Never mind

[SKL]

never mind

Edited April 30, 2017 by SKL

[Guest]

Coming from someone who used to teach about STIs and sexual health, I'm for separate regardless of age. I think it provides for a more open, honest dialogue. There are some things adults, much less kids won't ask in front of mixed company.

[MistyMountain]

Growing up we were separated by gender but OWL classes which anyone could take are not separated. I prefer it to not be separated. It is less taboo and mysterious.The kids did learn about the stuff you mention and I think it is good to be informed. It was done very respectfully and there were ground rules about being respectful before even starting and they were stuck to. I think it is good for kids to talk about these things in an age appropriate way with other adults. They had a good system where if kids have questions they can submit them anonymously. It also encourages open dialogue and talking to your kids about your values and encouraging them to ask any questions they have.

Edited April 29, 2017 by MistyMountain

[Guest]

I prefer them separated by sex/gender/whatever even if the content is the same.

[NorthwestMom]

Around here, public schools separate them by gender and then show both videos to both groups, among other lessons. It worked fine for DD.

 

Remember, puberty is coming earlier. I know girls who started their periods in 4th grade.

Edited April 29, 2017 by NorthwestMom

[MercyA]

At that age, I think the genders should be separated. These are private topics, and I think it would be more comfortable for all.

 

IMO 5th graders should already know the basics of reproduction and menstruation. I don't see a need, however, to talk to young girls about how boys might compare sizes or to talk to young boys about vaginal discharge.  :confused:

Edited April 29, 2017 by MercyA

[umsami]

When I did it way back in the Stone Age, it was separated by gender.

 

One thing I think would be good would be to allow for anonymous questions....so pass out papers for people to write anonymous questions on...or maybe they text them these days?

 

Sexual abuse/unwanted touching should be covered as well, with an emphasis on zero victim blaming, not your fault, etc.

Consent should be discussed as well... including touching, kissing, etc.  I remember having my bra strap pulled at that age.

 

 

Edited April 29, 2017 by umsami

[winterbaby]

Separate, and focused on the physical development of one's own sex and bare bones biology of how babies come about. The timing of the discussion of what's going on with the other sex, and of sexual issues, should be at the discretion of the parents at that age.

[MistyMountain]

 

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/spring-fever/ This reminds me of this article about how the Dutch sprinkle open dialogue throughout childhood and address many topics in an age appropriate way. It does not have to be embarrassing.

Edited April 29, 2017 by MistyMountain

[Crimson Wife]

We had a single-gender puberty-focused unit in 6th grade (too late for me personally) and then a co-ed s*x ed one in 10th grade (too late for many of my classmates but not me).

 

I didn't learn about cervical mucus until I was engaged and had to take our church's Natural Family Planning course.

[anmom]

We have been reading g books and having open discussion separated. However, I am curious if you have a video what it is? I would be interested in possibly showing it to them as well.

[Mergath]

I don't think separating the genders for this kind of stuff does anyone any favors. Why the need to act like puberty and sex are these mysterious things shrouded in secrecy that you have to be in gender-segregated groups to even hear about? I'd rather see age-appropriate, open, co-ed, ongoing lessons all through school.

[Crimson Wife]

I don't think separating the genders for this kind of stuff does anyone any favors. Why the need to act like puberty and sex are these mysterious things shrouded in secrecy that you have to be in gender-segregated groups to even hear about? I'd rather see age-appropriate, open, co-ed, ongoing lessons all through school.

 

I personally would have STRONGLY preferred that the high school s*x ed class been all-female. We had to practice putting prophylactics on cucumbers (this was the height of the AIDS epidemic) and I was mortified to be forced to do so in front of my male classmates. I would've opted myself out of the class entirely except that I knew that the classmates who did not participate (a Mormon girl and the members of the "Young Life" club) were bullied for doing so. 

 

[Tanaqui]

I've met too many older boys (and grown men!) who believed some or all of the following:

 

1. Girls and women can control their bleeding, just like we can "hold it in" for pee.

2. Girls and women actually need to pee less than men and boys do. (No, even if you're not pregnant, the uterus takes up some space, meaning our bladders are smaller!)

3. Periods only last one or two days, or, conversely, they aren't actually every month.

4. A clean, unopened tampon or pad is horrifically gross. (That one particularly galls when it's expressed by the same boy who, a week ago, was throwing condom balloons all over the classroom....)

5. Periods are always perfectly predictable.

6. Women do not produce smegma, and smegma is super disgusting at all times. (Therefore, circumcision!)

7. Women need to douche.

 

I've also heard the following from both men and women, especially young ones:

 

1. You can't get pregnant standing up, because gravity.

2. You can't get pregnant the very first time.

3. You can't get pregnant if you douche.

3a. Using coca-cola

3b. Using lysol (omg)

3c. Using listerine

3d. This will also prevent STDs.

4. You CAN get pregnant if you happen to swim in the same pool as some guy when he has an erection.

5. Men definitely have no control over erections ever.

6. Men and boys always have perfect control over erections.

7. Men just have to lust after everything that moves.

8. Normal women aren't interested in sex.

8a. Except certain types of sex.

9. Condoms are completely ineffective, so why bother?

10. Condoms never expire.

 

Well, suffice to say, there's a lot of ignorance floating about. I believe that this talk should start early, before they know enough to be embarrassed. Grossed out, maybe, but not embarrassed.

 

I really think that both boys and girls need to be educated about what everybody's body is going to be doing - and that needs to start young. Honestly, I don't think kindergarten is too early to start in with "babies, sperm, eggs" and "when you get bigger, your body will change". (You don't need to spell out at that point how the sperm gets to the egg, but I don't think it's harmful at all for kids to know!)

 

By the cusp of puberty, I think we need have moved past simply "babies" to "people have sex because they enjoy it, not just to make babies" and "these specific things will happen to your body, and also your classmate's bodies", and "this part can vary, and it's still normal". And they need the details! I wasn't told about discharge, and I was completely weirded out by it! Was I sick? Was it an infection? Nah, perfectly normal - but nobody told me. I know people in real life who weren't taught that they had to clean their parts, because it gets smelly, or they figure out that part alone but weren't told they shouldn't use soap, so they got painfully dried out. They could've used a matter-of-fact comment about this in health class, before it became an issue.

 

More disturbingly, I wasn't told that I might have a physical reaction to things I wasn't mentally interested in, especially during puberty when those hormones are running completely wild. You can bet I told the girls that sometimes, your body has the hots for people and situations that you have no interest in, because your body has kinda a one-track mind, but this is perfectly normal and you don't have to do anything about it if you don't want to. (Seriously, for a year there my body thought I might like to, um, spend some time with a boy I absolutely hated because he was a horrible bully. I could've used somebody explaining that this was normal, and not a sign I was a perverted self-hating freak!)

 

When I was a child, they did separate us by sex, and gave us different pamphlets. We promptly exchanged pamphlets so we could get both sides of the story. We wanted to know more. We didn't want to be ignorant.

[Crimson Wife]

 

When I was a child, they did separate us by sex, and gave us different pamphlets. We promptly exchanged pamphlets so we could get both sides of the story. We wanted to know more. We didn't want to be ignorant.

 

Having it be single-gender is not about keeping people ignorant but about making easily embarrassed adolescents feel a bit less uncomfortable discussing very personal matters. The only guy I want to see me put on a prophylactic is someone that I'm about to have s*x with.

[Tanaqui]

I can see that - but if you segregate by sex (which btw gets tricky if you have transgender students - obviously they need to go in the group for their sex for the more detailed puberty information, but that might make them uncomfortable in other ways) then both groups really need information on both predominant types of bodies.

[Janeway]

We had a single-gender puberty-focused unit in 6th grade (too late for me personally) and then a co-ed s*x ed one in 10th grade (too late for many of my classmates but not me).

 

I didn't learn about cervical mucus until I was engaged and had to take our church's Natural Family Planning course.

I didn't learn about cervical mucous until I read about it on the internet after I had two children.

[Crimson Wife]

I can see that - but if you segregate by sex (which btw gets tricky if you have transgender students - obviously they need to go in the group for their sex for the more detailed puberty information, but that might make them uncomfortable in other ways) then both groups really need information on both predominant types of bodies.

For the <1% of students who do not identify with their biological sex, a private individual session could be held. If it is a major metropolitan area with a large number of students, there could be a special class set up just for them.

 

Common sense dictates that some students with special needs are going to need individualized s*x ed. The school does not need to address those concerns in the standard unit since they aren't relevant to the overwhelming majority of students.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mergath]

Having it be single-gender is not about keeping people ignorant but about making easily embarrassed adolescents feel a bit less uncomfortable discussing very personal matters. The only guy I want to see me put on a prophylactic is someone that I'm about to have s*x with.

 

The entire reason the whole thing is so embarrassing is because of all the cultural taboos surrounding it in the first place. It's not like feeling ashamed or awkward about sex and puberty is somehow hard-wired into our species. If we're open with kids from a young age, don't bother with all the gender segregation crap, and just give everyone all the info the same way we talk about math or grammar, it will no longer be embarrassing. And that can only be a good thing, because kids who are too embarrassed to ask their questions tend to end up with a lot of incorrect information.

[SKL]

The entire reason the whole thing is so embarrassing is because of all the cultural taboos surrounding it in the first place. It's not like feeling ashamed or awkward about sex and puberty is somehow hard-wired into our species. If we're open with kids from a young age, don't bother with all the gender segregation crap, and just give everyone all the info the same way we talk about math or grammar, it will no longer be embarrassing. And that can only be a good thing, because kids who are too embarrassed to ask their questions tend to end up with a lot of incorrect information.

 

I disagree.  I think it is natural for kids to start feeling body-conscious and embarrassed about certain things around age 10.  My kids have recently entered this stage (one more so than the other).  This happens to coincide with the time bodies change and the time the sex ed videos happen in school.  Naturally it's going to be uncomfortable.

 

Talking about it in the privacy of our own homes is a whole different matter.  Talking about hard-ons with a group of 10yo girls and boys together at school?  I'm picturing my kids realizing what that is and simultaneously realizing that half of their classmates could be having an erection right now.  :P  No, I don't think that is necessary at 10/11yo.  The fact that their teacher is a man would make it that much more awkward.  (The girls are being taught this topic by the school nurse, much to their relief.)

 

Personally I think the "uncomfortable" stuff would be easier to absorb via reading vs. watching a video.  Something about reading print allows us to moderate the effect of uncomfortable communication, compared to video.  My kid was just explaining this to me yesterday.  :)

[bolt.]

I think group teaching is appropriate -- but I think most things should be limited to one-way communication by the teacher or a video.

 

The teacher should not try to initiate discussion or self disclosure. The teacher should explain that personal attributes and experiences have a lot of variance... s/he shouldn't ask the class to get personal in order to substantiate that point.

 

I think 5th grade is fair game to know "everything" biological and a lot about sexuality, arousal, and sexual experiences (from a reasonable and healthy perspective). I don't think there needs to be any secrets.

[Dmmetler]

I would also add-when you get to the discussion of actual TeA making point, that needs to include safety instructions not just for standard TeA bags, but for some of the more exotic flavors. This is probably something that, again, needs to be left initially to a book or video that can do so matter of factly.

 

I will say that being so interested in animal biology has in some ways been a really good TeA ed class for DD. It's given me a chance to slip in the "how humans are different" part, because, honestly, compared to TeA in the animal kingdom, even the most exotic human flavors are pretty tame.

[Wheres Toto]

I like the idea of submitting anonymous questions regardless of whether it's separated or together classes.

 

I'm kind of torn.  I could see kids in public school or groups being embarrassed in a group class, but I remember being embarrassed in my all-girls class getting the puberty movie.  

 

I think by high school age, the issues should be discussed with everyone together.   I think little kids learning about egg, sperm, etc. can certainly handle a mixed class.  I actually think if it's started young enough, the kids wouldn't think twice about the class being all together.  It's making it all mysterious that makes it weird.

 

I have a boy (11) and a girl (9) at home right now.  We've done the general talks, Each of them has their own books (although I'm pretty sure they've at least glanced at each others books).   When we were in Disney, my then 10 year old son asked me if I was on "my monthly bleed" (pretty obvious from the package of pads on the counter but I think it came up with regards to swimming).  A few weeks ago, my dd asked me to buy pads in her size at Target so they were available when she needed them. She then asked additional questions about how old I was, when I thought she might start, etc.  She did all this in front of her brother (and a dozen other people in Target).   Neither is embarrassed discussing any of this stuff in front of the other.

[Farrar]

I have come to think the OWL co-ed way is better... but also, when I was teaching, we used to separate the kids sometimes and I do think that both groups found that to be comforting and empowering sometimes, so I'm not really against that either. It's now been nearly a decade since I was in the classroom, and thinking about trans issues has evolved so much so I'm not sure how I would feel if I were teaching now. One of the best experiences I ever had teaching health was a girls retreat where we made pancakes and then had a huge array of period related products that everyone examined and then... gosh, this is going to sound nutty, but it wasn't planned, and this was the sort of wacky, small school I taught at, but the girls wanted to make art with them, so they did. It was so bizarre, but such a good day. Then we went for a hike. 

[Terabith]

My kids are in Catholic school. I was shocked that they were not divided by gender. Both girls were initially uncomfortable with the set up but wound up saying it was fine and there were good conversations that came out of it. They submitted questions anonymously. We'd read It's Perfectly Normal and It's Not the Stork at our house and been very open about such things.

[Crimson Wife]

I would also add-when you get to the discussion of actual TeA making point, that needs to include safety instructions not just for standard TeA bags, but for some of the more exotic flavors. This is probably something that, again, needs to be left initially to a book or video that can do so matter of factly.

 

Absolutely not. If someone feels the need to learn about stuff that goes beyond just standard PiV intercourse, that is something they should seek out on his/her own. There are a bazillion s*x guides available for sale on Amazon and these days they can be delivered discreetly to a locker at the local store if someone does not want it showing up in the mailbox.

 

I do NOT think schools should be in the position of normalizing kinky s*x and that would be the impression given by including it in s*x ed.

[magnificent_baby]

I don't think separating the genders for this kind of stuff does anyone any favors. Why the need to act like puberty and sex are these mysterious things shrouded in secrecy that you have to be in gender-segregated groups to even hear about? I'd rather see age-appropriate, open, co-ed, ongoing lessons all through school.

 

2 of my kids have gone through these classes so far and I'm going to guess that if classes were integrated it would significantly limit the comfort level when it's time for them to ask questions. And kids DO ask a lot of questions. There are a lot of hormones going on at this age, who wants to ask sensitive questions in the same room as their crush?? IMO, it would be detrimental to mix them for the all of the content.

[Crimson Wife]

Now if we're talking a simple warning to "make sure you use protection any time there is penetration", that is fine to include. But that's different than teaching kids how to have kinky s*x.

[winterbaby]

The main purpose of gender segregation at the fifth grade level, frankly, is to protect girls from nasty little boys who would make comments and insinuations at them if they were given detailed information about what is going on with their bodies. And yes, they would. The maturity level just isn't there and it's utopian to think you can make it be there by education.

 

And to protect people's modesty generally. A certain degree of discretion and modesty (one can debate how much) is part of being human, not just a social construct - it has to do with protecting the young, with family formation and pair bonding (reserving some things for your actual partner), and is part of how we kept everyone from being pregnant all the time with whoever else's baby before birth control was invented. In a word, it's part of sexual morality and even if you disagree with it that doesn't mean you can use access to other people's children through the school system to compel them to discard it. Different families and cultures have different standards, and different individuals have different personal comfort levels, about how much of this information to bring out in mixed company, and it's seriously not the school's (government's) job to override that and force everyone's children to ignore their own or their family's feelings. And CrimsonWife's story shows why opt-outs are an imperfect solution. The schools should try to meet people where they are at, culturally.

 

There's a difference between what a fifth grader should know and what an older teen or adult should know. And there's a difference between what one should know, and what should be discussed in a public school classroom. And I say this as somebody who plans to give my child great depth and breadth of information - I learned all this stuff by being plunked down with the radical feminist tome Our Bodies, Our Selves, and though I'm much more conservative in other ways now that's still my gold standard for detail about and attitude towards one's own female body.  I'm no friend of repression - but I also know from first-hand experience that the idea that radical openness will make sex completely unproblematic is as irrational as any traditional taboo. And I just don't want anyone but me discussing the details of sexual arousal and experience with my child. I'm aware that not all parents are going to step up on this; that's just too bad. That doesn't justify the school forcing every other child to have a sexual discussion (or in CrimsonWife's example, demonstration!) in front of their peers. The school can't fix everything. It's not their mission to reform our society and enlighten people's minds - and who gets to decide which direction that should go in?

[Mergath]

Absolutely not. If someone feels the need to learn about stuff that goes beyond just standard PiV intercourse, that is something they should seek out on his/her own. There are a bazillion s*x guides available for sale on Amazon and these days they can be delivered discreetly to a locker at the local store if someone does not want it showing up in the mailbox.

 

I do NOT think schools should be in the position of normalizing kinky s*x and that would be the impression given by including it in s*x ed.

 

I'm sure any lgbt kids would be delighted to know they don't deserve to learn how to have safe sex because it's too "kinky." :glare:

[Dmmetler]

I'm talking about the number of kids who think that a lot of non-standard practices aren't TeA because they do not lead to pregnancy. And the fact that not all forms of protection are created equal for all forms of TeA. It's not about normalizing-it's about not setting teens up for STDs because the only information they have about anything but pregnancy prevention comes from other teens and onlIne (which does a lot more to make kids aware than this stuff is out there than a talk about it in a middle or high school class does.) In addition, some kids fall into the LGBQTA spectrum somewhere. They don't become it by hearing about how to prevent disease transmission in a high school health class. They deserve appropriate, accurate information just as much as the straight kids do.

 

5th grade is not too early to start drumming that all TeA involves risk and that TeA is more than "How babies are made". If anything, getting the information out there when it's still at the "uh, gross!" stage is probably more effective than a few years later.

Edited April 29, 2017 by dmmetler

[bolt.]

Absolutely not. If someone feels the need to learn about stuff that goes beyond just standard PiV intercourse, that is something they should seek out on his/her own. There are a bazillion s*x guides available for sale on Amazon and these days they can be delivered discreetly to a locker at the local store if someone does not want it showing up in the mailbox.

 

I do NOT think schools should be in the position of normalizing kinky s*x and that would be the impression given by including it in s*x ed.

Interesting perspective: we should determine what kind of sex is "standard" then make sure that children who grow up to prefer it have more safety information than their peers? The ones who prefer "non standard" sexual activities should educate themselves, because it's easy and discrete? And the motive for this is to avoid "normalizing" it -- to make sure that schools actively avoid giving any impression that these activities are "normal" and ensure that people who prefer them know that they are perceived as "abnormal"?

 

That sounds like a double standard to me, and a seriously arbitrary one. Why not have all students order their own sex guides from amazon and leave them alone to read discretely? That would at least be fair and equal.

 

On the other hand [please read with irony] if the goal is to make sure some activities are identified as "abnormal" why not go all the way and just tell the kids: "If you aren't 100% piv all the time, that's not a normal urge." -- and then explain what to do about abnormal urges. It would be more effective than just not mentioning them!

[unsinkable]

With adults, it's not anyone's business who has sex with whom, unless they break the law.

 

But with kids...the message should be, what?

 

"Here are all the possible permutations..."

 

Sounds familiar: "any way you want it! It's your g-da#n right!"

 

So, just call Rachel Bloom and Bill Nye and get permission to use their video.

[winterbaby]

Interesting perspective: we should determine what kind of sex is "standard" then make sure that children who grow up to prefer it have more safety information than their peers? The ones who prefer "non standard" sexual activities should educate themselves, because it's easy and discrete? And the motive for this is to avoid "normalizing" it -- to make sure that schools actively avoid giving any impression that these activities are "normal" and ensure that people who prefer them know that they are perceived as "abnormal"?

 

This - actually everything about sex ed - should ideally be decided at the most local level possible, by a parents' council for each school. That would balance the advantages of discussing certain things in an objective, academic environment against the fact that it's really not the schools' job to use programs like this to try to move people's culture and morals by so much as a hair. Even if the culture is "wrong" per your opinion or mine. 

 

And it's easy to pooh-pooh "normalization" as a concern of repressive homophobes but actually a lot of feminists and medical professionals are concerned about growing pressure on heterosexual girls to perform, ahem, a certain act, that was not so common when we were growing up. A value-neutral presentation of "this is how you do this, this is how you do that" could easily be perceived as the school endorsing that this is normal now. And an "only if you want to!" disclaimer is pretty meaningless to young girls who are still figuring out their boundaries and how much what they actually want to do should balance against the desire to please boys - again, in an environment where even the school is communicating that certain demands are perfectly normal? There is no value-neutral way to discuss this; the way that's supposed to be value-neutral actually ends up subtly stripping kids (particularly girls) of some of the traditional tools for avoiding or delaying sex. I'm sure a lot of parents are perfectly willing to deal with other adults thinking they're horrible repressive conservatives if it preserves their daughters' ability to say "No, I'm not doing that! That's gross!" The theory that one should be careful to have no opinion on what's normal or abnormal, but still be able to rigidly uphold one's own subjective boundaries, isn't psychologically realistic, particularly not for teenagers, and particularly not for a teenager who may be fielding arguments from a partner keen to break down her boundaries, perhaps even using the sex ed curriculum's  authority to back up the idea that anything goes and anyone who doesn't think so is a backwards bigot.

 

I don't know how this should be balanced against making sure gay and bisexual boys know what they need to. It's a balancing act for sure. This needs to be a discussion among parents on the local level. If a certain group of people's kids are going to be put in a room together for a discussion of sexual behavior it seems like only common sense to get the parents themselves into a room first to decide what that will be.

[Garga]

The main purpose of gender segregation at the fifth grade level, frankly, is to protect girls from nasty little boys who would make comments and insinuations at them if they were given detailed information about what is going on with their bodies. And yes, they would. The maturity level just isn't there and it's utopian to think you can make it be there by education.

 

The above is my story.

 

EDITED: Decided to go back and remove the details. It was an ugly little story of a bully boy making mean comments during sex ed in 7th grade. END OF EDITING.

 

For any co-ed sex-ed class, the teacher should make it clear that any derrogatory comments would be treated with zero tolerance.

 

Perhaps if sex-ed was something that had been taught since the kids were very, very small, then the sort of thing that happened to me wouldn't happen, because it would be such a non-issue. But if the kids haven't been being taught all along and if they are going to be uncomfortable with the subject because it's new, then the teacher needs to say up front what sort of maturity she expects from the kids: no comments, no snickers directed at other students, no pointing, or whatever. Everyone listens and takes in the information, but doesn't bother the other students with comments or body language.

Edited April 29, 2017 by Garga

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Oral and anal sex is fairly common even among teens. Trying to brush either off as "kinky" and not up for discussion in a sex ed class is doing a disservice to the students involved.

[MistyMountain]

Telling kids that there are people out there that are homosexual and that if they are is ok is not going to make them gay or want to experiment sexually. They do not go into graphic details about methods. What it does is if a kid ends up gay they have a peer group that will accept them and they feel less ostracized. Why would someone try to experiment just because they hear people are gay and do not have standard intercourse.

 

The boys did not make comments or talk about girls when it is discussed up front about respect and making everyone feel safe. They hear that things that happen to girls is normal and that girls and boys hit puberty and develop at different rates and it is ok they are less likely to think it is something they can make fun of. There were plenty of questions that were asked when you are allowed to submit them anonymously and open dialogue both in class and at home is encouraged. A lot of the values stuff is part can be part of the home discussion.

Edited April 29, 2017 by MistyMountain

[winterbaby]

The above is my story. By the time I hit 7th grade, I was so hated by all my classmates because I was quirky that I sat in utter silence in every single class every single day of school and cried myself to sleep Every Single Night.

 

But still, when we had our co-ed sex-ed talk in 7th grade at the Catholic School with the nun doing the talk (that was a little odd), and she was reviewing menstruation with the class, one of the boys whom I'd never spoken to, because I sat in utter silence, and who had never spoken to me decided to say loudly to everyone, "Well, except for Garga!" He was insinuating that I wasn't sexually mature like the others as a way to shame me and show how very sexually undesirable I was and how everyone viewed me as a little girl while they were all maturing.

 

I know that can be an anomoly, but that was my life. I did nothing to anyone, in my silent shell, and yet they still found reasons to pick and yes, it was damanging to sit in front of 32 boys and girls and be shamed for being the least sexually attractive 12-year old in the class.

 

:grouphug:

 

I don't think it's that much of an anomaly. I had some similar experiences. Often girls getting bullied is part of a "mean girls" situation - or is thought of that way at least - but this is exactly the age where boys figure out they can join the dynamic by picking on unpopular girls in terms of sexuality or attractiveness.

 

I would like to think not tolerating such comments in the actual class would be bare minimum for how they run things, but even so, there's still lunch, after school, when the teacher's out of the room, etc. etc. etc.

[winterbaby]

Telling kids that there are people out there that are homosexual and that if they are is ok is not going to make them gay or want to experiment sexually. They do not go into graphic details about methods. What it does is if a kid ends up gay they have a peer group that will accept them and they feel less ostracized. Why would someone try to experiment just because they hear people are gay and do not have standard intercourse.

 

The boys did not make comments or talk about girls when it is discussed up front about respect and making everyone feel safe. They hear that things that happen to girls is normal and that girls and boys hit puberty and develop at different rates and it is ok they are less likely to think it is something they can make fun of. There were plenty of questions that were asked when you are allowed to submit them anonymously and open dialogue both in class and at home is encouraged. A lot of the values stuff is part can be part of the home discussion.

 

They do not go into graphic details about methods.

 

PP was forced to pretend a fruit was a male member and apply a condom to it.

The boys did not make comments or talk about girls when it is discussed up front about respect and making everyone feel safe.

 

I don't know what situation you're referring to but this has not been many women's experiences, leading to skepticism about whether educational methods can reliably shut down boys' tendency to be uncool about this stuff.

 

A lot of the values stuff is part can be part of the home discussion.

 

Values is intrinsic to the whole issue. It can't be boxed away. The whole idea that values is an optional side item is itself a value judgment, which many people don't share.

 

Give the parents control.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

They do not go into graphic details about methods.

 

PP was forced to pretend a fruit was a male member and apply a condom to it.

The boys did not make comments or talk about girls when it is discussed up front about respect and making everyone feel safe.

 

I don't know what situation you're referring to but this has not been many women's experiences, leading to skepticism about whether educational methods can reliably shut down boys' tendency to be uncool about this stuff.

 

A lot of the values stuff is part can be part of the home discussion.

 

Values is intrinsic to the whole issue. It can't be boxed away. The whole idea that values is an optional side item is itself a value judgment, which many people don't share.

 

Give the parents control.

The condom demonstration was in high school and is age appropriate. It would not be for 5th graders.

 

Explaining basic biology and safety is not a values issue.

[MistyMountain]

The value part is not an optional side it is actually the most important part that the curriculum is built around. I am talking about OWL but setting up a class like that is not difficult. The link I posted about is a country that uses that system and the statistics from that country about adults feeling like they made a good decision about their first encounter and teen pregnancy etc are good. It is not hard to talk to both parents and kids and discuss up front about not making each other feel bad. I found that talking about bullying and consent and that bodies develop at different rates and look different can alleviate the kids making fun of others. That occurs without a class. I did not have a class that was coed in 5th grade but I was bullied for being flat chested, skinny and not dressing girly enough.

Edited April 29, 2017 by MistyMountain

[winterbaby]

The condom demonstration was in high school and is age appropriate. It would not be for 5th graders.

 

Explaining basic biology and safety is not a values issue.

She was uncomfortable with it. I don't think there's any age where it becomes appropriate to compel a young girl to mime sexual behavior in front of her male classmates.

 

This whole discussion makes it clear that there's values-based disagreement as to exactly what counts as "basic." Trying to win a values argument by claiming that one's own values aren't actually values but purely objective doesn't do anything to convince the other side and is an abuse of the concept of objectivity. This is a question for parents in local communities.

[luuknam]

She was uncomfortable with it. I don't think there's any age where it becomes appropriate to compel a young girl to mime sexual behavior in front of her male classmates.

 

 

And there is an age where it's appropriate to compel a young girl to mime sexual behavior in front of her female classmates?

[bolt.]

This - actually everything about sex ed - should ideally be decided at the most local level possible, by a parents' council for each school. That would balance the advantages of discussing certain things in an objective, academic environment against the fact that it's really not the schools' job to use programs like this to try to move people's culture and morals by so much as a hair. Even if the culture is "wrong" per your opinion or mine.

 

And it's easy to pooh-pooh "normalization" as a concern of repressive homophobes but actually a lot of feminists and medical professionals are concerned about growing pressure on heterosexual girls to perform, ahem, a certain act, that was not so common when we were growing up. A value-neutral presentation of "this is how you do this, this is how you do that" could easily be perceived as the school endorsing that this is normal now. And an "only if you want to!" disclaimer is pretty meaningless to young girls who are still figuring out their boundaries and how much what they actually want to do should balance against the desire to please boys - again, in an environment where even the school is communicating that certain demands are perfectly normal? There is no value-neutral way to discuss this; the way that's supposed to be value-neutral actually ends up subtly stripping kids (particularly girls) of some of the traditional tools for avoiding or delaying sex. I'm sure a lot of parents are perfectly willing to deal with other adults thinking they're horrible repressive conservatives if it preserves their daughters' ability to say "No, I'm not doing that! That's gross!" The theory that one should be careful to have no opinion on what's normal or abnormal, but still be able to rigidly uphold one's own subjective boundaries, isn't psychologically realistic, particularly not for teenagers, and particularly not for a teenager who may be fielding arguments from a partner keen to break down her boundaries, perhaps even using the sex ed curriculum's authority to back up the idea that anything goes and anyone who doesn't think so is a backwards bigot.

 

I don't know how this should be balanced against making sure gay and bisexual boys know what they need to. It's a balancing act for sure. This needs to be a discussion among parents on the local level. If a certain group of people's kids are going to be put in a room together for a discussion of sexual behavior it seems like only common sense to get the parents themselves into a room first to decide what that will be.

I don't agree with the idea that a value-neutral presentation on the existence of certain sexual acts (and their safety requirements) serves as an invitation for anyone to "demand" anything. Demands are never normal. Being keen to break down the boundaries of a loved one is unfathomably, pathologically abnormal. Invitations are normal, and it's normal to accept or reject the idea of participation (without ignorance of what it is, without ever having thought about it before, and without the BS backup of the (false) assertion that 'nobody' likes or wants to do this-or-that because it's inherently gross).

 

That's not hard to teach in my opinion, and it's a far cry from being 'psychologically unrealistic'. It's probably the *main message* of healthy sex ed. It's the message of kindergarten 'sex ed' (no sexual information involved) that is taught from the ground up in my local public schools.

 

The 'traditional tools' that (supposedly) girls need to use (presumably against boys' pressure) never have been fantastic. It's much more powerful to simply be able to say that, "I don't want to do that because I don't want to; it's not my thing." What else is there to say? (What if I get pregnant? I'm afraid my dad will find out? People will think I'm a slut? No one will marry me if I'm damaged goods? -- Have these ever been healthy or successful excuses?)

 

Nothing about heterosexual encounter with a young woman is different (in this particular respect) from an encounter between two males. Therefore it is illogical to assert that gay and bi boys should know "what to do" but girls should be protected from the very notion that they might or might not want to do it.

 

Every party is free to prefer certain things, or find them "gross" on the basis of their personal taste and consent. People who want to do the types of things that worry doctors in terms of inept and inconsiderate approaches... they need more information about being careful, not less.

 

(And I also don't agree that it should be a parents' collaboration that makes these decisions. Students should be treated to a fair and balanced approach that is much more informed by the state of scientific research in the field than the opinions of various subcultures in the town.)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

She was uncomfortable with it. I don't think there's any age where it becomes appropriate to compel a young girl to mime sexual behavior in front of her male classmates.

 

This whole discussion makes it clear that there's values-based disagreement as to exactly what counts as "basic." Trying to win a values argument by claiming that one's own values aren't actually values but purely objective doesn't do anything to convince the other side and is an abuse of the concept of objectivity. This is a question for parents in local communities.

1.) I don't believe anyone said forcing students to do demonstrations if they are uncomfortable should be part of any curriculum.

 

2.) I was clarifying the age the incident occurred as you seemed to imply that the condom demonstration was part of a 5ty grade program.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

With adults, it's not anyone's business who has sex with whom, unless they break the law.

 

But with kids...the message should be, what?

 

"Here are all the possible permutations..."

 

Sounds familiar: "any way you want it! It's your g-da#n right!"

 

So, just call Rachel Bloom and Bill Nye and get permission to use their video.

I don't think a standard class could cover all the possible permutations. :D

[SKL]

nm

Edited April 30, 2017 by SKL

[SKL]

nm

 

Edited April 30, 2017 by SKL

[MercyA]

The above is my story. By the time I hit 7th grade, I was so hated by all my classmates because I was quirky that I sat in utter silence in every single class every single day of school and cried myself to sleep Every Single Night.

 

:grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug: , Garga. 

[Guest]

re the condom-cucumber demonstration and similar: I do think that is inappropriate! If someone feels it is absolutely necessary, the teacher could demonstrate and then send each student home with a condom and ask the parents to check off that it was practiced at home, so those who want to do it in private can. And those who want to laugh while doing it can!

 

Call me strange, but I have gotten to age 50 without ever putting a condom on anything. Also never been pregnant and never had an STD. I think it is a ridiculous thing to require, but if I'm wrong, then at least don't require it to be done in a group setting.

Wait wait wait. You've never helped apply a condom, or just never to something other than a living, breathing person?

 

I'm sorry this just broke my brain a little :p