The V&A still grooming kids

[Hoardasurass]

So the V&A have put highly inappropriate books in its children's reading room and when called out doubled down claiming that all their books are age appropriate.
How anyone can think that naked images of adult genital in cartoon form with the caption "Willie's aren't silly" in a book called It isn't rude to be rude, is anything but criminal grooming of children is unfathomable.

'Willies aren't silly', V&A tells children in 'tool for paedos' book https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15473795/Willies-silly-V-children-book-tool-paedos.html?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubutton

I can't say as I often agree with the daily mail but in this instance I do.

I was going to disagree, as I think books that are aimed at making children comfortable about their bodies are a good idea, as are books that give sensible, no nonsense information about what adult bodies look like (including the range of different body types). It’s important to explain biological fact and prepare kids for the big changes they’ll go through at puberty.

But, if half of what the Daily Mail is claiming is in the book is true, then this is clearly completely age inappropriate. The V&A has undertaken an inclusive focus over the last few years, but they’ve generally seemed to manage to find get right balance. I’m surprised they’ve managed to get this so wrong. Regardless of whether you have liberal views or not, most people’s hard line comes when it involves inappropriate content for children.

@Hoardasurass You say the V&A is still grooming kids - what were the previous controversies? I wasn’t aware of any before this.

Why is it the V&A’s job to teach small children biology with pictures of naked adults; or to teach them about Lesbian, bi-sexual, gay, trans, queer (?), + (?)
people? ( Do they even explain all this utterly mindless letter bundle?)

You can see pages from ‘It isn’t Rude…..’
It is peculiar. It is like an advertisement book for a nudist colony on some pages.

As it obviously is rude to be nude in many contexts, for example visiting the V&A or at school or walking down the road, the book is nutty. Another page says ‘ everyone has a bum’. We know.

What are they trying to say to children?

I didn’t explain that it includes naked children and naked adults.

Musk must be wondering why he’s the ‘baddie’ ?

Exactly. Pure manky and dodgy.

Hardly grooming is it

Re: the nude book.
I do not think it is overt sexual grooming. The illustrations seem quite charming to me in a way too.

It is grooming a general sense though in that it is aimed at young children in a context of a hallowed museum seeming to endorse nudity and this is potentially confusing. It also shows nude adults and children together, without any reason given, just when they are being taught the ‘Pants rule’ at school and being taught boundaries.

What is the is book trying to say anyway? Most children see their parents, themselves and siblings nude already. They do not think they. are rude. But they also learn that it stops there. The random nudity shown in the book will not keep them safe. Looking at a range of ‘Bums’ ( we are shown many sorts) is not something they need to do either but the book seems to make this one of its lessons.

(It could go on a biology shelf for teenagers as a light hearted portrayal of different body shapes, pubic hair and so on.)!

As for the LGBTQ+ also please leave little children’s alone.

It is grooming too in the sense that these things are nothing to do with the V&A. So someone there is pushing these books.

The V&A’s nude statues from antiquity have their own context with an explanation about age, distance, culture etc and it is not as though the book shows Classical Greek traditions in art, for example.

Makes you realize how many paedos are out there. A lot.

Visit the V&A and notice how many staff are enbies.

In the V&A? In an area for kids to just read and be entertained?

I don't see it as very different than having books like this in IKEA play rooms. Eve if the book is fine, it's not the right setting.

I’m not familiar with the children’s area, but I can see the logic to the book selection so long as it deals with content like this sensibly (which this book seemingly doesn’t). They’re selecting illustrated children’s picture books which, like the content or not, is an art form. I would expect a heavy focus on art and culture, but if the content is age appropriate then I wouldn’t find issue with them engaging other topics. For some children it’s going to be useful or interesting information they might not otherwise have access to.

It’s also not as if there aren’t any number of statues of naked adults or kids on display in the museum for them to look at. Would I prefer to see an age appropriate picture book that looks at bodies in the context of nudity in art through the ages? Yes, but that’s going to be pretty niche.

Does that matter?

Shouldn’t they be allowed to work in museums?

It's not the V&A but the Young V&A, a toy museum in Bethnal Green, which doesn't make it better (it actually makes it worse).

Of course they can work in museums. But they’re much more likely to push for exhibits that espouse the Queer Theory they themselves will have been groomed into. People who are “enbie” seem to make their lives all about being “enbie” and want the rest of the world to know about the specialness of being “different” because they don’t want everyone to notice they aren’t any different to the rest of us at all.

That's rather a radical interpretation of the text?

I was replying to the OP. As pp says, when you visit and meet a large number of, and I'll add if it helps, perfectly nice and helpful young enbies on duty, it becomes apparent why it would be likely that the museum is influenced towards political bias and activism. Wouldn't you agree?

The issue would not be with the staff, but with the museum's boundaries and impartiality. And possibly the diversity of their staff.

How is it appropriate for a public institution, which likes to think they are into diversity and serving all kinds of people, would have books in a public children's area on sensitive topics that families have quite varied opinions on, and typically like to teach their kids about in a time of their choosing and with time for discussion, and in a way that reflects that family's beliefs.

It's like putting books about God in a doctors waiting room, it's not the appropriate time or place.

There are masses of great kids books that would be fine, and plenty that would really fit into what the V&A is about. Why they think it is their role to teach kids about anything relating to sexuality or sexual identity or even human reproduction is really hard to comprehend.

Sorry to take do long in responding but real life happens
The V&A have been in the fir front of promoting GI in all its forms including transing multiple historical figures, creating displays that included packers and binders along with other highly inappropriate books and materials along with promoting inappropriate reading material and online resources including but not limited to mermaids (after the recent CC investigation). There has been multiple threads on the V&A.
Basically its got to the point that if the V&A are involved you know its going to include full blown gender ideology and outright indoctrination in gender woo. There isn't even one single single sex toilet in the entire building (there are "womens" facilities but they still class men with a special identity as women and allow access to them). If you need further proof just put V&A into the advanced search and you'll find all the evidence you could possibly need to know that this is an ongoing issue with them

I thought on my last visit that there were women, men and gender neutral facilities labelled?

Crikey, well that’s passed me by entirely! I’ve only ever visited for the historic exhibits, so I think I’ve missed a lot of this. Disappointing but not unexpected I suppose, given their areas of specialism, but I really hope some reality begins to filter in as it’s otherwise such a fantastic museum.

Yes, but "women" includes transwomen, that is to say, men.