Britain's Sex Criminals: Foiled Again!

Every elementary school needs a web site, but everyone knows that only perverts use the Internet. What's an administrator to do?

A primary school has been accused of being alarmist for covering up the faces of pupils on its website- -apparently to protect them from paedophiles.

Bizarrely, the images have been altered with the type of smiley faces popular during the Acid House dance craze of the 1980s.

Headmistress Clare Reece said yesterday: "The public nature of the internet is an issue we feel strongly about.

"Not all parents want their children's picture on there.

"You can't say what is going to happen with any of those pictures."

Previously, faces were simply blurred, but newer pictures, including action shots of the athletics tournament, use the smiley faces.

However, one child in a line-up of medal winners has been singled out – he alone has been given a sad face.

A commenter at the peerless Daily Mail notes: "That's funny, but safe." Many more terrifying pictures here.

Comments

Ska | March 6, 2008, 10:22am | #

"That's funny, but safe."

Risk never leads to anything but hurt!!

Everybody calm down | March 6, 2008, 10:23am | #

Who would commit a sex crime in Britain? I mean, gross!

Episiarch | March 6, 2008, 10:24am | #

Is there any level of stupidity a public school official won't reach for?

If No Child Left Behind graded on that, most schools would be doing great.

Fluffy | March 6, 2008, 10:25am | #

Why not just not put up a picture at all?

Pervy McPervertesen | March 6, 2008, 10:32am | #

They missed the brunette in the center of the back row.

Jackpot!

David | March 6, 2008, 10:34am | #

Don't the photos lose all meaning without the faces?

ce | March 6, 2008, 10:36am | #

What about all the pictures of kids in newspapers, magazines, and other media throughout the years? We haven't even started!

Jay | March 6, 2008, 10:38am | #

David/Fluffy-

My thought exactly. Why bother with pictures at all?

This is retarded.

Dragonfly | March 6, 2008, 10:39am | #

Forget the magazines and newspapers. People walking by the school can see these children on the playing grounds and through the windows. See them! Some of them could be pedophiles! Masks for all!

some fed | March 6, 2008, 10:41am | #

I find the irony of anyone trying to hide a face in a country as papered with surveillance cameras as Britain to be darkly hillarious.

J sub D | March 6, 2008, 10:42am | #

Beyond parody.

I've been thinking about the pedophile epidemic in the western world. Over 90% of convicted child molesters know how to use the phone book and possess the ability to ferret out an elementary school's location.

Isn't that scary?

some fed | March 6, 2008, 10:43am | #

If the kids actually wore masks themselves, the British authorities would assume they were antisocials á la Clockwork Orange.

Rhywun | March 6, 2008, 10:43am | #

I've been thinking about the pedophile epidemic in the western world.

That it's imaginary?

Reinmoose | March 6, 2008, 10:44am | #

Do those smiley faces creep anyone else out?

Reinmoose | March 6, 2008, 10:48am | #

I also like how this is in the section to the right of the article:

Wow! Ex-children's presenter Andi Peters flaunts his body
He's remembered as the likeable but weedy children's TV presenter, but now Andi Peters is every inch the hunk

Rimfax | March 6, 2008, 10:48am | #

The stupidest part is that the greater risk of having pictures is not to the children but to the adults, none of which are 'smilied', according to the Daily Mail article. I know of a church that had photos on their website and one of the staff member's psycho-exes tracked her down and she had to bolt the next day. Her name was common enough, but the photo on the website verified that it was her.

P Brooks | March 6, 2008, 10:50am | #

Instead of smileys, why not goat and sheep masks?

Better yet, since paedophiles lust for the beauty of unspoiled youth, why not maim and disfigure the children themselves, and thereby render them immune?

Abdul | March 6, 2008, 10:50am | #

One great irony is that we all laughed at Michael Jackson when he made his kids wear veils in public to "protect" them. And now English schools are essentially saying that Jacko--alleged molester--is probably right. I guess it makes some sense, in the "send a thief to catch a thief" kind of way.

Episiarch | March 6, 2008, 10:51am | #

Better yet, since paedophiles lust for the beauty of unspoiled youth

You seem to know a lot about the subject. What's the number for the FBI again?

Remember, the British posters told us yesterday that any suspicion is enough.

Rimfax | March 6, 2008, 10:53am | #

There is a risk, but this is the dumbest way to address it. You get parental consent to publish each child's picture and the same for each of the staff members. If a picture contains someone's face for whom you don't have consent, you crop it or you don't use it in the newsletter or the website. Simple enough.

TrickyVic | March 6, 2008, 11:01am | #

I would say the photo lost all meaning. It's useless to the point of why bother.

Mike Laursens of the World | March 6, 2008, 11:06am | #

That's a lot of work. Much easier common sense solution is to not put any pictures of kids on the website.

tarran | March 6, 2008, 11:07am | #

The simplest think to do would be to have the children's faces and bodies obscured by a garment that covers them head to toe.

Obviously it would have to have a mesh that allowed the children to see, but otherwise it should be made from an opaque, heavy cloth.

We could further shield them by not permitting any adult to see a child's body unless they were a relative. Since pedophiles are attracted to professions that give them access to children, this would include pediatricians.

David | March 6, 2008, 11:07am | #

These kids are going to have the worst yearbook ever!

stephen the goldberger | March 6, 2008, 11:07am | #

This has to be a joke.

Cesar | March 6, 2008, 11:08am | #

This can't be real. Whats wrong with Britain?

The Wine Commonsewer | March 6, 2008, 11:09am | #

What Fluff said. What is the point in putting up a picture at all?

However, I admit to worrying a little from time to time that there are pictures of my kids online (not enough to take them down). I mean, Photoshop is real, dudes! My brother-in-law photoshopped a better head (shaddup) onto his wife's body for the Christmas card and you can't even tell.

Mrs TWC thinks I'm nuts.

Cesar | March 6, 2008, 11:11am | #

Aren't there programming codes you can use to prevent people from grabbing your pic off the net anyway?

Danny | March 6, 2008, 11:19am | #

Can you prevent people from taking screen shots, Cesar? That is entirely off the net.

Cesar | March 6, 2008, 11:21am | #

Can you prevent people from taking screen shots, Cesar? That is entirely off the net.

Good point.

I'm just glad I went to Elementary School pre-internet before the pedo paranoia.

Episiarch | March 6, 2008, 11:26am | #

Remember, folks, there is a kiddie-diddler behind every tree and blade of grass, under every rock and fallen leaf.

I have spoken to otherwise totally rational, intelligent parents who believe this shit. Almost all of them do. It is crazy; mass hysteria like the Salem witch trials or the satanic shit from the 80's, but on a far grander scale.

Having kids truly does seem to make most people unbelievably stupid when it comes to those kids.

smacky | March 6, 2008, 11:29am | #

Not only are the pictures pointless, but they are also creepy! Just don't put any pictures up at all.

brotherben | March 6, 2008, 11:33am | #

That'll make the milk cartons easier to print.

Rhywun | March 6, 2008, 11:40am | #

Much easier common sense solution is to not put any pictures of kids on the website.

We wouldn't be in this mess if people just stopped having kids. Isn't there something they can put in the water for that?

Elemenope | March 6, 2008, 11:42am | #

It is crazy; mass hysteria like the Salem witch trials or the satanic shit from the 80's, but on a far grander scale.

I, for one, blame Law & Order:SVU. It's easier and entirely more satisfying than blaming each individual paranoid moron.

P Brooks | March 6, 2008, 11:42am | #

"That's funny, but safe" pathetic.

Kap | March 6, 2008, 11:43am | #

My wife is a psychotherapist who works with folks sentenced to court-ordered psychotherapy. Many (if not most) of her clients are molesters or rapists of some sort.

According to her child molestation is almost always by a family member, typically by the parents or by a mentally retarded sibling who doesn't know any better. The stranger jumping out of the bushes happens but it is very rare.

Rhywun | March 6, 2008, 11:47am | #

I'm just glad I went to Elementary School pre-internet before the pedo paranoia.

Not only did I have numerous pictures in the yearbook, but my Mom actually let me play outside--unsupervised!! I was not put into any "structured activities" whatsoever. I rode my bike in the street and I took the bus across town to visit friends. I'm amazed I'm not in jail or lying dead in a gutter somewhere.

smacky | March 6, 2008, 11:47am | #

Yeah, but because of the internet you can't even Google a dead cat without running across some really nasty (and quite possibly illegal) porn. I do think that the ubiquity of certain types of porn has contributed to an "epidemic" of sorts. I don't think it's hysteria or paranoia. If I had children I wouldn't want their pictures on the internet, either.

Episiarch | March 6, 2008, 11:48am | #

Yeah, but Rhywun, you're a homo. See what happens when children are unsupervised!?!?!

highnumber | March 6, 2008, 11:49am | #

I was at a dinner party with a group of parents a few months ago and the topic of pedophiles came up when one of the parents received a phone call from a distraught friend who had just learned that their child had been molested by a relative or family friend or something. The neighbor of the parents who were hosting the party had been arrested within the last year for molesting his daughter. I said something about how we don't need to worry so much, because despite these two rather close to our circle instances, it's still statistically very unlikely. It turned out that the mother I was speaking to had been molested as a child. Most of the other folks there already knew that. I kept my mouth shut on the topic for the rest of the night.
When it's that traumatic of a thing for both the children and the parents, the anecdotes are really frickin' powerful.

smacky | March 6, 2008, 11:51am | #

highnumber,

I dated a guy years ago and both of his parents had been sexually abused. How sucky can one family's luck get.

Warren | March 6, 2008, 11:52am | #

Un fucking be-lievable
What exactly is this suppose to accomplish. I mean worst case scenario? What possible ramifications could result from posting the yearbook pics online?????

The English have got to be the biggest wankers on the planet.

Reinmoose | March 6, 2008, 11:55am | #

The Internet is a scary place!
Boogedy Boogedy Boogedy!

Rhywun | March 6, 2008, 11:56am | #

Yeah, but Rhywun, you're a homo. See what happens when children are unsupervised!?!?!

Touché! Parents, guard your little ones at all times.

Livingston | March 6, 2008, 11:59am | #

Good gravy, don't they know people are capable of fetishizing anything, from bunny costumes to the fruit loopy smell of a men's restroom. You see that picture of a smiling Drew Carey on the side of the screen there? Oh, oh, Oh oooh, Splat.

Jozef | March 6, 2008, 12:00pm | #

Am I the only one who gets reminded of Pink Floyd's Another Brick in the Wall?

Cesar | March 6, 2008, 12:01pm | #

Good gravy, don't they know people are capable of fetishizing anything, from bunny costumes to the fruit loopy smell of a men's restroom.

True. Next they'll probably ban old Disney movies because OMG FURRIES!!

jimmy smith | March 6, 2008, 12:04pm | #

My kid is 40 years old and hides his face every time a patrol car drives by. Better to be safe than sorry, he says.

highnumber | March 6, 2008, 12:05pm | #

smacky,

Yeah. I bet his parents were quite protective when he was growing up.

smacky | March 6, 2008, 12:13pm | #

high#,


Yes. Actually, he was a pretty huge mama's boy -- which was probably a significant reason why we didn't stay together, ultimately. I think there's a fine line between being a good parent and smothering them to the point of damaging their personality.

daniel k | March 6, 2008, 12:39pm | #

I don't think their faces have been altered at all - alien happy-faced children are attending school. Obviously, they have already taken over the UK, and the eastern US. They have learned well - to use the cover story that "you can see pictures of children's faces - when you can walk about and SEE CHILDREN'S FACES!!!

Happy Jack | March 6, 2008, 1:07pm | #

The simplest think to do would be to have the children's faces and bodies obscured by a garment that covers them head to toe.

Hmmm. Is that Christo guy still alive?

Anonymo the Anonymous | March 6, 2008, 1:16pm | #

So by this theory, the safest child in the world is Michael Jackson's son Blanket, whose face was always obscured with a mask. You know nothing weird's ever gonna happen to that kid.

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 1:44pm | #

Free cookie to whomever can identify this quote =

"British Isles? OR - PAEDOPH-Isles??"

Brandybuck | March 6, 2008, 1:50pm | #

My conspiracist Bircher friends tell me that there's a global secret conspiracy to rule the world. One if its chief tools is the education system. Therefore this absurdist example of stupidity in the British education system MUST have been orchestrated and initiated by supremely cunning conspiratorial minds.

The more I observe the actions of governments, the more it seems that they're all a bunch of bumbling dolts with guns. Then along comes a story like this. It has to part of some monumental plot, because NO ONE can be that stupid! It's either the Illuminati, or self-trepanation has come back in style in Great Britain.

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 1:57pm | #

Yeah, that shit does look like The Wall

That meat-grinder bit scared me when i was a kid

alan | March 6, 2008, 2:00pm | #

Reason could have a Brickbrats section dedicated to Britain alone. Call it . . . And Live From Air Strip One!

Mike Laursens of the World | March 6, 2008, 2:10pm | #

It has to part of some monumental plot, because NO ONE can be that stupid!

I suspect it's roughly normal levels of human stupidity amplified by an arbitrary hierarchy of authority/responsibility and the need to cover their bums against lawsuits.

Alice Bowie | March 6, 2008, 2:12pm | #

Free cookie to whomever can identify this quote =

"British Isles? OR - PAEDOPH-Isles??"

The answer is Fernando Rimerez of Queens, NY

Cousin Kyle | March 6, 2008, 2:15pm | #

Oy! No reason to go coverin bums quite yet, there laddy!

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 2:17pm | #

Alice Bowie | March 6, 2008, 2:12pm | #

INCORRECT

The correct answer is "The Greatest TV Programme Ever Aired" =

Paedogeddon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7jVnrfoZD8&feature=related

This is so funny that the BBC stopped the broadcast midway

Alice Bowie | March 6, 2008, 2:20pm | #

So by this theory, the safest child in the world is Michael Jackson's son Blanket, whose face was always obscured with a mask. You know nothing weird's ever gonna happen to that kid.


Michael Jackson is the Pinnacle of Weird.

Something weird has already has already happened to this poor little rich child.

smacky | March 6, 2008, 2:55pm | #

It would have been better if they had made them all wear Burger King masks. They probably could have gotten some free stuff from BK for promoting their brand, too.

James Anderson Merritt | March 6, 2008, 2:58pm | #

Before Hitler, the Swastika was a positive sign of life force and glad tidings the world over. After Hitler, many people see that symbol as emblematic of the darkest evil.

Is it just possible that the British government is now, however inadvertently, laying the groundwork for the hijacking and repurposing of the smiley-face into the signature logo of yet another repressive regime?

Somebody needs to write a dystopian novel or movie script where the jackboots have smiley faces on their armbands, instead of swastikas. Maybe I will. Twenty years ago, the absurdity would have drawn laughs. By the time such a story is ever written and published, however, the idea may be less of a laughing matter. Let's watch and see where the Brits go with this.

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 3:11pm | #

James Anderson Merritt | March 6, 2008,

Somebody needs to write a dystopian novel or movie script where the jackboots have smiley faces on their armbands, instead of swastikas.

James,

You are inadvertently describing the fantastic work of my one of my personal-favorite artists, Banksy

See here =

http://www.artofthestate.co.uk/photos/banksy_peeling_riot_cop.jpg

His recent book is really good ("Wall & Piece")

(he's also a screaming leftist, but dont let that get to you. He's a libertarian and just doesnt know it yet.)

Brass Eye and Banksy... two of best things to come out of England since...paedophilia

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 3:12pm | #

Another banksy "smiley-faced grim reaper"

http://smallritual.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/261005_1323.jpg

SxCx | March 6, 2008, 3:19pm | #

Stop everything and watch the following:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7jVnrfoZD8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnQDYnGtS8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA07Tw4iEFw

SxCx | March 6, 2008, 3:20pm | #

Oh fuck, people have out-referenced me...proceed to videos regardless...

highnumber | March 6, 2008, 3:21pm | #

Banksy did the cover for Blur's Think Tank, too. (Not the clothbound limited edition obviously.)

Bhh | March 6, 2008, 4:00pm | #

Since nobody else has mentioned it yet

http://sleevage.com/boards-of-canada-music-has-the-right-to-children/

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 4:00pm | #

SxCx | March 6, 2008, 3:20pm | #
Oh fuck, people have out-referenced me...proceed to videos regardless...

Ha! In your face!

kidding.

I am dissapointed that H&R didnt suggest the Paedogeddon epsiode themselves. FOOLS! Brass Eye has got to be the most viscious humor ever. Anyone who doesnt recognize its genius is a PHILISTINE! PHILISTINE I SAY!

One of my favorites is when Chris Morris interviews the NAMBLA guy, pretending to be a sympathetic journalist, and asks:

"Does it bother you when people say things like, "Oh, You are a paedophil... you are a nonce... you're a perv... you're a slot badger... you're a two pin din plug... a bush dodger, you're a small bean regarder... you're an unabummer, you're a nut administrator, you're a bent ref, you're the crazy world of Arthur Brown, you're a fence foal, you're a free willy, you're a chimney bottler, you're a bunty man, you're a shrub rocketeer...""

And the guy is like, nodding, "uhm, yes...yes....yes... it's horrible...yes... yes... never heard that one... yes... dear me...yes... horrid...yes"

James Anderson Merritt | March 6, 2008, 4:13pm | #

# GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 3:11pm | #
## James Anderson Merritt | March 6, 2008,

## Somebody needs to write a dystopian
## novel or movie script where the jackboots
## have smiley faces on their armbands,
## instead of swastikas.

# James,

# You are inadvertently describing
# the fantastic work of my one of my
# personal-favorite artists, Banksy

# See here =

What can I say? Great minds think alike! ;-)

That was a cool link, thanks. Not exactly what I had in mind, but certainly in the same ballpark and very well done.

The test of the proposed novel or movie would be whether, after experiencing it, a person would have the same visceral loathing for the smiley face as so many of us have for the swastika. Right now, some people loathe the former as the symbol of triteness and faux-/forced perkiness. But the loathing of the swastika as emblem of true evil in the real world goes much deeper, and that's the kind of thing this particular hypothetical work of art should aim to achieve in the case of the smiley face.

Interestingly enough, the TV series "Hogan's Heroes" seemed to have an opposite effect on the wwastika. By showing the Nazis as trite and clueless buffoons, the show had the effect (at least with me) of moving the swastika logo that they wore more in the mental/emotional direction of the niche that the smiley face (which had yet to be unleashed on the world during Hogan's first run) later occupied. It didn't move very much, of course, as the swastika's association with great, dark evil was still very strong in the 1960s and 1970s. But the fact that it budged in conceptual space at all seemed remarkable to me at the time I realized it.

Robert | March 6, 2008, 4:16pm | #

If you look at the page I linked to from my ID for this post, you'll see some photos whose use I licensed in the hope of marketing my invention. One of them of Carol Low's children in the bath got ripped off by an advertising-supported site in India. They also used various other copyrighted images, such as Disney's.

Ventifact | March 6, 2008, 4:39pm | #

I find the irony of anyone trying to hide a face in a country as papered with surveillance cameras as Britain to be darkly hillarious.

Whenever my parents start talking about wanting lots of British-style surveillance, I ask them what kind of person they think will seek a job of sitting and watching people all day.

GILMORE | March 6, 2008, 9:12pm | #

Ventifact | March 6, 2008, 4:39pm | #
I find the irony of anyone trying to hide a face in a country as papered with surveillance cameras as Britain to be darkly hillarious.
Whenever my parents start talking about wanting lots of British-style surveillance, I ask them what kind of person they think will seek a job of sitting and watching people all day

Which speaks to another banksy fascination...

He likes to take cheap pastoral oil paintings, put surveillance cameras/images of violence in them, then sneak them into museums and hang them. it's gimmiky, but nice. Like these =

http://www.bigmother.dk/pictures/BanksyCCTV.jpg
http://www.banksy.co.uk/shop/images/shop%20small/houseonthehill.jpg
http://www.banksy.co.uk/shop/images/shop%20large/plate01.jpg
http://comments.deasil.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/banksy.jpg

also, he bombs cows =

http://stuff4restaurants.com/blog2/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/banksy_cow.jpg

seriously, buy his book. You cant find much of the good stuff on the web thats that hot

Yes, I am a fanboi

The Wine Commonsewer | March 7, 2008, 12:32am | #

Yeah, but Rhywun, you're a homo.

Epi, you owe me a monitor.......

LarryA | March 7, 2008, 2:00pm | #

I find the irony of anyone trying to hide a face in a country as papered with surveillance cameras as Britain to be darkly hilarious.

Some Fed wins.

I haven’t kept records, but as I remember of the last dozen pedophile stories the San Antonio news has carried more than half were—wait for it—school employees. A janitor, a coach, a couple of teachers, a vice-principal, etc.

Of course, Britain is probably different. ;-)