Why did he have that in his bum?

[IfIcouldturnbacktime217]

So tonight DD asked me when she was going to bed about something a boy in nursery had on his bum. She said he pulled his pants down and showed her a worm then starts showing me her mini saying she doesn't have a worm! I've tried to ask how this happened and not got a lot of sense from her (she's 3) I think it may of been in the toilet but she said there was no teacher there. AIBU to be thinking they shouldn't be going the toilet together without a teacher and slightly alarmed by this?

I suppose one solution is to teach the correct terminology and basics of bodily autonomy in an age-appropriate way as soon as children enter school. To ensure a shared standard language as well as private family ones. Or does that happen anyway these days?

*"Grandad licking my cookie is a bit odd isn't it?

I agree.

That story is just horrific.

Not sure about that cookie story. Surely the teacher would ask the child what she was talking about especially as its such an odd thing to say.

@SilverGlassHare

I doubt anyone is saying that if a child said eg "Uncle John touched my mini yesterday" they'd think, "Hmmmm I've heard mini used as a term for the vulva but as the child hasn't specifically referenced her genitalia, I won't dig any deeper here".

They're saying that if a child, in passing, who doesn't seem distressed, said "My step-brother touched my cookie yesterday", it might not set off alarm bells. If the same child said "John touched my vulva" there's no ambiguity. So why on earth are people arguing FOR introducing ambiguity?

Can the child point? Is the word a colloquialism? If my kid used mini and pointed to her front, I wouldn't be sitting their like a dummy, I'd know what she meant.

@DrManhattan

Not sure about that cookie story. Surely the teacher would ask the child what she was talking about especially as its such an odd thing to say.

I strongly suspect an urban myth. Anyone with a bit of common sense would hear a loud alarm bell, let alone a teacher who must have had safeguarding training. Got to be bollocks. And even if it’s true, it’s such an outlier that it it no way supports the argument that ‘you shouldn’t let your child use words like cookie for fanny because abuse might go unnoticed’, as some are suggesting.

@Stravaig

Two 3 year olds showing each other body parts seems pretty normal, especially where they differ.

A child not being able to accurately describe what they've experienced because they've been taught ridiculous cutesy names is a massive safeguarding issue. It's not enough that parent or teacher can decode special language. Using the correct terms lets anyone at all pick up on a possible problem.

Cutesy names make me wonder if not very grounded parenting, so I might hesitate about playdates, etc.

You wouldn't let your child go on a playdate with a child that didn't use the word vulva or penis? Hope you don't live in my area, as your child wouldn't go on many playdates.

I've worked in nurseries and been a nanny for multiple families over many years and have NEVER heard a child say vulva, vagina or penis. Anyone who works with children should surely make it their business to know alternative words and also be switched on if a phrase could be ambiguous?

I think it’s totally acceptable to call a penis a willy and a vulva a mini in my opinion. I just don’t think referring to genitalia as penis and vulva at the age of 3 is necessary.
However, worm is a bit worrying as I actually thought this was a thread about tape worms!

Sounds like they go to the toilet together and she just saw his genitals. My son goes to the toilet alone at nursery and he’s 3 which only worries me as I wish they’d help him wipe his bottom!

@nolongersurprised

Working in the police what do you think are the most common words used in these cases? The 'flowery' words do not get ignored

Well, I found this part One convicted offender (who had assaulted 75 children by the time he was stopped) reported that when children knew the correct terms for their different body parts, he would leave them alone (Sprengelmeyer & Vaughan, 2000) relevant.

I’d rather my children didn’t have to report abuse to the police. If correct language has deterred what sounds like prolific offender then that’s a good argument for its use, don’t you think?

Is this a joke? You seriously believe we should use the correct terminology just in case our children meet a filthy bastard like this? Do you actually believe a paedophile would leave kids alone in this instance? You're seriously deluded.

@CellophaneFlower You wouldn't let your child go on a playdate with a child that didn't use the word vulva or penis?

Now that isn't what I wrote, is it? Accurate reading comprehension, accurate listening skills, these are important attributes in your profession.

[quote Stravaig]**@CellophaneFlower* You wouldn't let your child go on a playdate with a child that didn't use the word vulva or penis?*

Now that isn't what I wrote, is it? Accurate reading comprehension, accurate listening skills, these are important attributes in your profession.[/quote]
What did you mean by If correct language has deterred what sounds like prolific offender then that’s a good argument for its use, don’t you think? then? It implies you believe using the correct terminology may deter certain paedophiles, yes?

@CellophaneFlower That wasn't me.

Not everyone who a child might speak with has had safeguarding training. It makes no difference whether teachers would or should ask more questions if the person the child chooses to confide in is a neighbour, or a teenager at the local creche, or even a little friend who is reporting back half the story to a busy mum "X was upset because her brother touched her flower". The language matters because you want all children to have the best possible chance of being listened to. Deciding that a child's best chance at safety should be compromised just in case the kid might say"penis" in a public space is baffling to me. I can only assume such people have never been in the distressing position of hearing about actual abuse, so they think it's less likely to affect a child they know than it actually is.

[quote Stravaig]@CellophaneFlower That wasn't me.[/quote]
Apologies, I confused you with the other poster I quoted.

Didn't you say you'd possibly not allow your child on playdates with children of parents who teach them "cutesy" names for things though?

@JustUseTheDoorSanta

Not everyone who a child might speak with has had safeguarding training. It makes no difference whether teachers would or should ask more questions if the person the child chooses to confide in is a neighbour, or a teenager at the local creche, or even a little friend who is reporting back half the story to a busy mum "X was upset because her brother touched her flower". The language matters because you want all children to have the best possible chance of being listened to. Deciding that a child's best chance at safety should be compromised just in case the kid might say"penis" in a public space is baffling to me. I can only assume such people have never been in the distressing position of hearing about actual abuse, so they think it's less likely to affect a child they know than it actually is.

I think the issue here is there's a lot of sanctimonious people trying to belittle the OP and others. If it's really about safeguarding from abuse it might be advisable to use the word vagina, rather than vulva. Of course it's not technically right, but I can guarantee there are people a child may confide in that wouldn't have a clue what a vulva is.

Is this a joke? You seriously believe we should use the correct terminology just in case our children meet a filthy bastard like this?

Of course it’s not a joke. I think correct terminology is important, or at least widely used terminology is incredibly important.

So that children can describe - in a way that makes sense to others - what has happened to them, and also from a medical perspective.

Why is that funny?

Look, I’m not the author of the study. They also concluded that using well-known terms was protective. They also used the term “naming power” to point out that children may be more confident talking about what happened if they were comfortable naming their genitalia.

A verbal, articulate, confident young child will get their message across eventually, even if they’ve been taught to use stupid terminology. A shy child with an expressive speech delay will have additional barriers - seems stupid to me to add to that by using names that don’t immediately set off alarm bells.

If correct language has deterred what sounds like prolific offender then that’s a good argument for its use, don’t you think?

That’s exactly what happens in the study I posted, ddi you read it?

@CellophaneFlower I said I'd wonder how sensible and grounded the parenting is generally. By which I mean, if all I knew about a family was that their wee girl used cutesy terms for her genitalia then it introduces a question mark to my default standard of - if kids are mostly fed and sometimes clean, we're doing okay. Because to me not using the correct terminology is batshit insane. So I'd hesitate about sending off on a playdate until I knew more.

Playdates are behind me now, but I've been really surprised by this thread. I thought the trend was moving strongly towards teaching correct terminology so that children can communicate clearly with whoever they choose to. Instead I've learned a half-dozen new cutesy euphemisms. If I'd heard a wee girl use one of these, I'd automatically correct her, assuming she'd got terribly confused along the way, and of course her parents would want her to know the correct terms. Oops.

@eastegg

JeffThePilot

A child saying mini instead of an anatomical word would in no way prevent the CPS from prosecuting, stop spreading nonsense. The interviewer would use appropriate questions, diagrams, dolls etc to draw out what the child meant.

And consider this. A 3 yr old alleges that someone touches her vagina? Is it case closed, no questions asked, because they’ve used the correct word? Of course not. An astute questioner , doing their job properly, would still seek clarification, bearing in mind the child’s age. And perhaps would have to be alert to the fact that 3 year olds don’t generally say vagina and it might be suggested that an adult had put them up to it.

Don’t get me wrong, you can all teach your 3 year olds the anatomical words, that’s fine, just don’t pretend that will solve all potential difficulties or that there’s any great danger in saying ‘mini’ or whatever.

It wouldn’t, because the interviewer would have to go through a whole process of getting that small child to explain what she meant by “mini” which is a whole raft of further questioning which would be entirely avoidable if the child was able to use the correct word. As it happens I have been in this exact scenario with a child using this particular word, and it made matters a lot more difficult than they could have been.

[quote Stravaig]@CellophaneFlower I said I'd wonder how sensible and grounded the parenting is generally. By which I mean, if all I knew about a family was that their wee girl used cutesy terms for her genitalia then it introduces a question mark to my default standard of - if kids are mostly fed and sometimes clean, we're doing okay. Because to me not using the correct terminology is batshit insane. So I'd hesitate about sending off on a playdate until I knew more.

Playdates are behind me now, but I've been really surprised by this thread. I thought the trend was moving strongly towards teaching correct terminology so that children can communicate clearly with whoever they choose to. Instead I've learned a half-dozen new cutesy euphemisms. If I'd heard a wee girl use one of these, I'd automatically correct her, assuming she'd got terribly confused along the way, and of course her parents would want her to know the correct terms. Oops.[/quote]
Ok, so you're essentially saying that parents that don't use the correct terminology are bad parents? How judgemental. Parents will use a term which they're comfortable with, for whatever reason that may be. It certainly doesn't mean they are doing the bare minimum in all areas

Parents will use a term which they're comfortable with, for whatever reason that may be. It certainly doesn't mean they are doing the bare minimum in all areas

I agree.

@Sofiegiraffe

Parents will use a term which they're comfortable with, for whatever reason that may be. It certainly doesn't mean they are doing the bare minimum in all areas

I agree.

Yes - this should really be common sense. Even if you, a random mumsnetter, have no idea, the parents will know what the child meant because they'll have their own terminology.

She is 3 not 23

Mine used Willie and foo and still do but the also know the real words should they need to talk to a doctor etc.

Christ MN is getting more and more ridiculous every year.

And op. Prob worth mentioning tho nursery so better supervision can be sorted.

@CellophaneFlower Except that's not what I wrote, is it?

Why don't you engage substantively with the dozens of posters explaining why cutesy words are problematic, and accurate terminology preferable.

So far, all I've heard in defence of cutesy is that those adults prefer it, are more comfortable with it. That's not a good enough reason. These silly terms - flower, cookie, mini, tutu etc - they're all for girls. Internalised shame and misogyny and a lifetime of gendered stereotypes will be driving parental preference and comfort. Let's not pass that on our children.

@whenwillthemadnessend

She is 3 not 23

Mine used Willie and foo and still do but the also know the real words should they need to talk to a doctor etc.

Christ MN is getting more and more ridiculous every year.

And op. Prob worth mentioning tho nursery so better supervision can be sorted.

Foo

I hadn’t considered the communication issue but for me giving euphemisms signals that there’s something to be embarrassed or ashamed of. We don’t do it for any other body part with children. Some one talked about age appropriate language but words like penis shouldn’t be seen as adult, like they’re dirty, as they’re just about body parts.