Sex education in UK ‘should be made compulsory for five-year-olds’: MP

[IG420]

What's your opinion on this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11416312/Sex-education-should-be-made-compulsory-in-primary-schools.html

[TokeItUpUk]

well when i was five i thought condoms were balloons.

[twigs]

sex education is compulsory already and has nothing to do with schools

its in almost every advert in main stream media advertising

tits sell shit

its very well known

schools are just being pulled along on the ride and will be used as an excuse ..and not the tv

[the crow]

How did they come up with 5? The article talks about 14 year olds. What are 5 year olds going to do with sex education?

In my opinion the age of 10 or 11 would be more appropriate.

[Hiphip]

What's your opinion on this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11416312/Sex-education-should-be-made-compulsory-in-primary-schools.html

My opinion is that it is a link to the torygraph

Cheers

[stummer]

IMO let kids be kids :/ not sure how parents do it but at 14 my mum didnt have no awkward talk she'd just drop comments on the subject and i was always sensible probably well defiantly more then than now days if i been drinking.

[GreenVision]

5 !

Come on, really. So by the time they're 8 curiosity sets in and they begin to experiment, as 13 & 14 year olds do now after 12 years old sex ed.

If someone stands in front of any of my 3 youngest and speaks about intercourse or anything similar before secondary school god help them. Because my real worry is not the children becoming active as at 5 they don't care for such things, my worry is the person that has the ability to stand in front of a class of 5 years olds and explain sex, in my book that has crossed the line. GV.

[Guerrillero]

Disagree, let kids be kids - plenty of time to learn about it later. 5 year olds ain't in any way shape or form in need of sex education, at that age they still think the opposite sex is disgusting ffs!

As mentioned, and afaik is when it currently gets taught, 10-11 seems about right to me, with refresher modules each year on the subject.

Maybe teach the bare biological basics of sex and puberty at 10-11, and in subsequent school years go further into the repercussions of unprotected sex, unwanted pregnancy etc - as the kids develop and are likely to start experimenting with their bodies and each others more.

IIRC we had very dry sex ed lessons in year 7 at school, delivered by embarrassed teachers, and then nowt after that. Pretty useless really considering that at that age it was very rare for anyone to actually be having sex. By the time sex became an issue I don't remember receiving any further advice whatsoever.

Refresher lessons catered to 13-18 year olds would be beneficial I reckon - Reiterating safe sex messages both concerning pregnancy and sti's, talking about the dangers of sexting, peer pressure, pressure into sexual acts by boyfriends, talking about online grooming, talking about the false image of sex porn portrays etc.

The world has changed since I was a kid, kids these days face a whole other level of issues around sex my generation never had to deal with, mainly due to technology.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Guerrillero

[dannychoo]

I was taught the basics of sex ed (i.e. sexual organs, what they were used for and a little video) in year 6 / ages 10-11 back in 1996. All I recall from that class was a lot of (nervous) childish giggling from every kid.

These days, I wouldn't be surprised if kids already know about sex given the amount of exposure and availability on the internet as well as other media.

Sex sells, and kids are groomed unconsciously from a very young age, in my opinion, from pop music. They don't know the connotation of the lyrics, likewise PG rated films such as Shrek which has plenty of innuendos. Unless the kids are shut-ins to socializing and technology, the exposure to sexual content will only grow.

Then again, kids aren't cool these days unless they've already played 15-18 rated games such as call of duty, Grand Theft Auto et al.

So... Sex or violence? Or both?

Edited February 17, 2015 by dannychoo

[wildbill]

With the right approach, the right teachers and material I think it would be a good idea. So no, almost certainly not.

Thats pretty much how they do it in NL and it works very well indeed. Very gently and slowly though and with respect, flexibility and understanding that children come from different backgrounds.

[Hir]

I remember a conversation in last year junior school,10 or 11ish, and I'd been told a bit, few kids knew stuff, there was the embarrassing mistakes, but you don't really know what's so embarrassas; all/most of you/us played doctors and nurse and explore each others differences ourselves at 5 and the parents knew it happened, then job done stop that after a year??? and be a kid have fun and slide into puberty.

5 year olds don't need sex education, they need to going "ARRRRRRRRRGhhhhhh!@#!*&?" around the place and enjoy themselves.

[Zokie]

I disagree with sex education at such early age. When I was 5, I also thought that condoms are ballons. 5 years olds really don't need sex education. Parents should teach their children about sex at age they think is appropriate and school shouldn't interfere in these things at all, at least till college.