Mum demands school BANS Sleeping Beauty because she 'didn't consent to being kissed'

[AGXStarseed]

(Not written by me)

A MOTHER has asked her son’s school to take ‘Sleeping Beauty’ off the curriculum for its "inappropriate sexual" message.

Mother-of-two Sarah Hall says Sleeping Beauty promotes unacceptable behaviour


Mother-of-two Sarah Hall, from Northumberland Park, says the fairytale promotes unacceptable behaviour which should not be read to young children.

She argued it teaches children that it is ok to kiss a woman while she’s asleep, which she says is not acceptable.

Ms Hall was reading a school book with her son, Ben, six, which was based on the traditional story.

She said: “I think it’s a specific issue in the Sleeping Beauty story about sexual behaviour and consent.

“It’s about saying is this still relevant, is it appropriate?”

She said she is worried about what message the tale, which features a Prince waking up a Princess by kissing her, sends to impressionable youngsters.

The 40-year-old left a comment in her son’s record book, and contacted the school to ask if books featuring it could be taken out of circulation for younger classes.

She said: “In today’s society, it isn’t appropriate - my son is only six, he absorbs everything he sees, and it isn’t as if I can turn it into a constructive conversation.

“I don’t think taking Sleeping Beauty books out of circulation completely would be right.

“I actually think it would be a great resource for older children, you could have a conversation around it, you could talk about consent, and how the Princess might feel.

“But I’m really concerned about it for younger children, would really welcome a conversation about whether this is suitable material."

Ms Hall said she might not have given the story a second thought, but recent coverage of sexual abuse and consent, including the social media ‘Me Too’ campaign, made her think about the subtle messages which, say says, help create a culture where consent is not seen as important.

She said: “These are indicative of how ingrained that kind of behaviour is in society.

“All these small things build up, and they make a difference.”

The mother-of-two says there might be problems with other fairytales, but that she is mostly disturbed by the ‘non-consensual’ kissing in this story.

She said: “I think it’s a specific issue in the Sleeping Beauty story about sexual behaviour and consent.

“It’s about saying is this still relevant, is it appropriate?”


Source: Mum demands school BANS Sleeping Beauty because she 'didn't consent to being kissed'

 

[Riley]

Okay...I see...

Nobody tell this woman about the version(s) of Sleeping Beauty where the title character is outright raped in her sleep.

When I said I wanted the 90's back, I didn't mean the "book banning" mentality.

 

[AGXStarseed]

I was originally going to put this in the "Things that make you laugh" because I found this absurdly amusing in my own point of view, but decided to post it here to see what you guys thought.

Personally, I think its stupid that this mother is taking such a message away from this nowadays. When I was a kid reading this, the idea of 'he didn't ask her for consent before he kissed her' never crossed my mind and has never crossed my mind until now. For starters, how the heck would he get consent from her when she's been bewitched to sleep forever?!

Does this mother do the same for other children's fairytales?
For example, in her mindset Goldilocks and the Three Bears should be banned because she broke into someone else's house, stole their food, vandalised their property and I guess you could say she was squatting as well by sleeping in someone else's bed.
Jack and the Beanstalk should also be banned because Jack forgot about not taking things from strangers, not carrying out a risk assessment and/or using proper climbing equipment before climbing the beanstalk and stealing from others.

Would she also ban children's songs as well, like banning Ring a Ring a Roses because it talks about people dying of the Black Death/Bubonic Plague or Jack and Jill because Jack, Jill or their parents didn't file a claim for compensation for Jack injuring himself when he fell down the hill?
It reminds me a lot of when Harry Potter was banned in many American schools because people were worried that it would turn readers towards Wicca (among other things) although JK Rowling herself is a Christian and said parents are fine with pupils reading Romeo and Juliet - which features people getting injured/murdered in family feuds and teenagers committing suicide, and Macbeth - which also features witches and murder.

At the end of the day, School is there to educate you in the lessons you need for passing your exams, getting good grades and sending you on your way to further education and work. Parents, on the other hand, are responsible for raising you and that includes instilling morals and restrictions, like not making fun of others for any reason, trying your best and having fun even if you don't win, etc.
I think its another example of Political Correctness trying to take over where its influence doesn't need to be.

 

[Flinty]

A lot of fairy tales and nursery rhymes hold no useful lessons. Oh, wait, they say that if you're beautiful enough, a prince will want to marry you and you'll live happily ever after, just like Charles and Diana. It's important that small children learn that.

Spoiler

Most of this message is sarcasm, in case you missed it.

 

[tree]

Sleeping Beauty was under a spell/curse that could only be broken by the kiss of a prince,
after a lengthy sleep. One interpretation of this story is that Sleeping Beauty represents nature,
which ebbs & flows through the seasons, seeming to sleep during winter, and awake with
the return of spring.

The Prince in the Sleeping Beauty story doesn't rape the Princess, he respectfully & tenderly
kisses her. It seems like this woman is far out of touch with the meaning of myths and
unable to grasp anything symbolic.

 

[Riley]

The Prince in the Sleeping Beauty story doesn't rape the Princess, he respectfully & tenderly
kisses her. It seems like this woman is far out of touch with the meaning of myths and
unable to grasp anything symbolic.

I'm talking about the other, older versions Like Sun, Moon, and Talia. Or, in a more recent case, Anne Rice's book series. Yer thinking of Disney's version. Just like a moron who thinks Into The Woods is a good musical. Sorry; Got a bitter.

 

[tree]

No, I am not thinking of Disney.

 

[OkRad]

Hmmm . This is interesting. The side of me that likes to see both sides is intrigued. On one hand, he must be very shallow to have fallen in love with her just because she is beautiful. It also does represent the oddity of those who wish to attach to helpless people. I knew a guy once who said he wanted to marry a disabled person. When I asked why, he really could not explain it anymore than needing to take care of someone. What if she got better? What if she wanted to work? etc......He said he did not want his wife to work.....

So that is one aspect.

Two, the kiss

I am not so upset that he would kiss her when she is asleep, if that is all he did. However, if she had not woken up, then what? Would he have stopped at that?

Note he is always depicted as dashing. If he were drunk and disheveled and kissed her, why, we would all be ASSUMING he would go further.

So, yeah, I get her point. But I bet she has some sort of PhD from some place and overthinks things and assumes that because the think tanks sit around thinking all day, well, that translates into how the mass thinks or should think.

So on the other hand, ...........In the end, this will not matter to anyone..............

PS
BTW: Funny how "Mass thinks" is plural thinks while "The Mass Should think" is singular. English language madness.

 

[Streetwise]

(Not written by me)

A MOTHER has asked her son’s school to take ‘Sleeping Beauty’ off the curriculum for its "inappropriate sexual" message.

Mother-of-two Sarah Hall says Sleeping Beauty promotes unacceptable behaviour


Mother-of-two Sarah Hall, from Northumberland Park, says the fairytale promotes unacceptable behaviour which should not be read to young children.

She argued it teaches children that it is ok to kiss a woman while she’s asleep, which she says is not acceptable.

Ms Hall was reading a school book with her son, Ben, six, which was based on the traditional story.

She said: “I think it’s a specific issue in the Sleeping Beauty story about sexual behaviour and consent.

“It’s about saying is this still relevant, is it appropriate?”

She said she is worried about what message the tale, which features a Prince waking up a Princess by kissing her, sends to impressionable youngsters.

The 40-year-old left a comment in her son’s record book, and contacted the school to ask if books featuring it could be taken out of circulation for younger classes.

She said: “In today’s society, it isn’t appropriate - my son is only six, he absorbs everything he sees, and it isn’t as if I can turn it into a constructive conversation.

“I don’t think taking Sleeping Beauty books out of circulation completely would be right.

“I actually think it would be a great resource for older children, you could have a conversation around it, you could talk about consent, and how the Princess might feel.

“But I’m really concerned about it for younger children, would really welcome a conversation about whether this is suitable material."

Ms Hall said she might not have given the story a second thought, but recent coverage of sexual abuse and consent, including the social media ‘Me Too’ campaign, made her think about the subtle messages which, say says, help create a culture where consent is not seen as important.

She said: “These are indicative of how ingrained that kind of behaviour is in society.

“All these small things build up, and they make a difference.”

The mother-of-two says there might be problems with other fairytales, but that she is mostly disturbed by the ‘non-consensual’ kissing in this story.

She said: “I think it’s a specific issue in the Sleeping Beauty story about sexual behaviour and consent.

“It’s about saying is this still relevant, is it appropriate?”


Source: Mum demands school BANS Sleeping Beauty because she 'didn't consent to being kissed'

I can understand what she means, The thing is if she wants him to learn a certain syllabus why didn't she ask beforehand ,why was she not bothered before the Me too campaign.

 

[pjcnet]

I'm not saying that I agree with all this, but there's an amazing amount of controversy and even conspiracy theories about the messages that Disney productions pass on to children and there's various similar examples of alleged inappropriate content as well as some subliminal messages (I won't link to them, but if you search online you will find them). A large Freemason lodge beneath Disney World in Florida further fuels conspiracy theorists and I've even heard of Walt Disney himself being described as a very evil man that was falsely portrayed as the pleasant fatherly figure that most people think of him as. They've even gone as far as to accuse Disney of creating teen idols who then grow up to have serious issues such as committing criminal activity and/or becoming a drug addict, the conspiracy theorists argue that Disney do this purposely so children grow up "worshipping" their idol and are then more likely to become confused and follow them in their footsteps into a destructive future. I don't believe they've done it on purpose, but there is fuel for the fire, here's some examples of Disney "teen idols" and "heartthrobs" that have gone "wild" and since this article was written in 2013 there's been more, please click here.

Regarding Sleeping Beauty, she does actually have a point and it is in some ways sexual assault. On the other side of the argument I very much doubt there was any purposeful malice when the story was originally written, especially since it was written way back in the 1950s when people's views on women was different to how it is today, in those days it's less likely anyone would have noticed an issue. Also surely it's still okay to give CPR as well as mouth to mouth resuscitation to someone who is unconscious in order to save them if they've stopped breathing? Well it could be argued that the prince on Sleeping Beauty was also doing in many ways what was absolutely necessary in order to save her as the original curse stated that she could only be awakened by a prince's kiss. What was he meant to do, leave her there to never ever awaken in case he got accused of committing sexual assault? lol!

It's difficult to know what to do about Sleeping Beauty however as should a movie and book that is mostly intended for children either be banned or reclassified for adults only? They couldn't even just remove the kiss from the story as it's a key part of the whole thing. I think it's fair to ban it from schools and to reclassify it as PG (parental guidance) or equivalent for the book with a disclaimer for parents / guardians so they have the choice whether or not to allow their child to watch or read it and to also give them the appropriate education about the kiss if they do choose to allow it. At the moment the 1959 movie at least is still classified as U in the UK, which means it's suitable for all without even parental guidance or consent.


Edit:

It reminds me a lot of when Harry Potter was banned in many American schools because people were worried that it would turn readers towards Wicca although they were fine with pupils reading Romeo and Juliet - which features people getting injured/murdered in family feuds and teenagers committing suicide and Macbeth - which also features witches and murder.

Lol, what century are we living in because I thought any witchcraft acts were abolished long ago? Well they were in the UK anyway and also The First Amendment is supposed to protect the right of a person in the United States to hold any religious belief whatsoever. Wicca is just another religion that comes with many religious beliefs, so banning Harry Potter for this reason is being severely prejudiced against this particular religion that people have as much right to believe in as any other religion, they are also directly breaking The First Amendment by trying to shield children from it, making a clear point that it is not a desirable religion (which is their personal opinion based on their religious beliefs), doing this is strongly against the religion and anyone that chooses to be a part of it, it also encourages persecution which is the complete opposite of protecting people's right to hold any religious belief what-so-ever. If they're willing to do this they might as well bring back prison sentences for people who practice wicca or any other religion that the state decides are less desirable, or why not just go back to burning witches on the stake? I thought things were moving on.

PS: I'm not personally into Wicca, but I knew a really nice lady who considered herself a white witch and practised Wicca, she was also part of a witches coven that would regularly meet, she caused no harm to anyone and should not be persecuted against. I am into Spiritualism however which also used to be severely persecuted against (and still is to a lessor extent, do vicars / priests have to legally justify their claims before reading a sermon in church, E.g. prove that God exists, well Spiritualist's do in the UK and to achieve this they'd have to literally prove in a court of law that spirits exist, so they're forced to start religious services with a disclaimer which includes the words such as, "for entertainment purposes only" or risk prosecution, please click here for more). It is interesting that they banned a Ouija Board from most UK shops which was once a popular toy made by Parker Brothers, but that wasn't as much persecution of any religion as concerns that it actually really worked and was potentially dangerous to people including children who didn't know what they were doing, especially after people watched the infamous horror movie The Exorcist in 1973. That "toy" was potentially a lot worse for children than reading or watching Beauty and the Beast even if they only imagined that something had gone wrong.

 

[Riley]

While you guys have your complex discussions, I'm firmly standing by my black-n-white views. Which translates to: "If a parent calls for something to be banned, they're uptight and completely in the wrong."

 

[Judge]

When I see these sort of controversies it seems they are all central to one theme. Those parents who expect or demand that the state is inherently responsible for teaching a child everything- including moral values associated with basic standards of acceptable behavior.

Frankly my experience in school at that age reflected good behavior as a precursor just to enter the place. That I was there to be educated- not rehabilitated.

Moral values, good behavior and respect for others? Those were things I learned exclusively from my parents. Never my public school teachers.

Punishment was occasionally rendered by them, but without any formal lessons as to why. Making it very apparent that educators expected us to already understand the difference between acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

If a parent has a six-year old with impulsive behavior issues it's their problem. Not the school's problem.

 

[dragoncat16]

That is going too far. Of the entirety of children's literature, some of which contains imagery and behaviour that is extremely violent at best and absolutely disgusting at worse, Sleeping Beauty does not even come close. I wonder if that mother has read or heard of those other books/nursery rhymes.

Examples:
Little Red Riding Hood (do you know what they did to the wolf at the end, not to mention what he did to the grandmother - wasn't he wearing her skin????)
Little Mermaid (the book, not the Disney version - do you know what happened to the mermaid at the end?)
The Old Woman who lived in the Shoe (a good example of child abuse)
Pippi Longstocking (so much racist language, even in the original Swedish - but not a racist message when it comes down to it)
Wizard of Oz (e.g. the tin man cut off his own appendages with an axe)
The Three Little Pigs (the wolf was trying to KILL and EAT the pigs)
Snow White (also a non-consentual kiss)
Ring around the rosie (everyone dies of the plague or whatever)
Allouette (a fun French song used to teach kids names of body parts, but what is it really about?)
Hansel and Gretel (the witch COOKED and ATE CHILDREN, and then didn't she get cooked in her own oven at the end?)

Those are just the few that came to mind off the top of my head.

I think the rule one could teach children from e.g. Snow White or Sleeping Beauty is that it's not ok to kiss a person who is sleeping in the regular way, but if they are in an enchanted sleep from, e.g., a prick from an enchanted needle or a bite of a poisoned apple, then it's ok to kiss them. Maybe the message could be that those guys actually gave the women mouth to mouth to revive them, and that's surely ok when someone is unconscious and doesn't constitute sexual assault.

Have generations of little boys been inappropriately kissing kittle girls while they slept because of reading Sleeping Beauty? I really doubt it.

 

[watersprite]

The mother cannot figure out how to parent her way through this without expecting/demanding that the authority figures fix it for her.

Another sign of the times.

 

[Kirsty]

Dear oh dear. There’s no point in even debating further about this as it just fuels the ridiculous energy.

 

[Bolletje]

Honestly, even as a kid I thought this was a weird semi-rapey story, but that never influenced me in any way.

 

[OrSomething]

I don't agree with this. The only way for the princess to be woken up was to be kissed, so someone had to kiss her without her consent or she'd remain sleeping forever. Would this person be against mouth-to-mouth resuscitation too? I think consent rules should be overruled when someone's safety is at risk. For example, it's usually wrong to touch someone roughly without their consent, but if they're about to run into traffic, it may be necessary to grab them in order to save them.

Besides that, I don't understand her distinction between younger kids and older kids. Why couldn't you talk to a younger child about the importance of getting someone's consent before touching them? And many old stories may contain "politically incorrect" messages. Like many of them are criticized for featuring female characters that wait for a man to rescue them instead of taking matters into their own hands. I think you can absolutely have a discussion about such matters, but I don't think the stories should be banned outright.

 

[Tom]

I was just reading an article today about how Children's books and their authors are often pretty bonkers. Edward Gory, Dr Zuess, etc.

I think in general, I'd want to be able to see a wide range and make my own decisions and conclusions. There have been stories for thousands of years and many do not reflect current attitudes. I think it would be sad to have an increasing number of books/stories banned and cultural history lost.

Its up to parents, teachers, guardians to present things logically and help with interpretation, not to censure entirely. Excepting too severe examples of course.

 

[Katleya]

Snarky me can't help but wonder how that woman feels about the Bible and the tale of Loth's 2 daughters getting him drunk and having sex with him.
None of the stories and legends that form part of a common core of culture are rosy, happy, fully moral stories, really.
Also, I hope she never comes across anything by the brothers Grimm. She'd be throwing a hissing fit over some of the tales.

 

[Tom]

Snarky me can't help but wonder how that woman feels about the Bible and the tale of Loth's 2 daughters getting him drunk and having sex with him.
None of the stories and legends that form part of a common core of culture are rosy, happy, fully moral stories, really.
Also, I hope she never comes across anything by the brothers Grimm. She'd be throwing a hissing fit over some of the tales.

Hope she never stumbles across the old German Strumpel Peter...

https://io9.gizmodo.com/5913747/the...demented-german-childrens-book-ever-published