NSPCC again

[Imnobody4]

I'm not sure whether to be heartened by this or not.
NSPCC put out a tweet implying children can consent to sex.
Lots of complaints and outcry concerning safeguarding.
NSPCC withdraw for rewrite. No accusations of bigotry etc
I am wrong to think this is progress of sorts?

[Clymene]

Children need to be taught that their own boundaries are important. That's the foundation of understanding that other's boundaries also matter and from there comes consent.

Children shouldn't be having sex and there is nothing in this tweet that implies the NSPCC is talking about future sex lives, it seems to be talking about sex in the present tense.

The NSPCC has repeatedly shown itself not fit for purpose

[XXSex]

@Lamahaha

When I first read that I was at once confused and horrified. With "child" I understood a real child, and it confused me that the CHILD should ensure that the other person (an adult? another child?) should be happy the other one must consent.
Never mind that a child cannot consent to sex anyway -- it sounded like the person driving the action was the child; that it was the child who wants sex.

I am anyway not happy with the rumour I keep hearing that "children masturbate too", which is not my experience at all, and that we should educate ourselves on this and not be so prudish.

Yes. Children masturbate thing really annoys me too. 6 children here and only one of them inclined to put his hand down his pants. And it wasn’t to masturbate!!
In conversation with a therapist recently she told me that children masturbate and it starts as infants. Fuck off.

[Resisterance]

Safe Schools Alliance have posted this thread in response on Twitter. I find this NSPCC statement incredibly worrying. Especially given their staff previous sexualised behaviour and the fact that they don't see how inappropriate that was!

twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1285868833891377152?s=19

[queenofknives]

This is really disturbing. Why are they talking about children consenting to sex? With adults? With other children? Wtf.

I also don't agree that children masturbate. Why would they, when sexual feelings don't evolve until puberty? I think the idea of claiming that they masturbate is to suggest they have sexual desires and then the next step is to say it's wrong to deny them fulfilment of those desires.

It's abusive. The NSPCC needs to be stopped.

[Beamur]

I read it as saying a parent should educate their child how to both request and convey consent to sexual activity.
The problem with this is - child - to me personally, this is a young child, my older children I would call young people or something similar. Given the subject, the age of the child is really important.
A tweet is just not a good way to try and cover such a wide scope.
Is it implying teach your children early about consent when hugging and kissing and make sure that the other person is happy with that too? or is it saying to a child (10, 11 older/younger) that when you have sex with someone (age unspecified) you have a responsibility to ensure consent. Which is dreadful!
Children can't consent to sex, even if they are willing. Tis the law.
Or. Children can learn really good skills around boundaries at an early age.
It's just not clear, thus leaving it wide open for misinterpretation.

[PasstheBucket89]

i saw this all over twitter, have you seen their article on their saying children hugging, kissing or swearing behaviour is sexual behaviour?

[R0wantrees]

16 year olds are not children. There is a range of ages where a person becomes entitled to carry out certain activities.

NSPCC

"Definitions of a child
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) defines a child as everyone under 18 unless, "under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".

England
In England a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached their 18th birthday. Child protection guidance points out that even if a child has reached 16 years of age and is:

living independently
in further education
a member of the armed forces
in hospital; or
in custody in the secure estate
they are still legally children and should be given the same protection and entitlements as any other child (Department for Education, 2018a).

Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland the The Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 defines a 'child' as a person under the age of 18.

Scotland
In Scotland, a child legally becomes an adult when they turn 16, but statutory guidance which supports the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, includes all children and young people up to the age of 18." (continues)
learning.nspcc.org.uk/child-protection-system/children-the-law#heading-top

[BlackForestCake]

Does "statutory rape" exist in English law? I thought it was an American thing and the offence here was "sexual activity with a child" or something.

[ShinyFootball]

No England and Wales don't have statutory rape.

Under 13 is (supposed to be) no excuses, consent cannot be given.

13-16 underage but more nuanced. EG CPS say not in public interest to prosecute teens in s consensual relationship.

Over 16 there are restrictions for eg teacher student

[BoomBoomsCousin]

England and Wales does have statutory rape, it just isn't called that. Sex with someone under the age of 13 is rape because there is legislation (statute) whereby putting a penis in the mouth, vagina or anus of a child under 13 is "Rape of a child under 13". That's statutory rape.

Crimes against children 13 > 16 are sexual offences but not rape (though, obviously, children 13 > 16 can be raped, but that would be under the regular law against rape, not one that depends specifically on their age).

[Quillink]

I would expect a children's charity to word this far, far more carefully.

[Kantastic]

I would expect a children's charity to word this far, far more carefully.

A children's charity that is specifically concerned with preventing child abuse, at that! Who is in charge of their social media? I wonder if the person who posted this is the same person who accused all the people concerned about rubberpissworktoiletwankman of homophobia.

[truthisarevolutionaryact]

The perfect example of why twitter is not a place for complex issues. And why safeguarding charities should not be using it. And why charities should ensure that their social media is always tightly managed / supervised and never used as a vehicle for their individual staff members to advocate for their personal views - which appears to be the current situation for so many of them.

[ChattyLion]

BoomBoom has set out that England and Wales does have the offence of rape for under12’s involvement in the sexual activities described. In this field professionals have described those activities involving that age group to me as ‘statutory rape‘ so I used their term. It’s always rape under the statute by virtue of the child’s age, when a child is aged 12 or under, is my point.

So the worrying question is why is a child protection charity talking to the public about ‘your child’ having ‘sexual activity of any kind’

[Aesopfable]

NSPCC

"Definitions of a child
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) defines a child as everyone under 18 unless, "under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".

But their ‘technical’ definition is irrelevant when communicating with the public. The common understanding of child is someone who is younger than a teenagers and that is the way ‘child’ should be used in context such as this. To suggest they were referring to 17 year olds is either incompetent of disingenuous.

[Rahres]

A 16 year old can leave home and get married without parental permission.

Yes. Still a child though.

[TopBitchoftheWitches]

No they can't, they need parental permission at 16. 18 is when they can do what they like.

[merrymouse]

The perfect example of why twitter is not a place for complex issues. And why safeguarding charities should not be using it.

Very much agree.

Regardless of preceding tweets or what they said afterwards or whether the tweet was later deleted, this tweet now exists as a screen grab, and whatever the intention, implies that the NSPCC believes a child can legally consent to sex.

[HermioneWeasley]

I have written to their chairman saying their culture is rotten and they have too many people following agendas other than child protection. I’m sure I’ll get a bland response

[merrymouse]

Like a pp I would take this to mean talking about it with a child about their future sex life.

It's all written in the present tense.

The problem is that the audience for this tweet is not just parents of teenagers (and how many of them get parenting advice from the NSPCC twitter account?).

[ThinEndoftheWedge]

NSPCC not able to recognise/name planned rape of an 8 year old, as rape.

mobile.twitter.com/adulthumanfem10/status/1303762125500960773

[CuriousaboutSamphire]

Bloody hell!

They deleted it quick enough though! Unbelievable.

[NearlyGranny]

Dido Lamenting, the legal age for marriage without parental consent in the UK is actually 18, not 16.

[Disfordarkchocolate]

I took it as meaning that you teach this to children so they can act on it when necessary. No one needs to first learn about consent as an adult. However, I can see why it caused some confusion.

[NearlyGranny]

We ought not to be surprised if - when - we see predatory male adults who are sexually attracted to children below the age of consent actively seeking out posts where they have access to children or can influence policy and practice around safeguarding and child protection.

It is a given that such people will attempt infiltration. Schools and other organisations must always be alert and whistleblowers must be protected. Nothing shows up on an enhanced DBS check if the subject has never been caught.

Even more worryingly, it seems likely that nothing will show up if the person has transitioned to the opposite sex, changed their birth certificate and their name. Convicted child sex offenders may be able to shed their past completely.

Organisations and parents have a treacherous road ahead.