I wonder if placing modesty sleeves, as suggested, on those specialist mags for one handed lads will be extended to the freedom loving injunction busting newspapers who back and help subsidise Cameron and his upstanding pals. The popular papers on the bottom shelf, read by those who possibly don't give a toss about such initiatives, and part of their popularity is down to having photos of various girls in their pants on the front of their scandal sheet. Are they going to be changed? Thought not. Indeed, if you look at the Daily Mail on-line some of their ads are funded by well-rounded bottoms and breasts.
It seems to put the onus on business to self-regulate or be regulated. Fair enough - granted I have not read the report and only read about the initiative . From what I have gleaned, there is nothing (yet) about the role parent(s) who, I am old-fashioned and crusty enough to believe, have a minor role in bringing up their children? (Or have they all given up parenting for being friends).What should they be doing? Well, Cameron is one of the Sons of Thatcher maybe we should be inculcating Victorian values much beloved by his late heroine? Or perhaps going Back to Basics championed by the forgotten John Major who was espousing such virtue while squring the delightful upstanding Edwina Currie.
What about boys who seem, anecdotally at least, to receive their real sex ed from the Internet? Is this initiative indeed necessary or just rancid hot air to detract from the cuts on public services and tax dodging of their friends many of whom are running the businesses that are supposed to be regulated.
...and if they really want to protect our girls either educate them, encourage aspiration or stick them in a burka which, from having worked overseas, would doubtless get adapted and improved by our fashionista girls regardless of advertising, media or any nanny imposed initiative.
|Year 9 adapting the new Cameron / Christian Union inspired uniform|