Safer schools issues guidance on furries in school

Have people actually read the guidance?

Its not a “guide about furries for kids”.

It’s guidance for safeguarding staff on how to respond to a situation where they have students who are identifying as “furries” or showing an interest in “furry” subculture. I just read it and personally found it helpful.

There are increasing numbers of students in secondary showing interest in this sort of thing because of TikTok and a big overlap with the ones who are into anime and other more alternative types. Like the article says, a lot of these students are neurodiverse. We have a few in my school and no, they are not identifying as cats and asking for litter boxes. The article seems a sensible assessment of the risks.

I don’t know why people are reading this as a safeguarding organisation exposing kids to furries. It’s an article about the risks associated with a current safeguarding issue.

How many children in your school identify as animals/furries?

I don’t have any kids who “identify as animals”.

There are a few groups of kids in various year groups who are currently into the furry trend. This seems to mostly manifest in fairly harmless ways… Spending breaks and lunch drawing anime style pictures of animal people, outfits with cutesy little anime animal ears on non-uniform days, interest in cosplay/comic cons etc. They don’t think they are animals, they are following a trend.

I’ve dealt with one as a real safeguarding issue and the whole furry thing was incidental. The real issue was that it was a neurodivergent older child who was failing to see that they don’t really know online friends. Some of these were online friends in furry forums, some were just general anime forums, some were from fan fiction websites.

Firstly can o say I don't understand why anyone wants to dress up as an animal! But it is bizarrely true that some teens seem to want to and it's not to do with sex, they see it as an identity like being gay ... go figure!

At a school with uniform there's an easy fix, strict uniform! Without like my DD's old college was harder, nothing in the code about not wearing a tail and ears, some wore onesies even. Apparently they have a uniform now

“Not innately sexual” = attractive to an innocent child then puts them on a pathway to be introduced to a sexual fetish later as part of the “Furries Community”.

But teachers in schools are trained in safeguarding. They don't need detailed knowledge of every fetish subculture to be able to safeguard appropriately.

They have proper, accredited safeguarding training based on KCSIE - not random stuff produced by some random organisation highlighting some random subculture.

I doubt most teachers would have time for this and definitely would not have time for a document on every single conceivable subculture a child could or has engaged with online. It would be inappropriate for them to spend time on this because the safeguarding red flags are the same regardless of the subject matter e.g. as PP has indicated, making "friends" who they only know online.

One of the issues that nobody likes to mention is that sometimes non- consenting animals are involved. This whole scene has a very dark underbelly which is sickening. They label it zoophilic now as everyone knows what bestiality means. Zoophilic furries are a thing.

That animal rape as a 'kink' is anywhere near kids - however remote these people will claim it to be - is so sickening that it makes me want to leave the entire fucking planet.

I think documents like this seek to dilute the general safeguarding training that is likely to keep kids safe.

It's hard not to conclude that this is the point.

Does the document talk about bestiality as part of this culture? If not, why not? Why do they talk about the 'benefits' of furries for KIDS? I can't honestly see any benefits, only risks. When they're adults they can get into this stuff if they want, not while they're minors.

If you actually are a teacher and cannot see the innate harm in this lovely fluffy subculture then you should not be in post.

I worked with teachers aggressively pushing the trans agenda - why do you think that they would not be on board with this shit? There are creeps and predators everywhere and teaching is nor exempt. Plus if the leadership go with it you get a put up and shut up culture or you lose your job.

One of the main overall perspectives to be taught is noone online can be trusted?
You have various conventions eg comic con where fans dress up in all manner of their favourite characters etc.

If anyone is going to the shops, please could they get me some heavy duty Parazone for my eyes/brain ? W.T.F did I read?🤢

Too many people have forgotten that being a furry has always been a fetish. I've been on the internet since the mid-90s and it's always been known to be sex-based.
There was even a CSI episode 20 years ago that made it clear it's based on sex for many.

I'm on a sewing group on Facebook and there's a surprising number of mothers happily helping their kids make furry costumes. This comes under people being so open-minded that their brains have fallen out. Makes me cringe TBH.

I can understand why kids can be drawn to it, cute costumes and all that, but who do we think is lurking in the shadows of it? Who might be attracted to easy access to lots of young teenagers with useful idiots cheering them on?

Some of these were online friends in furry forums

Children are online with adults? Are their parents informed of this?

I'm on a sewing group on Facebook and there's a surprising number of mothers happily helping their kids make furry costumes. This comes under people being so open-minded that their brains have fallen out. Makes me cringe TBH.

Fucking hell I have no words. What is WRONG with people?

A look at the Safer Schools organisation:

'The Safer Schools Ecosystem is brought to you in partnership between Zurich Municipal and INEQE Safeguarding Group, combining over 250 years’ experience to create a multi-award-winning suite of safeguarding services.
The Ecosystem has been created by the experts at INEQE Safeguarding Group, led by CEO Jim Gamble QPM, founder of the UK Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre.
INEQE Safeguarding Group and Zurich Municipal are proud to bring our Ecosystem to school communities, knowing we’re using our expertise to help your school empower, educate and protect your children and young people'

https://ineqe.com/

Jim Gamble:

'Jim Gamble has over thirty years experience from the world of protective services and a strong reputation for successful delivery in counter terrorism, the fight against organized and hi-tech crime and child protection.

A strong advocate of international multi-agency partnerships, Jim was the founding Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre, the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on Child Protection and Child Trafficking and the founder and initial Chair of the Virtual Global Task Force, an international collaboration to make children safer online.

As the CEO and one of the founding partners of Ineqe Group, Jim has continued in his dedication to protecting the welfare of children and helping to make people safer.

Specialties: His primary focus has been on developing effective multi-sector partnerships that make people safer by integrating traditional best practice with cutting edge technology.

He is a highly regarded public, conference and after dinner speaker and delivers motivational leadership and specialist subject matter speeches around the world.

He is a frequent media commentator on issues related to protective services, best practice, the internet and child protection.

He is the independent chair of the City and Hackney Safeguarding Children Board, which under Jim's leadership is the first to be judged outstanding by Ofsted. In January 2017 he added to his safeguarding portfolio of roles when he was appointed as the Independent Chair of Bromley Safeguarding Children Board.'

In addition there is a team of roughly 40 people running this organisation. They call them 'geeks'.

Zurich provide insurance for the public and third sectors.

Safe school alliance and safer schools sound similar.

I'm so bloody cynical about these things, that as I was reading that, I felt sure it was going to end up with 'and has been arrested for paedophilia.'

Also 'Ecosystem' makes me disregard everything written after it.

Safe schools alliance should go out of their way to distance themselves, in my opinion.

And Yes, everyone knows that furries is a sex based fetish. If kids are into it, it's out of naïveté and/or grooming.

Advice about it in schools is deliberately legitimising it in my opinion.

surely this topic should be on the main talk board, not hidden in sensible womens corner.

Many of the conversations we have on FWR should be out there for all Mumsnetters to see. Hiding this stuff away is so harmful, people need to know. I suspect many Mumsnetters and lurkers are in blissful ignorance about the matters discussed here.

Is that a serious question?

Unfortunately, it is completely normal now for people to let their children have access to the internet, which is full of adults. It’s their parents who allow this. Any child that’s online is potentially online with adults. In this case the child was 17. I don’t know anyone that age that doesn’t have relatively free access to the internet.

In this case, thankfully, the parents were on the ball and still monitoring their child’s internet use because they recognised that the child was more vulnerable than most of that age. It was them who alerted me.

I just don’t see how anyone can read that document and conclude that it is meant to dilute safeguarding. It’s meant to help professionals to identify risks and sort that from misinformation and misunderstanding.

If safeguarding professionals think “furry” means identifying as a cat, crawling on all fours and asking for a litter box then they may miss the fact that you might want to ask some questions to kids who are doodling anime animal pictures and wearing cutesy cat ears about what they are doing online. Many people may not even recognise that as a potential indicator of risk.

The document is saying that you may well come across behaviour that is not overtly sexual and not in itself harmful but which may be an indicator that children could be at risk of harm, particularly from online behaviour. As a safeguarding lead I see all kinds of briefing documents like this about specific online subcultures, vaping, particular apps or websites, porn, sexting, edibles. It is bizarre to me that the Daily Mail are spinning it that way and the insinuations about Jim Gamble are disgusting. He’s the founder of CEOP and has been a huge force for good in child safeguarding, particularly around online safety.

Perhaps I'm reading the wrong thing, but I've just read

There have been popular portrayals of the Furry community as ‘sexually deviant’ and focused on a sexual aspect of being anonymous and in a suit. However, there is no evidence to support this claim. Many Furries reject this misconception as not accurately reflecting their community.

No evidence???

I have never seen a portrayal of a furry that wasn't sexual. The ones at Pride were quite upfront about their tails actually being butt plugs. They were in a ball pool with unsuspecting children wandering up to them, entirely unaware.