Porn is giving youngsters a distorted view of ?perfection?

Schoolchildren have become this country?s biggest consumers of pornography ? even although you may have thought that particular soubriquet belonged to the husband of a certain Cabinet minister.

When people talk about pornography use, they are usually referring to adults. But Channel 4?s Anna Richardson revealed on The Sex Education Show Vs Pornography the truly horrific fact that many children download porn daily to their mobile phones.

That young people are influenced by this sort of ?adult entertainment? is disturbing on many levels.

The programme suggested that the average teenager watched 90 minutes of porn a week, on their mobile phones and on the internet. Most alarming of all, three in 10 pupils said they learned about sex from pornography.

There has not been any national outcry on the matter. We really are becoming quite unshockable. And that is not a good thing.

If you recall the country?s reaction to the porn viewing of Home Secretary Jacqui Smith?s husband, Richard Timney, you may remember that there was very little shock at the content of the films he was watching. On the contrary. The outcry was, purely and simply, over the fact that Mr Home Secretary had dared to use our precious taxpayers? money to fund his viewing.

Ms Richardson?s investigative programmes made the serious point that children were growing up with a distorted image of what bodies should look like. In other words, the pupils' responses to questions showed that their expectations of body shapes and sizes were framed solely by what they had seen in porn movies.

The trouble with distorted images is that they, in turn, create unrealistic expectations. And that is a major worry where girls are concerned. Pornography parades perfectly-shaped, or, rather, reconstructed women in front of men, leaving little room for the normal female form. Pornography sells images of a manufactured ?ideal?.

Whenever feminists have objected to it, they have invariably been written off as man-hating, mustachioed harridans. But pornography debases women because it refuses to sanction the female form as it really is. And that is asking for trouble.

It means that, sooner or later, we will lose whatever it takes to keep men and women interested in one another.

No wonder the average woman feels dissatisfied with some part of her physique. As things stand, most women think they are too fat, their hips are too big, their waists non-existent.

Anna Richardson encouraged the kids to compare these women?s real, imperfect breasts with those that were surgically enhanced. She invited the children to look at normal bodies, at Mr and Mrs Average ? and, guess what? Not only did they prefer the surgically-enhanced ones, but they expected girls to look that way. Almost all of them turned up their noses in disgust at the real thing. So, cosmetic surgery becomes an aim, the only way to achieve physical perfection and male acceptance.

Kids downloading porn also puts pressure on girls to behave in the way depicted in the seedy films. In such videos, there is no real relationship between those participating. They treat each other as impersonal objects. That is why the camera is so close to the action. There is no need to talk or act.

Children need real sex education ? not just biology lessons. They need to learn about the human aspects of sex, in other words, about treating partners with respect.

Girls should be taught to negotiate relationships, to say no if they want to. Boys should be taught to respect what the girls want. However, pornography does not help that process in any of its many guises.

One of the most offensive is child pornography when kids are used to star in sleazy films. Anyone caught downloading child porn always has the perfect excuse ? such as: ?I?m doing research? or ?I wanted to make sense of the abuse I suffered as a child.? They always deny wrongdoing. Who wouldn?t deny being a paedophile? It isn?t a nice label to have hanging around one?s neck, after all. Paedophiles are the lowest of the low.

And people who look at pornographic images of children are paedophiles ? not middle-aged men who fancy recouping their lost youth by ogling young flesh.

What do you do with a man who says: ?I haven?t done anything other than look at pictures, M?Lud. I?m not a paedophile? ? the person who maintains this is a victimless crime? Like hell it is. Voyeurs get their kicks from looking at unspeakable acts against children which have been captured on film. So, the victim is right there in front of them.

The voyeur is doing much more than looking. He is aiding and abetting the criminals who produce the material and, if he is using a credit card, he is funding their activities.

OK, nobody can say for certain that a person who looks at child pornography will, one day, commit an offence against a minor, but, surely, such an activity ranks as an excellent training ground and therefore makes a person a very high risk, indeed.

During the past two decades, the age of initiation into sexual activity has decreased steadily and the point at which most people marry has increased, resulting in a big rise in sexual experience among teenagers. Scottish health experts say the rise in the viewing of pornography is also implicated in a variety of sexual problems ? including an increase in levels of sexually-transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancies. They want parents to be more aware of what their children are watching.

Some schools appear to have abandoned the role of equipping their pupils with the social, moral and emotional skills they need to build solid adult relationships.

But the creeping sexualisation of children has become endemic in our society. Innocence is for children. Who wants to lose out on childhood, on Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny? The loss of innocence comes too soon these days ? even without the internet.

No wonder so many parents believe there is a pervert lurking around every corner. In fact, the 21st-century pervert is in your child?s pocket.

It is called a mobile phone.

The Press and Journal