my niece made a point...

[JokersGiggle]

she's very intellectual but views things in a very black and white way.
She has strong feminist views like me (her mum doesn't care much ). In conversation she threw in FGM (as you do!) And in her opinion having a bikini wax done is a mild form of FGM.
Just throwing it out there for consideration. It really made me think.

OP - I have just read your last post, am hiding the thread now.

Well, one way of drawing connections is to start with hyperbolic analogies and see whether they hold up under scrutiny.

I'm not sure this is a sturdy analogy at all, but well done her for being so thoughtful.

The NSPCC has launched the PANTS campaign which is aimed at age 7 and below.

So where do we stand on the men who remove their leg and chest hair? Are they also succumbing to societal pressure?

There is a big awareness campaign within our LA, but the onus is on adults to be extra vigilant and watch out for prolonged absences for which there seems a strange reason given, often not planned, that sort of thing, BillanTed

Oh and the baby boys who are mutilated in the name of religion or lack of infection?

Exactly matilda.
Its a jumping off point for a discussion.
TBF she is 7. She has an excuse for thinking the comparison hold water.
Grown women don't.

Yeah and getting a manicure is like having your hands cut off like those little kids in Sierra Leone.

Okay, pearl-clutchers, you do realise that FGM is enacted on pre-pubescent girls? Including 7yos?

It's okay for kids to know that there are some scary things out there and that they happen in all kinds of different contexts.

Well she doesn't understand the analogy because it's all wrapped up in adult female sexuality.

So if she said it to me I would just say, huh, that's an interesting analogy. And if she wanted to explore it further I might find her a kid-friendly book with facts of life.

However, I bet she'll drop it of her own accord and just mull it over with time.

An adult woman choosing a wax treatment is incomparable to brutalising a child
The adult has choice,and made decision.the child is brutalised with no choice
Either niece is bit thick or she's being purposefully obtuse

Okay, pearl-clutchers, you do realise that FGM is enacted on pre-pubescent girls? Including 7yos?

I work with young women who have experienced FGM so I don't need that to be explained to me. And it is what I see on a daily basis that is exactly why the thought of a 7-year old girl and her aunt, who seems to think that the fact that her niece is privately-educated has an iota of difference on any of this, comparing bikini waxes and FGM in the name of 'feminism' gives me the rage!

Re the NSPCC pants campaign. That is making children aware that parts of the body normally covered by underwear are private. Very appropriate for young children. FGM discussion is not appropriate for young children.

It should either be covered properly (at an appropriately older age) or not at all. Skimming over it as "changing the body from its natural state" is pointless and confusing.

My 8 yr old does not need to know about either FGM or bikini waxing. She does however know the pants rule.

It's not pearl-clutching for goodness sake.

There is simply no point in only partially explaining such a horrific and oppressive act as FGM.

It can't be explained fully at that age, it would be far too traumatic and frightening for most 7yos.

We get there bit by bit. At 7 we will already be introducing the basics of things like racism and sexism - Usually framed historically, Martin Luther King as opposed to raping of slaves and lynchings; suffragettes as opposed to sex trafficking and FGM etc.

As they get older other aspects are introduced in and age appropriate manner.

Having a grasp of that is not pearl-clutching

Telling 7yr olds about FGM is only going to cause fear anyway. They can't stop it happening to them if they are at risk, they are too young to engage in the political process etc. as PPs have said, do they really need to know about all bad stuff that can possibly happen to children just because they are children? Ffs why?

She's 7, thank goodness she doesn't know the horror of FGM, so she's drawing a naive comparison with something she knows members of her family do, which she does have a (slight) understanding of.

Of course they're not comparable to those of us who know more, but to a child, I can see how she's thinking this.

If you had to make (a very poor comparison) it would be more like someone marching their daughter down to the salon to have a bikini wax from the moment she had pubic hair so that she would be attractive to men. (I do know someone who was taken to have her legs waxed from the age of 12)

"So where do we stand on the men who remove their leg and chest hair? Are they also succumbing to societal pressure?"

Yes.

"Oh and the baby boys who are mutilated in the name of religion or lack of infection?"

Yes.

I can see why the comparison occurs to a 7 year old as both alter the "natural state" of the area.

Depending on what was said at Africa week - it could have been grouped in with, say, neck stretching, ear hoop insertion, facial scarring etc- she almost certainly doesn't have a full comprehension of what FGM means long term.

And you all don't think it happens in the UK?!

If everyone is aware and talking about it, then it's more likely that one of her classmates might ask for help if she begins to fear it'll be done to her.

Okay, KellyHopter: I am assuming that the info was provided in a kid-version sort of way. The way kids are told the facts of life: the basic info and terms at first, then more info as they get older.

I am assuming that there weren't enormous slides with photographs illustrating the various forms of FGM (like there were at that horrible training I attended in 2003--traumatised emoticon).

Yes, why shouldn't 7-year-olds be educated about it, in an appropriate way?

Who said it doesn't happen in the UK?

I dont want any 7 year old to know about fgm. Either because theyre being 'taught' about if, or, at the extreme end because it happens to them. Children need protecting from this abuse, the most important is that it doesnt happen to them but i also think learning about it is inappropriate (before people leap in I DO NOT think they are at the same level of harm)

I have no objection to your opinion that 7yos should/could be taught about it.

My point is that they're not. There'd be too much that couldn't be said, making it a pointless exercise.

Of course it bloody happens in the uk matilda. Horrible things happen tochildren every day. Doesnt mean I have to share the details with my ds.

And let's not forget, this, apparently, wasn't taught in a PHSE context but as part of Africa week.

I have spoken to dn and she was told about it along with boys having tribal tattoos forced on them.
She knows some cultures do this (FGM and tattoos) and it happens whether the people in the culture are in the UK, other developed counties or in the native countries. And that they all need to look out for each other and keep their friends safe by telling their teacher if they are worried, even if the person doesn't go to school with them.
She knows that having it done is horrible, can't be reversed and causes girls and ladies lots of pain all the time. Like going pee pee and having babies.
I think she's got an age appropriate idea of what it is.