Back in July, the NSPCC launched its "underwear" rule.
The campaign, to get parents to talk to children about the risks of sexual abuse, made me strangely queasy. Also, the underwear rule itself seemed contrived. The five pillars of the campaign spell out the word pants, but not very obviously.
The idea is that parents should protect their children by having conversations with them about their bodies and their right to control what happens to them. From primary age, children need to understand what is and isn't OK.
That way, the NSPCC says, they are less likely to go along with grooming or keep quiet when something is wrong.
So parents have to talk pants. I think the naff vulgarity is off-putting, but you might argue that it is friendly and accessible.
The P stands for "privates are private", the A for "Always remember your body belongs to you" (which feels a bit forced by the acronym).
The N stands for "No means No" and the T for "talk about secrets that upset you". Finally, the S is for "speak up, someone can help".
I'm not sure whom the slogan is aimed at: the parents or the child.
I felt that pressing this topic on primary age children was possibly inappropriate. Do they really need to know about this risk? And just because some probably do, does that mean they all need to?
Well, it turns out others felt the same. One of the biggest objections to the campaign the NSPCC has faced is about undermining the innocence of childhood.
But the charity insists the campaign is important. And what it is really about, it says, is opening up the channels of communication between a parent and child. It argues that children do need to know about what is OK and what isn't. Leaving aside more disturbing types of grooming and abuse, the prevalence of "sexting" alone (when teenage boys pressurise girls to send them naked or partially naked smartphone pictures of parts of their body) shows why all children need to know the limits, the NSPCC says.
It isn't alone. Peter Davies, chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre, agrees.
The NSPCC will launch a second phase of the campaign early next year. It insists the initiative has received positive feedback from parents and has hit a chord with those who are worried.
Charity chiefs argue that, while parents want to do the best by their children, this is understandably an area many feel awkward about discussing.
The campaign's main aim is to encourage parents to talk to their children, opening up channels to prevent future problems.
If a child is never told that adults can be wrong, for example, this void can be exploited.
If they do not learn from a parent that they can talk about anything without getting into trouble, they may stay silent.
I'm still not sure about the campaign. But its key goal is simply to get parents to think about how to have conversations with their children. And that's surely no bad thing.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article