Nude Family swim at Stoke Waterworld

[VortexofBloggery]

Flagged up by Sammy Woodhouse on Twitter.
mobile.twitter.com/sammywoodhouse1/status/1308822025797013509

Supported by who else but NSPCC.

Adults can buy a single ticket.

To Shut it down, Change petition here:
www.change.org/p/water-world-stop-nude-family-swim-session-for-adults-and-children-of-all-ages-at-water-world?utm_content=cl_sharecopy_24863394_en-GB%3A2&recruiter=1151217419&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=tap_basic_share

Attended by convicted paedophile
www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/4047602.convicted-brierfield-paedophile-member-naturist-club/

Unbelievable.

littlebrowndog at least they admit child protection and Naturism are at odds. Disturbing reading.

I honestly think that if an adult strips off in a room with other adults and kids in, knowing that a child could be present who does not want to be there, then they are complicit in child abuse

Let's try an analogy. The UK age of consent to sex is 16. While under-16s do have sex, we consider that they aren't able to make a competent, informed decision about doing so before that age, and we - as a society - are particularly concerned where that happens with an age gap. In other words, it would be illegal for any under 16 to have sex but more likely for action to be taken if it's with a 30 year old than with, say, another 15 year old.

Given all that, do we feel that under 16s are competent to decide they want to take their clothes off in a large mixed group of people? Or would we say that might be a decision where they might feel pressured and coerced? And how would the fact that the group will contain adults much older than them, rather than being a group of their peers, affect that too?

If I am a prude for safeguarding kids. Then will be a prude with and proud of it

And to say that being a prude is harmful and pornography is not harmful

Wtaf

@PullTheBricksDown

Let's try an analogy. The UK age of consent to sex is 16. While under-16s do have sex, we consider that they aren't able to make a competent, informed decision about doing so before that age, and we - as a society - are particularly concerned where that happens with an age gap. In other words, it would be illegal for any under 16 to have sex but more likely for action to be taken if it's with a 30 year old than with, say, another 15 year old.

Given all that, do we feel that under 16s are competent to decide they want to take their clothes off in a large mixed group of people? Or would we say that might be a decision where they might feel pressured and coerced? And how would the fact that the group will contain adults much older than them, rather than being a group of their peers, affect that too?

Your analogy doesn't really make sense.

There is no 'age of consent' for nudity in the UK.

Unaccompanied children are not allowed at official naturism events, so no one is suggesting they are competent to make this decision by themselves - they must be accompanied by a parent or guardian.

Pelleas

It's your rebuttal of the analogy which makes no sense. You completely ignore the fact that adults are deciding their children should be naked in front of strangers.

You don't seem able to make your minds up - are you saying children should or should not be able to make the decision for themselves?

@Pelleas

You don't seem able to make your minds up - are you saying children should or should not be able to make the decision for themselves?

I don't think children should be making their minds up that they can be naked in public in front of strangers and I don't think parents should be deciding that their children should be naked in public in front of strangers.

OK - so would you support a law that said no child under 16 should ever be left in the care of an adult who is not their parent?

Because statistically, abuse is far more likely to occur in that situation than it is at a chaperoned naturist event.

If I found myself arguing the case for public child nudity, against people concerned about safety and abuse, well,

I’d be having a long hard think about my life

@Handsoffisback

pelleas we are not just talking about abuse as you well know. We are talking about the lack of dignity, humiliation, feelings of not being comfortable that many people on here who were forced to attend these events have described.

There are situations in which I have felt humiliated, undignified or uncomfortable, but which others are comfortable with. I don't see it as a reason to ban everyone from doing something, just because I (and possibly others) are frightened of it.

There are situations in which I have felt humiliated, undignified or uncomfortable, but which others are comfortable with. I don't see it as a reason to ban everyone from doing something, just because I (and possibly others) are frightened of it

You are an adult. You will also in most situations have the ability to remove yourself from the situation which made you feel humiliated etc. etc.

@DidoLamenting

There are situations in which I have felt humiliated, undignified or uncomfortable, but which others are comfortable with. I don't see it as a reason to ban everyone from doing something, just because I (and possibly others) are frightened of it

You are an adult. You will also in most situations have the ability to remove yourself from the situation which made you feel humiliated etc. etc.

I was actually referring to situations in childhood Dido.