Are Britain’s children living in a society defined by sex and sleaze? Some MPs seem to think so. Seeing a young girl wearing a crop top or heeled shoes might make you think: “Don’t they grow up quickly these days?” Hearing her singing about being excited by chains and whips might make you think we have a problem. This week, the Government unveiled the Bailey Report, which demands an end to the sexualisation of children. The focus of the recommendations is heavily on the way women are portrayed in advertising, music videos and in magazines. The proposals, which David Cameron is said to be “acting on”, were made by Reg Bailey, the chief executive of the Christian charity, the Mothers’ Union.
Tory MP Nadine Dorries joined the debate on Radio 4’s Today. Her recent and contentious Private Member’s Bill on teaching abstinence to children caused upset among feminists – as have her speeches on abortion rights. Her input on how young girls being influenced by push-up bras and bottom shaking have been met by similar heckles. Dorries’ interest in intervening in people’s sex lives and the sexualisation of young people shows the weakness of the argument of the Christian right and its illiberal nature. Before leaving office, Labour commissioned television psychologist Dr Linda Papadopoulos to report on the sexualisation of children. Although the report’s recommendations were never implemented, there was a clear difference in its findings.
Whereas the Bailey Report suggests that children are becoming more aware of sex at a younger age, the 2010 Home Office report found that exposure to suggestive advertising and imagery could be linked to an increase in violence towards women. It said that the “drip drip” effect of exposure distorts boys’ expectations of females and makes them more macho and domineering. The lack of focus on the consequences of access to pornography and sexual imagery limits the grasp that the Government can have on regulating the media and retail sector.
The Tory proposals, many of which have a family-oriented theme, make it easy to see why the Prime Minister is pushing them. The introduction of a “modesty shield” to cover the front of so called “lads mags” is used in America, but has moved beyond hiding the assets of models. The birth of Elton John and David Furnish’s first child by a surrogate mother last year was well documented in celebrity magazines in Britain and in the United States. Having received complaints about the portrayal of two men holding a baby, the manager of a grocery store in Arkansas decided to use a plastic “family shield” to censor the front of the US Weekly magazine.
The suggestion was also made of tightening the rules over which broadcasting regulator Ofcom presides. The current 9pm watershed has been criticised by many on the right – with the Daily Mail railing against the regulator after a particularly explosive episode of The X Factor. More than 2,000 people complained after the singer Rihanna performed on stage. Ofcom’s rebuke of the Mail’s anti-sleaze campaign – saying the dance routine had contained “some gentle thrusting of the buttocks” – could actually give that campaign extra ammunition.
The Advertising Standards Authority, has asked to regulate where adverts using sexual imagery are placed. The report’s recommendation to keep such ads away from schools and nurseries fails to explain what effect this may have, other than stop children seeing such images. A new Government website will give parents the opportunity to report adverts or any other media that they find “inappropriate”. While middle-class parents may be able to limit the images that bombard their children, the policy leaves the most vulnerable open to representations that psychologists have said encourage violence against women.
