Explicit Sex Ed material for 5 years olds!!!

[vintageteacups]

sex ed for 5 years olds

I think this is extremely wrong on so many levels. Would you seriously like your 5 yr olds to be told about sex like this???

and I don't understand this "moral-free zone" business - have you looked any further than the fact that the KS2 curriculumn (which overs 7-11yr olds) teaches about the facts of sex? Do you realise it goes into relationships, (not just bf/gf, gf/gf, bf/bf but with other people in general)???

The first book my DD ever chose from the school library was one of those 'life cycle of a...' series.

Snails. Fantastic, hermaphrodite reproduction in the first week of reception

I'm with the Guardian rather than the DM take on this. The actual PSHE lessons are age-appropriate. If there are materials suitable for 5-10 year olds, teachers do actually distinguish which parts are appropriate for which ages.

How old were the people who agree with sex ed at age 5-7 had sex below the age of 16? (just out of interest?)
I didn't. Not till 20, I'm 50 now and have had exactly one partner. Your point was what?

I think when people say "morals free zone" they are usually coming from the assumption that they would prefer their DC to be taught that sex outside marriage is not acceptable.

and also I don't think it's about "rubbish" parents at all. I have 3 boys, they know I have a period each month (well DS3 doesn' yet- he's not asked anything about it yet). As it happens I'm single parent who isn't at all averse to the idea of potentialy in the future having another partner and maybe even more children - so we've discussed parent break-ups, step families etc (they're very keen for me to find a "nice man and have another brother or sister.......but they'd really like a sister" ). Growing up I only knew one boy who lived in a LP parent family (there may have been others but it was never talked about - was too much of a "stigma" attached to it back then). My parents stayed together "for the children" (a common belief back then that it was better to stay together for the children than to end a bad relationship). They never had any need to talk to me about single parent families, I didn't know any (apart from a vague knowledge of a boy at school who was teased mercilessly by many about it ) and they didn't know any (apart from another friend whose mother had died - so they talked to me about that situation - but not the general picture). There was no need in their eyes to do so.

We didn't (afaik) know any gay or transgender people either - so again not something I asked about - or that they thought to mention to me (I first learned about those from a magazine......),.

It will be natural for most parents to talk about sex and relationships in terms of what they know and have experienced, or what their children ask about. If the child never asks about something which isn't found within the parents family and social group it's highly unlikely that parents will think to tell them about it.

Every family will have it's own unique outlook and experiences of sex and relationships - and that is what they will teach their children. For some - it will cover the entire spectrum - others will have a much smaller experience to draw on to talk to their children about.

Sex and relationships education in schools offer children access to the entire world of sex and relationships (both intimate and non-intimate) so they can hopefully be more tolerant and understanding in the future.

In the same way that telling an enquiring 7yr old (as I did recently) that yes "2 boys can love each other" isn't going to turn him gay - neither is educating children and young adults about relationships and sex (and really if you look at the ncb website very little of it is about the actual "sex") going to make them rush out to have sex.

Our of interest - how do you feel about educating children about drugs at the upper end of Primary school and in senior school???

Grimma at the book your DD brought home

Last year we had a fly/maggot problem (not helped by a very hot period of weather and me being to ill to always remember to put the bins out)....we found out all sorts of interesting information about flies and maggots - and all 3 DS's were rather intersted in how flies mate

Bramshott - fair enough...that may be your assumption about the term 'moral-free zone'...mine is somewhat different.

I don't have any particular axe to grind regarding sex outside marriage. I'd be something of a hypocrite if I did .

But making it clear that consequence-free sexual incontinence is likely to lead to STIs and unwanted pregancies is another thing altogether.

To put oneself in a position where one ends up raising children one has not wanted, or for whom one cannot provide, is irresponsible and, to my mind, immoral.

This is where I was coming from.

Baroque - re drugs education...yup, I'm all for it...but again, I'm curious about cause and effect here - more sex ed/drugs ed etc - is it causing earlier and earlier experimentation, resulting in higher drug abuse?

"But making it clear that consequence-free sexual incontinence is likely to lead to STIs and unwanted pregancies is another thing altogether."

that's what SRE includes..........

The older curriculmn goes into the difficulties of being a single parent, help for young people - and STI's etc.

When my DS's (together) asked about how babies were made I didn't go into details about condoms and STI's and contraception - because it was irrlevant them. They didn't rush out and have sex after I'd told them.

You know when you see an advert for something advertised as being "from £££'s?" And when you look that's the cheap, bog standard, no added extras prices, if you want the thing that does more you have to pay more money - so the "from" is just a starting guide.

Well when it says "from" 7yrs old it does't mean that they get it all thrown at them at 7 (or 5) years old. It means they get given the basic, no added extras bit then.......and as they get older they more........

On cause and effect - coming from a generation raised on the cusp of the 'permissive society', with only basic sex ed in secondary school - I really don't believe education is in any way the cause of increase in activity, its trying to deal with the consequences of changes in society and in particular popular culture.

so you're all for drug education................yet drugs (excluding tobacco and alcohol) are illegal no matter HOW old you are.....

I do't think there was much drug education in the 60's and 70#s.............yet drug use in the 70's was rampant.

agree with Grimma there.

I used 'Mummy laid an egg' (one of the books pictured by the DM) to talk to my 4.5yo DD about my pregnancy when I was expecting her DB. I also used a very funky 70s book (all beards and VW beetles) which I had read as a small child.

Doesn't seem to have caused my DD any issues at all and there is the added benefit that school-based sex education won't come as a complete surprise to her (nor will she be left to the tender mercies of playground gossip).

Baroque - to be clear, I believe drugs 'education' should seek to prevent drug abuse, with clear explanations of the harmful effects thereof.

Just as sex ed should.

Re 1970s - drugs use was not rampant...amongst children anyway. Sure, the middle classes enjoyed a spliff now and then - but there was no ecstasy at teen parties etc etc.

so if drugs "education" seeks to prevent drug abuse - why can't sex and relationships (sorry but the relationships part is very important as that is what the vast part of the curriculum at all ages covers) seek to prevent underage sex, abuse and the likes?

AFAIK around 25-30% of girls start their periods at primary school these days. 8yo isn't unusual. The idea that could happen with no info what it is... Is that the level of"innocence" we want? How about saying NO to nice Uncle Paedo? Don't you want kids to be prepared for these potential situations in an age-appropriate way?

The post was more about graphic sex ed for younger children rathe than the period talk (i've done that with dd (9) when she was 8.

LMAO at teaching sex ed at 15.

They will have learned ALL about it by then - in the playground, on television, from lads mags with Agony Uncle experts like Danny Dyer, from internet chats, from films and playground porn... I know where I would like my DS to learn about sex - at school and at home.

Would be interested to see evidence that abstinence based sex ed leads to fewer pregnancies and STIs. Bristol Palin - fine example of someone brought up with abstinence based sex ed.

I remember reading somewhere that unprotected anal sex is most widely practised in the US not by gay men but by Christian teenagers proudly wearing their "True Love Waits" chastity rings - because it don't count. Petra Boynton and PZ Myers usually have some good stuff around this subject and the folly of leaving sex ed to late and relying on parents to deliver it. Sorry in a rush otherwise would find a link.

piprabit - i've got the 70s book - where it shows the baby comes out with its arms outstretched Is that the one? Its brilliant.grin They should reprint it.

or

Cool - I love the German translation

My 7 and 5 year olds know the man puts his penis into the woman's vagina 'willy and wee-wee hole' are their terms and sperms swim in to an egg and a baby grows. They asked - questions arise when brothers and sisters bathe together. I tell them it feels nice if both people want to do it and feels horrid if either person doesn't - like tickle fights. They don't want to know more now but the Year Ones talk about it and the school isn't teaching anything yet - I'd rather tell them than have their friends' strange little theories take hold.

DD1 (aged 7) is fascinated by how lesbians have babies though. (We have gay friends with a daughter.) I said they had to borrow a penis which wasn't quite what I meant so changed it to saying a friend who was a man gave them some of his sperm to make the baby. Don't know why talking about it has to be complicated really.

Debating the timing and content of sex education is all very well but I reckon the threats of internet porn addiction, casual website pick-ups, friends competing to lose their virginity, boys bullying girls into sex to keep them and Facebook bullying by ex-partners are what kids really need to be warned about. Being sexually active and not smart about your choice of boy/girl, especially if they are immature, does put a kid at emotional risk.

Kids' brains and emotions vary. It's like doing acid . One kid can do 10 tabs every week, another does one and feels the affects for months afterwards.

HelenMM - most of those issue you have mentioned are covered in SRE in schools...........

himalaya, perhaps we should start a campaign??

I think this would be a good thing, Sex Ed in this country is currently appalling my 15yr old DD has had 1 lesson so far as part of science which explained it from a biological point of view and my 14yr old DS hasn't even had that yet. Although apparently they have a discussion on teenage pregnancy.

I put a lot of effort into teaching them about sex and relationships but I think that schools need to play their part too. So many teens have no real idea, their knowledge of sex is made up of myths like I CAN'T get pregnant at a certain time of the month, and then they do and we complain when really they haven't been educated enough BY US.

I am also thoroughly pissed off that there is no acknowledgement by my DCs school of homosexuality or bisexuality. According to DCs most of their friends are quite homophobic and supposedly haven't interacted with homosexuals unlike my DCs.

My youngest DD is 4 and I would WELCOME her being given this kind of sex ed. Yes, even about the prostitutes (who btw are not the scum of the earth and deserve better treatment from our society as far as I'm concerned), maybe if we teach about them younger and they are less of a taboo a few less might be attacked and murdered each year.

Sorry gone a bit of topic but is something I feel strongly about.