Council bans anyone recording school children
December 17, 2000 5:25 PM Subscribe
Council bans anyone recording school children...due to possible paedophilia. AHAHAHAaaa hahahahaahaaa haa. Oh where was I? Oh that's right [more inside]
Jesus! Everyone takes things too far these days! I have great contempt for almost all school boards. I do have to join holloway in his laughter.
ahahahhahahahha hah hahahaha ha.
posted by bytecode at 6:49 PM on December 17, 2000
ahahahhahahahha hah hahahaha ha.
posted by bytecode at 6:49 PM on December 17, 2000
Yeah, the ban (and the general paranoia about paedophila) are absolutely ridiculous. But I have to say, the obsession parents seem to have over videotaping every waking moment of their kids' lives creeps me out too. A while back, I drove past an elementary school on the first day of classes, and was just shocked at the swarm of parents with videocams. Do these people ever see their kids other than through a viewfinder?
posted by harmful at 7:41 PM on December 17, 2000
posted by harmful at 7:41 PM on December 17, 2000
okay, that means that recording of sports games is illegal. I hear they're a big part of your american lives (judging solely by king of the hill).
posted by starduck at 7:43 PM on December 17, 2000
posted by starduck at 7:43 PM on December 17, 2000
judging solely by king of the hill
This explains so much of our foreign relations.
posted by harmful at 8:12 PM on December 17, 2000
This explains so much of our foreign relations.
posted by harmful at 8:12 PM on December 17, 2000
Um, why exactly is this rediculous?
Children should never be videotaped on school grounds without the consent of their parents. Unless the parents of every student involved in the play, sporting event, etc. give that consent, it shouldn't be allowed.
Indeed, anyone can attend school sponsored events - not just parents. I would be more comfortable knowing that my child wasn't falling prey to a paedophile (you know, I really do love British spellings).
Perhaps a solution is to set up a formal taping of each event while at the same time preventing individuals from bringing in their own cameras. That way, parents could preserve their precious moments while at the same time protecting their children from being taken advantage of.
Regardless, this is a good idea, and I'd support it fully were local school boards here to propose a similar measure.
posted by aladfar at 9:17 PM on December 17, 2000
Children should never be videotaped on school grounds without the consent of their parents. Unless the parents of every student involved in the play, sporting event, etc. give that consent, it shouldn't be allowed.
Indeed, anyone can attend school sponsored events - not just parents. I would be more comfortable knowing that my child wasn't falling prey to a paedophile (you know, I really do love British spellings).
Perhaps a solution is to set up a formal taping of each event while at the same time preventing individuals from bringing in their own cameras. That way, parents could preserve their precious moments while at the same time protecting their children from being taken advantage of.
Regardless, this is a good idea, and I'd support it fully were local school boards here to propose a similar measure.
posted by aladfar at 9:17 PM on December 17, 2000
Aladfar. Lets take the morals of this law and extend them to being in town or walking down the street - to protect kids from the paedophile. If I'm a parent (i'm not) and my kid is playing with others - do I have to get permission to record my kid playing with others on school grounds?
Apparently so.
Furthermore da law sez: "Only in exceptional circumstances - such as national awards - should a school publish a photograph of an individual pupil."
So no longer are we going to have a photo of little Betty-sue, who has sold the most crockery? bah. silly silly.
Some paedophile might go home and jerk-off thinking about your children - or take a photo from the newspaper and photoshop (tool of the paedophile!) it out of context. This will happen as long as there are paedophiles and, really, it's an unfortunate piece of life. Images can be manipulated in sexual situations by all kinds of people, not just paedophiles - this isn't a new idea. Quite frankly though, it's their (mental) problem.
Kuro5hin had a wonderful story on this several months ago. Do read, chums.
ps. couldn't agree more about kodak moment parents, Mr Harmful.
posted by holloway at 9:57 PM on December 17, 2000
Apparently so.
Furthermore da law sez: "Only in exceptional circumstances - such as national awards - should a school publish a photograph of an individual pupil."
So no longer are we going to have a photo of little Betty-sue, who has sold the most crockery? bah. silly silly.
Some paedophile might go home and jerk-off thinking about your children - or take a photo from the newspaper and photoshop (tool of the paedophile!) it out of context. This will happen as long as there are paedophiles and, really, it's an unfortunate piece of life. Images can be manipulated in sexual situations by all kinds of people, not just paedophiles - this isn't a new idea. Quite frankly though, it's their (mental) problem.
Kuro5hin had a wonderful story on this several months ago. Do read, chums.
ps. couldn't agree more about kodak moment parents, Mr Harmful.
posted by holloway at 9:57 PM on December 17, 2000
My girlfriend's brother had to go and photograph a London school recently because he's an architect. So he went up on the roof and started taking some pictures. The kids in the playground spotted him and, when he was coming down again, they all surrounded him chanting "Paedo! Paedo! Paedo!"
He said he felt fairly unnerved.
posted by Mocata at 3:39 AM on December 18, 2000
He said he felt fairly unnerved.
posted by Mocata at 3:39 AM on December 18, 2000
When people attack a p(a)edatrician because they're in a panic over p(a)edophiles, then matters have reached the level of a witch hunt. I believe the situation is ridiculous because I think the panic is vastly out of proportion to the real occurrence of pedophilia.
posted by harmful at 7:17 AM on December 18, 2000
posted by harmful at 7:17 AM on December 18, 2000
Does anyone see parallels to the Satanic ritual abuse hysteria of the 1980s?
posted by snarkout at 8:49 AM on December 18, 2000
posted by snarkout at 8:49 AM on December 18, 2000
The solution is clear: ritual blinding of every human once they reach the age of eighteen. No pervert shall eyeball our precious little treasures (TM).
Can anyone else hear the shrill cries of Mrs. Lovejoy? "Won't somebody think of the children?"
posted by Skot at 9:24 AM on December 18, 2000
Can anyone else hear the shrill cries of Mrs. Lovejoy? "Won't somebody think of the children?"
posted by Skot at 9:24 AM on December 18, 2000
As far as I've read, the entire nation of Britain has gone nuts with the paedophilia fears recently. The incidence of paedophilia there is no more substantial than in the United States or any modern nation. As someone mentioned, a paedeitrician was run out of his town and threatened when people got the word confused with paedophile.
To show even more evidence of mass hysteria (psychosomatic hysteria, I believe, is the official term), in Nova Scotia earlier this year, there was a panic over fragrances and perfumes causing allergies in huge amounts of the populations (of course it ended up to be entirely placebo), and in Turkey, they banned some TV show because 2 kids jumped out their window because they felt they could fly.
Some more American psychosomatic concerns: entertainment media causing violence (Japan has a far lower crime rate despite having more violent and sexual entertainment), genetically engineered food being unhealty (no one has *ever* gotten sick from genetically engineered food, ever), and cell phones causing tumors (2 reports this month, including one from the NiH, have proved this to be untrue, even for heavy users over a 5 year period).
Someone needs to tell the English: hysteria doesn't solve problems. Good examples beget good examples. Getting rid of pictures of kids won't reduce paedophilia any more than getting rid of guns in Pakistan will reduce anti-government sentiment.
Ridiculous.
Peace,
Kevs
posted by Kevs at 10:18 PM on December 20, 2000
To show even more evidence of mass hysteria (psychosomatic hysteria, I believe, is the official term), in Nova Scotia earlier this year, there was a panic over fragrances and perfumes causing allergies in huge amounts of the populations (of course it ended up to be entirely placebo), and in Turkey, they banned some TV show because 2 kids jumped out their window because they felt they could fly.
Some more American psychosomatic concerns: entertainment media causing violence (Japan has a far lower crime rate despite having more violent and sexual entertainment), genetically engineered food being unhealty (no one has *ever* gotten sick from genetically engineered food, ever), and cell phones causing tumors (2 reports this month, including one from the NiH, have proved this to be untrue, even for heavy users over a 5 year period).
Someone needs to tell the English: hysteria doesn't solve problems. Good examples beget good examples. Getting rid of pictures of kids won't reduce paedophilia any more than getting rid of guns in Pakistan will reduce anti-government sentiment.
Ridiculous.
Peace,
Kevs
posted by Kevs at 10:18 PM on December 20, 2000
« Older George W. Bush named Time Magazine Person of the... | "Model tax legislation under study" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by holloway at 5:25 PM on December 17, 2000