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

[littlemissbumshine]

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.

Saying prime attractiveness is bang out of order.
I think from a fertility point of view women are at their reproductive peak from late teens to early twenties. But there's more to life than reproduction!

You drip fed “attractiveness” after several posters told you he was scientifically correct. Come off it.

Given that under 19 is considered a higher risk for child birth, (higher risk is under I9 and over 38 I think?)and the female body is not fully mature until 19/20 I don't think he could have meant prime for child bearing.
Sounds like a lecherous creep. Probably is. Half my teachers were anyway.

It's not even true from a fertility perspective. 18 year old girls have higher risks in pregnancy for a start, and female fertility is the same from reaching a normal level in early 20s until early 30s. www.britishfertilitysociety.org.uk/fei/at-what-age-does-fertility-begin-to-decrease/
Teacher is sexist and also incompetent to teach biology.

I understood 18 - 26 were the best child bearing years for women.

It's not even true from a fertility perspective. 18 year old girls have higher risks in pregnancy for a start, and female fertility is the same from reaching a normal level in early 20s until early 30s. www.britishfertilitysociety.org.uk/fei/at-what-age-does-fertility-begin-to-decrease/

This.

Prime couldnt be just one year anyway - can you imagine women who have quite a number of fertile years and generally only have one baby at a time just having one year that is prime and it being still in the high risk category.

Well you should take it up with his Head of Dept, beginning with what he actually said to ensure your DD did hear correctly and pass it to you correctly.

he said prime attractiveness

In what context? Prime attractiveness for reproducing, he's about right.

I don't believe any science teacher would say attractiveness and mean it in the way that you are implying.

It’s referring to reproductive prime, teenagers saying he deliberatly meant attractiveness are most likely misunderstanding or over egging it. There’s no way a science teacher would have told giggling teenagers it was a ‘scientific fact’ about attractiveness which is subjective anyway. YABU

When I was In College we where taught genetically body wise it’s all down hill from 25 so I guess you peak not much before.

he said prime attractiveness

Did he ?

Depressing. In any sense. I don’t care if it’s “scientifically accurate.” Society has surely moved on from the only “scientific” value of women being to fuck (either for male pleasure of procreation).

I read something today that has really bothered me (because I suspect there may be some truth to it) about woman being commodities and men being consumers. This charming “scientific fact” slaps a nice best before date on all women.

Dino it was a science lesson though, should we not teach facts now in order to avoid upsetting people? They can learn about society in the lessons relevant to that, and science in science lessons.

Top result for the search "maternal age child mortality uk" from a university in the UK:

Maternal age is also associated with infant mortality. Children of very young mothers have a substantially higher IMR; the IMR for mothers aged under 20 years is 6.1 deaths per 1,000 live births compared with 3.4 deaths per 1,000 live births in mothers aged 25 to 29 years in England and Wales10.

I don’t care if it’s “scientifically accurate.” Society has surely moved on from the only “scientific” value of women being to fuck (either for male pleasure of procreation).

It was a biology lesson

Fertility is only one element of reproduction. Late teens have high fertility and are at a significant advantage in regard to having an uncomplicated childbirth. It would logically fit that women are also most attractive at this age. I would struggle to feel offended.

Girls and young women between age 10 and 19 have the highest range of pregnancy and labour complications globally.

So for maternal health, a couple of years older than 18 is a better bet.

If it was prime attractiveness that was said, surely that is subjective and not determined by some law of science I haven’t heard about?

If it was just “prime” what does that mean? Strength? Resilience? Fertility? Mothering skills? Sexual prowess? Intelligence? Common sense? Organisational skills?

I wonder if the males “prime” age was discussed? I would also like someone who knows about the year 10 biology to quote the part of curriculum that states that pupils must know the “prime” age of women. Science lesson? Bollocks. I think the male teacher was enjoying the banter of the male pupils and was trying to be down with the kids with his scientific “fact.”

I mean it seems obvious that girl children being forced into marriage which results in pregnancy is a huge risk to their health - but I remember being surprised that being 17 or 18 carries a higher risk.

*I don’t care if it’s “scientifically accurate.” Society has surely moved on from the only “scientific” value of women being to fuck (either for male pleasure of procreation).

It was a biology lesson.*

Really? You think teaching kids about a woman’s “prime” is on the biology curriculum?

He could have said “a woman is most fertile at 18” if that’s what he meant? Using this term in this way is loaded.

dino I’m a science teacher. It’s definitely not on the gcse spec for AQA exam board.
It’s a shitty thing to say to a year 11 class without further discussion. If I heard a story like this about a colleague I’d be asking that colleague exactly what was said.

And yes, it strikes me that this 'biology lesson' was everyday misogyny.

Simple declarations about a woman's 'prime' are reductive and stem from values that prize the act of impregnation itself.

Yabu, its true.