I came across the “daycare comics” today and they’re really cute! I think they illustrate pretty well how kids can be really funny, adorable and loving.
But the 15th comic of the series and one of the replies under it really rub me the wrong way. As you can see in the image it’s about this little girl, Bitsy, who is gay and has a crush on one of her teachers who’s also gay and is the protagonist and author of the comics. The teacher outright rejects her though, and her reason for it is “Because you are 9.”
In a previous post here I’ve talked about how it really annoys me that society frames age gaps in relationship as inherently inappropriate and harmful even when it comes to adults - and this comic and comment are examples of that.
Even though the kids fell in love on their own terms and were the first to express romantic intentions the teachers still shut them down. And don’t get me wrong, I obviously don’t mean that adults have some obligation to be romantic or sexual with kids. If they don’t want to be in a relationship they obviously have the right to reject the kid in the same way that they would with any adult, but that’s clearly not what’s happening here - she specifically rejected the girl because of her age.
Mind you that non-MAPs don’t have a problem with kids expressing romantic attraction in general. I remember that when I was around 4-5 when I or my classmates had crushes on other kids our teachers and parents thought it was cute and funny, and you can find plenty of pictures and videos on Google/YouTube of adults doing “pretend weddings” for their kids.
But when it comes to children expressing romantic attraction towards adults all rational thought turns off. It doesn’t matter if the kid is the one who’s eagerly proclaiming their love, for some reason it’s still seen as inherently inappropriate and something that should be shunned.
This reminds me of yet another post of mine in which I discussed some details of Sebastian Bleisch’s case. He’s a former gay porn producer who was arrested for employing some underage boys in his films. He received a lighter sentence after the defense proved that the boys had approached Mr. Bleisch willingly and weren’t psychologically harmed. In interviews the boys also said that they saw him as a friend and mentor, and that they had a good relationship with him. Still the prosecution completely ignored the boys’ accounts and falsely claimed that Mr. Bleisch had abused them.
In a rational society that didn’t buy into anti-MAP fearmongering and wanted to nurture its children as much as possible kids wouldn’t be shunned for expressing romantic or sexual attraction to adults (or vice-versa). In fact I believe that adults should be incentivized to nurture and validate these feelings to create more empathetic and loving individuals. I believe that love and sex shouldn’t be treated as these icky and dangerous topics, and that it would be beneficial to society if everyone recognized that children are deserving of and benefit from all forms of love and pleasure.
I remember a simlarish depiction. I used to watch Eastenders (a British soap oprea). A few years ago they had a story line with on of the charaters, Bex and her teacher Gethin. Bex was 16 years old, her teacher had been giving her private tutoring and they grew quite close. Gethin got injured and Bex helped him and in the emotion of the moment they kiss. Gethin leaves, stops being her tutor and insists it was an accident and he has no feelings for Bex and continusly reminds her they can’t date bc it’s illegal and she’s a minor. Bex continues to pursue him, insists she is mature enough to be a relationship with.
Eventually Bex’s mother, Sonia, finds out and gets really mad at him, even tho Bex continues to insist she’s not hurt by him and begs her mum not to pursue any charges. Sonia tells Gethin’s landlord who then evicts him and chases him out of city.
The way it’s played protrays Gethin as the bad guy for kissing her and “leading her on” and Bex as a foolish teenager making a mistake and putting herself in danger. At least that’s how I think they meant it. It’s strange bc they very much show Bex as not being harmed by this, even after Gethin leaves she doesn’t show any signs of trauma from the kiss itself, only anger at the way her mum reated and the fact that Gethin left. It almost makes me feel like their was at least on pro-MAP on staff trying to write a youth showing their autonomy without seeming too suspicous/controversial. Especially with the Star storyline around the same time.
(Don’t want to fully explain the Star storyline bc this is already a long comment but summary with a lot omitted: Star is a teenager who fakes her name and age to get into a bar and sleeps with one of the adult characters(Jay) who doesn’t know she’s a minor. Neither is depictated as the villan, it’s just treated as an unfortuante accident and said that Star shouldn’t of lied as it put Jay in danger)
Weirdist part: 16 is the aoc in britian. I’m not fully familar with the law but I still think Gethin and Bex’s relationship was illegal as, legally speaking, Gethin has what’s known as a “duty of care”. Esentially he can’t date her bc he is her teacher, not bc of her age. Had Gethin been a random stranger he would have no duty of care so I think the relationship would be legal. Her age isnt even an issue from a legal perspective despite how often they bring it up.
While I haven’t watched the show you mention, considering your description it honestly does sound like it’s coming from a pro-MAP perspective, or at least that it’s sympathetic towards the character’s situation considering how he was so thoroughly mistreated after just one kiss. It wouldn’t be the first piece of media to condemn MAPs while still trying to portray us in a somewhat sympathetic light (See the movie “Head Burst,” for example).
