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

Age appropriate sex and relationship education should be part of the curriculum. I don’t see children as ‘innocent’, more that they’re too young to understand or process some of the mechanics of sexual activities.
My mum told me about periods when I was about 10-11 and asked what her sanitary towels were for. She never discussed sex other than passing on her own mothers advice about not letting boys ‘down there’ because boys can’t control themselves like we can.
The biology teacher was tasked with our ‘birds and bees’ classes, there were to be two, we were 13 - 14 years old. Lesson one, we all sat waiting, Miss did birds, bees, pollination and said we’d ‘discuss further’ in the next lesson. Miss was so embarrassed during lesson 2 that the class rescued her. We were coed but for these two classes, boys and girls were separated
No one would want to return to this kind of nonsense. I don’t want to perpetuate the idea of childhood innocence, as though it’s a Thing. I don’t believe primary school children need instructing on various sexual practices. Maybe Miss could return and do the birds and the bees

Doodledog

Children having sex at all is illegal, so legality isn’t the issue

They might ‘know about’ all manner of sexual practices, but do they really need to discuss them at 9? I suppose it comes down to the purpose of the classes. Is it to prepare them for when their bodies change and they start having sexual feelings, or to teach them how to engage in sexual acts? Personally I think that the former approach is healthier, and that encouraging exploration within consensual boundaries will allow them to find out for themselves what they find enjoyable.

I agree that if some children have been exposed to or traumatised by pornography they may want and need to be reassured about how far they will be expected to do the things they have seen - what a world. Is that a job for teachers though? That brings us back to tails wagging dogs, I think.

We, as a society, need to think about how we can allow freedom of choice for adults whilst protecting children from the effects of that. I don’t think that a child can give informed consent to viewing porn (morally as well as legally). When things are seen they can’t be unseen, and shrugging our collective shoulders and saying ‘oh well, they know about these things from the Internet, so we’d better expand sex ed to include them’ doesn’t feel to me to be the best way of dealing with the problem.

👏👏👏

Lathyrus wrote:

"I was responding to Caleos post and agree with what she has explained more fully about an educators understanding of children and how expertise in children’s thinking and learning is important.

But I would reiterate that we only know them in one context, for instance where there are responsible, sympathetic adults that order their environment. Out of school, where they may be the only responsible person in the home, their level of emotional and social understanding may be quite different.

We see and know just part of the pattern that makes the whole."

I agree that the classroom can only be partial experience of social life. Educating a sociable human being is best done, as I think you are saying, where events actually happen. However , teachers are specially trained to lead the child to understand and criticise raw events towards discussing the moral and practical implications of the event, and to do so in language that matches the individual ability of each child .
It's sometimes popularly supposed that teaching is easy and no big deal, however teaching involves knowledge of language as means of communication at at least undergraduate level subject

It is because I don't think that teaching is easy that I wonder at the wisdom of expecting this sort of thing from teachers.

Dealing with children traumatised by pornography, which seems to be the rationale behind including rather more graphic content in sex education, is beyond the remit of a primary teacher, surely? I have only taught adults, but even there the expectation is that people refer when faced with something beyond our remit.

Clearly, if something is on the curriculum it has to be delivered, but that doesn't mean that it should have to be, which is what we are discussing, I guess.

Whilst I don't think we should be automatically teaching about anal sex or other practises when the children are aged 9, I do think that if the questions being asked by the children involve this, they should be allowed to respond positively or neutrally to address these things.
When I grew up and somebody talked about anal sex I was horrified and thought they were perverts. It took years before I even realised that it was considered "normal" by many people. Knowing at least gives me the chance to respond as a person who just sees that I have the choice to consent rather than thinking that my boyfriend is a sex fiend.
Having taught Sex Ed I know that in one school (inner city with many social problems, poverty, etc) those issues (and worse) would have arisen through question and answers , in another (less social problems and poverty) the children engaged less and the more explicit questions were unlikely to be raised.
I don't think the issue is so black and white.

I don't think the issue is so black and white.
Nor do I, and I didn't suggest otherwise. Responding to a question is different from bringing something up. As I have said throughout this thread IMO children should be left to learn for themselves what they want to do, after being taught about changes in their bodies and that they have a right to say no to anything that makes them uncomfortable (and yes to anything that doesn't).

Sounds like we're agreeing to agree in many areas, Doodledog!

icanhandthemback

Sounds like we're agreeing to agree in many areas, Doodledog!

Yes, I don't think there has been as much disagreement as some have liked to suggest. Not all, but most people are saying pretty much what I have said, yet the accusations of prudery and naivety (not to mention believing everything we read) have persisted.

But if you read most posts, people are reiterating the meaning of what you’ve said. Expressing concern about the age things are taught, or questioning the need for such detail of what’s being taught is sensible.
When I was at school, sex education was intended to stop girls getting pregnant and to teach boys that sex could result in pregnancy which would be their responsibility as well as that of the girl. It came under the heading of respect. When AIDS started, the emphasis was even more heavily aimed at safe sex i.e. not without a condom and no exchange of bodily fluids. I don’t recall lessons including a Karma Sutra of sexual possibilities. In fact until the outburst over 50 shades, if I thought about anal sex at all, it was because that was the only possibility in a gay relationship. I guess I was naive.

Is that to me, or to ichtb, Molly?

If to me, I agree

It was to you Doodledog, I just forgot to add your name, sorry. I also meant to say
Expressing concern about the age things are taught, or questioning the need for such detail of what’s being taught is sensible not naive or prudish.

I agree with that, too .

Doodledog wrote:
"It is because I don't think that teaching is easy that I wonder at the wisdom of expecting this sort of thing from teachers.

"Dealing with children traumatised by pornography, which seems to be the rationale behind including rather more graphic content in sex education, is beyond the remit of a primary teacher, surely? I have only taught adults, but even there the expectation is that people refer when faced with something beyond our remit. "

Porn and other lies or disinformation can be dealt with by all of us by means of condemnation of lies and disinformation and substitution by truthful stories and integrity. Adults too need to think critically.

Mollygo Expressing concern about the age things are taught, or questioning the need for such detail of what’s being taught is sensible not naive or prudish.

I agree. Sensible people are concerned and do question.

I'm naive and prudish - nothing wrong with that either, imo.

Porn and other lies or disinformation can be dealt with by all of us by means of condemnation of lies and disinformation and substitution by truthful stories and integrity. Adults too need to think critically.

Er, yes. But what has that to do with sex education?

The biology of sex is simple; and relatively simple to teach.

But the stumbling block is trying to explain to pre-pubertal children that sex is actually fun and pleasurable and not simply done as an act of reproduction. As one of my GC said: "Mummy, why do you let Dad do that to you?"

I know that the message my children were given is that love and respect and kindness are central to sex; that you only do it with people for whom you have respect, and who respect you. An ideal I know, but it does allow for all sorts of sexual practices as long as they fulfil those conditions.

I do think my AC have grown up with self-respect and respect for others and that this has informed all areas of their adult lives, sexual and otherwise.

The sad thing is that proliferation of easily available porn has detached sex from relationships in a more profound way that in earlier times. I did not really have to face that when bringing up my children.

Doodledog, what porn has to do with sex education is that disinformation about human relationships is widespread, including among quite young children . Sexual behaviour is a very important human relationship . Teachers are especially well placed to present better attitudes ; story is an important method of presenting good attitudes to sexual relationships.

Just reminds me of my elderly foster mother wondering why John, a cousin all of us had known was homosexual, never married. David just said” Auntie, John’s homosexual so won’t be turning up with a girlfriend, ever “. Her shocked response was “Oh no he isn’t. I changed his nappy when he was a baby so I know he’s a normal male “
She honestly thought that homosexual men were born with genitalia completely different to either the male or female sex .