Girls, boys and harassment at school

[Tinkers]

Given the #beaswede thing, in addition to 'don't give them tea' I'd propose they could add

'If you see someone trying to give an unconscious person tea, stop them'

Or words to that effect.

[Stroller]

Excellent. I had read the blog ages ago, but wasn't aware of the animation.

I'd add additional points about having good friends and being a good friend. If someone appears drunk or drugged, don't abandon them. Put them in the recovery position if they're lying down. Stay with them. Don't take photos or videos of them yourself and don't allow anyone else to do that either. Maybe cover them with a blanket or coat. Call for help - parents or someone else's parents if they're nearby, or a couple of sober friends (or passers by) who will share supervision and help to get the person to a safe place. If anyone tries to take advantage of the situation, call security or the police immediately.

Drunkeness isn't always self-inflicted. And even if it is, good friends will watch out for each other.

[Amber]

Yes to all this but I do think eccentric makes a valid point amidst it all. Of course, of course, there must always be consent. I don't think she is suggesting otherwise.

But to allow young girls to go about in skimpy, sexily-designed outfits which leave little to the imagination is surely something mothers ought to be cautioning against - not because the girls are therefore 'asking for it' but out of pride for their own bodies, for a little consideration for those who have to look at them, and yes, sadly, to a point, for their safety - because if they are then, as I know lots of them do, offering particular 'services' to hormonal boys at parties, then they must really not be surprised if it backfires slightly. They might at the age of 11 or 12 not realise at all what it looks like to have shorts right up to your private parts and a skinny top which stops just below the nipples with a lacy black bra underneath. Someone has to tell them and have a conversation about self-respect and owning their own bodies; I think that is the job of a mother. I had the misfortune to be the confidante for a 12 year old who was s exually assaulted in a nightclub ( admissions policy, 18+). She genuinely did not know what had happened to her. It is one of the worst moments in my teaching career, having to explain to her and then help her to deal with doctors, police, and her own mother who thought she had been at a friend's house.

And as an added dimension to what must be a very nuanced debate: I have told this story on the forum before but a (GS) teacher friend had the unpleasant task of speaking to the parents of a (highly academic) girl who had been filmed by her friends at a party performing a s exual act on several boys in succession. The film had then been generously shared by her friends on social media. It was all clearly initiated by the girl, and the boys were queuing up, quite literally. The girl was probably a bit drunk. But she was also clearly very much keen to do it. The lines between abuse and consent are not always clear, and I think teaching children to respect the integrity of their own bodies and those of others is a very important job of parenting.

[Eccentric]

Very well said Amber. My sentiments entirely. As someone who has often had to help young people through trauma and had the misfortune to hear about the bad stuff. I can't say how important not only building self esteem but education and keeping our children safe is.

[Stroller]

But to allow young girls to go about in skimpy, sexily-designed outfits which leave little to the imagination is surely something mothers ought to be cautioning against

Or fathers. Or adults who care and have some influence over the child. Some mothers buy the clothes...

Someone has to tell them and have a conversation about self-respect and owning their own bodies; I think that is the job of a mother.

As above.

a (GS) teacher friend had the unpleasant task of speaking to the parents of a (highly academic) girl who had been filmed by her friends at a party performing a s exual act on several boys in succession. The film had then been generously shared by her friends on social media. It was all clearly initiated by the girl, and the boys were queuing up, quite literally. The girl was probably a bit drunk. But she was also clearly very much keen to do it.

These peers were not her friends.

The lines between abuse and consent are not always clear, and I think teaching children to respect the integrity of their own bodies and those of others is a very important job of parenting.

Agreed.

[loobylou]

I agree with everything that has been said on here. For many years we as medics have been advised that girls as young as 13 have the right to consent as long as they are deemed competent - and now everyone is aware of the massive problems of ******** exploitation and all of a sudden the parameters have changed and everyone is recognising the blurring between abuse and consent. I have been having these conversations with my students for years ("where does exploitation start? Can s.x between an 18 year old and a 14 year old every really be non-coercive when he is unlikely to stay in a relationship without s.x?") and have felt like a lone voice because political correctness (of which I am normally a fan) has been so far in one direction and has now swung very far to the other.... Consent requires understanding of the consequences which nowadays go beyond unwanted pregnancy and STIs.

I am not aware of exploitation within my dd's circle (aged 13, at a mixed school) but I am sure it exists in many schools. I have come across it in child protection cases - generally still dealt with rather badly by the schools in my limited experience.

I agree that I know a few young people who post extremely inappropriate photos in very skimpy clothes which are very provocative. They are all girls. I think they post largely in innocence, liking to look "sexy" without appreciating exactly what that means. Whilst I absolutely agree that we should be able to wear what we want without anyone taking that as an invitation, I have some sympathy with a friend who only has sons who says that she finds it very difficult to know how to teach her sons to treat women's / girls' bodies with respect when there are so many girls out there who don't treat their own bodies with respect.

I am lucky that my dd has no interest in wearing skimpy clothes. Or shaving or wearing push-up bras (one of my friends has a 13 year old who buys all her underwear in Ann S.ummers ) or anything else that I consider inappropriate. I think we are really lucky in both her and her friendship group who are all like her. But I think it is hard for parents to manage the pressures on girls, particularly when their friends are all wearing certain things or looking a certain way..

[Proud_Dad]

Can someone please clarify the issue with the Boots ad?

When I first saw the photo I have to admit, I thought everyone on here seemed to be overreacting somewhat. From what I could see it was an advert aimed at teenage girls for a razor which I would assume might be used for body areas such as legs and arm-pits. (OK you might ask why girls/women are encouraged to shave these while boys/men aren’t but its pretty much a convention in our culture and I can understand why a teenage girl might feel uncomfortable say doing PE with hairy legs)

Obviously I must have missed something though because from reading later posts it seems everyone else has taken the advert to be encouraging young girls to shave their “bikini” area. If that’s the case then I fully understand why everyone’s so against it, but just wondered how you all came to that conclusion from that ad?

(Apologies if I missed something obvious in the advert or am just being an ignorant/naïve male… )

[Amber]

Ouch PD. Sorry, don't know where to start with answering that as to me (and indeed my DH and sons) it is very obvious what is wrong with it.

I had wondered whether to paste this and several others have asked me to PM it to them so here goes - sorry, it is long. This is what I sent to the ASA. I hope that this might clarify my objections. The asterisks are what the forum does with the word s exual.

1. The girl in that photograph is maybe 13 years old. I feel very strongly that no girl of that age should be put under any kind of pressure whatsoever concerning her body image - mental health and eating disorder issues are already rife in our society and any suggestion that a girl’s worth, or ‘confidence’ as it says in the advert, is in any way linked to her appearance, is dangerous and needs to be vigorously challenged. Most girls of 13 will not have any ‘need’ to remove body hair, however that ‘need’ is defined.

2. ‘Help your teen feel confident’ - this is intended for mothers. As a mother myself, of both a daughter and sons, I know how important confidence is, and how much it is lacking in the teenage years. Mothers seeing this are being framed as caring individuals who of course want the best for their daughters - ergo, if you want your daughter to feel good about herself, help her to remove her body hair. This is a dangerous message on so many levels. If a mother thinks her young daughter needs to do this, that is the message the daughter will get - especially at the pre-or peri-pubescent stage that the girl in the photograph shows.

3. Women and girls are increasingly expected as a matter of course to remove hair from legs and underarms. This is not a new trend - which does not mean that it should not be challenged. A newer trend, however, is the expectation to remove pubic hair. Whether or not this advert is intended to facilitate that (some products in the range below are aimed at the ‘bikini line’), I am sure that young people seeing it will, as my son did, assume that to be the case. This takes things to a whole new level of discourse around ******** activity in the young, the infantilisation of female bodies for the gratification of men (which is also damaging to men, in my view), as well as ******** health: removal of pubic hair leads to an increased risk of STIs, as well as local infection arising from the procedure itself. It is about this which the ‘caring mothers’ portrayed in the advert should be informing their daughters - giving them confidence in their own bodies rather than helping them to embark upon a lifetime of depilation for the pleasure of men.

4. Stating the obvious here - the word ‘teen’ here refers solely to girls. Boys, of course, have just as many confidence issues as girls. They are not, however, under any pressure to remove signs of ******** maturity from their bodies - my son winced visibly when I said ‘how would you fancy removing your body hair?’ . There were no similar adverts about teenage boys in the shop. I think this proves that this advert is about as gender-stereotyped as it is possible to be.

Hope that helps. It is part of a discourse on gender, sexualisation of girls and body image - as well as being blatantly sexist, it is unacceptable on many levels to me. And no I am not a sandal-wearing hippy - just a normal mother.

[loobylou]

Ouch PD. Sorry, don't know where to start with answering that as to me (and indeed my DH and sons) it is very obvious what is wrong with it.

I had wondered whether to paste this and several others have asked me to PM it to them so here goes - sorry, it is long. This is what I sent to the ASA. I hope that this might clarify my objections. The asterisks are what the forum does with the word s exual.

1. The girl in that photograph is maybe 13 years old. I feel very strongly that no girl of that age should be put under any kind of pressure whatsoever concerning her body image - mental health and eating disorder issues are already rife in our society and any suggestion that a girl’s worth, or ‘confidence’ as it says in the advert, is in any way linked to her appearance, is dangerous and needs to be vigorously challenged. Most girls of 13 will not have any ‘need’ to remove body hair, however that ‘need’ is defined.

2. ‘Help your teen feel confident’ - this is intended for mothers. As a mother myself, of both a daughter and sons, I know how important confidence is, and how much it is lacking in the teenage years. Mothers seeing this are being framed as caring individuals who of course want the best for their daughters - ergo, if you want your daughter to feel good about herself, help her to remove her body hair. This is a dangerous message on so many levels. If a mother thinks her young daughter needs to do this, that is the message the daughter will get - especially at the pre-or peri-pubescent stage that the girl in the photograph shows.

3. Women and girls are increasingly expected as a matter of course to remove hair from legs and underarms. This is not a new trend - which does not mean that it should not be challenged. A newer trend, however, is the expectation to remove pubic hair. Whether or not this advert is intended to facilitate that (some products in the range below are aimed at the ‘bikini line’), I am sure that young people seeing it will, as my son did, assume that to be the case. This takes things to a whole new level of discourse around ******** activity in the young, the infantilisation of female bodies for the gratification of men (which is also damaging to men, in my view), as well as ******** health: removal of pubic hair leads to an increased risk of STIs, as well as local infection arising from the procedure itself. It is about this which the ‘caring mothers’ portrayed in the advert should be informing their daughters - giving them confidence in their own bodies rather than helping them to embark upon a lifetime of depilation for the pleasure of men.

4. Stating the obvious here - the word ‘teen’ here refers solely to girls. Boys, of course, have just as many confidence issues as girls. They are not, however, under any pressure to remove signs of ******** maturity from their bodies - my son winced visibly when I said ‘how would you fancy removing your body hair?’ . There were no similar adverts about teenage boys in the shop. I think this proves that this advert is about as gender-stereotyped as it is possible to be.

Hope that helps. It is part of a discourse on gender, sexualisation of girls and body image - as well as being blatantly sexist, it is unacceptable on many levels to me. And no I am not a sandal-wearing hippy - just a normal mother.

Amber, I think that's a brilliant letter.
The idea that confidence has to come from a particular body image is very sad. Of course confidence is linked to some extent to body image - but we should be encouraging girls to have confidence in their own healthy bodies, not upon having to meet certain societal norms.

[Proud_Dad]

Thanks for the detailed reply Amber. (hope my previous post didn't cause any offence ).

Regarding the pubic hair point, I completely agree. Its certainly wrong to encourage teenage girls to shave there for all the reasons you gave. I guess I just didn't personally pick that message up from my brief look at the advert, but that's not to say it didn't exist just because I didn't see it. So I can fully understand why you feel the need to complain about that aspect and wish you good luck with your letter.

I'd never really thought of women shaving legs and arm-pits as a s*xual thing though or them trying to "infantise their bodies for the pleasure of men" but just more of a thing some western women choose to do because they prefer the look (like colouring their head hair). In my experience anyway, they seem to do it more due to what other women think rather than men. (DW will shave her legs in the summer when she wears a dress/skirt in an office full of women but doesn't always bother in the winter when I'm the only one who sees them! ). I guess regarding the advert I imagined a teenage girl being teased by other girls for having hairy armpits/legs so didn't see anything too s*xual in it, but I do agree with you in principle that no-one should feel pressured to look a certain way.

Regarding point 4, I know beards are quite popular these days, but that's quite a recent trend. If an advert showed a Dad giving his teenage son a razor for his first shave I don't think I'd see that as pressuring boys to remove signs of s*xual maturity from their face, just advertising a product related to sustaining a standard accepted male image? Is there a difference?

Anyway, hope I'm not coming across as too contrary, just interested in your views as ever.