes, it's in coed schools too - Alleyns for example is definitely a party-hard school, look at all the threads where it's described as 'socially sophisticated' (which is code for very active party scene, and need to be savvy to deal with it - an unfair burden)

But we need to remember that it is a minority of pupils in each school that is the issue, and look at why most pupils are not the problem and make that the norm

DC family I know had comment from their DS 'it's the party set ruining it for the rest of us again'. The normal, unexceptional teens are the ones who need championing right now, with the explicit aim of making the horrible conduct unacceptable at every level

Does anyone know the relative reputation for state schools in the same area?

Eg Charter ED

@Schnitzelwithnoodle

As a DC (junior) parent, I hesitated before posting... Maybe I'm going to be judged as naive, but I really feel shocked and very unsettled. Not being originally from the area, we'd never heard of this "reputation". I have a son who started this year in the junior school and reading the testimonies and the posts on this thread raised a lot of questions for me indeed. I'm feeling so far away from the description of "alpha-type" macho families described by some people here, it's actually quite stinging... We also have a teenage DD and so many discussions at home about gender equality, women's empowerment, being decent persons in general... I never got to visit the senior school (thanks to covid), but I really like the junior school, which I find lovely and strict with misbehaviour; they do insist a lot on respect and kindness. I know very few families in the senior school (only a couple of families with DS in lower school , who ironically are both lovely, nerdy little guys), so it's difficult for me to have a feel of the senior school atmosphere.

But, clearly, I'm looking forward to hearing what the management is going to do exactly to drastically change these disgusting behaviours and culture, and follow up on these testimonies. I want more than just a few extra PSHE lessons, and plan to write to the management to say that we fully support them to take drastic actions. I hope other parents to the same and do get involved as the problem is indeed wider than the school environment.
I heard some schools called in external bodies to investigate and draw a plan, which might be a good idea. The headteacher said in his letter that DC is coordinating with other boys schools to tackle this.

anyway ... feeling awful :(

I also feel shaken about this to the point that I start regretting accepting the DC offer a few weeks ago. We didn't get to see the senior school either despite trying for more than a year (due to Covid). What worries me most in the open letter and testimonials is the persistent reference to the "rugby culture" and alpha-type macho families. My DH was privately educated, and his description of how aggressive, racist and entitled some of the boys were - during his school years and later in Durham - makes me think that nothing has really changed.

I also look forward to hearing what the management would do, but also start thinking that maybe we should not send our DS to DC after all...

AuntieStella can I ask more about this pls? What do you mean by unfair burden.

(which is code for very active party scene, and need to be savvy to deal with it - an unfair burden)

Don't worry about DC. If your DS is not part of the party set, then the characterisation of the school will be unrecognisable.

Publicity is currently on DC, but party sets exist in all schools. Would you rather a school that's just had a hell of a wake up call and is bound to re-double efforts? Or one that still has its head in the sand?

It's not just single sex though. Everyones invited was full of stories from coeds like LUS

I do think, sadly, that this is being made a Big Deal because the school is private. The press ignored the scandals of racism and sexism at Graveney last summer.

@sur125 see my post below - that scene still exists in Durham. DD, graduated in June 2020 and spent 4 years dodging it. Nasty, nasty individuals - assault, rape, shaming. Similar sporty public school backgrounds and they continue to get away with it. She went to a pretty rough state school and nothing prepared her for the levels of misogyny and entitlement she witnessed - and worse, the support those individuals received from their peers.
It's still a thing. Sadly

I genuinely (although from the area) didn't know that there was this reputation.

Me neither. My nieces go to one of the girls schools in the area and I've asked and they don't really recognise it either.

@MarshaBradyo

AuntieStella can I ask more about this pls? What do you mean by unfair burden.

(which is code for very active party scene, and need to be savvy to deal with it - an unfair burden)

Conflating my last couple of posts a bit: I mean that most pupils at DC (and indeed every school) are normal teens with unexceptional behaviour. But the party set is a problem, and Alleyns is notorious for its extent.

When it goes unchecked, girls have to deal with it (the unfair burden) and at a co-ed it's in the classroom (maybe literally, but more during breaks). Now perhaps learning to cope, during every aspect of school life and taking it forward into a world where toxic masculinity is a blight, is the outcome parents want from a school.

I didn't mean to single out Alleyns other than in passing because of its enduring party reputation. Because like other schools, the majority of pupils will not be a problem. I suppose I just wanted to highlight that it's an issue in every school. And if your DC is not part of the party set, you will see a school quite differently, because your DC will have self selected friends who are just not like that. I don't mean never going to parties at all, I mean the unsupervised hard-drinking ones where recreational drugs are likely to be present (some schools run parent information talks on this, which include accounts of what really happens, which is an enormous eye opener).

But one always needs to remember that even at the most socially active schools, it's still a minority who are toxic.

So things to consider include whether the school is big enough to have many tribes - will your DC find congenial friends? How diverse is the school? All the Dulwich foundation schools have extensive bursary programmes which broadens the intake. How active are co-curricular departments - all of them not just sport?

Unfortunately with the pandemic, you can't do on a look-around with a pupil guide at the moment. But if anyone is looking ahead, then one good question to ask the pupil guide is whether they are aware of any bullying and if they spotted something wrong, what would they do about it? A confident answer that shows they trust teachers to deal with it, is a positive sign.

Asking the school about drugs policy is also worth it - especially if you ask them about numbers asked to leave in the last few years. And what they tell pupils about drugs related expulsions (donthey use it as a learning opportunity?) Any caginess is a very bad indicator.

@KillingEvenings

It's not just single sex though. Everyones invited was full of stories from coeds like LUS

I do think, sadly, that this is being made a Big Deal because the school is private. The press ignored the scandals of racism and sexism at Graveney last summer.

Perhaps so. But perhaps it's precisely bc it's private that it IS a big deal. We know that the great and the 'good' of this country are disproportionately drawn from schools like this. And surely we don't want characters like Mr Schulenberg has described to rise to those positions. They'll have influence

My friends with DC at state schools are reading these Times articles in horror. I think if you have no experience of fee paying schools you can’t imagine the sort of toxic horrors they can breed - plenty of lovely children too of course but the bad eggs are particularly insidious and evil - I shiver at the memory of the ones at my top school.

@Dillydaffy

My friends with DC at state schools are reading these Times articles in horror. I think if you have no experience of fee paying schools you can’t imagine the sort of toxic horrors they can breed - plenty of lovely children too of course but the bad eggs are particularly insidious and evil - I shiver at the memory of the ones at my top school.

To be fair though a lot of the parents with DCs at the schools being singled out are also reading this all in horror, often because they or their children aren’t aware of it. Can the state school parents be confident it isn’t a problem at their schools either? Certainly my friends who teach and have children at state schools say they have just as many issues.

Agree, this is surely about minorities in every school and every 'class'. Kids whose values are fundamentally objectionable. Just as there are adults in every walk of life and from every 'class' or wealth bracket whose values are fundamentally objectionable. When I was at Oxford I was surrounded (for the first time in my life) by a large number of privately educated peers. Some of them were awful, in the stereotypical braying arrogant way described above (girls as well, not just boys). Most of them were lovely. This didn't seem to depend heavily on school. The two OEs I knew well couldn't have been more diametrically opposed (one utterly lovely, one utterly awful) - you would never have met them and dreamed that they were the product of the same school culture. (Incidentally, the only DC guy I knew well was one of the nicest, most self-effacing and 'woke' (in a good not annoying way) men I have ever had the pleasure of knowing.)

What I do remember is that the 'awful' girls tended to socialise with the 'awful' boys. There was a definite 'set' of boys and girls who thought they were better than everyone else, partied with each other in a scene I was never remotely interested in being a part of, and generally ended up marrying each other. Most of us (both state and private educated) just tended to ignore them, to be honest - they floated round the college and the union generally being loud and objectionable but not really causing the rest of us any concern (a lot of the time they disdained college social events and spent their weekends in London). One of them tried to shag me at a party once (I don't mean forcefully). I told him to bugger off. End of story.

Perhaps one of the wider things we need to be looking at is why do people like this continue to have such allure and power among certain groups? Is it just their money? Why do basically decent kids even want to be at parties with kids who behave like this? I suspect that it's not only the girls who are appalled by the kind of behaviour described in these letters - my guess is that quite a few boys on the periphery of these groups are probably highly uncomfortable with it too, but don't have the confidence to call it out. To make it very clear, I am categorically not blaming girls for putting themselves in these positions - the blame is entirely on the boys in question - but it is nevertheless true that if we as a society could find a way of reducing the kudos that these kinds of individuals seem to have, then they would have less power and influence at school. How do we give both girls and boys the awareness and confidence to give no oxygen to people who behave like this, and to socialise instead with those who are worthy of their attention and respect?

It is a problem at state schools too. These allegations are shocking if you're a private school parent who believed that money could protect your child from "state school problems" This is an actual opinion that I've seen on many threads and I think it's good for everyone to realise that it's a universal problem.

Agree it happens at state schools - I think what I am saying is that increasingly by paying fees we put children in to a tiny minority and open them up to huge scrutiny and sometimes persecution by a majority who increasingly (and perhaps rightly) have no tolerance for the sort of elite entitlement fee paying schools can produce in some children.

Private schools having these problems is a problem for everyone. They are more likely to be future people in authority like PMs, judges etc

NC for this one.

My DS' prep sends most of its boys on to Dulwich - enough that they usually account for about 1/4 of the number in Dulwich's year 9.

However, when it comes to choosing next schools they are pretty clear that Dulwich is a better fit for the sporty, outgoing "boy's boys" and that they need a certain level of hardiness/confidence to thrive there. So the very academic/nerdy boys are guided to Westminster or KCS (both now having similar problems to Dulwich), the sensitive/arty/musical boys to Trinity or Alleyn's (although as PP have noted with the caveat that this requires a certain level of social adeptness) and then the sporty/ all-rounders to Dulwich or Whitgift.

Now obviously some very nerdy/sensitive boys do still choose Dulwich for all sorts of reasons (and I know lots of lovely boys at DC who would not dream of behaving in the ways described) but within DS' prep school there is a sort of informal filtering out of the boys who don't fit the mould or display less stereotypically masculine traits.

If the same is happening in other Prep schools then it would make for a very alpha-male intake to DC at the senior level.

To be fair to DC, I imagine this is pretty hard to change although they do seem to be trying. They invited us to talks to stress they didn't see themselves as just a 'rugby' school, valued all types of achievement and emphasise their focus on welfare and kindness. But most of the quirky boys from DS' prep still chose to go elsewhere. Not quite sure how they break that cycle.

This is a very hard situation for parents at DC especially if their DS’ are innocent parties. The problem with these open letters is the collateral damage they cause and it very easy for those not directly impacted to declare that they should just suck it up for the greater good of the victims. The world and out legal system doesn’t work this way and I don’t doubt that the schools involved who have launched investigations to help improve processes (and weed out predators) will, depending on their findings, also be carefully considering the case for libel.

@RedGoldAndGreene

Private schools having these problems is a problem for everyone. They are more likely to be future people in authority like PMs, judges etc

You are conflating two separate problems.

1. Sexual abuse and misogyny which pervade our society and need to be stamped out wherever found.
2. Over representation of elite privately educated men in top jobs and politics.

Don't get me wrong I agree both are wrong but I think conflating them makes it less likely that we can effectively tackle the former.

I also worry about the message the focus on the 'famous' school stories is sending to girls who have posted testimonies on Everyone's Invited about their experiences at the hands of boys from more run of the mill schools. Just because the abuser wasn't privileged doesn't mean the abuse was any less awful yet their voices are not being amplified in the same way and their experiences risk being dismissed altogether if we chalk this up as a 'private school' problem.

Also, for what it's worth, I have spent a fair bit of my professional life working with organisations which work with disadvantaged and vulnerable children (including children in care etc). The sexual and other forms of abuse that quite a lot of these young people suffer at the hands of their peers is horrendous. But as others have said, the Sunday Times tends not to give it quite so many column inches.