‘Grandad’s Pride’. Really?

VioletSky

It's not in the book

This has turned into some flat earth level conspiracy theory nonsense now

Look at the book reading you linked to. At around 50 seconds that couple in bondage gear are to the left of the illustration.

VioletSky

Must we not depict women in bikinis now then or men in trunks? Because fashion goes in all sorts of directions

Should we outlaw tiny shorts or short skirts?

What about cycling shorts? They don't cover much

Bondage is being tied up, this is just a facet of fashion...

People should get to wear what they want

Also that image is not in the book, if it is in the US version, which I have no idea, go hassle them about it

Irrelevant what-aboutery
Also strawman argument.

Because the version with the bondage gear is the US version of the book, does that make it OK? Do principles or morals stop at Terminal4?

Give over VS this book is nothing to do with fashion, but sexual practices, so stop trying to be so cool and down with the kids.Bondage is not a “facet of fashion” and don’t be so flippin patronising about London (or wherever) Fashion Week while you are at it.

But anyone involved in the LBQT+ community is well aware of the acronym MAP and what it stands for, and should know better than to include such a controversial image in a children’s book. In plain sight?

I don’t see any images of dominatrices (not sure whether that is still an acceptable term) in the book, should they be represented as well?

Mumsnet has a more forthright view on this, not all of which I agree with but they seem to be better informed than I was before entering this debate.

Bondage is not just a facet of fashion VS. Bondage is the sexual practice that involves the tying up or restraining of one partner.

Bondage is bondage Smileless clothes that cover your bits are fashion

Have you never seen fashion week?

Because leather often features

Being realistic, no one has sanctioned the use of MAP as minor attracted person anywhere (because gross) and the usual meaning, that it means an image of the world, a part of the world, or the local roads in an area as well as topography and other geography words I can't remember.... Still applies

Since when was bondage just a facet of fashion?

I don't understand - if the image is not in the book where has that image come from?

Of course we need books featuring inclusivity, and as Doodledog pointed out above, they have been around for over 30 years, certainly since my children were small. But I don’t think they need to include sexual images such as a man in bondage gear ( and yes there is one in the link provided by VS even though it’s a different one from that shown elsewhere). The very fact there seem to be different illustrations in the US version and the UK version make me ask why. And I still wonder why, if the inclusion of the MAP was purely coincidental, no one from the author right through to the publisher ever picked up the fact that this could be controversial, knowing the fact that so called MAPs are trying to become accepted as part of the wider LBTQ+ community. Why did no one think to pull that image or at least modify it?

I really try not to buy into conspiracy theories, but this worries me. I come back to my experience and training in child protection, and the lessons from inquiry after inquiry that in order to protect children professionals must leave behind optimism and be ready to ‘think the unthinkable’.

If granny and/or grandad were dressed in bondage gear then yes it would also be sexual.

If there are same sex couples in a family, the children of those family are more than likely to see them holding hands, giving one another a cuddle and sharing a kiss, but how likely is they would see both or either in bondage gear?

Must we not depict women in bikinis now then or men in trunks? Because fashion goes in all sorts of directions

Should we outlaw tiny shorts or short skirts?

What about cycling shorts? They don't cover much

Bondage is being tied up, this is just a facet of fashion...

People should get to wear what they want

Also that image is not in the book, if it is in the US version, which I have no idea, go hassle them about it

LadyGaGa

So because Grandad was with Gramps the book is sexualised? Would this be the same if Grandad was with Granny? Would this also be sexual as it implies that they too had sex? It’s only adults that make it so, not children.

Yes, if they were dressed in bondage gear.

We mustn’t sleepwalk into allowing anything goes cos some say inclusivity! Or be kind!

Inclusivity my arse.

LadyGaGa

So because Grandad was with Gramps the book is sexualised? Would this be the same if Grandad was with Granny? Would this also be sexual as it implies that they too had sex? It’s only adults that make it so, not children.

Would it show them in bondage gear though?

Come back, Enid Blyton, all is forgiven!

We do need books to show inclusivity

The evidence is on this thread

So because Grandad was with Gramps the book is sexualised? Would this be the same if Grandad was with Granny? Would this also be sexual as it implies that they too had sex? It’s only adults that make it so, not children.

You don't need a book to show inclusivity to children you show it by doing it. A book with a man dressed in bondage gear, from whichever country, is not appropriate, surely at this age basic introduction, and not full on cod pieces is the best way.

The book has been removed from the nursery library on safeguarding grounds.
An audit of the library is taking place.

VioletSky

It's not in the book

This has turned into some flat earth level conspiracy theory nonsense now

Silly post.

I don't object to the subject matter but I do think it is overly sentimental and garishly coloured.

It's not in the book

This has turned into some flat earth level conspiracy theory nonsense now

but this isn’t about sex
So wearing bondage gear and leering in public is just part of your everyday relationship?

You must live in a parallel universe to most of us.

Grandad's Camper Van illustration is just Grandad in ordinary bloke gear.

No vitriol at all here.
I'm sure my gay neighbours, friends, relatives would not want to see themselves portrayed like the illustration in that book.
They're just normal people.

One is a very delighted new Grandad. 🙂

Here is the actual book reading again including all pages and images

youtu.be/BZgWE-f4McA

LadyGaGa you are absolutely right

There is a lot of disinformation about the book in the later pages

If it contains those images in the US or not, I can't say but the UK version does not have that image and it is a positive book about love and acceptance only