this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
345 points (96.5% liked)

World News

51337 readers
2169 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

What’s the weird restriction?

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Their parameters for deciding who gets instruction & method for deciding who meets those parameters.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 0 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I mean surely pupils who aren’t displaying misogyny aren’t appropriate candidates for an anti-misogyny behavioural course?

I may need the signpost in flashing neon here.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Because teachers are excellent, impartial, objective judges for deciding this & they're all equally skilled and not at all inconsistent as a group?

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

That wasn’t the part I was querying, I was asking about the “weird” restrictions.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Poor objectivity of a restriction by unreliable judges is part of the restriction. Also, restricting instruction to "demonstrated misogynistic behavior" whatever that means as if the people who need it will necessarily demonstrate that need in a way the teachers recognize.

Is your incredible lack of imagination willful or do teachers in the UK operate at an entirely different level of reliability than elsewhere such that lapses due to poor judgement are unlikely?

[–] Isolde@lemmy.world 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, you’re right. The only being who should teach the world’s children about anything is the omnipotent entity that we most definitely have. This entity is without bias, without error, and with perfect judgment. The rest of us are just humans, I guess we don’t get to decide what would help children and try to implement that. Apologies.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

(I think their point was that it should be taught unilaterally instead of used as a punishment because the teachers administering the punishment could be overly sensitive, overly passive, or even directly weaponize it.)

Tbf that argument is not without it's merits, that might be better, in addition to being harder to abuse it as a punishment, it also wouldn't limit it to witnessed/reported misogynists, and teaching it to even young women could help them have the courage to call it out when encountered or even just recognize it, or even help with internalized misogyny. Idk, sounds good to me.

[–] Isolde@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

I agree it’s not a punishment. It should be a lesson and everyone should have it in their toolbox to have as adults.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 points 12 hours ago

This isn’t about teaching it, that would presumably be covered for all. This is about a behavioural course which is something very different.