Is this acceptable in a school?

[noblegiraffe]

A friend of mine is a teacher in an all boys school. He was showing a group of pupils some of the football and was fast-forwarding to get to the action. The camera lingered on some pretty girls in the crowd (you know the ones they normally pick!) and the pupils demanded that he go back so they could get a proper look. He obliged, but commented that if there had been a single girl in the classroom, he wouldn't have.

Obviously this was a pretty minor incident, but do you think it was fine (and if so, would it have also been fine if there had been girls present?), or is it encouraging the sexual objectification of women? Or anything else?

What are your thoughts?

It's the old sauce for the goose argument again, which only works if you believe that we live in a society where men and women are equally objectified, equally raped, equally intimidated by a culture of objectifiation and equally affected / disadvantaged by sexism.

Nobody sensible believes all that though, do they?

Yes, out of interest, who is Zac Ephron? [Out of touch emoticon]

Yes, I'd like to know too. Is he worth googling?

SSM: I would be in the classroom the whole time they were ogling - they're not allowed in my room on my computer unsupervised, so technically, I would be in charge. In my imaginary scenario, I can picture them saying 'Miss, he is well fit' and my response would be something like 'A bit young for my tastes'. (btw Zac Efron is the male lead in High School Musical, I should have said Robert Pattinson from Twilight who is about the same age and seems to get more airtime on Mumsnet)

Re: sauce for the goose, as a more general comment than just this situation, I understand that care needs to be taken around boys to emphasise that unwanted leering etc is a problem, that they need to respect women. But they will want to look at pretty girls. How do you come down heavily on the leering without making them feel guilty for normal behaviour?

They aren't going to take much notice of what their teachers think anyway. It's not as if they're going to go home or to a party at the weekend and think "Sir wouldn't like us to do this, better not..."

You can't make them feel bad about their sexuality by refusing to go along with it. It shouldn't be condoned in school.
A male teacher is in a perfect position to be a role model to teenagers and might later in their lives have a modicum of influence over them by showing them how an adult man doesn't have to see girls or women in the same light as teenage boys.

maybe the consent issue is helpful here - 'Those girls are there to watch the football, they didn't ask to be stared at'?

Sakura, if they're presenting a 'bad' example, it's all about the influence on the kids, if they're presenting a good one, kids aren't going to take notice anyway? Not sure you can have it both ways.

And adult men do still want to look at pretty women, why deny it? Am I supposed to pretend that I'm completely disinterested in good-looking men? Teacher as eunuch?

noblegiraffe, "Teachers have two roles in school, one educational, one pastoral. I don't see the two as conflicting."

The pastortal role is a subset of the educational role. If teachers aren't educating then they aren't teachers. As a mother with no school teaching experience, the "pastoral" role comes across to me not so much "trying to encourage the formation of more-rounded children as they enter young adulthood" (laudable), more "trying to be a pal" (but which teacher can ever give kids "enough" friendship or what they are really after i.e. slack? - kids will always demand more). When it comes to teacher-condoned sexual content on the computer, I see the two roles conflicting.

A teacher might lend a child their computer during lunch break, even for sex education, but I don't think ogling celebrities etc. counts as sex education, it's indulgence in sexual fantasy. If it's just a bit of fun, then teachers need to think harder about alternative ways for children to have fun in school. It is the responibility of adults i.e teachers to set appropriate boundaries for the children when in the school, even at lunch break. I think gratuitous sex surfing on the Internet crosses the line. I suspect that many of the children probably have Internet access on their mobile phones anyway. If they access such material on their own devices, then that is their action and their responsibility. I just don't think teachers should use their pastoral role to give children that sort of thing, on a plate.

I suppose teachers could think they are doing society a service along the lines "at least the children aren't bored" or "at least the children are looking at titilating material, avoiding damaging "shame/guilt/denial" complexes about their sexuality". That would sound like a figleaf rationalisation to me.

I am curious to learn more details of how teachers see their pastoral role. Please share.

Where's your line in the sand? What wouldn't you allow the children to do during lunch break?

you don't have to pretend you're not interested in men but equally you don't have to share the activity of looking at them with your class. There's quite a difference.

I mean, the good adult behaviour you can model is 'confining your ogling to appropriate times and places', 'exercising self-control over your desire to ogle'.

Sorry, I meant that teachers have a perogative to set a good example, but in doing so they shouldn't be worried about stifling the boys' sexuality. TBH, there's no way a teacher will be able to stifle teenagers' sexuality, anyway, if that's what you're worried about.
But that's no reason that they should just join in themselves with the teenagers.

And Eeeeww that a teacher has a sexuality.
Isn't that like realising your parents having a sexuality.
Surely it's something all kids would rather not know.

have a sexuality

SDG I think you may be missing the point. The tutor role is not inferior to the teacher ole. It is part of the same job. Teachers are in loco parentis so provide education and care for the children during school hours.
One of these roles is (voluntarily) supervising children while they have free time (at lunches etc). At these times the children can do anything that conforms to school rules. Looking at pictures of celebrities is not against any rules. It would be inappropriate for a teacher to join in with any lecherous comments, sometimes it is appropriate to remind the children that the person on the picture is an actual person, but generally pictures that children can access through school firewalls are pictures that the celebrities have approved. This is not the same as ogling members of the public who have no say in the matter.

You seem to be sexualising this when actually mostly it is about aesthetics and social fantasy (ie I wonder what it would be like to be Zac Ephron's girlfriend, rather than I wonder what it would be like to have sex with Zac Ephron). Sex is difficult to imagine if you have never had it and doesn't often form part of a teenager's fantasy life.

clemettethedropout wrote "You seem to be sexualising this when actually mostly it is about aesthetics and social fantasy (ie I wonder what it would be like to be Zac Ephron's girlfriend, rather than I wonder what it would be like to have sex with Zac Ephron).

What does Zac Ephron's girlfriend have with Zac Ephron then?

If you asked my students they would say they his girlfriend (does he have one?) gets to go to wonderful parties, wearing fantastic dresses and there would be some kissing. They don't generally think about his penic, they think about his face.
How old are your children SDG?

clemettethedropout, I don't think I'm the only one "sexualising" the discussion, and I did also repeatedly mention fantasy in my previous posts. I think many teenage fanstasies are about sex.

clemettethedropout, my kids aren't school age yet, so this whole new world awaits . This thread has been very educational for me (pun intended).

I can only go on my experience as head of sex and relationships education at secodnary schools.
Children need a safe place to explore their burgeoning sexuality without being made to feel like their emotions are in any way shameful or to be hidden. This does not, however, mean that ogling should be led by a teacher which is how I read the OP.

clemettethedropout, yes I know the girls may well think of the parties, clothes and glamour but that's not been the flavour of this thread as I've read it.

"Re: sauce for the goose, as a more general comment than just this situation, I understand that care needs to be taken around boys to emphasise that unwanted leering etc is a problem, that they need to respect women. But they will want to look at pretty girls. How do you come down heavily on the leering without making them feel guilty for normal behaviour?"

This isn't about stopping boys from ogling. this is about their teacher joining in and colluding with the ogling.

To enlarge on my previous post of "clemettethedropout, my kids aren't school age yet"

I'm not sure that the age of my children adds anything relevant to the topics under discussion in this thread, other than perhaps, to show that I'm not a "school mum" yet, which also is not relevant. I do know quite a few teenagers already though. I've even been one myself.

"I think gratuitous sex surfing on the Internet crosses the line."

Good grief SDG, what on earth do you think is being looked at here? When I was that age we looked at the posters in Smash Hits and put the stickers on our pencil cases so we could look at our favourite stars during lessons. I'm thinking of the internet equivalent, not porn!

By the way, he didn't 'join in' with the ogling, the boys asked him to go back so they could see the pretty girls and he did.

Proles, is your clear as day issue with the behaviour in the OP, or would it also extend to my hypothetical Zac Efron for the girls at lunchtime situation?