Thursday, 24 July 2008

"Pool picture ban over paedophile fears"

An [82 year-old widow] was told she could not take snaps of an empty paddling pool because she might be a paedophile.

My latest blogpost: "Pool picture ban over paedophile fears"Tweet this! Posted by Mark Wadsworth at 10:08

Labels: , , , ,

8 comments:

Bill Quango MP said...

If its private she can't without permission.
If its public she can take as many as she likes.

24 July 2008 at 13:35
Anonymous said...

Almost like the two old dears from Harry Enfield and Chums...

"Oooh Young Man, would you like to paddle in my pool?"
"Young Man!"

24 July 2008 at 14:45
Gregg said...

Problem is political correctness is so 'non-judgemental' and simplistic that people have lost the ability to look, discriminate and decide. In other words they are scared to judge and always take action 'just-in-case'.

24 July 2008 at 17:00
malpas said...

Compared with the 50s you all have such fears and enforced beliefs that back then you would all be considered barmy.
can't take photos of children/ can't say anything who is a diversity/ mustn't offend anyone/criminals are victims.
well ,yes , you are all potty.

25 July 2008 at 08:20
Anonymous said...

Actually, Bill, it might not be as simple as that. The local authority is entitled to set a 'no photography' rule at their facilities, although it is nearly impossible to enforce. Most indoor swimming pools already have a sign up to that effect. It is there to show the council is covering its backside by taking all reasonable child protection measures. The council worker was pretty daft to worry about it when there were no children on site, though, but they've probably had it dinned in to them that 'nobody is allowed to take photos because of child protection' - which is technically true.

I do some crowd management in the voluntary sector at events. While parents and grand parents are the first to yell - rightly - about the primacy of child protection, they are also the first ones out there with the cameras when it has been explained to them a dozen times that:

a) Flash photography is very upsetting for the little performers, so please would they not do it.

b) They can't video it as they don't have individual permission from every performer's mum and dad. They then argue that as each parent has given permission for an official video, this amounts to a permission for them to film as anyone could buy a final copy. No it doesn't, but this is a hideous argument to be having as a volunteer.

c) They wouldn't want some unknown person to take unauthorized photos of their child, so would they please not do it to anyone else. If they are allowed to, then I won't be able to stop that funny-looking bloke either. Then the parent/grandparent gets all huffy and says ‘are you calling me a paedophile’ whilst simultaneously holding that everyone else might be and where is my CRB clearance.

Good grief, exactly how much of a sicko would I have to be to get off on 300 screaming children all squabbling and having stage tantrums, followed up by various bruises where they will keep running, cut lips where they manage to fall over and smash themselves on other childrens’ tap shoes, vomiting, headaches, and tears where one squirrel has bashed another rabbit over the head with what they clearly were told were ornamental lanterns, not oriental kung fu weapons. And please, chaperones, do not let the unicyclist run over any more of the snowflake fairies; it looks bad in the accident book. Let me tell you, unless you have safety-pinned the tails on 30 squirrels in 12 minutes and only drawn your own blood instead of inadvertently puncturing a woodland creature, you don’t know what it means to sweat.

I am the ghost of Joyce Grenfell, and I’m disinclined to argue about photography so pack it in. Moosh.

26 July 2008 at 01:09
Trooper Thompson said...

Woman on a raft,

these rules that you are called to enforce are clearly ridiculous. I have no desire to enter into the mindset of deranged perverts, there is really nothing that will satiate their devilish lusts in a school play. Preventing parents from filming and then attempting to sell them a video of the same thing is merely imposing a monopoly.

Taking unnecessarily-strict action in the interest of 'child protection' normalises something which should not be allowed to be normalised. It is corrosive to society to institute rules premised on a presumption that paedophilia is commonplace.

The first step in dealing with the risk of paedophiles would be, when such people are convicted, not to let them out of jail so early.

27 July 2008 at 15:19
Mark Wadsworth said...

" ... not to let them out of jail so early."?

"... not to let them out of jail, full stop"!

My final thought was, if taking photos is legal, why would it be illegal for perverts to take photos?

As to parents videoing school plays, I find this most irritating, but each to his own.

27 July 2008 at 15:28
Trooper Thompson said...

Mark,

I'm happy with your amendment!

27 July 2008 at 16:33

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)