Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that science teacher saying that a female's 'prime' is at 18 to a year 11 class is out of order?

105 replies

littlemissbumshine · 21/02/2020 19:35

DD came back today and her friend came over, they both came back talking about how shocked they were at their (30s male) science teacher.

Apparently they got onto the topic of puberty and the boys were chiming in with the usual stuff about boobs and ageing and the teacher said that it's a scientific fact that a female's prime is at 18 years of age...

I think it's disgusting. Especially when the class already has had problems with sexism (supposedly being tackled) after year 10 joiners have tipped the small class from being 9 boys and 6 girls, to 16 boys and 4 girls.

OP posts:
Rootd · 21/02/2020 19:36

Surely he meant from a reproductive standpoint?

Bezalelle · 21/02/2020 19:38

I think he's right, from a scientific viewpoint.

PickleMyPepper · 21/02/2020 19:40

Scientific fact is disgusting? Would you rather he'd lied?

Original poster
littlemissbumshine · 21/02/2020 19:40

Sorry! I missed it out because I was typing whilst watching telly, he said prime attractiveness (if that's the word).

OP posts:
Jess827 · 21/02/2020 19:40

Did he mean biologically for reproduction? (I.e. ability and health of the mother)

I actually thought it was younger, I seem to remember Romeo & Juliet being mentioned at school (... Which led into a history lesson about marriage age in other eras, and how fit mentally a set of early teens might be)

I guess what I'm saying is, do you understand the context under which it was discussed?

It can be a useful talking point to frame science, PSE or history.. or he might just be a creep. Who knows? But it's not necessarily inappropriate.

IamChipmunk · 21/02/2020 19:40

I teach health and social care, we talk about the life stages and reproduction and menopause, if he is being scientifically correct where is the issue?

Ahitsallover · 21/02/2020 19:40

I remember being told this when I did biology A level 30 years ago. In that case they were referring to 'reproductive prime age'. The teacher was a 20 something year old woman. I presume your DDs teacher meant the same.

Original poster
littlemissbumshine · 21/02/2020 19:41

I thought it was implied by just the word prime

OP posts:
LucilleBluth · 21/02/2020 19:41

Prime for what?

LooseGoose29 · 21/02/2020 19:42

I think in a science context ie for reproductive purposes, this is a fact I was taught at school.
I don't think it is a feminist issue - maybe it is but I don't feel it is.
If it were a business lesson or a citizenship lesson I could see your point. But biologically women are in their reproductive prime late teens that does not mean anyone is advocating teenage motherhood rather than education/careers so I don't have a problem with the statement.

SewItGoes · 21/02/2020 19:42

What did he say was the male's prime, or did that not come up? I hope he added that the physical reproductive prime isn't he only factor to consider when it comes to the optimal time to have a child.

Mulledwineinajug · 21/02/2020 19:42

Sorry, I think he’s right!

CherryPavlova · 21/02/2020 19:43

My daughters school had a fertility talk from Robert Winston. He would support the teacher but acknowledged that in a modern world girls needed to establish careers first and twenty three was a better age to think about babies.

Jess827 · 21/02/2020 19:43

he said prime attractiveness

Again, was he talking about gene theory / survival of the species in terms of mate attraction?

I can't see how a teacher would raise it other than in a Darwin / biology situation if it's a science teacher.

ohnooutofdateham · 21/02/2020 19:43

He said 'prime attractiveness' ? I'm not sure I believe that to be honest.

ohnooutofdateham · 21/02/2020 19:44

Although for most people it's probably true.

Iloveknockknockjokes · 21/02/2020 19:44

Sexist bull shit. Your DD should ask which scientific publications he is referring to and let us know tomorrow.

Tvtvtv · 21/02/2020 19:45

I always thought 22 was the biological peak for a woman and the most ‘attractive’ she’ll be to a male for the first reason.

Same to do with spotty skin - something to do with reproductive abilities too.

AhoyMrBeaver · 21/02/2020 19:45

I don't think he would have been talking about 'attractiveness'. Fertility and physical strength perhaps.

catanddogmake6 · 21/02/2020 19:46

Not helpful but all I thought was I don’t think the fictional Jean Brodie would agree. Now I have “Girls, I’m in my prime” in a Scottish accent by Maggie Smith going round my head. Tell the science department to take it up with the English department.

Socalm · 21/02/2020 19:46

What on earth is scientific about "prime" age? If it means lowest risk of birth defects that would be 20s anyway (?). But it sounds as if he meant attractiveness. He has no reason to mention that in a science class! Ew.

SewItGoes · 21/02/2020 19:47

Ah, just seen update. Prime attractiveness? Well, that might also be true, most of the time, but it sounds a bit... Confused

He should be more careful to avoid coming across as a creep.

Waveysnail · 21/02/2020 19:49

Isn't 18 biological prime age for woman to reproduce hence probably attraction from biological standpoint

LooseGoose29 · 21/02/2020 19:50

@socalm
I think I was taught (although going back 20 years) prime refers to most likely to have a healthy pregnancy with a positive outcome with minimum effect on ongoing maternal health.

Socalm · 21/02/2020 19:51

Physical strength would still be 20s to early 30s. I cant think of any "prime" that women reach at 18 actually...