Sex toys on display at child friendly day for Out There Queer Fest Exeter

[IwantToRetire]

It was reported that one stall displayed anatomical models of male and female genitalia, a condom-fitting device, condoms, and a penis-girth measuring card. Children as young as three were said to be present.
Devon County Council did not directly receive any complaints about the event from parents at the time, but Cllr Hill insisted there had been a safeguarding oversight.

His motion called for an independent review and an assurance on safeguarding policies and added: “This motion seeks to ensure that children and vulnerable people are protected from inappropriate material, unsafe environments, and disorderly conduct at publicly funded events.”

Cllr Hill said his motion was about protecting children while the cabinet’s response – that the council already had robust safeguarding procedures in place – was about protecting the council.

Full article https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/26156426.council-clash-sex-toy-stall-row/

The event was actually last year, so not sure why this is only be raised not.

Eh, they have rock candy male and female genitalia displayed in sweet/gift/tat shops all over blackpool. Usually on a high shelf but definitely still visible to children. I've never heard anyone call that a safeguarding issue.

'Not a safeguarding issue' - perhaps, I don't know.
But not what I'd expect to find in a public library!

Shops are not funded by the council so they’re not held to the same standard.

Read the article but couldn't find my answer, was it a "Queer/LBGTXYSGJFB" event labelled as family friendly or not?

Ive taken my kids to various festivals, so many stalls with "questionable" items. Literally gave a raised eyebrow and head tilt when my then 8yr old was trying to buy 2 bucket hats, one with the hash/weed logo and the other magic mushrooms 🤣🤣

A queer festival (albeit labelled as family friendly) im assuming is generally geared at youngsters questioning their sexuality or just non hetro people so seeing these things wouldn't phase me. My youngest would actively run away and my eldest would be mortified if I started saying ooooh this would make an awesome ornament.

https://www.outthere.org.uk/young-persons-day

There was a Young Person’s Day held at Exeter Library in 2025. The report below mentions safeguarding and misleading information being spread so I think it was this event.

https://outtherequeerfest.my.canva.site/ypd-2025-report

Honestly not only did I paste the extract, but if anyone bothered to read the article it is quite clear that about the event itself and there being a special day.

Instead the first posts are all about was it really this, or was it that, instead of the issue itself!

That's the point of posting links!

The outstanding question is why this is only being raised now a year later.

Is it genuine or some sort of Reform gotcha action.

So primarily aimed at teens questioning their sexuality.... my post still stands. How to put on a condom? What's the issue. Prosthetic anatomy..... pretty sure if I was a gay man I would want to try prepare myself for anal, its nowhere near like a vagina.

I was amazed at how many comments arose after the episode lf Orange is the new black and the trans inmate had to show females where their piss came from.....ie not the clitoris.

I think I'd have to agree with the Lib Dem councillor - I don't think this is a safeguarding issue, although it is ill-advised and sounds inappropriate.

Condoms are common sights on shelves in supermarkets and pharmacies, and some supermarkets even sell sex toys. In and of themselves it's not a safeguarding issue for them to be in display.

Was it actually sex toys? Because from the article, that seems to come from reform as language to describe but the other descriptions sound more like a stall providing sex education on anatomy and contraception.

Are Reform the new Mary Whitehouse?!

I have never noticed this. I must have a look next time I am in Blackpool, which will be this summer.

Afaik only men think women pee through the clitoris, which is why TiM called the vagina the 'front hole', it's not, it's the middle one as anyone who has seen an accurate diagram of the vulva knows.

You think anyone who thinks a sex toy stand at a kids event is Mary Whitehouse? Are you Jimmy Savile?

The whole point of Queer theory is the destruction of societal norms - and that very firmly includes the norm that prohibits sex between adults and children. All the big queer theorists are quite explicit about that.

I beg to differ.... going on my SM when that episode aired.

Wouldn't you have anatomical models of genitalia in the average childs text book for biology class? They did when my kids were in school.

And condoms are sold in shops, really I believe they should be treated as normal so that hopefully children grow up to take responsibility for their contraception once they are adults.

I don't see how any of these are sex toys, or why you would assume that next year there would be a live sex show. Grasping at straws jumps to mind.

This is queer theory - the normalisation of exposure of children to sex and sexual
paraphinalia. Saying young children should be comfortable around condoms and know their use. There is another word for this too. It has nothing to do with contraception.

Could you please point me to an overview to queer theory? This is at odds with my current reading of it.

Young children having detailed knowledge of condoms and how they work would be a safeguarding red flag, yes. But I wouldn't expect young children to be at this event anyway, and given no parents complained they presumably found it age-appropriate and managed any resultant conversations.

Older children, in my view, should be given appropriate and factual sex education. Knowledge of contraception is power, particularly for young women, which is why there are forces who wish to hide that knowledge from them and restrict their access to basic contraception.

Analyzing public festivals through a lens of gender performativity involves examining how spaces are constructed to either reinforce or challenge the "heteronormative matrix." In this framework, the public sphere is often regulated by norms that dictate which bodies and identities are considered legible or "natural."

A critical pedagogical approach might suggest that public displays of diverse identities serve to disrupt the compulsory dictates of the gender binary. By presenting information that detaches anatomy from traditional, procreative expectations, such spaces attempt to open up a multiplicity of ways to understand human existence and political resignification.

Furthermore, the regulation of knowledge in public spaces often relies on established disciplinary frameworks. Challenging these frameworks allows for an education that exists outside the constrictive binaries of the dominant culture, potentially fostering broader capacities for thinking about autonomy and non-normative identities.

Ultimately, from this philosophical perspective, creating critical spaces where the rigid boundaries of sex and gender are challenged is seen as a way to materialize a more inclusive social reality. This involves a constant process of "undoing" restrictive norms to allow for a radical opening of what it means to live and be recognized within a community.

A Judith Butlereque response.

Where is the quote from?

regardless, all that quote boils down to is that it's OK to be queer/non-conforming and for that to be visible. Are we arguing that children shouldn't be aware of gay people? That gay people are intrinsically transgressive and that children should be protected from them? That seems to prove the quotes point.

I've done more reading on queer theory. There have definitely been some problematic characters associated with the academic discipline (specifically, supporting pedopholia) but it seems, like critical race theory, some quotes and ideas have been taken out of context/ misunderstood because it was written for an academic audience. I'm not excusing pedophilia or apologists for pedophilia.

But, there is no need to tar all queer people or events with those negative ideas, or assume all lqbtq things are promoting them. There's no implication this stand was promoting/ based on queer theory. As far as I can tell from reading the article, this was about sex education. The lack of parental complaints supports that idea.

Be as pedantic as you like, the vast majority of responsible parents do not want a pop up sex shop in their local library. Shielding children from adults’ sexuality - gay or straight - is an entirely normal thing to do. This was an ill-thought out event where the cloak of DEI was used to inhibit critical thinking.

Young people questioning their sexuality can and should be supported sensitively and appropriately. Children can be taught that different sexualities exist and are normal without sex toys being on display alongside their favourite picture books in the library.

Nice try shaming people with a “Mary Whitehouse” accusation (we need Mary Whitehouse more than ever now, she’d be better than our wet-lettuce politicians in challenging the tech companies who send harmful content to children’s phones) but it’s not “queerphobic” to separate children from adult sex related aspects of life.

Oh, and there were complaints. I know that for a fact. The organisers refused to listen to them, accept them or record them.

So it was sex toys on display and not just condoms and anatomical stuff?