Having unusually - these days anyway - found myself in a van between 9 and 10 this morning (half term and all that), I managed to catch part of a phone-in on Radio 5 Live. Now, these things are generally quite off-the-wall affairs and, yes, I know you shouldn't take much of it seriously.
The subject was today's brow-furrowing over 'child sexualisation'. Yes, you can imagine.
While it may be true that there are some extremes, I really can't subscribe to this view that societal collapse is imminent because Rihanna prances around in hot pants or that there are a few (and yes, only a very few) dodgy fashion items being marketed for kids.
But that's not the point I'm intending to argue here. What was deeply weep-inducing was the attitude of those calling in. After hearing one after another screeching about "kids wearing short skirts in the High Street" and "buying high heels", I was already sighing while wondering what on Earth it had to do with them what other kids (or, indeed, parents) did.
It was then that a quite extraordinary exchange occurred between the Mail's Sonia Poulton and Sean Gabb of the Libertarian Alliance. I do urge you to listen to it here from 41 minutes in. Or just click below for those reading beyond seven days.
Poulton came to the table already either whacked up on caffeine or just naturally aggressive. Within the first minute she had dismissed as 'deluded' anyone who disagreed with her stance and set out a stall as some kind of unassailable expert. Gabb came over calm by contrast.
However, while Poulton was waxing hysterical about how we needed controls for "our children", Gabb challenged her. Exactly as he should. "Our children?", he said, "you look after your children, I'll look after mine". The result was as predictable as it was shrill.
From then on, Poulton issued insults; demanded people who held that view "be quiet"; refused to debate; and became madder the more it was insisted that others might not share her opinion. She embarrassed herself by asserting that she knew - knew no less - that Gabb wasn't a parent simply because he believed other people's kids were not hers to control, and when the host revealed that Gabb was indeed a parent, simply called him names and became even more insulting.
This, sadly - in fact, soul-destroyingly - is modern Britain. A place packed full of arrogant people who feel it perfectly acceptable to interfere in every aspect of the lives of others. If you disagree, or resist, they will shout and scream; make a call to their own delusional authority; and denounce you as a heretic or anti-social abuser.
I'm a parent too, and am terrified that someone like Poulton claims to have any kind of input into how my kids are brought up. I'm trying my hardest to make sure they are independent, the best they can be, and respectful of those around them. If they ended up as nosy, self-aggrandising, bad-mannered, and intolerant to others as Poulton, I'd be horrified.
Unfortunately, while we have this rather tired debate raging about child sexualisation - which hasn't changed much in tone since Victorians were appalled by ankles, those in the 50s were disgusted by Elvis's hips, and the easily-scandalised were shocked by Frankie Goes To Hollywood - no-one seems to be caring much about hideous mares like Poulton.
We used to have a few of these prodnoses dotted around, but they're everywhere now. Self-aggrandising, aloof, condescending of others, and entirely dismissive of choices different from their own.
Put this latest over-wrought moral panic to one side for a minute. Let's instead try to investigate why we have an army of shrieking curtain-twitchers who insist on getting involved in everyone else's life as well as their own.
Now that's something that government should be doing if it cared for society, instead of encouraging the most objectionable to forcibly dictate their own personal gripes on the rest of us ... as they seem to do at every turn nowadays.
It's none of their piggin' business.
25 comments:
"I have the right to interfere in your life and to tell you how to behave because that is in the interests of ."
OK, how about:
"If you interfere in my life and tell me how to behave, I have the right to apply whole pineapple as forcefully as is necessary to relax those apparently hypertight sphincter muscles. This is in the interests of everyone."
"This, sadly - in fact, soul-destroyingly - is modern Britain. A place packed full of arrogant people who feel it perfectly acceptable to interfere in every aspect of the lives of others."
Fantastic quote! I would even go as far as calling this my quote of the year.
Ha! Thanks for that, DP. I had a good chuckle listening to it. Squirmed a bit in fascinated horror at some of her utterances though - it was a bit like the morbid appeal of a big accident.
Lord, that woman is like something out of my worst nightmare! Thank heavens my two daughters weren't subjected to a parent like that. At least they had a chance to grow up to be independent, self-reliant, polite and articulate.
Shrill doesn't even begin to describe her. She epitomises everything that is going wrong in society today. The abrogation of responsibility for the upbringing of your child in favour of state intervention. The thought of that spittle flecked harridan having any influence over any child (including her own) fills me with horror. How Mr Gabb maintained his equilibrium I'll never know.
And of course, he was right on the nail. "Our cheeldren" were merely a proxy for a desire to control their parents. And it's people of her ilk who swell the ranks of TC, with their identikit chant: "Think of the cheeldren..." Same mindless shite.
It's going to be a long haul, DP, while we've got lunatics like that running the asylum...
Sounds like a plan. :)
Ta, Tony. Shame it has to be said at all, mind.
I must admit to wishing I was out and about more often rather than in the office if this is the kind of stuff going on over the airwaves.
Give Nicky Campbell his due, he is very good at teasing out extremists. Who, for example, can ever forget this?
http://soundcloud.com/dick-puddlecote/die
If you listen very carefully to the recording, I swear you can hear him suppress a laugh when Poulton gets so agitated that she calls Gabb a clown and appeals pathetically to Campbell for help. :)
Excellent write up DP.
Shh! Don't tell ASH, but perhaps this quote about Sonia's eternal guilt will explain it all:
"So far my daughter appears to have been spared from my selfish actions,
but who knows how it will affect her later in life? I am bereft with
guilt but I cannot change the past. I can only hope for the future." - Sonia Poulton
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1290135/I-admit-I-smoked-500-cigarettes-I-pregnant--Sonia-Poulton-reveals-dark-secret.html
more here
http://www.121doc.co.uk/news/sonia-poulton-on-pregnancy-smoking-struggle-4639.html
Having just been to a really enjoyable Jubilee street party in my locality, I’m pleased to report that the opening event of the party – a kids’ fancy dress competition – was peppered with a large number of spacemen, fairies, zombies, and miniature members of the Royal family but with not a miniskirt or a pair of high heels in sight. So where, exactly, are all these over-sexualised children that Ms Poulton seems to think are prowling the streets like mini-Lolitas in every town in the land?
I'm not so much in favour of the "The Gov must do something" school of thought, but rather a "Society in general should set boundaries" as to what's considered morality.
Case in point, must be about 6 years ago a neighbours young girl of about maybe 7 or 8 came in the pub one sunday afternoon wearing a T-shirt with like a Kellogs cornflakes cockeral on the front with the words (I'm paraphrasing here) "There's nothing like a big cock in the morning".
Now this might be mildly amusing on our lasses nightie, but on 7 year old girls, I think it's a tad inappropriate.
It was pointed out to parents, and their reaction was one of "Yeah but it's cute". To which I pointed out that would they still think it "Cute" if some lorry driver were to take her into his cab and introduced her to "Mr Wobbler"? Also should he get his collar felt, he then turn around in court and say "She was asking for it dressed like that"? Would you still think it was "Cute"?
I don't think thongs, boob tubes and mini skirts are appropriate for 3 year olds, fucks sake, I wouldn't let my daughters out the house dressed like that when they were 15.
You're welcome mate, often I say the same thing but cannot seem to articulate it nowhere near as sweetly as you did there. :-)
It sure is a shame it had to be said but it's only going to get worse too, I find myself pining for the good old days (80's and to some extent the 90's) more and more each day. A bygone era when by-and-large we were allowed to think for ourselves without all these gibbering imbeciles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiBuZan2KLo&feature=player_embedded
Posted by a UDBU contributor,"Don't you worry about me, worry about what you do!"
I KNEW that to let Mary Shite....na, what was it now??? Ahh, WHITEhouse and Lord Longford breed together was a bloody bad idea.
Now the world is FULL of their bastard offspring.
LOL! I really enjoyed that!
Libetarianism is on the rise as it speaks the truth...
I'm not so much in favour of the "The Gov must do something" school of thought, but rather a "Society in general should set boundaries" as to what's considered morality. Case in point, must be about 6 years ago a neighbours young girl of about maybe 7 or 8 came in the pub one sunday afternoon wearing a T-shirt with like a Kellogs cornflakes cockeral on the front with the words (I'm paraphrasing here) "There's nothing like a big cock in the morning". Now this might be mildly amusing on our lasses nightie, but on 7 year old girls, I think it's a tad inappropriate. It was pointed out to parents, and their reaction was one of "Yeah but it's cute". To which I pointed out that would they still think it "Cute" if some lorry driver were to take her into his cab and introduced her to "Mr Wobbler"? Also should he get his collar felt, he then turn around in court and say "She was asking for it dressed like that"? Would you still think it was "Cute"? I don't think thongs, boob tubes and mini skirts are appropriate for 3 year olds, fucks sake, I wouldn't let my daughters out the house dressed like that when they were 15.
I'm not so much in favour of the "The Gov must do something" school of thought, but rather a "Society in general should set boundaries" as to what's considered morality. Case in point, must be about 6 years ago a neighbours young girl of about maybe 7 or 8 came in the pub one sunday afternoon wearing a T-shirt with like a Kellogs cornflakes cockeral on the front with the words (I'm paraphrasing here) "There's nothing like a big cock in the morning". Now this might be mildly amusing on our lasses nightie, but on 7 year old girls, I think it's a tad inappropriate. It was pointed out to parents, and their reaction was one of "Yeah but it's cute". To which I pointed out that would they still think it "Cute" if some lorry driver were to take her into his cab and introduced her to "Mr Wobbler"? Also should he get his collar felt, he then turn around in court and say "She was asking for it dressed like that"? Would you still think it was "Cute"? I don't think thongs, boob tubes and mini skirts are appropriate for 3 year olds, fucks sake, I wouldn't let my daughters out the house dressed like that when they were 15.
Ahh, but you're using your adult mind into the body of a little girl. The girl will not be thinking about anything other than the cockerl was cute. Children have a totally different view on the world from adults. We see nasty things, they'll see cute things.
That's why a lot of children's comedy will multiple levels of humour. Some for the kids, and others for the parents. And the children will not understand the adult humour.
Were we need to teach them is to ensure that the very small number of cute things are really dangerous. So there should be no problem talking to strangers which are naturally scary to children, but warn them about strangers or try and persude them to do things.
Ah, you'd like this one, then:
http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/06/07/engrish-shirts/engrish-shirt-20/
This is worth a look /watch - Aussie but sane....
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/6/6/the-forbidden-history-of-unpopular-people.html
That was embedded in the article before this one, M. ;)
Must tweak the Tardis up
Pointless waiting for the Libertarians to sort out the Nanny Levellers,
basically an invisible legion of Keyboard Wizards and La Las
Often read,seldom heard never seen.
Street Urchin
Hearing this confirms my view regarding the BBC. Local BBC radio had the same topic up for discussion. A memo must go out: Sexualisation today, smokers tomorrow and over the weekend we will return to the evil drink with dog licences on Monday. That shrill awful bullying woman will remain deaf to any concept of true debate.
For anyone to not realise that to control/manage "the sexualisation of children" is inescapably the control of adults exhibits either imbecility or utter disingenuousness.
She conveniently conflates erotica with "Gaga Lady" or whomsoever she was referring to.
Erotica is the chess game in The Thomas Crown Affair.
Ban children from watching that? How evil and oppressive to deny them such a thing! The moment they work out what is going on is precisely the point at which they become ready to cope with it.
"When you knew that it was over; You were suddenly aware; That the autumn leaves were turning; to the colour...of her hair".
FILTH! I tell you!
Imbecility, I'd say.
Post a Comment