Tuesday, 29 March 2011

Schools, or paedo supermarkets?

I remember my schooldays (well, I was sober for most of them) and it was a pretty good time overall. There were bullies, but they were dim and easily deflected. Teachers could hit us but they had to have a good reason and in a mining town, they had to have a very good reason because most kids had fathers who looked like the Hulk on a bad-mood day. Lots of weird stuff happened but it still does and I still blunder my way through life with no plan and somehow it seems to work out fairly well, most of the time.

There was the time I was delivered home, memoryless, at around age 16 and to this day I cannot face vodka and lime. I had consumed far more than the current monthly units limit that night, but we didn't have score cards then. There was the time in the pub when conversation died, someone turned to me and said in a loud voice 'So, when are you 18, Leggy?' to which I replied 'Shut up, idiot!' The school trip to some opera or other at which four of us left during the overture to visit the gents and returned to the bus just in time, and only because the pubs were closing. Still, most of my school days were sober and slightly less bizarre than a drunken dream.

I recall Fat Ian moving forward in his seat with almost supernatural timing just before Simon the Nutter's drill broke through the back of it. Yes, when American kids took guns to school, modern kids take knives, we took power tools. There was the time Short Brad entered the dining hall just as a thunderclap struck. Everyone was impressed at his Vincent Price entrance.

The school has now been flattened. In fact, all of the places I studied and worked at have now been flattened. It's as if there's a God up there thinking 'Damn, missed the little bugger again.' Maybe there's a guy with a scythe following me around. It's something I found best to stop mentioning at job interviews, anyway.

Once, we had a sort of IQ test, but we didn't get a number. After the test we had an interview with a careers guy who was supposed to tell us what sort of job we'd be suited to. We were all in terror of being cast as 'future careers guy' because that would mean 'you are no damn use at all'. In those days, we didn't have diversity outreach officers or smoking cessation enforcers or all the other places to put the useless.

The careers guy showed me my score with hope in his eyes. Here, he thought, was at last one who could do better than sewer maintenance operative or plumber's tool-passing assistant.

"So what do you want to do with your life?" was his question.

I had no idea. Still don't. I said "I'd like to be a professional budgie breeder." My older cousin had an aviary and it appealed to me at the time. He also had no life plan and still doesn't. It seems to work for him too.

I think that was the moment I realised just how fast you could deflate someone with a few words. It still took a few years to turn that into a proper weapon, but I'm sure that was where it started.

In these enlightened times, children are no longer given sensible careers advice. Thanks to the Tiny Blur, schools expect all their little charges to go on to university or college and thus their futures are someone else's problem. Either that, or they have no future beyond benefits and Stella and can be given classes in shellsuits, Burberry, convincing Cash Converters the stuff isn't nicked and voting Labour. That's the modern version of vocational training.

Parents are no longer concerned about the quality of teaching in schools, only about whether their child is likely to come home on a school bus or in a body bag. Future careers are a secondary consideration when you have to worry about there being any future at all.

Now it seems the principal career choice offered to children is membership of Stonewall or a life dressed like Julian Clary and a career based on crude botty jokes. Children are to be questioned with 'Are you a pooftah?' at age 11.

At age 11 I had no idea what 'homosexual' meant. I was still a couple of years away from any interest in girls, in fact I still had to pass through that natural phase of experimentation with explosives and had hardly electrocuted myself at all. I was many volts away from the time of sexual awakening (and if you're 11 and are wondering, no, it's not all it's cracked up to be so have fun with the explosives and the electricity while you can).

There is something sinister in this obsession the authorities have with children and sexuality. Children have no sexuality. In my childhood, even kissing was a disgusting and unhygienic practice. It was a thing girls did to you if you weren't alert enough to get out of the way in time.

At age 11, the principal drivers of life were toy cars, plastic kits, things that went 'bang' and things that could fire something over long distances. There were no videos or electronic games in those days. We amused ourselves by finding lizards under rotting logs or finding crawlies under stones or building dams across streams or a hundred other things, none of which involved any sexual activity of any kind at all.

At that age, the dangly was urinary apparatus, nothing more, and our only interest in it was how far up the school pissoir we could wet the bricks. At the age of 11, it didn't do anything else.

Now the authorities want to know if kids like to pot the pink or the brown at age 11, when no natural child should know what the euphemisms even mean. Equality? It sounds more like the sorting of children into paedophile preferences.

If they are caught, then - unlike men accused of rape - they are granted anonymity.

I had dismissed the conspiracy theory of 'institutional paedophilia' as silly. But now I'm beginning to wonder.

There is no rational need for an eleven-year-old child to be asked about their sexual preferences when they are too young to know or care what those words mean.

Therefore, it's not for them. Therefore there is another reason.

There is no alternative reason that is palatable, but one of them must be true.

16 comments:

JuliaM said...

It's so the various quangos and pressure groups will be able to point to the numbers and say 'See! We're still relevant, so pay us more money!'

Anonymous said...

This is part of the plan by the misanthropic eugenicists to promote homosexuality, particularly male homosexuality, as a lifestyle choice. They don't generally produce children and are therefore better for the planet, cheaper to keep and all round environmentally friendly. Next step is to introduce restrictions on the number of children a woman can produce and their gender plus state control of contraceptive availability.

sounds like something out of a paranoid nightmare doesn't it. Probably is, but even paranoids have enemies.

(like the word verification- maxiases, wonderful)

Anonymous said...

Age 11, break world record in catching frogs, create lethal kneecapping slides, eat everything edible and many that were not, explode or test the burning destruction qualities of all toys.

Girls weren't invented and boys were fellow members of the Man from Uncle gang.

Span Ows said...

We played kiss-chase at primary school...but I was fast!

subrosa said...

Sorry LI, I wrote about this last night and published it this morning. Wasn't imitating honestly. :)

CIngram said...

I told my careers officer I wanted to ber a uranium prospector, because I liked the idea of spending my life up in Northern Alaska or some such place a very long way from anyone. It got quite interesting when my mother came to the interview and he went through the form with a poker face.

But what did he expect? What is the point of asking a 15-y-o what sort of office he wants to spend the rest of his life sitting in and how big he would like his mortgage to be?

kitler said...

LI you are making the commie mistake of assuming all are the same. You may not have been sexual as a child but I was playing sex games with girls from the age of 8 and became interested in boys as well from about the age of eleven.

I would never have admitted this to any adult at the time and I doubt many kids similar to me would either. Regardless of sexual orientation most kids naturally see teachers and adults in general as the enemy, who cannot be trusted with personal info lest it lead to a severe bollocking.

And for all you fuckwits who think there is a gay agenda to feminise you all or some bollocks, you are very wrong. The only agenda gays have is to fuck other gays and buy nice clothes. If you could be made to feel as excited about pink glittery things as we are, that would be nice, but its not essential to us and its certainly not important enough for us to take up politics.

Chalcedon said...

That makes me feel better. i went through an electrolysis at home phase with a transformer and two carbon electrodes. Amazing how pungent Chlorine can be.

I also would be charged under the terrorism act and locked up for my home made explosices. I was a big fan of chemistry.

I don't think I had heard the term homosexual at age 11 either.

Elby the Beserk said...

@Kitler

NO-one is blaming gays for this. They are blaming the fucking government. Chill. Do you REALLY think it is ok to question kids of 11 about their sexuality.

My kids are grown up, but had it happened to them I would have refused permission for this to happen.

Whatever happened to "none of your fucking business"?

ScienceGuy said...

For my sins I am a science teacher and I have just finished teachin reproduction to my class of Yr 7s. Most of them see members of the opposite gender as a completely different species and have no real idea of how relationships and sex work. Going out with someone is just what they do to fit in; getting beyond the point of holding hands is rare.

In science lessons all we are supposed to do is teach the plumbing but inevitably wider questions come up. Most of these are due to a wider exposure to sex in the media (trying to avoid explaining flavoured condoms is becoming an annual event).

I always give the pupils a chance to ask questions anonymous questions (mainly as they can get embarassed by other mocking their ignorance). The most common question this year was "How do lesbians have sex?", not due any concerns that they might be gay but due to a curiosity as to what is involved. At this age they find it almost impossible to conceive of anything different to their own families - asking them to label themselves as straight of gay would get almost 100% reposnse that they are straight becuase that is what is normal and what they are most used to.

Anonymous said...

Would any other adult asking 11 year olds about their sexuality not be charged with grooming? I didn't know about homosexuality then either but crushes on older same sex children is common and meaningless where future sexual preference is concerned

kitler said...

Elby, sorry sometimes I type before i get stoned and my words convey an irateness that really isn't there.

I totally agree with you that asking chidren about their sexuality is inappropriate. However i do think that the pedos with be disapointed when they discover that 11yr old kids are not generally predisposed to discussing their sexuality with adults and esspecially not teachers.

Stewart Cowan said...

I wish we had knocked about as youngsters, Leggy. You would have been three years ahead of me, but you could have taken me under your wing. You could have let me test the explosives while you were a safe distance away. I was very naive in those days.

I agree with the second comment. This isn't about "equality" but about promoting lifestyles which are not conducive to a strong, healthy society. What passes for sex education, contraception, abortion, alternative lifestyles incl. single motherhood and, of course, feminism - have all contributed to the situation where European women are no longer having the 2.11 children required to maintain the population. Some countries' birthrates are so low that unless something is done quickly, the society must end in extinction in not many generations.

You wonder why I rail against Stonewall??

Leg-iron said...

AAAAAAH!

I had a long comment in response and Blogger bloggered it up.

I'll post on the matter when I've had a smoke, a drink and a bit of a swear.

What I chiefly need now is a rubber model in the shape of Deborah Arnott that will resist biting for a time.

Leg-iron said...

Stewart - we set off the explosives with an airgun. The trigger was made of a lot of cut-off match heads and a pellet through that was enough.

Hey, we might have been insane but we weren't stupid ;)

Anonymous said...

The old image of the youngster-fancying public schoolteacher didn’t come about for nothing, did it? Any more than all those jokes about naughty vicars and priests and choirboys did - and look how grimly true so many of those turned out to be! Although I think that the teaching profession has worked hard to rid its profession of adults with paedophile tendencies, and has by and large been successful, the fact is that teaching as a field in and of itself - concerned as it is with children and young people - remains an attractive one to those people with a sexual orientation towards the immature.

I think that all that’s happened is that closet paedophiles, now largely chased from the teaching and child-care professions towards which they were previously so attracted, have simply switched to connected-but-not-directly-involved professions which see them acting as “advisors” to the teaching profession in order that they can achieve some form of vicarious satisfaction from knowing that, even if they aren’t getting the same hands-on pleasures of yesteryear, they nevertheless can have endless fun-filled fantasies from imagining young people being “initiated” by, often unknowing, others in the way that they used to be “initiated” by themselves.

opinions powered by SendLove.to