 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Sex Ed |
New poll |  |  |
| Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
Sabishii Red Paragoomba                  Since: 02-26-06 From: Georgia Last post: 6463 days Last view: 6463 days |
| ||
| I was digging around in Femine's Corner and I got to thinking about it.
Who should teach kids about sex? How should they teach it? What age should it be taught at? Was it taught to you? If so, how? I know a bunch of people that are of the opinion it should be the parent's job to teach it to the child, others that think the school and still others that feel both should have a part. The varys more so when age and method of teaching are brought into account. My school taught it in 8th grade(ages 13-14) as part of a health class. They didn't even really teach us about sex so much as they explained anatomy, went over diseases and manipulated the lessons into making many of us feel that the only way we could avoid getting pregnant or getting an STD was by being completely abstinant. I don't think that was the right way to go about it. I think they ought to teach it in 6th or 7th grade, when many kids start hitting puberty so that they understand that what they feel isn't abnormal or dirty. I also think it needs to be a joint effort between the school and the parents. The parents can make the discussion more personal and real and the school can serve as a backbone to guide the parents if they need it. Also, I think it needs to be taught in a completely different style. There needs to be a scientific portion that details STD's, anatomy and function of the body, birth control, etc. for sure, but there also needs to be a portion discussing methods. Abstinance needs to be mentioned, because it's definitely not a bad thing, but they also need to talk about more than just the diseases you can get from avoiding safe sex. They need to be taught about how they can have safe sex as well. Also, masturbation needs to be covered. There's too much of a social taboo around something that everyone does or has done at least once. They could even get parental permission to have guest speakers and go into the psychological problems that arise if you jump the gun or have sex with the wrong person. They could also make mention that although casual sex exists, it forms a bond that makes it difficult to have and that it should be a mutual act of care rather than a case of wham,bam,thank you m'am. This might be better suited for Femine's, but I though it would get a decent debate going here. Opinions, ideas? |
|||
Tarale    2710 Affected by 'Princess Bitch-Face Syndrome' ++++!! Persona non grata   Since: 11-17-05 From: Adelaide, Australia Last post: 6295 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| I was taught in the first instance by my parents, who read to me Where did I come from?. They explained anything I had questions about, and that was... that.
We learned some very vague stuff concerning puberty at the end of Primary School, and in High School we learned some more detailed stuff re: sex ed in both Science and Health classes (Health looking at it from a more social point of view, Science being strictly anatomical). I dunno, I'm kinda happy with the way I was taught. I don't get all the fuss some people have with things like this being taught at school personally.  |
|||
|
Sweet Kassy Molassy Out of ice cream and PB. Would KILL for a milkshake right now.  Since: 06-17-06 From: LoozeeAnna Last post: 6296 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| People have a problem with sex ed but not with what's on TV? Yeah. It sounds dumb to me too. | |||
candrodor Red Goomba Since: 12-31-05 Last post: 6383 days Last view: 6383 days |
| ||
| We touched on fertilisation to do with flowers in Year 6 - 10/11.
Then in secondary school, Year 7, 11/12, we studied puberty and sex from a purely sciency approach. Penis goes here, and then all of a sudden sperm travel from the testes through the epididymis (sp?) through to rest etc. In Year 9, 13/14, we studied contraception along with the menstrual cycle, the pros and cons of each method. We also looked at STDs, and we were told onenightstand = bad, but in a friendly way, so it wasn't really a scary message. What I mean, is that it wasn't really throwing her own opinion at us strongly, it was in the context of the health lessons she was actually teaching. I think this works out quite well, especially if you've got a good teacher, who can make sex ed lessons less embarassing. What I did notice was though, that she gave out leaflets from sex awareness groups or whatever, and they mentioned masturbation, mutual masturbation, oral and anal sex, and she didn't touch on those at all, if you'll excuse the pun. Make of that what you will. (edited by candrodor on 07-08-06 03:56 AM) |
|||
|
Silvershield 580  Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6308 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| I'm not in favor of such lessons being left to the parent, mainly because I know how terribly embarassed I would have been if it were my parents' job to explore that topic. As far as I'm concerned, it should be left to schools.
However, as with most other questions of domestic education versus formal schooling, I'm all in favor of a child's parents being given full knowledge, and full control, of what their child is exposed to. If parent x does not want Junior to know about contraception, either because it's against his religion or for whatever other reason, then Junior should be exempt from those lessons. The exception comes when a child is of a certain age - say 16, somewhat arbitrarily - when parental control in curricula should be cut back or even eliminated. There are many "facts of life" that a child absolutely must be taught, but that a parent has a right to withhold when that student is still young and impressionable. As for what should actually be included in lesson plans, I'd argue that STDs, birth control, and similar issues are irremovable. Abortion might be appropriate as well, plus the usual anatomy and mechanics lessons. I'm all for abstinence being included as a serious topic - that's not to say that it need be of absolute primacy, but that it cannot be brushed aside as religious mumbo jumbo. |
|||
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6298 days Last view: 6298 days |
| ||
| I vaguely remember learning the basic scientific facts about sex when i was in middle school. It was very mechanical and felt completely detached from the human experience. It was taken more as a joke than anything else, because by then i already knew much more than they were trying to teach me from experimentation and peers. In fact i had already engaged in sexual activities with my "girlfriend". So, lot of good the abstinance lesson was. This is why i feel that sex education should be made more practical and taught earlier. There should be a great effort to remove the taboo from it and teach kids the facts of life as they actually are and not how adults would want them to be in a perfect world which will never happen (all teens abstaining from sex? are they out of their minds?). By the time sex ed is taught (at least where i live), almost all of the kids in the class know more than is being taught and consider it comical. The only teens i knew when i was in school who were practicing abstinance were the ones who were too socially awkward to get a girlfriend. So then they'd proudly say they were being smart by abstaining. The moment they got a girlfriend though, suddenly they were'nt interested in abstinance anymore. Humans are still a type of animal, and when we hit puberty the hormones can get very powerful. No matter how much we want to believe our little babies would never do something like have sex, they do and will, behind our backs. And its a perfectly natural desire. You cant fight nature completely, so what i think is best is for sex ed to take place at some point just prior to puberty hitting, before the kids have already made up their own mind about sex and might actually be willing to learn about it intelligently. And it ought not be taught from the perspective that the kids will all be abstinant, it should be taught with the understanding that most wont. | |||
Doritokiller Mole Since: 06-15-06 From: California Last post: 6439 days Last view: 6301 days |
| ||
| I was taught about sex and puberty in school around grade 6... By that time, I knew about it already (and stuff on puberty from my friends. I was surprised that they were actually right), and learned just a few things. Nothing big. I mostly found out about a year before by looking it up. I really wasn't surprised, since I had an idea of what happened during sex around 4th grade. 7th grade was basically the same as 6th grade, except we got to see a video of a woman giving birth. *Shudder* I've known about birth, but now I know exactly how freaked a father can get when he sees a baby coming out of his wife's vagina. 8th grade was just... My god. NOTHING new. It's one of those plays that look suitable for 4th graders. It also had a Full House sense to it, which I truly despise. You know what it was called? Nightmare on Puberty Street. Sex, puberty, drugs, thoughts of suicide, the whole latter.
Our Sex Ed stuff had a permission form for them. 6th grade was probably the best, since we were truly comfortable with talking about it, and even our teacher talked more in-depth about it. The thing is, sex and puberty should be tought head-on with anecdotes to make kids more comfortable when it comes to questions. Videos are a horrible excuse, and usually don't involve much more than a basic view. Not even masturbation. Masturbation was mentioned only once out of those three years, and it just was a question asking if it's healthy. I was glad that the teacher didn't lie and said yes to it, explaining a few benefits. Sex Ed has room for improvements, yes. It shouldn't depend entirely/mostly on videos, but should contain one or two short ones to reinforce the lesson or something like that. |
|||
|
Kingpin Since: 11-21-05 From: Amarillo, TX Last post: 6302 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| I think it should be left up to the parents. School should have nothing to do with it. Problem, in these times, parents suck as parents. Schools arent only teaching kids about sex, they are raising them. Parents sit back, tell kids to do chores, and provide food and shelter etc. Parents do very little raising. My sister has two kids, one of them is 5. The 5 year old has no idea what letters are or even what numbers are. She has very little vocabulary at all. I asked my sister why she hasnt tried teaching her things like that. Her answer is simply "She is supposed to learn that stuff in school." Sure they are, but parents should have a part in everything that kids learn. Doesnt seem to be the case with her, she just feeds her and gives her clothes, expects the rest to come from school. Its ridiculous to me. | |||
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6297 days |
| ||
| I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating in this case. Look at the results. When you compare countries in the developed world there's a fairly clear correlation between robust, frank, comprehensive sex education and lower teen pregnancy rates. Simple enough. |
| Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Sex Ed |
| |
