Children as young as 11 who demonstrate misogynistic behaviour will be taught the difference between pornography and real relationships, as part of a multimillion-pound investment to tackle misogyny in England’s schools, the Guardian understands.
On the eve of the government publishing its long-awaited strategy to halve violence against women and girls (VAWG) in a decade, David Lammy told the Guardian that the battle “begins with how we raise our boys”, adding that toxic masculinity and keeping girls and women safe were “bound together”.
As part of the government’s flagship strategy, which was initially expected in the spring, teachers will be able to send young people at risk of causing harm on behavioural courses, and will be trained to intervene if they witness disturbing or worrying behaviour.
Well, you know all the humiliation porn, hardcore porn, rape porn and such?
That’s not a very nice representation of sex that can be considered safe for anyone, especially young humans with a developing brain.
Can we say that is objectively wrong? Or are we all so addicted to porn that we get angry as soon as it comes up in such discussions?
“Young humans” sure. Not young humans, you absolutely do you.
There’s a bit of an emerging trend in leftist European circles in particular that sees porn as inherently patriarchal and wrong and we’re not ready for how much anti-porn is going to be the new terfism yet. This is going to suck a lot, and not in a good way.
i would just like to point out that not everybody sees it like that. i identify as leftist and don’t see things that way, even though porn often is exploitative. but that has nothing to do with the porn itself, but with the economic coercion that is at play when the thing is created: for money. that’s the problem, that it happens for money, and not voluntarily. and that’s an economic problem, not one of porn itself.
So long as women choose to do it to fulfill capitalist needs (which is to say, to avoid the implicit violence of homelessness and/or incarceration), rather than simply because they enjoy it, then it kind of is.
If not specifically patriarchal, then at least evil and exploitative in some capacity.
I don’t disagree with you, but if you’re going to take that position you have to include work as a whole, not just sex work. There are difference, sure, but we’re all selling our minds, bodies, and time just to stay alive.
Oh I absolutely do apply that position to all work. But I would do so with the caveat that if you have a career which helps people even despite the reality that you’re being exploited while doing so - like taking care of kids or special needs people or the environment or something - then that might provide you with more happiness than purely selling access to your body.
That’s not at all intended as a judgement of the mere fact, though. If you genuinely prefer sex work to the available alternatives to you, get that bag. Or maybe you even help people in your capacity as a sex worker, I don’t know.
So educating children about porn equals being anti-porn?
I want education about drugs as well as liberalization of the same.
You know, the world is not black and white, left and right, like they have led you to believe.
Think with your own mind and exercise some objectivity, especially on important topics like education.
That’s a cool argument you’re having with a thing nobody said.
Educating children about sex in general is educating children about sex (and nobody here has argued against it or equated it with being anti-porn).
There is a rising trend in European lefitsm, and particularly in European feminism, that argues that all porn is inherently pernicious and ultimately should not exist.
Note those are two separate statements.
You definitely dabbled in the second of those statements when you claimed that “that [can’t] be considered safe for anyone”. Whether you meant to say what you said is in your head, but as presented that slope is both mighty slippery AND very consistent with some of the very anti sex-work trend I’m talking about. The false equivalence and misquote at the top of your response doesn’t lead me to believe you’re treating this “objectively”, either.
LOL
As I said already, if you have any doubt you can do your own research like I did instead of trying to confirm your beliefs in a random comments section.
Also I’ll point out that your arguing about leftism, feminism, terfism and whatnot like you feel persecuted when we are only talking about educating children on the difference between porn and reality and about factual (that, again, you can look up) psychological implications of consuming porn, is all incredibly weird.
Is porn that important for you? Is it such a meaningful part of your life that you can’t even stand criticism?
Or do you think porn is some kind of free expression of sexuality that should be protected?
I like drugs and I use them, but I don’t lose my mind whenever a study finds out that this or the other substance is harming me.
What the actual fuck mate?
I, once again, did not say or imply that I am persecuted in any way.
I do think porn is free expression, of sexuality and otherwise, and should be protected about as much as any other form of free expression. Which is not universally and without limit, before you try that one.
And all of that is not the same as saying I “can’t stand criticism” about it. Which I didn’t say or think. I will actively, aggressively criticise actual porn, both as a media product and as an industry.
Once again, the strawmanning and talking points aren’t doing much to disprove the notion that anti-porn activism will become the new TERF-like trojan horse wedge among ostensible leftist movements going forward. People don’t like to talk about those, but they are bad and this is incoming.
Again you keep talking about leftism and such, but you should invest the time you are wasting with this empty walls of text in reading some research on porn.
Would be definitely healthier than watching porn itself or fueling your paranoia against whoever you think is your enemy.
Good luck!
Hey, if you just happen to be a run of the mill traditional prudish conservative that would actually be mildly heartening. I genuinely don’t care about those continuing to run that line.
Still not wrong about the underlying issue, though. And for the record, I don’t think anti-porn so-called “abolitionists” are “my enemy”. I think all left of center forces are my allies, personally. The problem is single issue wedges used as hostile propaganda do work, as seen very clearly in the case of trans issues.
that’s porn
it’s not real life
A simple web search will prove you wrong.
the porn is porn
the real life incidents are real life
And teaching young kids about the difference is important, because you are 100% right but kids don’t realize unless taught.
I’m not talking about the tragic endings of the process, but about the process itself.
More violent porn being consumed leads to more demand of the same. It basically rewires your brain, like drugs. Look it up if you have any doubt.
Educating about porn should be mandatory like educating about drugs and all similarly harmful stuff.
So, rough sex is inherently bad?
That’s a pretty wild stretch to back bigotry.
No no, I’m sure the industry is completely reformed since
Linda LovelessTwo Girls One Cup.Of course it is, it’s grotesque! But it’s faaaaaaar from the core of the issue. Men can be/are misogynistic way before they get a girl in bed consensually… like I said in another reply, very inefficient, like ice on broken leg.
It’s funny because your religion is deeply misogynistic too and that is blatant even in the cringe commandments.
I’m not Christian/Catholic/Trinitarian, I just mentioned the commandments because they stand on their own and they’re closer to the West…
So close that they shaped the patriarchal society we live in.
No, thanks.
The “patriarchy” is not why women are mistreated and porn is rampant… What kind of father wants his daughter to be abused or become a prostitute?! Your framework is all wonky and the words are all wrong.
Patriarch != father
Today you learned.
I mean, if we’re doing doublethink with basic words what else can I say, lol.
What world is it that you live in? Maybe trump didn’t want his daughters to become prostitutes, but that didn’t stop him and many other men with daughters to abuse children younger or the same age as their own daughters. Maybe if you spent some time in the real world, and less in a magical one; you could see that many things exist in it.
Because of the “patriarchy”? What are we talking about here?
I can’t help you. Maybe read a book.
You are welcome.
Probably the same fathers and mothers who
momentsmolest their children, sell them to pay for bills and drugs and anything else.Let’s not pretend other religions’ adherents don’t also indulge in/participate in/create porn, human trafficking, and other horrific abuses of adults and children. From Buddhists to taoists to Hindus and monotheists and everyone else.
And to keep it fair, even atheists.
Human beings make mistakes and are sinful/antisocial at times, of course, but not every sociocultural group condones, excuses and even legalises these failures of character.
When it keeps happening by people in positions of an authority, it’s a pattern of abuse, not a mistake. And predators are really good at masking and positioning as authority figures or other power positions.
I’m not sure if your arguments are conditioning/naïveté, gaslighting, plain ignorance, or gaslighting, but they sound a lot like abusers I’ve encountered, inside societal institutions. I invite you to reflect rather than deflect and excuse the inexcusable.