Father removes 9 yr old daughter from school over sex ed lessons

Thanks for your response TerriBull! An interesting post.

It is a thorny problem, I do understand that.

As for the young girl being made to put a condom on a carrot in front of a classroom of sniggering boys <<<sigh>>>. I think whoever thought this a smart idea should have been forced to eat the carrot - complete with the condom.

I went to a boarding-school which became co-educational in the year I enrolled (1952). We had sex-education - it was surprisingly 'progressive' given the era. However, initially girls and boys were educated separately so that they could absorb the intimate details of how their and the opposite sex bodies functioned - in relative comfort, free from the embarrassment that would be inevitable in a mixed class. Only later were we educated together - when we'd got over the giggling and sniggering stage.

And not simply nodding our head at the message given by porn. There is a considerable problem for young girls having to participate in activities that are led by porn, anal and strangulation bring two of them.

I think it is more important to deal with the fact that they are seeing such things. It seems insane that it seems to be just accepted that young children will see porn, and that they need to have lessons to deal with that, rather than to refuse to accept it and find ways to legislate

More often than not, it seems that nowadays it is the tail wagging the dog.

Like it or not, children and young people are seeing content many of us can't even imagine - so we need to give them the tools to deal with what they are seeing.

I think it is more important to deal with the fact that they are seeing such things. It seems insane that it seems to be just accepted that young children will see porn, and that they need to have lessons to deal with that, rather than to refuse to accept it and find ways to legislate. I'm not sure how legislation would work, but maybe making it illegal to sell to or give a child a phone without a porn-blocker on it, and/or to insist that unsuitable content is log-in only, with a credit card or something to grant access, and making it an offence to allow children to see unsuitable images, putting the onus on adults to proactively prevent it, rather than concentrating on penalising deliberately showing images to children. I don't know - I'm not sure how the law stands now, but I think it should be possible to find something better than the way things are, whilst still protecting the freedom of adults to make choices.

I appreciate that that won't be popular with people who want to access porn and not pay for it, but I think it's maybe a price worth paying to protect children and young people from seeing things that distort their ideas about consent and relationships. It seems to impact on young women's looks too - encouraging them to get cosmetic surgery and so on. There will be some way to leave the free stuff free but keep it away from young children, which would be found if there were a will.

vegansrock

Is it innocence or ignorance that people wishing to preserve? The fact is that most 11 year olds will have a smartphone and a high % will have viewed pornography or been shown it by an older child, surely it’s better to educate them in what they will have been curious about or didn’t understand than to have them turn to the internet for their sex education?

Is it innocence or ignorance that people wishing to preserve?

Innocence does not have to be ignorance. My son asked at age 4-ish where babies came from, so we told him. It was nearly two years later that he wanted to know more details. I think that's what people mean when they talk about 'age-appropriate'. And as children develop at different rates, I don't think you can make a blanket assumption about what is age-appropriate sex education. Some 4 year olds would have been very curious about the answers we gave my son - but he wasn't - he lost interest - which is why I didn't pursue the matter further at the time.

Human sexual relationships are complex and once you become aware of your sexuality it does, IMO, become something of a burden, especially for girls who start to be overly concerned with how they look, how attractive they are, whether their bodies measure up to the images that are pushed at them via the media (and pornography) to the extent that, it seems to me anyway, that the media and pornography are indirectly basically setting the agenda on how we educate children about sex.

I'm not suggesting that nine year old girls should be reading the equivalent of Enid Blyton or playing with dolls, but it would be (again in my opinion) preferable that they were able to pursue their budding interests and hobbies at the one and only time in their lives when they are not burdened with earning a living, or cooking dinner... and all the worries of the adult world that come with the end of childhood. That's what I mean by innocence. It's more to do with 'freedom' than innocence.

I think we should allow children to 'dictate' the pace at which they discover 'sex'. There might be nine year old children who are ready to learn about the intricacies of anal /oral sex, but they won't all be I don't think.

And I do think it's a shame that we have to 'force-feed' them information to some extent in order to protect them from the porn industry, whose movers and shakers probably don't give a damn about the welfare or mental health of children - they just make sure they're abiding by the law in order to protect themselves... after that - anything goes. And, from what I've seen, read and heard, that anything is usually content that is purely aimed at satisfying the needs and wants of the male population where females are simply a construction of anatomical parts. However, I have not 'researched' extensively, so I'm sure there's things I don't know.

Dickens

Does anyone think or feel that we are being 'forced' to educate children about sex, and specific 'acts, at an ever-earlier age than what might be appropriate or necessary because pornography is so readily available, and entertainment is now so overtly sexual... so that we have to pre 'arm' them, before they come into contact with it?

In other words pornography and the entertainment world is forcing the pace? So much so that we can't really allow them to have that once-only time of 'innocence' where they, for a brief period in their lives, are free from the worries and problems associated with the adult world, and all that it entails - not just in terms of 'sex'.

I ask because I've remembered a time back in the very early 50s
at around age 9 sitting in the Saturday morning cinema - the Children's Cinema Matinee - with my cousin - when during one of the films, the inevitable 'love interest' was introduced in the story, and my cousin grimaced and said, as he always did when this happened, "just kiss 'er mister and get on with the film" (it became a long-standing joke as we got older). It bored me, too, and I remember the rest of the kids sighing with boredom, or giggling at the ludicrous sight of Jane simpering at Tarzan (so to speak).

We just were not interested in sexual and romantic liaisons. They got in the way of a good story.

Oh, the innocence LOL! Of course, times change, but I do wonder if children are being 'burdened' with information that we are now compelled to 'force' on them for their own protection to some extent because of the overtly 'sexualised' world around them?

Personally, I think that pornography being available at the click of a couple of keystrokes is not healthy - and I'm in favour of it being something one has to subscribe to instead of it being freely available on the 'net. But have been shot down so many times for saying so, that I never mention it normally. I've been told (mostly by men) that it's a 'right' to have it freely available and any attempt to change the dynamics is simply censorship being attempted by the "prudish". They could be right, though I've never regarded myself as a prude. However enjoyable pornography might be for many, I don't regard it as an 'essential' on the 'net - and would prefer that people had to sign up for it. But that's a debate for another thread.

Don't shoot me - it's only a thought and I aknowledge I could be quite wrong.

I pretty much agree with your thoughts Dickens, particularly your first paragraph. Sadly pornography is a fact of life and children will have access to it one way or another, so I take on board the comments made by those who have stated the inevitability around that. Nevertheless, this is an industry that has a dark underbelly of exploitation and in worse case scenarios criminality, could there be anything worse that some of the vile acts committed against underage children who can never consent. Even as far as adults are concerned, lets not kid ourselves everyone who partakes in a pornographic movie gives their consent either. With that in mind, and given your suggestion that the new teaching of sex education is possibly not how it was framed in say my children's time at school, which was the '90s and noughties, I won't go back to my era because the extent of it then was the reproductive habits of various mammals, is it not a reason why some parents withdraw their children or wish to because they feel what is being taught is all too graphic. What of the children themselves? A while ago there was an interview with a mother whose daughter attended a school in the Isle of Man which was again under scrutiny when a 12 year old boy had argued with what was being taught as to there being more than two genders and was ejected from the class for expressing that. At the same school the mother in question had stated that her 12 year old daughter had been humiliated by having to put a condom on a carrot in front of sniggering boys, and had been so upset by that she no longer wanted to go to school. I think it is crucial to know what the children themselves think, whether they are uncomfortable, alarmed even! about what they are being imbued with and whether "some" because they like any other sector of society are not a homogenised mass, their experiences will have often shaped their understanding so umpteen variables will come into play, , and imo they should have a say in what is foisted upon them in this particular area. Stonewall, who are un elected lobbyists have been pushing various programmes in school and whilst the government may well have their guidelines as to what should be taught at the various stages of child development, individual testaments from parents often contradict that.

Freya5

vegansrock

Is it innocence or ignorance that people wishing to preserve? The fact is that most 11 year olds will have a smartphone and a high % will have viewed pornography or been shown it by an older child, surely it’s better to educate them in what they will have been curious about or didn’t understand than to have them turn to the internet for their sex education?

You are making a large generalisation about children aren't you. Where is the evidence for your claims. Just because you assume doesn't prove anything.

Sadly, I think many people on here would be shocked to the core if they knew just what many children around that age were accessing on their phones. I remember being quite shocked when my daughter, then at high school, showed me things she'd been sent on her phone - and that was something like 18 years ago. Like it or not, children and young people are seeing content many of us can't even imagine - so we need to give them the tools to deal with what they are seeing.

vegansrock

Is it innocence or ignorance that people wishing to preserve? The fact is that most 11 year olds will have a smartphone and a high % will have viewed pornography or been shown it by an older child, surely it’s better to educate them in what they will have been curious about or didn’t understand than to have them turn to the internet for their sex education?

You are making a large generalisation about children aren't you. Where is the evidence for your claims. Just because you assume doesn't prove anything.

Definitely Uk, reasonably rural Dorset state school. Thankfully an enlightened one.

Unusual school I would say, LtEve. In the UK?

vegansrock

Is it innocence or ignorance that people wishing to preserve? The fact is that most 11 year olds will have a smartphone and a high % will have viewed pornography or been shown it by an older child, surely it’s better to educate them in what they will have been curious about or didn’t understand than to have them turn to the internet for their sex education?

Innocence. In a 9 year old. Though I think some would still be 8?

At that age, some will be innocent and some wont be as innocent.

It’s a question of age appropriateness, though. 8 years old is not an appropriate age to be told about anal or oral sex and I would certainly withdraw my children from any class that discussed that. They’ve got more sense here, though.

Is it innocence or ignorance that people wishing to preserve? The fact is that most 11 year olds will have a smartphone and a high % will have viewed pornography or been shown it by an older child, surely it’s better to educate them in what they will have been curious about or didn’t understand than to have them turn to the internet for their sex education?

I learnt about anal sex when I was about 8 from page 3 of the Telegraph in the early 1970's. The Telegraph was much less prudish than the redtops and tended to use proper terminology in it's reports. rather than astericks in place of the words. Of course they called it buggery, I didn't know what that meant but being a resourceful child I looked it up in a dictionary. Can't remember being traumatised in the slightest or wanting to try it.
We had proper sex education at school when I was 9, three films starting with the differences between men and women, moving through to periods, errections and what intercourse was culminating in the final one filming a birth. It didn't make me desperate to try it and I remained a virgin until I was 18. I don't remember being taught about consent but then rape in marriage was still legal then. I was glad we had it at school as my parents were very religious and sex was never mentioned at home. I am very grateful they did not withdraw me from the lessons even though they were informed of the content, they were probably glad someone else was covering it.
Most little children, particularly girls, masturbate at times simply because it feels nice, it's not sexual to them as such and they may have to be told it's not something you do in public but it's perfectly normal.

Does anyone think or feel that we are being 'forced' to educate children about sex, and specific 'acts, at an ever-earlier age than what might be appropriate or necessary because pornography is so readily available, and entertainment is now so overtly sexual... so that we have to pre 'arm' them, before they come into contact with it?

In other words pornography and the entertainment world is forcing the pace? So much so that we can't really allow them to have that once-only time of 'innocence' where they, for a brief period in their lives, are free from the worries and problems associated with the adult world, and all that it entails - not just in terms of 'sex'.

I ask because I've remembered a time back in the very early 50s
at around age 9 sitting in the Saturday morning cinema - the Children's Cinema Matinee - with my cousin - when during one of the films, the inevitable 'love interest' was introduced in the story, and my cousin grimaced and said, as he always did when this happened, "just kiss 'er mister and get on with the film" (it became a long-standing joke as we got older). It bored me, too, and I remember the rest of the kids sighing with boredom, or giggling at the ludicrous sight of Jane simpering at Tarzan (so to speak).

We just were not interested in sexual and romantic liaisons. They got in the way of a good story.

Oh, the innocence LOL! Of course, times change, but I do wonder if children are being 'burdened' with information that we are now compelled to 'force' on them for their own protection to some extent because of the overtly 'sexualised' world around them?

Personally, I think that pornography being available at the click of a couple of keystrokes is not healthy - and I'm in favour of it being something one has to subscribe to instead of it being freely available on the 'net. But have been shot down so many times for saying so, that I never mention it normally. I've been told (mostly by men) that it's a 'right' to have it freely available and any attempt to change the dynamics is simply censorship being attempted by the "prudish". They could be right, though I've never regarded myself as a prude. However enjoyable pornography might be for many, I don't regard it as an 'essential' on the 'net - and would prefer that people had to sign up for it. But that's a debate for another thread.

Don't shoot me - it's only a thought and I aknowledge I could be quite wrong.

What I think many are forgetting is how the children actually think about these lessons.

Many kids will just snigger and sneer. They are not going to walk out, grateful to their teachers telling them about masturbation etc etc.

We got the sniggering and sneering out of the way in the first lesson. We looked at the words which we all called our anatomy, had a bit of a giggle and then talked more seriously. I was open and didn't show any shock whatsoever. In those lessons, some of the children were talking about gay relationships, transexuals and a lot of stuff they had heard from their older siblings. On the whole, even the most lively inattentive children actually sat and asked questions. Sadly, I used to do the Sex Ed for the whole year because the other teachers felt so uncomfortable about it.

There was such a variation in the innocence of the various members of the class. You could tell very quickly who was an only child sheltered from the inappropriate and the ones with teenaged brothers and sisters where they had heard talk.

Hmmm......A general sense of Dreadful Dangers and joylessness and few mentioning the benefits I think.

Benefits including that sexuality is "out there" a lot and many primary kids do have access to it and it's better to get information given well rather than not. As I said in one post, children brought up for centuries on farms are well aware from an early age of the facts of life.

Do you remember that Yorkshire farming family they had several series about on TV? It was brought up in one episode and the kids "knew" a lot and the Dad and eldest girl were laughing about it as in, "well we knew when we were 5".

I'm going to ask DiL about it as I'm genuinely interested to know what she and DS think, their kids are 11, 9, 7 and 5.

Do you mean some responses in this thread Wyllow? I haven't seen any that "seem determined to try to prevent age appropriate learning as if knowledge were dangerous rather than empowering".

What's being discussed is lesson content being age appropriate. Of course knowledge is empowering but only if the knowledge being given and received, is fully understood.

You have the comments in the wrong context and wrong order MerylStreep

And the part of the discussion I quoted from gives the context of why I was talking about why it is ok to teach that sex should be enjoyed (as adults of course)

I think healthy enjoyment (by which I mean non abusive) of our bodies is one of life's great gifts and it's never too early to learn age appropriate facts including safety and responsibility.
It's all over social media, magazines, and TV yet some responses seem determined to try to prevent age appropriate learning as if knowledge were "dangerous" rather than empowering.
My parents reacted as if boys were dangerous - without telling me why -no information at school except for odd whispers behind hands which was pretty partial, useless and often mis-informed. No sense it was something that had joy and happiness in it.

VioletSky

If you want to argue that sex education somehow enabled pedophiles Lathyrus you can do it with someone else given you know my history of abuse and that I would never place any child at risk.

If I had received the education on sex and consent that is actually happening in schools now (not the nonsense parroted here), I may have been able to protect myself and been able to get help. I had no idea what was happening until it was far too late for me

I will always advocate for safeguarding children and anyone who wants to twist that into something else doesn't deserve a respectful dialogue from me

You put this post up where you tell us ( in so many words) that something unwanted happened to you sexually.
Then you bite back at a poster who shows sympathy🤷‍♀️
We post information on here and usually get a response.
It’s what kind people do. If you didn’t want a response to that very loaded piece of information, you shouldn’t have written it.

What does women faking enjoyment of sex have to do with the content of sex education for 9 year old's?

Parents have always had the right to remove their children from these lessons. It is an everyday occurrence. They do not have to give reasons.

Ok

It was not meant to be provocative at all but it's not always easy to know whether statements are personal or generalised.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood and you thought it was provocative