Good luck with that. It’s enough of a struggle to get people to stop putting actual kids in porn, and the entire concept of stepsiblings is ruined.
They say only death and taxes are certain, but everything getting sexualised has to be up there.
The complicated part will be defining what a school uniform is. “Skirt and blouse” would be a bit of an overreach, so where would be the line?
A burqa’s hemline.
Holy fuck these comments are something else.
The article specifically talks about a group of MINOR teenage students wanting to ban their school uniforms in porn because they have been sexually harassed by other people while wearing said uniforms.
Literally nobody is trying to ban what goes on between two consenting adults. This is all about teenage students not wanting to be sexualized over wearing a school uniform that they had no choice in.
I just don’t understand what exactly it is that the government could do. It would result in them have to define a school uniform and since there isn’t a standardized uniform across all schools in the UK that would become quite difficult.
Right now? The govt hasn’t done anything. Only two Parliament members so far have expressed support for their petition, and I suspect that’s only because this is gaining public attention.
Since nobody has read the article, here are the relevant points:
Aylin and Mae, both age 15, are members of their school’s Little Feminist Book Club in Bicester, Oxfordshire, England.
During a group discussion, the club learned that teenagers at other schools were trying to have the sale of school uniforms banned in sex shops.
Schoolgirl costumes are also widely used in pornographic videos.
“All of us unanimously agreed. We wanted to take it a step further; we wanted to ban school uniform from all pornography,” Aylin told DW. As a result, they started a petition to raise awareness of the issue.
Many of their fellow students, as the petition states, have already had unpleasant experiences while wearing their uniforms. Some reported being harassed as early as the age of 11. Many of these experiences had left them feeling frightened, ashamed and insecure. **“I don’t wear my school uniform outside of school,” said Mae. “I don’t like wearing it out.” **
In their petition, the girls also refer to a 2018 report by the charity Plan International. According to a survey in the report, 35% of the 1,004 respondents aged 14 to 21 had experienced unwanted sexual attention while wearing a school uniform. Eight percent said they had been filmed or photographed by a stranger without their permission, or that someone had taken a photo under their school skirt, known as “upskirting.”
In the United Kingdom, uniforms are mandatory at almost all schools and preschools, which means essentially all children between the ages of 4 to 16 wear them.
Outside school, children have no way to escape unwanted attention.
Until that happens, they still have a long way to go, but the girls are optimistic. As of October 5, 2026, the petition has garnered more than 24,000 signatures. Thanks to an article in the English newspaper The Times, it’s also gotten plenty of attention.
Now, Mae and Aylin hope to get parliament to debate the issue. Two Members of Parliament have already voiced their support.
But the girls also know some people believe longer skirts are the solution. “I believe that’s wrong,” explains Aylin. “We shouldn’t blame the victims. We should blame those who think it is acceptable to sexualize them.”
These are smart kids. The dismissive comments here regarding their opinions and personal experiences with a blanket “just trying to ban porn” statement is a gross overreaction and shifting the blame onto the victims.
You underestimate the government’s ability to overstep bounds, and fuck up things for everyone.
Completely unenforceable outside of banning specific school emblems.
Based
I’m shocked they haven’t just outright banned porn yet
Edit: reading the article I’m sympathetic to the kids, but distrustful of the UK’s continuing slide into censorship especially on topics that involve sex. It’s horrible how adults are sexualizing them, and there does need to be a solution, but I suspect that this one both goes too far and won’t actually solve the problem.
Banning things has never been a solution unless your solution is to a budget you think is too low.
That’s fair, I suppose.
What about the officer’s academy porn? Where the fledgling officer brings a pizza to the door but the unsuspecting mother in law has no money but DOES love her a boy in a uniform!!
What about THAT movie plot? No officer’s uniforms either? Fuck’s sake. What’ll I jack off to now…
Unless it has a specific logo, there is no such thing as a school uniform.
A uniform is a standardized dress code. Just because it doesn’t have a logo doesn’t mean it’s not a uniform.
Then anything is arbitrarily a uniform as long as more than 1 person is wearing the same thing. Same concept… No such thing as a uniform to ban as per this article.
Is this your first time encountering the term uniform, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?
By your logic, the guards at Buckingham Palace don’t have a uniform, they just all like that outfit and happen to buy the exact same items. I don’t see a union jack on their clothes, so by your own standards, it doesn’t count as a uniform.
If you have a mandated dress code that you cannot opt out of, which even specifies which outfits are acceptable to be worn on which occasions, and often goes so far as to say you must purchase them from specific businesses (my experience with Catholic school uniforms, could well be different in the UK), then you have a uniform.
You know what I meant, don’t be a pedantic ass. A schoolgirl uniform in this context can be anything. They don’t want skirts, it’s that fucking simple.
It’s a uniform, they call it a uniform, their school enforces it as such, yet you’re here saying it isn’t because it lacks a school logo. You’re the one trying to force a novel definition of the term uniform on us, so it’s on you to actually provide a coherent definition of the term and convince us it beats the one everyone else is using, which you fail to do.
Also, school uniforms often consist of much more than just a skirt. Typically, it will be a skirt, stockings, blouse, a blazer in the winter, and possibly even shoes. Do you know these girls? If not, how do you magically know they would be fine with the rest of their uniform if they didn’t have to wear a skirt? You’re making a lot of baseless assumptions, from what I can see.
Also, for what it’s worth, nothing in the article even says they are asking to not have to wear skirts or do away with uniforms. They are requesting that porn producers be banned from buying and using schoolgirl uniform costumes in pornography. Straight from their petition linked in the article:
Ban School Uniform in Pornographic Content
We, the Little Feminist Bookclub (LFB) of the Cooper School, believe that it is crucial that school uniform being depicted in pornography is banned. The possession and publication of this repulsive content clearly aims to simulate a child. We are calling on the Prime Minister to ban this use of the uniform designed to make us feel safe.
They actually are making a very good point though. How do you legally define a uniform.
What exactly is it that they are proposing to ban here, because as far as I’m aware porn doesn’t actually depict a particular school’s uniform they just depict a general suggestion. White button shirt, skirt, tie.
What exactly would the law say? How would it be worded?
That’s a perfectly valid point about law that they have bumbled adjacent to, but never actually broached themselves. I’m not saying that the law would even necessarily be a good idea, just pushing back on their original, nonsensical claim that if something doesn’t have a logo, it doesn’t count as a uniform. They just claim this isn’t a uniform on an absurd basis, and provide no support to justify why anyone should accept that idea when it has nothing to do with the conventional definition of a uniform.
Is this your first time encountering the term uniform, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?
I think Lemmy just got an influx of dumbass teenagers. It’s Fall Break in the US. I’ve been coming across this idiocy in multiple other threads the last day or so.
Not sure what the hell “fall break” is but uh, just here to point out you’re already peppering your comments with random made-up shit. (Granted I haven’t been in school for like 20 years)
“Fall Break” is just the autumn-themed equivalent to Spring Break. Most US-based schools have one of some sort.
Not every school has one. But some (most?) have introduced a “Fall Break” to match “Spring Break”. I thought “Fall Break” was always Thanksgiving Week in the U.S., but my youngest niece is on Fall Break this week. My last year in university was 2003, and I don’t think I ever had a Fall Break.
And yet, when I say “school girl’s uniform,” you know damn well what I mean.
Just because I’m not an idiot and live under a rock, many people do and would have no idea, and ultimately, there is no such thing. It’s bullshit and not standardized anywhere, just a cultural thing.
That’s not how the law works though. You have to define everything.
These poor wardrobe department workers on porn sets. Are their lives not difficult enough?
“Sex is Free”
Guilt and shame has been sucessfully leverage by the patriarchy for far too long.
Teach what real consent is and the entire scheme crumbles.
How about we ban school uniforms instead? That seems much more attainable.
At least have uniforms that are not as sexualized. Why is it official policy that girls must wear skirts anyway?
The teenage school close from my house allows girls to wear either the uniform skirt or uniform pants.
In confortable weather, I would say at least half of them wear the skirt. About half of those wear it above mid thigh.
Surprisingly, even on the coldest mornings of our Montréal winters, a small minority still wear skirts with nothing on their legs.
Yeah we should increase costs for parents, its about time they had less spending money!
And on top of that, I want my kids focused on fashion and not education. I want them worried that their clothes are not stylish enough when in class, or bullied for their personal style.
Yeah because outside of school everyone walks around naked.
Exactly what I said well done. Or is it iseful for parents to separate out the unis deal with them and have the kids wear what they please after school.
I’ve literally never seen school uniforms that don’t need to be purchased by the individual
Yeah it cost us €40 for the year. They come home after their school and change, its either okay for the next day or they swap it for the clean one. Shorts and spare shirts included.
Are we all going to pretend like there isnt cliques, like kids cant be mean, like there are not social pressures added to children once they leave their fsmily unit for school
So the cost was already on the parents, is my point.
That being said, a uniform doesn’t prevent any of what you’re talking about. If a kid comes from a poor family and has a uniform, they’re still going to be picked on for being poor. If not for being poor, then for some other reason. You can’t protect children from everything and there’s a solid argument to be made that trying to stunts their growth.
Yeah it amount to about 1.5 local currency a week over the school year. If it cant be afforded, which it absolutely can be by almost anyone, it is supported by the state.
It does prevent it, it puts them on an equal footing visually and from the start. Kids are only going to see that they all have the same outfits. They cant compare phones, lunches are provided. I would hope that by the time such biases come out the kids have formed a safety net and social circle.
40£ is pennies compared to what most parents spend on clothes for kids to wear to school.
Great, what I’m reading says that parents spend on average over 400£ per year for kids in secondary school and over 300£ per year for kids in primary school (on uniforms, which means they’re undoubtedly spending more on clothes outside of that because no kid wants to wear a uniform outside of school). Where are these numbers coming from? Who knows! None of what I’ve said has changed significantly.
Personally for me I begged my mom to take me out of catholic school and put me into public school, and one or the best parts was not having to put up with uniforms.
I’m not sure what part of the world you’re in, but in the US school uniforms cost more than regular children’s clothes. And I still needed regular clothes, so my mom had to basically buy a second wardrobe for me just to go to Catholic school.
My first job out of college was processing expense reports for a corporate relocation management company. Basically, global corporations want to move their employees around the world, and offer benefits to those employees and their families to cover extra costs they will experience and to incentivize them to take those jobs. Part of that included education Costa for their children to go to international schools, many of which required uniforms, and I can tell you those reimbursements got to be crazy expensive.
I dont think there is any aspect of life americans wont find a way to make excessively costly. My kids uniform, spare and alt stuff all in was €40.
I have never ever seen someone get bullied for their clothes fashion or choices, also if bullying is that common of a mistake maybe parents should teach their children how to behave.
Unfortunately, the parents of bullies are often bullies themselves.
Yeah absolutely they should. Its just kids having something to say mostly but why create an avenue for it to become an issue. Let uniforms exist, remove the whole piece around fashion and let them build a community. Let them focus on education.
If parents can only afford 40 currencies in clothes, I’m failing to understand how it being a uniform or some other clothes makes a difference.
You think kids aren’t getting bullied anymore because they all wear the same clothes? Magically bullying is fixed when their outfits are the same?
You want to discourage or prohibit children learning to accept themselves and develop independence and individuality?
You think indoctrination is ‘building community’?
I didn’t say any of that.
If parents cant afford a uniform we here in the civilised world provide them free of charge. But it generally isnt the case that parents here cant spare forty a year for uniforms.
I didn’t mention fixing bullying through any means, I removed an opportunity for it to occur. No magic involved.
No I dont, those are essential to growing up. As are building communities, understanding you are part of one, finding commonalities with new people and new groups.
Uniforms put kids on an equal footing within the school. Standards are important.
It’s much more common for British school children to want rid of school uniforms than it is for schoolchildren in the huge part of the world without them to want to be required to wear them. Clothing-based bullying is overblown as a hypothetical problem. Also, uniforms are the more expensive option for patents as they need to get their children regular clothes whether or not they need to also get them uniform. There’s also some evidence that places with school uniform produce adults much more likely to buy branded clothes, so if there’s a genuine causal link there, uniforms end up the more expensive option for adults, too.
My kids full unforms cost €40 and the first thing some prick kid did on a no uniform day was mock a child for having an old jersey.
This is satire, right? Like, you’re obviously being sarcastic, yes?
Yeah clearly, uniforms are a necessary point of contention
I wish we could ship all the Prohibitionists and Puritans to another country far away, but we ran out of indiginous peoples countries we can send them to.
I don’t think it’s funny to joke about the genocide of 100 million people in the Americas :/
How about you let consenting adults do what they want?
It seems to me that the UK is slowly, but surely, banning kink.
Keep in mind that this is the same country that used to chemically castrate men for the seemingly unforgivable crime of being in a homosexual relationship. Remember Alan Turing? They have learned nothing.
Poor Turing :(
Fuck the state.
Uk being the bad guys? Gasp Uk being puritans? Omgosh surprise gasp
Surely Queen Victoria is rolling in her grave!
deleted by creator
Banning and shaming as not the way, example A:
Japan
It seems to me that the UK is slowly, but surely, banning kink.
you mean doing what it always has done?
70 years ago it was entirely improper to even have one bed for a married couple, let alone a couple having sexual relations for anything outside of procreation.
It was improper to show that on TV. A single bed was very common.
I’m sorry? The kink of sexualizing schoolgirls? I’m all for ball gags and whips but if we don’t pause and do a sanity check when minors are asking adults not to treat them as sexual objects that’s a problem.
A lot of kink is an outlet for unethical behavior. Whips, pain, choking, dominance, submission, roleplay, furry, cnc, blood, other edgeplay, whatever.
Letting a weird dude fuck a woman dressed up in a school uniform is fine as long as it doesn’t go towards hurting children.
Puritans using WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN as a way to ban stuff is pretty popular right now, and has been for a long, long time, and basically ALWAYS results in a worse outcome, showing either ignorance and/or actual malice for the actually intended protected group.
So yeah, don’t rape people, but enjoy your cnc.
Don’t fuck children, but enjoy your roleplay.
Don’t beat people, but enjoy your consensual s&m.
Figure out what is ethical and what isn’t, and THEN work from there. Don’t just make leaps in logic or fearmonger. Banning schoolgirl costumes in porn isn’t a) gonna fix anything, or b) happen.
Schoolgirl and uniform porn is extra popular in places with uniforms, it has nothing to do with if there’s porn of it. Teach people ethics and morality, that’ll solve a LOT more issues than just child abuse. Education reform is the way; it always has been, and likely always will be.
deleted by creator
I never said ban - bans don’t work. I asked us to pause and acknowledge that kids are feeling sexualized and exploited by the community around them. Considering the climate these kids are growing up in (i.e. the Epstein files, news stories about rape, AIs that strip them naked, etc.). I don’t blame them for trying to change something, anything. As adults we’ve done fuck all to make the world safe for them. Kids shouldn’t feel like they need to fix the porn industry to feel safe. That is such a profound failure of society and it’s embarrassing that our response to it is either puritan nonsense or closing ranks to protect the kink. Why aren’t we protecting kids from predation so they don’t feel like they have to take on the sex industral complex? Kink should be the last thing on their minds, and they absolutely shouldn’t be aware of those dark places in the world where they star in people’s fantasies. But children have been exploited, used, and abused. That needs to be addressed.
kids are feeling sexualized and exploited by the community around them.
I think its a good thing they feel that way. Because they are. Stop hiding the cold reality they are born into, they need to know they are not on a good planet so they can better prepare themselves for the trails they will face in life.
Agreed. This is a huge red flag.
Did you see that recent French interview with that extraordinarily articulate kid? Where he was talking about going hard left, rather than just replacing the leadership with more of the same because the current methods just don’t work.
Reminds me a lot of that, where when shit obviously isn’t working - we need to actually examine what’s going on, rather than just using it as a wedge or pushing an agenda, and that likely also means starting over, cutting down to a certain level.
The kink of consenting adults safely role-playing in whatever capacity they want.
I’m all for ball gags and whips
Based on your overt “won’t someone please think of the children” moralizing here, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that you probably aren’t. Why not claim that ball gags and whips are sexualizing “torture” or “slavery”?
Here’s an honest “sanity check” for you:
Consenting adults can dress up like a kid without harming kids. Consenting adults can dress up like an animal without harming animals. Consenting adults can simulate violence and torture without actually being violent or dangerous. Consenting adults can act out goofy office sex scenes without actually being a menace in their actual workplace.
The idea that role playing in fetish pornography is at all correlated with sexual crimes is just as dubious as the idea that violence in video games can be correlated with violent crimes.
And you should probably be aware of the fact that the UK has also made an effort to ban sexual choking scenes in pornography. So, let’s not act like there isn’t a broader movement to legislate and criminalize various kinds of atypical sexual expression.
So, I’m sorry back, but I’m really not convinced that they are going to stop at just choking and school girl uniforms when there are so many other kinks of roleplay that they can be puritanical about.
How about you let consenting adults do what they want?
The young girls and women don’t consent to being perved on in public and online. The problem is no doubt amplified by such suggestive and explicit material online. (Not to mention denudification apps).
The point of this is to reduce the association that happens where girls and women’s dress titillates the fantasies (and what, unfortunately follows) of mostly older men.
You’re right that anyone with a fetish for school children will have fewer avenues to practice that fetish, but that’s not a bad thing. I don’t know why you’re more concerned about the latter than the kids.
That’s a bad argument with a lot of bad assumptions
It’s a pretty well supported argument, actually. But by all means vibe away in the comments.
No, uh, actually I’m the one saying you’re making stuff up, you can’t just come back and say the same thing to me, but slightly differently and dismissively
The problem is no doubt amplified by such suggestive and explicit material online.
No doubt…? Actually, I do doubt what you’re saying very much… Is there anything to back it up?
Do you honestly believe that there is no difference between sexual roleplay between consenting adults and sexual crimes? If so, would you also argue that violence in media contributes to or causes violent crime?
This strikes me as little more than a puritanical justification to regulate what other consenting adults do in the bedroom.
I don’t understand why so many commenters are removing the child victims from this situation and pivoting to “consenting adults”.
The petition does not aim at what consenting adults do together. It concerns the production of pornography and it’s consumption.
Whether via sexualisation or simply memeification, it does frame school uniforms and school girls as sexual objects. Male peers of schoolgirls have easy access to such materials too.
We already know how easily psychological associations are formed (see Pavlov’s dog). But whether a child or an adult, making such a psychological association with schoolgirls and their clothing is surely “unnecessary”? There is an infinite amount of sexual material already available.
Give the children what they want. You won’t notice the difference.
I understand that frustration, but this isn’t the answer.
I would get rid of school uniforms.
Teach boys not to harass girls (I’m a father of 4 boys, btw). None of the other stuff will stop the root cause of boys harassing girls.
My parents made the effort to teach my brothers and me to always treat women with respect, unfortunately consent wasnt really in the vocabulary in the early 2000’s, but in the end my brothers became sexist and overly macho anyway.
I have a young son and I don’t want him to become like my brothers or to align themselves with the machoistic values of the Manosphere.
I don’t know if it’s just my family but based on my personal experiences you can’t ensure that your children will follow your morals. They’re experiences at school and with their friends and with girls and the wider world and probably their individual temperaments end up determining who they become.
I believe that teaching boys about respect isnt enough, we also need to teach girls to not accept disrespect and to advocate for their consent as well. I also think that the blame game from people advocating for women online (or at least the most aggressive voices in that sphere of influence) that plays out on social media drives boys towards the manosphere influence rather than away from it. Many men look at the constant yelling about how men arent doing enough to stop they’re friends from assaulting women are just as powerless to do anything about that behaviour as the people yelling about it in the first place. I understand the frustration from the people that want this illegal immoral behaviour to stop but it’s a difficult problem to overcome and I would argue the blame game is doing more harm than good.
We probably can’t completely remove this kind of behaviour in the same way we won’t be able to completely remove murder from our societies but we have to find a more effective solution then what we are trying now.
My theory is that young boys are missing a strong sense of self that helps them to differentiate themselves from the girls Men and women are equally capable and should be treated equally under the law but we need to help boys understand their place in the world.
Ultimately you can’t control who they become. You can at least give them the tools to be the best they can if they so choose. It’s more of a head start than not teaching them.
There will always be peer influence and societal pressure, but I see it kind of like vaccines. You need “herd immunity” for it to make an effective change.
I, too, was a young adult in the 2000s, and had a lot of those influences. I’ve moved past that, and hopefully my lessons will sink in with my boys now.
I can’t speak to girls since I do not have daughters, but what you said makes sense.
Ultimately you can’t control who they become.
You can control if they are born or not.
Strange. Neither I nor my children had to be taught that. We instinctually knew girls and women were people who deserve respect.
I’m not disagreeing with you in the slightest. Just commenting on how different people and places can be.
I’m not disagreeing with either of you, but teenage buys teach each other. This is usually where the disrespect comes from. Gotta teach the younger boys preventatively so they won’t flip as teenagers. These are formatitive years.
The world teaches kids to objectify women, that’s why parenting needs to counter it.
You probably did get taught, but maybe just not explicitly. And maybe other people get taught that it IS okay to harass and that women are lesser, and maybe explicitly and maybe not.
Like… Learn and teach morality and ethics.
You are absolutely right. It was implicit, not explicit. You see correct behaviour and adopt it before you understand it. I was silly.
This is probably nature vs. nurture, but context and environment can shape morals without ever being said out loud. It still helps to just lay it out with a talk, you don’t know what hides beneath the surface till too late.
