Pro-porn Childline film encouraging kids to google BDSM etc

[Sunkisses]

Jeez, just seen this from the Safe Schools Alliance UK on twitter. Six years ago Childline produced this pro-porn film which is basically an advert for PornHub masquerading as a child protection resource. It tells children that porn is "fun" & recommends genres like BDSM to google. It's had over 3 million views in the last 6 years, and goodness knows how much it has contributed to the rape culture we are now seeing in schools. It is illegal for under 18s to view porn, and children should be taught this and the harms of pornography, not encouraged to view it with a nod, nod, wink, wink attitude.

You can view the Safe Schools Alliance UK tweet here: twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1379528765261381634

SSAUK are calling on Childline and the NSPCC (who run Childline) to take this film down.

The Government should bring in age-verification for online porn ASAP to prevent children having easy access to online porn. All the laws have been passed, and the regulatory framework is in place. The Government bottled it at the last minute in 2019 after facing pressure from the powerful porn industry. Our children deserve better.

ASugarr

ScrollingLeaves
GoingThruTheMotions

“However, I'd much rather a young person in that situation watch this then find dangerous pornography.” (Written by Asuggar)

Absolutely. I too did not know many of these variations of porn and was especially confused by Swan dancing porn.

Of course children would look it up. Just think of those girls and some boys who love dancing. Think of the beauty of Swan Lake.
Now think of the horror of what they’ll find - immediately:

Without opening links I just found lots of porn sites look linked to Swan Lake.

Pointing the way to finding this- which in my opinion the video does- epitomises the meaning of corruption.

Well yeah if you google any thing with porn you are going to get porn. You can put restrictions on your internet so that key words like porn can't come up, again that's more of a parental thing.

Eh? What am missing here. An 'influencer' man, sponsored by the NSPCC, is telling children to google a porn genre to do with Swan lake (I'm assuming because of the obvious, but maybe I'm wrong).

And you are saying that parental controls on technology is the way to deal with it. Instead of not saying it.

Still, it's all on a par with the director of Childline saying "children are telling us very clearly that [porn] is having a damaging and upsetting effect on them.”

It's a complete mindfuck.

@ASugarr

I said I might make some changes, not very big ones though. I'd probably just want to discuss other parts of the porn industry and stuff.

I think people are mistaking that regular porn is fun to watch. We've used porn in various medias for decades (go the Amsterdam sex museum if you don't believe me). Porn hub as a site isn't very credible because of the harm its done, however porn itself outside of that is actually a fun way to masturbate and learn about the human body in a sexual way!

It might not be a fun thing for you, that's okay! But for many it is and discussing the pros and cons is important to allowing young people to make a choice for themselves to know if it is right for them. Do I think more hardcore/fetish porn should be behind a security system like they do in other countries in europe where you must be over 18 and show evidence for that? Absolutely. But do I think porn as a whole is just this super dangerous thing? No.

Why are you coming back to inferring we are disagreeing that porn needs to be discussed with under 18 year olds?

People are NOT mistaking or confusing types of porn. Please stay with discussing THIS video and it’s messaging.

The messaging in this video, in my opinion, fails on many layers. Your bringing hard core/fetish porn into the conversation does not change the failures that I and others have pointed out in this video.

That you, as a sexual health expert, with, I assume, years of safeguarding training and education training for the relevant age group have stated you deem a good resource.

However if this is in collaboration with child line then they would have approved this meaning it is okay to post.

Their approval doesn't mean it is okay.

What happens when you ask children to talk about porn...

"Youngsters in years 7, 8 and 9 were set the work for their Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) class, as part of their home-learning during the coronavirus school shut down.

Teachers at Archbishop Sentamu Academy in east Hull asked the 11 to 14-year-olds to "define" pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography, as well as female genital mutilation, wet dreams, trafficking, male circumcision, breast ironing and more."

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

I don't have any parental controls on my phone and I don't want to elaborate on what I found when simply searching for that article.

Using the words 'school' and 'girl' along with 'porn' should be enough to give you an idea.

I know you desperately want to reframe this as a nice little black and white argument where you patiently explain why porn needs to be discussed to a group of prudes, but that's not what is happening here.
People have pointed out very specific things wrong with that video. That's what's being discussed here. How it's unsuitable for children. I don't say young people because it's very easy to manipulate meaning by saying young people. Children are people under 18, the people this video is supposedly aimed at. Young people could refer to anyone below 30.

To be honest if you showed this to a class in any of the schools I have worked in you'd be subject to a displinary. If you then defended it as you have it would not fly because teachers have to be impartial and that includes not promoting porn.
I admit I work in primary now so am not up to date with the latest curriculum changes, but a quick look this morning shows no need to discuss any of the things listed in the video. The education is as you would expect, very much focused on keeping safe and informing not promoting.

Porn is fun to watch, drugs are fun to take. Alcohol is fun to drink. Cars are fun to drive.

Its massively missing the point to say that children search for porn because its fun; no they don't.

Seemed liked an informative video that explains some of the issues of porn in a simplistic age appropriate way. Wake up that video is not going to be the first time your little darlings hear terms like "BDSM" and if it is it's better to hear about it like that, rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it.

cs98127634

Have you read the thread?

@ASugarr

Actually from my knowledge TomSka is a child abuse survivor so he does a lot if work with charities like childline to help young people.

Maybe he is maybe that doesn't matter in the context of this video. It is a useless video for what its purporting to do. It appeals to none of the target audience (your words) Let's be fair, I too could make a video just like this, and my video would be shit too. Because I dont pretend to know everything about safeguarding children simply because I survived CSA. People are supposed to know stuff like that before making bloody videos.

I can't believe I am having to explain why disembodied vaginas, hinted beastiality and BDSM are not suitable topics for a 'fun' video. To be used in sex education.

For children.

Especially to a supposed educator.

If this is what passes for education in KS3 4 no wonder the problems we are facing as a society.
It's really frustrating to see how lax some people take their role. You're not there to be a friend, you're there to inform and educate.

And inform means to do so to equip children to make safe choices, not hand them the keys to the porn world and say, 'help yourself'.

Do you have to be a parent to grasp that adults model the world for the children they come into contact with? Whatever they see us do, we have normalized for them.

@cs98127634

Seemed liked an informative video that explains some of the issues of porn in a simplistic age appropriate way. Wake up that video is not going to be the first time your little darlings hear terms like "BDSM" and if it is it's better to hear about it like that, rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it.

Really? Ok what age group do you think its aimed at?

Wake up that video is not going to be the first time your little darlings hear terms like "BDSM" and if it is it's better to hear about it like that, rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it.

Right. And what is it about that video that reinforces the messaging that it is ok for a sexual partner to say no? Remembering the throw away attempts at humour, including the ‘your all over 18, right?’ complete with a very young voice answering. Remembering the discordant message of ‘it’s not real. Bodies come in all shapes etc.... but I wish I had a porn star body’.

And remember ‘porn is fun’, it is all fine in moderation. And porn and sexy and fun interspersed through out. Even after some very serious points raised.

In what way does this video give under 18s the language, and the confidence to say they don’t give consent, to that BDSM?

Or ‘our little darlings’ as you so expressively put it?

And again, we are discussing the merits of this video. We don’t disagree ‘our little darlings’ need porn to be part of a wider and very balanced discussion. Ffs.

Wake up that video is not going to be the first time your little darlings hear terms like "BDSM" and if it is it's better to hear about it like that, rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it.

Dear lord.

If BDSM is cool enough for a Childline sponsored influencer to recommend, then why the dire warning of 'rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it'??

You're approving the recommendation of something you use as a threat!

Whilst using the term 'your little darlings' as though you think other people's children are somehow lesser.

Do you have any idea how that all comes across?

Wake up that video is not going to be the first time your little darlings hear terms like "BDSM" and if it is it's better to hear about it like that, rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it.

Hear about it like what?

0 points for use of the term 'little darlings' by the way, yaaaaaawwwwnnnn.

@cs98127634

Seemed liked an informative video that explains some of the issues of porn in a simplistic age appropriate way. Wake up that video is not going to be the first time your little darlings hear terms like "BDSM" and if it is it's better to hear about it like that, rather than a sexual partner trying to get them to do it.

Wow. Way off the mark. You have kids?

0 points for use of the term 'little darlings' by the way, yaaaaaawwwwnnnn.

It's more of the same tedium as prude and pearl clutcher. Anything to minimise the issue. (Despite the obvious error of using BDSM for kids as a threat).

Sorry if it has been mentioned earlier but Safe Schools Alliance have put a petition on iPetitions - search open letter to childline if anyone wants to sign. I have put a message with an actual link under the petitions thread.

Having seen Oxfam have had their funding paused again www.bbc.com/news/health-56670162 for safeguarding failings whilst instead put their energies dreaming up forms for job applications with 'Man-identified' or 'Woman-identified' without also having the options to simple be a man or a woman, and now realising the NSPCC are pushing videos that also push the concept of safeguarding to its limits, it is getting hard to know who it is safe to donate to now.

This video seems to have been made with good intentions and this Tom Ska character seems to be truly trying to reach the audience and tell them the problems with porn from his own experiences growing up having unrestricted access to this stuff.

However...

I think it woefully misses the mark with regards to the tone. It's far too chummy and trying too hard to be "down with the kids." Naming various genres of porn is truly unnecessary- the first thing a curious child is going to want to do is google these terms. When a child I work with found out that Hitler shot himself the first thing he did was google "pictures of Hitler after he shot himself." The morbid little bugger was hoping for photos of what he looked like with his brains hanging out.

I also think the video is rushed. Tom Ska talks at a hundred miles a minute. Why are they trying to condense such a weighty subject into such a short video? All this information is flung at the kids rapid fire without time to properly digest what's being said. Someone will likely say it's simply an conversation starter but I don't see why this video is necessary at all. It will only encourage children to look this stuff up.

More effort should be put in to making it as difficult as possible for children to access porn at all. Their brains are not yet equipped to deal with it.

The thing I really feel about many of the things aimed at children around sex, porn.

Is that they seem to be aimed at a much older audience. There seems to be an assumption that children will be pretty worldly and sexually knowledgeable. Pretty blasé about sex. A lot of things are referenced casually as if well obviously they all know this, have seen that, have heard of the other. That really bothers me for a number of reasons.

The other thing is that a lot of it to me seems to really come from a male perspective. And that also bothers me a lot for obvious reasons.

@NiceGerbil

The thing I really feel about many of the things aimed at children around sex, porn.

Is that they seem to be aimed at a much older audience. There seems to be an assumption that children will be pretty worldly and sexually knowledgeable. Pretty blasé about sex. A lot of things are referenced casually as if well obviously they all know this, have seen that, have heard of the other. That really bothers me for a number of reasons.

The other thing is that a lot of it to me seems to really come from a male perspective. And that also bothers me a lot for obvious reasons.

I agree with this. The Tom Ska video is a prime example of this. It's all very "knowing" and is pitched like it assumes enough prior knowledge to put everything into context.

I also have a question, I don't know if anyone knows the answer.

Films and games and TV programs have age ratings. 12, 15, 18, whatever it is. This is to give an indication of how suitable the content is for younger viewers. I know lots of parents ignore it but the ratings are there.

When I was young porn videos were referred to as 'x rated' by people in general. It was widely accepted that they were an 18+ classification. In fact when they were literally videos I assume they were 18+.

So my assumption would be, from a common sense point of view, that watching porn is for people who are 18 and over.

Now as it's the internet, and it's short films/ clips etc, through these sites, and they are hosted around the world, there is no organisation trawling through it all and saying this is an 18, and there is not AFAIK a law about watching it. But it is illegal to show porn to a child.

So this idea and the fact that it seems to be very important to these orgs to reassure children that's it's fine to watch it, there's no age limit, is ????

It's a loophole. However no one actually thinks that in reality it's AOK for children to be watching this, especially in the form it takes these days.

So why is the message so often, it's sexy and nice and not illegal so don't worry?

Rather than, these things if categorised would be 18 and while many of you may well have seen things/ been shown things. They are not made for children and you may well find it scary/ confusing.

Most 12 yo girls would baulk at the sort of things you see being done to (and it is done to) in het porn I'm sure. Many boys would as well tbh.

The tone of so much of this stuff seems totally fucked up to me.

*"Kids shouldn't be on YouTube. They should be using YouTube kids until they are 11 years old.

Um,you do realise that people don't become adults at 11 years old dont you? That they are still 'kids' until they are 18? confused"*

From what I've seen the content on "Youtube Kids" looks like cartoons and stuff for very young kids ie toddlers. I don't think a 16 or 17 year old would be interested in any stuff that's on Youtube Kids.

That's a massive misread of the point!

The point was that there's a lot of difference in maturity and knowledge and etc between an 11yo and a 17yo.

Content that is ok for 17 is not necessarily appropriate for a 12 yo.