More 'stuff that doesn't happen Paws, why are you getting your knickers in a twist?' Chapter 897

[Lordfrontpaw]

Mum fuming as daughter, 11, set homework asking her to 'define hardcore pornography' (yes thats 11 years olf not even year 11)

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-fuming-daughter-11-set-22049850

A teacher set this homework. On what planet did a professional working with children think this was ok?

It's not appropriate to ask 11-year-olds anything about extreme pornography.

If the answer is well they are going to hear about it anyway, then then 'hearing about it anyway' needs to be addressed.

It's only when I discovered that transactivists were being consulted about women's rights, at the same time as advocating for extreme pornography that even I found out what it was actually about.

Yet another example of the softening up of and removal of children's boundaries, now let's just think who benefits from this? It most certainly is NOT the children.

I note the 'apology', weasel words but no commitment to remove the content of that particular homework or material which they will no doubt continue using and teaching. If this has, as claimed by the school, come from the DfE that is appalling and questions need to be asked of Government. Sounds like yet another case for the Safe Schools Alliance or Baroness Nicholson.

How the hell does a child need to hear about pornography? This is purely the activists trying to get kids used to all this early.

If the intent was benign why would the kids need to know about the different types of porn? It's also interesting to speculate about why they thought the kids needed to know about trans porn in particular, but didn't need to know about the porn that focus on say race, so obviously the point being made can't have been a "this is an example of the ways in which porn adds to the stigmatization of minorities".

Time to call the head and drop a mention of the local paper.

I'm going to send a copy of my comms with JL (changing rooms) to the Baroness - I might add a wee link to that story for her to peruse. I get the impression that she is a Christan woman - this will do down especially badly then.

How the hell does a child need to hear about pornography? This is purely the activists trying to get kids used to all this early.

Yes Lordfrontpaw, making children pliable, getting them used to, and accepting of all manner of sexual behaviour, including extreme forms, fucking marvellous, what could the end game of that possibly be.

I couldn't define hardcore pornography even now I don't think (not that I'd want to) - why on earth would an 11 year old need to? I was still climbing trees and wearing short socks at that age.

Well, I would have been 10 in that class of 11-year-olds. TEN. 10. Just gone double figures.

Years away from boobs, boyfriends and periods. Still at Brownies. Too young to go to the local junior discos. Too young to go into town without an adult.

Too bloody young to learn about various flavours of porn.

Grasping at straws, did the teacher misunderstand the pack? Presumably the teachers were supposed to consider what those terms meant, in order to know more than the kids and understand what children are exposed to. Like the graphic information in the drug prevention packs. Not intended for children, but to inform the adults responsible for protecting the children.

Now assuming that's the case, what kind of teacher would misunderstand in that way?

Was that Jonny Hunt or whatever his name was, of Respect Yourself/Warwickshire CC fame connected to this?

To show porn to minors is abuse but to leave them to google is...just a simple oversight about safeguarding?

Either one too scardey-cat to say something, or there's a more sinister reason.

Wouldnt a teacher read such pack very very carefully, knowing that these are kids they are dealing with?

No words.

I'm not sure I could make the distinction today. Back in the Good Old Days when there was no internet and we got our porn and fags from sweetshops, hardcore was the material with a more gyanecological focus.

But the character of porn has changed, specifically it has become heavily phallocentric like some primitive religion, so I'm guessing that you might need a protractor to measure the hardness of the core these days.

I would also like to think that they would mention in passing that even the softest of porn involving anyone under 18 is a crime.

Wtf is that 'we didn't tell them to google so it should have been fine to ask them to define different porn genres' bullshit about?

I'm looking forward to being told what a prude I am for not wanting 11 year olds to be able to define porn genres accurately, so I can accurately define who are the creepy grooming weirdos.

Was that Jonny Hunt or whatever his name was, of Respect Yourself/Warwickshire CC fame connected to this?

And of course there would be kids who would go fir extra credit and research etc

Yes I was thinking it was a bit reminiscent of the wcc stuff.

I fail to see how mentioning porn is in any way acceptable in a classroom of primary school-aged kids - or any kids for that matter? For what purpose?

What was their take on porn anyway - yay or nay? Were they telling the kids it is a good thing or a bad thing?

Again, why do kids needs to know anything about porn beyond the fact that it exists and isn't legal for them to consume or appear in, so if anyone asks them to do either they should tell their parents or another trusted adults? It's the F is for Fisting pack all over again.

I think mentioning it in year 6 is sort of ok, as long as it’s made clear that at their age it’s illegal.

It doesn’t need to go into specifics.

I think it does need mentioning due to the fact they are going into year 7 and will hear lots more.

But this level of depth is not needed

What did you learn at school today...

"well there this thing called porn..."
"Eh? what was that?"
"Porn mummy PORN. Its when people take photos of people doing rude things with each other - and sometimes animals!"
"Ummm, wait a minute - this was at school???"
"Yes mummy, Xi Smith says you can have soft pron - that's the least rude, alllllll the way up to extreme porn - that's the one where people do all sorts of silly things with fruit and cattle prods..."
"No, wait..."
"but I don't get to do porn until I'm a but older...i have to go and do my homework. I'm going to do a lovely drawing for Xi Smith of a naughty nun and an aubergine..."

They will know about it from their phones, or the phone of the nasty boy who sits near them. Girls will be under increasing pressure to supply photos to prove they are not a frigid lesbian, etc.

It is a part of their world, sadly, and they will have to learn to deal with it, and you can draw a parallel with drugs education where they will be asked to learn the slang names and describe the effects of taking various products etc.

But 11 is way too early for that, and certainly not to be attempted online. The emphasis needs to be on learning to say no assertively.

Grooming in plain sight.

Wow, that's all types of wrong.

Does anyone know if the bodily damage that can caused by sex acts such as anal are taught? Or is teaching them that seen as some type of ' kink shaming'?

It could make for an awkward World Book day if someone comes wearing only two staples.

The line must be surely that if you receive messages photos etc that you don’t understand or want, you need to tell somebody trustworthy...hard to know who these are these days though.