this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
410 points (96.4% liked)

World News

51357 readers
2156 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MudMan@fedia.io 178 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Waaay better than the porn bans and online age verification schemes, honestly.

I question why this is just for "children who show mysoginistic behavior", though. Sex ed should be universal, and this should be a major part of sex ed.

I assume the fear here is parents complaining about their kids being talked about porn, which may end up being a larger underlying issue than the porn itself. I guess you just have to trust that education professionals handle the opportunity well and this doesn't become a stern talking to for problem kids, which is likely to do as much as stern talking tos have done historically.

[–] sleen@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 day ago

I agree, at least they're actually focusing on an actual real world issue that widely impacts individuals. It is to point out, the highlight that only boys are talked about it - is oddly counter intuitive. If equality is the issue, then single sided efforts are going to further reinforce negative stereotypes.

And the point about sex-ed, is that it should be mandatory in education - it is a science like all and it prepares older children for when they become teenagers. Even so, stereotypical differences could be abolished if sexuality was formally talked in schools - after all we are all human, no matter what we have under there.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 55 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Is porn really behind the misogyny? What about the tards in the so-called "manosphere" saying all sorts of crazy and immoral shit? Those have more reach than whatever extremely weird pornography is supposed to be at fault. Is this what not being able to say "this is objectively wrong/right" because of Western moral relativism leads to?

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 75 points 2 days ago (17 children)

It's in the article and it's very good. You should read it.

Preventing young men being harmed by “manosphere” influencers such as Andrew Tate.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Thing is the specific guy we're all thinking of ran a porn company. One with little consent.

I do think porn is a symptom not a cause and targetting it wont actually help. Mistreatment of women wasnt exactly rare in say the 50s, even if it wasnt filmed for money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago (18 children)

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?

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 21 points 2 days ago (9 children)

"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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (7 children)

that’s porn
it’s not real life

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 38 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

might as well tell them about the pickup artist grifters too, these are probably the primary source of that misogyny, i feel like porn is adjacent to this.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I personally feel that porn more than likely has fuck all to do with it and that this is part of a broader crusade against sex by the British government.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

trying to deflect from the actual sources, the right wing grifters, and pickupartists, if you go back far enough it ends up with foreign individual funding all of this and any right wing legislation.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Not shocked.

One day porn addiction was a thing suffered by... no one? A very small group of people? However many people there were that legitimately gooned such that their life was negatively impacted and couldn't stop.

Then it was fucking everyone, everywhere, and watching porn at all meant you were a depraved addict. And deviation from the sexual norm for a man - porn addict. Any non vanilla sex interests? Porn addict. Difficulty orgasming? Porn addict.

It came out of fucking nowhere. Nobody sees the agenda behind this shit, they just accept it. Media literacy is borderline nonexistent.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Children as young as 11 who demonstrate misogynistic behaviour will be taught the difference between pornography and...

You are correct sir.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] horn_e4_beaver@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean this sounds entirely sensible.

But I do worry what a bureaucratic system is likely to decide a normal relationship looks like won't capture reality either.

[–] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hopefully they use it as a lesson in consent. And leave it at that.

I don't know enough about England's politics to form an opinion on how they will actually end up botching it, but I feel like it's going to be botched.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 31 points 18 hours ago (7 children)

This is going to backfire hard. Kids aren't stupid, they know when they're looked down upon. These classes are going to be rejected by the boys who end up taking them, and they'll resent what it stands for.

It reminds me of the US back in the 80s when schools pushed abstinence extremely hard. That didn't stop kids from having sex, and this won't stop misogyny.

The only way schools can contribute meaningfully to ending sexism is by providing a safe environment that requires young boys and girls to actually interact with each other in natural and healthy ways outside of class time.

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 10 points 18 hours ago

Kinda like how DARE taught us what all the drugs looked like, how to spot fakes, and how to find the dealers?

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (2 children)

yep. nothing makes kids resent you more than being condescending to them or telling them something is horrible and bad and will corrupt them.

this puritanism nonsense makes zero sense. sex education should be about the facts of sex. not value judgements about waht is 'good' porn or not. and female students should be included. this notion that 'women don't watch porn' is completely nonsense.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 6 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

After reading the article, it seems like there's a lot more to this than just classes for boys. I struggle to draw the same comparison to 80s abstinence-only sex education, and I think schools can contribute in more ways than the one you listed, like the ones mentioned in the article.

[–] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 6 points 15 hours ago

Are we reading the same things? Here are some quotes from the article that I found problematic:

Children as young as 11 who demonstrate misogynistic behaviour will be taught the difference between pornography and real relationships

They're trying to pin porn as the cause of misogyny and that's really stupid for a variety of reasons.

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.

See, these classes are not meant to be a part of the normal sex ed curriculum where they're taught to everybody because the information is valuable. They're specifically meant to be punitive. The idea is to signal out kids and force them to take these classes as a consequence.

To out of touch activists, this sounds good, but in reality the kids who are being sent there are going to feel humiliated in front of their peers, and they're going to resent both the material being taught and the system that put them through it.

Keir Starmer, announcing the strategy, said: “Every parent should be able to trust that their daughter is safe at school, online and in her relationships. But too often toxic ideas are taking hold early and going unchallenged.”

This is a theme that's echoed in the entire article, and it is also reflected in the actual strategy. I could've quoted a bunch of different statements, but I specifically chose this one because it's coming from the top. You have the PM here pushing the false idea that only girls can be victims and that boys are the problem.

The much-trailed strategy is expected to focus on three pillars:

  • Preventing young men being harmed by “manosphere” influencers such as Andrew Tate.

Are you kidding me? The "manosphere" is an online slang term, Andrew Tate is a meme. How can you possibly draft policies in general, let alone ones about education, on something so vague, unsubstantiated, and unacademic?

The point is that if the entire curriculum was taught like normal sex ed where it's apolitical, fact based, and required to be taken by all students because it contains useful information that they need to know then there wouldn't be an issue. However, that's not the case. It is narrative driven, it is not entirely fact based, and it's not applied to all students across the board. The whole thing just seems unprincipled and poorly thought out. This strategy looks like something planned by radfem weirdos on Reddit, not by people who are in charge of the education system of an entire country.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 5 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (10 children)

Schools should focus on facts. Not political narratives about the evils of pornography necessarily leading to misogyny and sexual assault or that they are all 'manosphere influenced' until prove otherwise. that kind of mentality is some witch-hunt bullshit.

Porn is also incredibly diverse its content. Like video games, or comics, it's treated as if it was this singular mass of crassness and crudeness and could never have any redemptive value. There is a vast difference between sexual assault fetish commercially produced porn and a loving couple who just wants to share tehir passion for sexual pleasure with each other with the world and make a few bucks on onlyfans. And the former is a dying breed.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

“Can’t talk now lads, I’m off to porn class!”

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t think porn is to blame for that, rather social media but at least there’s learning.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

I think the problem is not just porn...... Maybe... Also society, systemically? Maybe also the parents? Television, Internet culture, business culture, religion, oh yeah, also RELIGION.

You know what stops misogyny? Education and real leadership. Not blaming pornography and kids not knowing the difference between ~~music~~ ~~movies~~ ~~videogames~~ porn and reality.

[–] SkabySkalywag@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago

Hate to say it, but this reminds me of that Monty python Meaning of Life sketch about the John Cleese teaching bored kids about sex

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 7 points 13 hours ago

I thought they blocked all the kids from watching porn. How are they going to know what they're talking about in these classes?

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Sad that it is required and that parents are unwilling to do it

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I think it is overall a good thing that the UK is trying to make some progress. It is disappointing that it’s come to teaching 11 year olds about pornography.

As much as porn may be a factor, there’s a lot more beyond that single factor that is involved - reminiscent of video games causing mass shootings.

Parenting and parental examples are a huge component of teaching kids to be responsible adults. When I was a kid, parental controls if they existed were a challenge that I worked on learning to circumvent (and I learned a lot about computers), but today they’re pretty bulletproof. But parents don’t use them at all. There’s not even an attempt made to limit screen time or exposure to pornography.

It’s not just parents of course; tech companies are absolutely responsible as well. It’s a complex issue.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] sircac@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The healthiest thing is a decent sexual education to tackle all the topics rather than only this issue in these cases... but very welcome anyway

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (10 children)

No mention of what behavior they are talking about, misogyny is a pretty wide and often vague subject. It's almost like we're not supposed to know the details so we can't decide for ourselves if the behaviors need 'correcting' instead of taking their word at a claim of misogyny alone.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] IRemember@lemmings.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (8 children)

Why doesn't the British government tackle their organizational transphobia problem first?

Oh what about Prince Andrew, how many girls did he do worse too? Maybe arrest him while you're at it.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago

I guess one good thing will come of this porn panic in England.

Still think there's a lot better things the labour government could be doing with their massive majority.

[–] pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I doubt that the cause of misogyny in 11 year old boys is porn. I'm happy they're trying something, I just hope it doesn't backfire

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›