To think that this cartoon really isn't too "graphic" for seven year olds?

[squirrel42]

Full news story is here: the latest Mail-sponsored "uproar" is over a sex education cartoon being shown at a primary school. Parents were apparently asked in advance if they wanted to view it first, some weren't able to attend the pre-viewing session but okayed it for their children to see anyway. At least one was later angry enough about what their child saw and some other children "copying" what they'd seen (presumbly not completely) that they have removed their child from the school.

I found a youtube link to the cartoon they're talking about here (NSFW obviously since it has cartoon sexual intercourse in it). Maybe it's my wooly liberal side speaking, but I really don't see what the problem is with that clip. You don't see any erect cartoon penises or a close up of "the action" just the general bodily movements, and sex is presented as an enjoyable activity engaged in by adults who love each other. Not quite what the parent says in their DM quote: "It should have said in the letter children would learn how to have sexual intercourse".

I really don't get what is in the cartoon that is apparently so objectionable for seven to eight year olds. Thoughts?

I really don't think you can comment on something you haven't seen.

I have said from the start that I believe strongly that accurate information is vital for children, and that all children are interested in the idea of sex and reproduction even if they haven't expressed the interest yet. The sooner they get the information the better - that way it becomes part of their mental furniture just like the 5 times table or how to spell which/witch. They are used to seeing cartoons and videos and being taught things in a visually engaging way - and that is what this video is doing. And knowing the facts is the best possible way to counter the tide if misinformation that surrounds them, not least from some of their little friends who are getting their knowledge of the subject from Big Brother, Eastenders, Embarrassing Bodies and Grand Theft Auto.

So how about this? Children have sexual feelings very very young. They don't know they're to do with sex and the opposite sex. This tells them their feelings are sexual, to do with the opposite sex, and that sex with other people is pleasurable.

Can you explain how this is helpful when they are too young to have a conversation about health, safety, personal protection, emotional maturity?

Can you tell me how this matches with the advice to answer questions when they are ready and curious, and then leave it for them to process?

Can you tell me why parents who don't want their children to see this should have to possibly stigmatise their children by excluding them?

Just for starters.

barefootinthepark - if the entire video was this one minute clip, you would have a very valid point. But as it happens, an above poster told us that it is part of an hour long video which focused mainly on puberty, and was probably intended as an explanation of why children were about to embark on puberty. So, in the context for which it was intended, I believe it does not do the things which you described. I didn't see any point at which the video said "right now you might be getting tingly feelings for boys/girls you know, and that is because your body wants to have sex with them, and sex is very enjoyable"

It said that sex is a thing grown ups do because it makes them feel good. That's a pretty important distinvtion.

gorionine - I can understand you being cautious from the descriptions of the video! The difficulty is that the YouTube clip is a one minute extract of the most 'controversial' part of the video, which I have not seen, but which another poster has said focuses mostly on puberty. I can't comment in too much detail on that, obviously, but I personally think the video has a lot of tact - you do not see the penis or the vagina during it, and it is a voiceover which describes the points you mentioned. Yeah, the vagina comment is something I can imagine kids going 'ewww' over, but it's no diffrent from other videos which describe it as 'moist'.

Overall, yes, I think it is a suitable video, but I don't think there is anything wrong with someone viewing it for themselves and deciding that it is not appropriate for their particular child when offered. Yes, the child will possibly hear some of the content on the playground, but then if you have declined to let your child watch the video, surely you would be giving 'the talk' yourself anyway, so it's not like they will be completely in the dark. I do take umbridge at the people describing the video as pornographic or disgusting however, because those are subjective terms which imply that people who allow their children to watch the video are in the wrong.

Sorry, just realised I made it sound as though I haven't seen any of it. To clarify: I have seen the YouTube clip, but not the entire film.

When they are going to embark on puberty.. but they aren't. They're seven. It's a rare child who starts puberty before nine or ten. And it's not just factual. Showing a couple chasing each other around the bedroom with feathers isn't just factual. It's fun fun fun.

Again, slightly naive to think that when seven year olds are told "it's just for grown ups" that's enough.

Why can't you just show it privately to your child? Why do you want mine to see it? Why do you want mine to be the one left out and told the story in chinese whispers or chased with a feather while other children laugh, or told "this is what it shows" with a demonstration of humping?

Why can't you just show it to your child if you feel that strongly? No doubt you'll have a sensible talk to and tell your child it's not for the playground. Great. Will every parent of the children that see it in class? No. Will they all listen to the teacher? No. Why do it in class? We're all different, is that not allowed any more?

When you take a sex education video and make is something people have to show to their children in a hidden away viewing at home, you are completetly contradicting the message that sex isn't wrong. Because the first thing that crosses my mind would be that children will ask "but if sex isn't anything to be ashamed of, why am I having to watch this at home and never talk to anyone about it?"

And the video is usually shown to children who are 9/10. I'm not forcing your child to watch a video if you don't want them to see it, and neither is the government. The seven years old comment is a bit of a misnomer, as most seven year olds will not be shown it, and there's no suggestion that they will.

And I'm not being naive when I say that it is enough for the seven year olds who are told it's just for grown ups. As you rightly pointed out, the number of seven year olds who have hit puberty is minute. So they would be completely incapable of acting on any rebellious thoughts, and by the time they are old enough, it won't be fresh in their minds. I'm not saying that 9/10yos will go and give it a go because they "can", but you're sort of implying that any child who sees this video will go out and start trying to have sex with people, which I really can't see happening at all.

I have 5 sisters, i am the oldest at 29 with 1 DD and another on the way i lost my virginity at 16, my sister is 24 has 2 children she had her first at 21 as did i she lost her virginity at 18. My other sister is 21 she has 3 children and she had her first at 16 lost her virginity at 13. My 4th sister is 18 and still a virgin and the youngest is 9 and never wants to have children or sex!! that will change.

Now those of us with children have been brought up exactly the same, mum told us re sex at 7-8 and had sex education at school yet my sister had her first at 16.

My point is every child is different and all we can do is our best, i dont think telling a child of 7 will make them go and have sex, i didnt and i still wouldnt have if i had seen that video, i saw more in films! I think personality has an awful lot to do with it too.

did that make any sense

Just watched the youtube video, IMO there is no need for that level of graphics/information for 7/8 year olds, I would certainly remove my children from viewing such a film.

I agree with the views on this helping/encouraging the over sexualization of children.

Why do children need to see sex 'in action' what is it meant to teach them?

Haven't social services investigated families where children have viewed porn in their homes? This may be a cartoon but I really don't see the difference.

DH and I are both science teachers. When DD is old enough and/or she asks, we will tell her what sex and babies are all about. I have no problem with her knowing the scientific and emotional (age-appropriate) details as and when she is ready. I am also generally pretty laid-back and liberal. Having said that, I agree with a lot of the posters who feel that seeing moving images is somehow very different to discussion with parents and even still pictures; my immediate visceral reaction is that age 7 is too young for this, and I would not be happy with dd seeing it at that age. 10/11 yes, 7/8 no.

And I also think the language of "slippery vagina" is a bit much....

"On another thread on the same subject, someone who had seen it and was telling the content mentionned:

-sex pleasurable
-stiff penis
-wet vagina
"

So what is wrong with any of these 3 statements?

There is nothing wrong with those statements.

Posters had said on this and other thread that sex education has to start young as the country has a high level of teenage pregnancies. I do agree with that, however I think I am allowed to desagree with the method.

I was questionning how these statements would make a difference in the teenage pregnancies because they do not relate to contraception at all. I was asking if in the film (complete, not just the youtube clip) there was any mention at all of contraception or not. Nobody yet has ansewred me that.

I think that this video is not actually usually shown to 7 year olds (although I personally wouldn't mind if it was.)

I think people are living in cloud-cuckoo land if they think that 7 year olds are not aware of and interested in sex, even if it is just where babies come from. And the playground is rife with rumours and misinformation. Arm children with facts - including that sex is pleasurable and fun. Better than the impression that sex is shameful, sleazy and violent which you would get if your source of information was the headlines in the tabloids, Big Brother and Grand Theft Auto.

And maybe it would be better if children learned about sex from their parents, but many won't, and of those that do, many will not get straight facts.

And , as an aside, some people have said that their children will be left out if they don't allow them to watch this video. I agree that this could be a problem - but when in the past I have said that I don't want to withdraw my children from RE and assemblies because I don't want them to feel left out, I have been told to deal with it. And withdrawing a child from seeing one video shown once is very different from withdrawing a child on a daily basis from a significant part of the school day. Not strictly relelvant, but I needed to get it off my chest!

Have to admit to feeling a bit about this particular cartoon.

Otoh I felt it was rather silly and possibly not an essential part to anybody's sexual education- I wouldn't make a fuss if my dcs were deprived of this particular one.

Otoh I wouldn't make a fuss if my 9yo did see it either; he's seen silly cartoons before. The contents would be unlikely to come as a great surprise: we do not live in the countryside, but have a fine collection of nature programmes, so he's probably known about the humping side of things since he was about 3.

In any case, I find it highly unlikely that he would rush out and try it out on the neighbour's dd just because he's seen a cartoon. And teenage pregnancies were happening long before sex education- most teens can probably work out the basics without special lessons, but then that isn't the point of sex education.

I thought that what started these threads was precisely the fact that this video had been shown to 7yo. Did I get my wires crossed?

The underlying message of that video clip, as mentioned by barefootinthepark, is that sex is "fun fun fun". To drum the point home, there is a child's voice over saying "they're having fun" when the cartoon characters are having sex. This is not a message that most parents want emphasised. Parents are trying to encourage abstinence until children reach the age of 16. I am sure that the rest of the 1 hour video does include a lot of information about contraception. I wonder how much of the message is about abstinence and morality. The church and many parents would be worried by the emphasis in the video. At the moment parental consent is allowed, but this may not always be the case in the future. I think that the HPV cervical cancer jab can be administered to girls without parental consent, a similar thing may one day happen with these videos.

A major issue here is who are the best people to educate 7 year olds about sex, parents or the educators?

Frankly I don't want the church having any influence at all on my child's education in this area. Or any other area, but that's another thread!

This may come as a surprise to you, claig, but the majority of parents in this country are not active adherents of the church

I am a Christian and I have always understood that Christian teaching on this point is that God did indeed intend sex to be pleasurable (= fun)

which is not to say that starting young is necessarily a good thing

but then there was absolutely nothing in the video clip that suggested sex between teenagers- the people in the clip were quite definitely adults and the voice over quite clearly started that this is something that adults do

I would have been far more concerned with a video that suggested that this is something adults do because it is their dreary and miserable duty

I still don't get the feather though

Frankly seeker I don't want the state to have any influence on my child's sex education. Maths, literature, art etc yes but not sex.

I am not a church-goer myself, but I can understand why church-goers may not want the video shown to their children. I think parents need to receive more information about the contents. Expecting them to come to the school, when they have work committments, may not be the best method. Many adults enjoy alcohol, some find drugs pleasurable, do 7 year olds need to be taught that?

"I think people are living in cloud-cuckoo land if they think that 7 year olds are not aware of and interested in sex"

I think you'll find many of us have been 7 years old therefore have a fairly good idea of what 7 years olds think. I certainly knew nothing about sex until about 10 years old, I'm in my 20's so hardly out of date in regards to modern attitudes to sex.

By ray81 Sat 06-Mar-10 17:56:07
Its personal choice as far as i am concerned if you dont want your DC to know about sex at 7 that is down to you, dont let them see the video. I want my DD to be informed and ask me any questions she has about sex,i dont see how this is going to make her go out and have sex at 13.the more she knows and understands the more likely she will be to make the right decision, at least i hope this will be the case.

Perhaps a study should be done, those happy for their cildren to see it show it to them, those not, dont. we can then all meet back here when they are 18 and see whos dc has had sex, at what age and if they are pg or had a baby. There may be a link you never know.

RAY are you not reading anyone else's posts or are you just choosing to ignore what some of us are saying??

For the umpteenth time - I have no objection to answering any questions they ask, or telling them about periods, puberty, sex - with facts & feelings - if you need to use this video to assist you in doing that with your children then that's up to you, but could you at least try to understand that just because some of us choose not to show our children this video, it does not mean they are uninformed about puberty & sex.

""For the umpteenth time - I have no objection to answering any questions they ask, or telling them about periods, puberty, sex - with facts & feelings - if you need to use this video to assist you in doing that with your children then that's up to you, but could you at least try to understand that just because some of us choose not to show our children this video, it does not mean they are uninformed about puberty & sex.""

Thank you ChippingIn! I wish I had said that!

"Frankly seeker I don't want the state to have any influence on my child's sex education"

So withdraw them. We have a state education system in this country, not a church one.

seeker, Thediaryofanobody pays taxes to the state and is entitled to her views about how the state should be spending that money and what its priorities should be. It is not an issue of church vs state. She could possibly be an atheist.