The Original post quoted...........

“If a stronger ‘just say no’ message was given to children in school then there might be an impact on sex abuse … if we imbued this message in school we’d probably have less sex abuse.”

If the abuse was happening "At home" by a parent, sibling, family member.......then somebody else has to point out to "Teach" a child to say "No" and "Tell" 

Absolutely!

I think teaching children to 'tell' is the only way you can combat child abuse.

If a child already knows that something that's happening to them is wrong, then they can say 'No', but it won't always do any good, unfortunately.

If they know that they can tell and that they will be listened to, whatever threats have been handed out, then they will have some hope of stopping it.

Nadine Dorries' emphasis on 'girls saying "No"' and her insistence that kids as young as seven are being taught to put condoms on bananas, is a good example of the scare stories put out there by the moral 'majority'. The fact that places like Holland, who have a much more open sexual education programme, have a better record on teenage pregnancy and sexual health, seems to be completely ignored by the likes of Dorries.

Linking her campaign with sexual abuse is grasping at straws, IMO.

Unfortunately, she's in a really safe Tory seat. The previous MP was known as "the MP for South Africa" because he had massive business links with the apartheidt regime. A corrupt seat altogether.

An online petition has been started to ask Cameron to call for the resignation of Nadine Dorries over her comments.

Link to this petition

Am I reading it differently?  To be honest I don't know the MP at all, but when I read the opening post I read it that she's saying that children should be taught from a young age to say no.  Not that its their responsibility if something happens because they didn't say no?

I think it's a good message.  It's a dodgy subject, you don't want to tell a child too much and take their childhood away, but then again you don't want something to happen to them either.  Reinforcing to them that if some one comes near them they can say no, they don't have to do anything the potential abuser tells them is a good thing.

OH

MY

GOD

Nadine Dorries is a freaking loony.

The first time I heard of her was when she was knee-deep in dodgy expenses claims. Sadly, it wasn't the last. Dangerous nutter.

That's how I read it too Temps. 

Me too.

OK - I've read it again - maybe the way it's worded is wrong - it sounds like children should simply say no to sexual abuse and then it wouldn't happen so often. I'm not sure that's the real message - surely she's letting children know that it is wrong - let them know it's not normal - let them know they can talk about it. So many young children think that because it's their dad/uncle/brother/family friend or someone they know or trust it must be OK.

I honestly think it's been badly worded.

I think so too Soozy...I read it that way too, that they don't have to follow through with what an adult tells them to do, just because the other person is an adult and they're a child, that they do have the power to say no.  I don't think anyone would suggest that if a child doesn't say no whatever happens next is their fault for not resisting?

My kids have never been taught in school about what's right and wrong in that respect. They have however had basic sex education. That's not teaching them anything more than how babies are made and how to avoid it until they are a decent age and in a relationship. 

If the kids are too young for school but the abuse has already been happening then isn't school an ideal opportunity for these kids to be taught something and realise that what they've suffered for however long is wrong? It's not ideal as we'd all prefer the abuse never started in the first place but if it can be caught and stopped by the age of 5 then I'd say that's better than nothing. Even younger if they go to nursery etc and it could be taught there.Most of the time the only people to know are the abuser and the child. Threats of "mummy won't love you anymore" tells a child that nobody cares. Surely for a school to teach children about good and bad touching shows that yes....people do care. 

I don't know about this woman or anything else she's said....I'm only commenting on the opening post and what she said on the Vanessa show and how I interpret it. 

Knowing what Dorries has been like in the past, I think you're being way too generous with her. She really is as bad as your original interpretation, especially when it comes to anything to do with sex. This is the person who wanted to pass a bill forcing all women who went for abortions to go for pro-life counselling first.

She has also "proposed a bill to require that sex education in schools should include content promoting abstinence to girls aged 13 to 16. While sex education already mentions the option of abstinence, this Bill would require active promotion of abstinence to girls, with no such requirement of the education provided to boys. "

I know nothing of her past proposals. I guess it'll colour your view. I was simply going on the OP.

I wasn't having a go, just letting you know where she's coming from and what colours her views

I know that .................I'm simply saying - if she has a past history of dodgy proposals then you'll obviously view it differently. 

I'm really not good with the written word myself ..............I've lost count of the times I'm misconstrued.

I didn't for one moment think you were having a go.

She is as bad as those mad bible belt US politicos. She probably reads the Handmaids Tale and wishes that it was real life.

Stupid irresponsible woman that she is.

PC your post earlier about her seat and the previous incumbent made me think of that episode in Blackadder the Third with the rotten borough

She obviously chose to forget about the victims who are too young to speak, let alone say no.  Stupid stupid woman.

Wasn't in Nancy Reagan who had the old just say no campaign.

Another lunatic telling the less fortunate to grow a backbone and things will be hunky dory. Grrrrrrrr

Am I really naive? Isn't this a step in the right direction? It's virtually impossible to reach babies and infants - but - if young children at school are made aware that it is wrong - and that they can say no (even if it's not listened to they know it's wrong). So many kids being sexually abused within their own home really don't know thAt it's just not right until years later. 

Honestly - can someone please spell it out for me - what is wrong with this proposal? Is it simply her previous gaffes that have made this proposal somehow 'not right'?

Signed and some good comments there. Not getting into the debate here, it enrages me too much 

I don't know her, but from what I've read clicking a few links she seems a bit of a puritan.    i can't see anything about abuse though.. all the things I've read are basically her saying teenagers shouldn't have sex too early (I feel in her view it would probably be after marriage, in the dark and for procreation only) - anyone got a link to how she works out teenage girls saying no boyfriends is going to have any affect on child abuse?

Soozy, I think the point is her suggestion that if kids just knew how to say No that there may be less child sexual abuse......entirely missing the point that abuse takes place within a relationship of power where the victims have no choice/ personal power and are often threatened......So if, for example she'd said that there may be less adult rape if the victims learnt how to say No then I would be offended by that. From my perspective it's much the same..... I do agree that all children should be taught about relationships, what's right and wrong, good and bad touches etc. but that's v different from the 'Just say No' message 

Before i go off, i would like to say that boys get abused too, its not just girls, or did that not enter her head, 

I really do see where your coming from but ............isn't it just badly worded. We can all eff up with a wrongly interpreted phrase/interview/speech or post even. I'm sure she really wasn't saying it's down to the children to simply say no. Surely there's more to it than that?

Here Kaffy at 18.52....I'd be very interested re where and from whom she's allegedly 'heard' the 'evidence' 

Absolutely Sky

I personally won't be giving her the benefit of the doubt Suzy, I think she knows exactly what she's saying....She may try and backtrack now she's royally screwed up....we'll see?

Yes indeed but ...............................if what she's saying is so wrong in the first place - where's the problem?

Both little boys and girls should know that they don't have to do everything that adults (with wicked intent) make them do. They may well be powerless to stop it but .............if they know it's not right maybe they may feel able to tell someone to get it stopped.

I honestly think I'm more than a bit out of sync on here (not for the first time ) so it's probably best I bale out 

if only it were that simple....

of course there is nothing wrong in teaching children what is appropriate or inappropriate touching or behaviour towards them.....however..........when a child is in the grip of the abuser.......'if you tell mummy daddy will be taken away and mummy won't be able to look after you and you'll be sent away and we'll never see you again'......and other such emotional blackmail ...the child is so frightened that this.or other such lies told will become reality........they simply are too frightened to speak out......

I know it's not simple but surely any step in that direction is good isn't it? We will never eradicate evil people who abuse children and fill their heads with nightmare scenarios but if only a handful come forward because it's been broached in the classroom that's good isn't it? I'm 100% sure that she wasn't saying children should say no and if they don't then they are to blame!

of course it is soozy.....and i agreed with that in my first sentence......but with prolonged sexual abuse comes emotional blackmail.........and if a young child is being told by their dad/mum/uncle/whoever that these scenarios will happen..it is very hard for them to not believe it......if they tell  they will be taken away...that's what daddy/mummy/whoever said will happen...........the child trusts them even if they are inflicting horrendous abuse on them

OK - so what do we do? Close our eyes and pretend it's not happening or at least make some steps towards righting it? I can see nothing wrong in this proposal TBH. Very, very hard to get into the home and get to the roots of child abuse but surely any attempt is better than nothing isn't it?

I'm not being difficult but - I really don't see what's wrong with this proposal TBH. Maybe it's badly worded but any step towards eradicating child abuse has to be good doesn't it?

I'm sure I'm missing something here - I'm not a stupid person but I really am failing to see what is so offensive. Please someone (and I'm not being lairy) spell it out to me.

A lot of it has to do with politics Soozy. 

Whilst one should obviously observe each policy/statement on its merits, she does seem quite a character.

Say No to sexual abuse,it's not like you have a choice.

soozy...i have said nothing  to suggest i believe we should 'pretend it doesn't happen'..and as i stated in my opening post on the subject.....of course it is right to teach children what is right and wrong with touching

the idea is a good one......all i am saying is that it's very difficult to put into practice and for a child to dispel the ideas or lies that have been drummed into them by their abuser......they may well go home after being told that it's wrong and it's ok to speak up...of course that is good..........the problem is when the adult abuser then starts the emotional blackmail again with the child...........the child may think...'they said at school this is wrong'......but when told....'it's our little secret.you mustn't tell or daddy will have to leave and mummy will be sad.you don't want that do you?'...that the confusion and fear starts again...the child doesn't want daddy to leave or mummy to be sad so stays quiet

and sadly some children are abused before they can even speak out

Didnt want to get into this,,but i have to say after reading about this, not just on here but other places....what i find personally offensive, is the slight suggestion, although i agree it may be wrong wording...that somehow the onus is on the child to say no. Children living in fear, cant say no, as often the abuse is in the home, and it starts at a very young age. They can be threatened with the most awful threats, and they cant understand how their friends at school dont have this life?  Perverts wont take a no, infact a few may take this is some kind of warped challenge. In an older child who is being abused they may start to listen and understand that they can say no, but in some cases it has gone too far by then. I think it would be more appropriate to send out a clear message that perverts should be seeked out and reported to the Police or other departments. A grassing helpline should be made available. They do it for benefit cheats, why not for this? Parents should too, always, have an eye open. I have had 2 kids, and been aware, and yes i taught them at an early age, not scarily, as they deserve a childhood without fear, to say if anyone touched them down below or said some things to them, to tell me or a teacher etc.  The comments this person has made has not been helpful , thats why i voted for her to be sacked . Longest rant ever, but had to do it x