This more than anything else should infuriate the masses and force them to push back.
I sure hope so, although I’m beginning to really wonder about their ability to see things for what they are. I’m afraid too many might just think, oh, they’re just teaching them that their bodies are natural and nothing to feel ashamed of.
Slippery slope? This episode of law and order was 14 years ago:
Read the reviews. Lesbian couple molests daughter. Psychologist calls it naked body massage to instill confidence. Grandparents accused of hate crimes which weren’t even a thing back then.
I think we hit that slope almost 2 decades ago.
Someone lays a hand on one of my grandchildren, I guarantee, they won’t see the next sunrise. I may not know the law, but I know what I like. Like TR said, why spoil it with legalities. Laws can be juggled; just history. When it comes to obvious wrong doing, I prefer malum in se. Malum in se refers to certain acts that society judges as being inherently wrong, or even evil, whether or not laws have been enacted regarding them.
“Should”
And yet I still don’t see the horizon obscured in a haze of smoky fires or hear the cries for forgiveness and mercy from the guilty on the way to the Gallows.
That’s one of the reasons they make Louisville Sluggers. A few compound fractures have a way of taking the starch out of degenerates. Tried & true.
Our bodies ARE natural and nothing to feel ashamed of, true. But our sexuality was given to us for a purpose by the creator. That purpose is to create live in our own image, another great gift. There is no animal throughout the whole animal kingdom that has sexual urges until it is mature and fully grown, so that it can procreate.
These demons separate sexuality which is a means to an end from its wholesome context (procreation)and turn it into something vile, harmful and hideous.
It is well known that premature sexual encounters are harmful for children and even stunt their mental and emotional development-which I suspect is part of the outcome that these demons wish to see.
Sex crazed, horny, stupid creatures who live only for the immediate gratification of their basest urges.
Because kids are being told about what they all do anyway…
1 Like
You sound stuck in the dark ages…
1 Like
Based on many of the replies here, it seems that some of you believe that ‘compulsory self-touching lessons’ imply that the children have to touch themselves or be touched by the teachers. This is of course not the case.
The case is that the children will learn that touching your own body is not unnatural and nothing to be ashamed of. The background for teaching this to children is that most children have a fascination with their own bodies, they are curious and start exploring their own bodies at a young age. It is quite normal that children that are six do masturbate, although it is a non-sexual masturbation. Children do masturbate, therefore it is important to inform them about the do’s and don’ts regarding masturbation. They need to know where and when they can do it, that they are the only ones allowed to touch themselves and that they are not allowed to touch others. The latter points are important so that children know that no older child nor adult are ever allowed to touch them down there.
You can of course disagree with many of the points here, and whether it is the school’s job to teach the children about sexuality at all is an interesting debate. I just wanted to point out that 1) we are not talking about children being forced in touching themselves or being touched by teachers in school and 2) that there are positive sides with children having some basic knowledge about masturbation. The goal is not to destroy their innocence, but hopefully to maintain it.
2 Likes
This is completely inappropriate for any school to be teaching a child at such a young age. You are bonkers.
1 Like
Innocence is short lived; so why would some degenerate wish to make it shorter? Sooner or later you become aware of your body; but usually by then, some maturity has been gained.
1 Like
Yes, and let’s see these “educators” in the UK start by teaching this curriculum to young Muslim girls first. I’d love to see how the Religion of Peace and Tolerance reacts to that in the UK.
2 Likes
I can see some of the points you make as being as reasonably made in terms of what is natural. The issue is really about it being compulsory and not the government’s job to teach young children about sexuality and forcing a subject matter onto children without parental consent! All the other details that you articulated is certainly open for debate but not really the crux of why this is a controversy being imposed without parents input as to whether they want this to be included in a educational curriculum at such an early age!
2 Likes
It’s not just touching down there; it’s also touching their minds. Sex is just a minor part of the mosaic of life. Foot in the door liberal creeping gradualism. It’s easy to sway the way an innocent child thinks. An honorable person steps lightly when relating to children. Like I said, innocence is a short lived period in a short life. Why steal that from a child? What can possibly be gained? I see the ulterior motive flag being raised.
2 Likes
So, what you find problematic about the issue is that the children are too young. I disagree. My main reason is based on the fact there unfortunately are many children who experience sexual abuse. Giving children a language to use to talk about their bodies, teaching them the difference between a safe touch and unsafe touch, can increase their safety.
Additionally, informing children about their bodies and removing stigma around our sexual organs can be one step to take in order to increase their likelihood for consensual and safe sex as adults.
I do not argue that one should teach six-year-olds everything there is to know about masturbation and sex. It is a large topic, and I believe that many of the relevant topics should be reserved for when they are older. But teaching them about their own bodies and their body ownership is something I strongly believe will serve them good.
If you also mean that schools shouldn’t be the communicators of sex ed at all, then you can read my reply to Dr_Manhattan.
Alright, there is a lot to unpack here. For the debate’s sake, I will try to structure your arguments into propositions. Please do arrest me if I have misunderstood any of the following points. You argue that:
- Educating children about masturbation will affect their ways of thinking.
- Sex is a minor part of life.
- Educating children about masturbation is one small step on the way in order to accomplish some damaging liberal goal.
- Educating children about masturbation robs them of their innocence.
Number one
So far so good. Then, regarding the first proposition: yes! Generally, when we educate children, we want to affect their ways of thinking. We want to serve them with important knowledge that they will profit from having, and that changes their way of seeing and understanding life. Of course, I am guessing your problem is not with “touching their minds” in principle, but with touching their minds in a bad way. And further, I am guessing, you believe that teaching them about masturbation in particular is bad. If so, I would love clarification about why you believe it is bad, so that I can respond to the best of my abilities. If the sole reason is that it robs the children of their innocence, I will respond to that in a bit.
Number two
Secondly, the argument is that sex is a small part of life. Well, that depends on what kind of life you live, I guess! Jokes aside, I will begin by saying that it seems intuitively wrong to distribute knowledge based on how much space the subject takes in our lives. Here is a trite example: we spend a larger part of our lifetime watching entertaining TV-series than we do in a voting booth. Still, we expect our schools to teach our children more about the voting process than what happens in season four of Friends or Seinfeld.
I guess your main point is that sex is not that important. I disagree. One counterargument is that all life begins with sex, that life cannot exist without it, and that it therefore is an essential topic. I find this counterargument quite corny, but it does imply something important, namely that sex is natural. It is a part of our natural lives, and most of us will have sexual feelings throughout large parts of our lives. Understanding our own sexuality then means understanding this part of ourselves.
Number three
I do not quite know how to answer this proposition. I do not personally do not work towards some grand, damaging goal. Nor do I believe that the British authorities behind this curriculum are working towards such a goal. Your proposition needs some clarification, although I believe that will result in a debate much different from the one of sexual education.
Number four
One of the most beautiful things about children is their innocence. They are often not aware of the difficulties, problems and horrors of the world, and they go about life with a clean slate. This is a luxury that we adults only can dream of.
The proposition that educating children about masturbation robs them of their innocence implies that they somehow lose this clean slate. A child can wake up one day, innocent as ever, eat breakfast followed by the daily trip to school. Then, when she arrives, the horror takes place: the teacher is talking about the possible usages and boundaries of one’s body. The child walks home and is never the same. She lost her innocence…
I’ve exaggerated in order to show how silly the notion is. A child’s innocence is not something that is exterminated through providing them information regarding their body. Teaching them that 1) masturbation is natural and 2) the difference between a “good touch” and a “bad touch” will not destroy their innocence.
We both agree that children under no circumstances should have a sexual life in the sense an adult has one. A child’s innocence is a beautiful thing. However, not every child has this luxury, and many children are robbed of their innocence through the grave neglect and abuse of adults. One of the main points of teaching small children about masturbation has to do with giving them the guidelines regarding sex in general, most importantly that adults never are allowed to touch a child. Children do not know what they have not been told. If they never hear that adults are not permitted to sexually abuse children, then the victims of sexual abuse can believe that sexual abuse is justified and permitted. If we on the other hand teach children about it, it can give the victims of sexual abuse the language and knowledge needed in order to tell a safe adult.
When I posted my original post, I was prepared to answer every reply that came. However, this one seems a bit off the topic. I do not really see how wondering how Muslim girls and Islam in general are contributing to the debate.
First, I would like to say that this is the most constructive and interesting answer I have gotten, so thank you!
The problem you raise fits into a more general question on what the role of the school should be, and how much autonomy the school system should have from the children’s parents. This is a very interesting debate.
I do not want to bear all that on my shoulders, so I will try to focus on sex ed specifically. I have very much understanding for parents’ wish to control what, how and when their children get schooled in sexuality. It is a very intimate, personal topic that most of us have different views on based on our personal experiences, religion, culture and so on.
One answer could be that one would like a normed or standardized view on the matter. One could firstly argue that there are so many incompatible views on sexuality amongst parents, and secondly that children – the citizens of tomorrow – would be served by having the same view on sexuality. This would make all debates on the topic so much easier in the future.
This answer is not very satisfactory, unless we could confirm that the view our children are thought really is the “correct” one (if there even is such a thing). If it is the wrong one, we have done our children a great disservice, as well as counteracting their parents’ own views on sexuality.
However, I can find one clear advantage of having sex ed in school. Some children are unfortunately victims of sexual abuse, and even more unfortunately, the abuse can be conducted regularly and familiarly. Small children in sexually abusive homes are often thought that what they experience is normal and justified, and also something one cannot speak about outside the family. This is of course a horridly flawed view on sexuality, and one that maybe could be corrected in school, and hopefully in turn give the child the justification and courage to tell another adult about the horrors at home. In other words, making it the schools’ task to teach children about sexuality could possibly contribute to stopping the sexual assault of some children.
I must note that I do not possess any empirical data supporting this claim (nor have I looked, since this debate was supposed to be for fun rather than hard work, hehe). I am also open for counterarguments and I am not entirely sold on my own position. Looking forward to hearing what you have to say!
I never said healthy sex is not important; I said it’s only a small part of life. It does not need to be magnified as some holy mission. I guess it depends on how in touch one is with the big picture. we spend .45 percent of our lifetimes having sex.
To put things in perspective, that’s only 117 days out of an average 25,000 days in your entire life.
Deciding what to teach to our children based on how many days of our lives we spend on it is not the right way to go about things. I tried to describe why in my original reply to you.
Some things do not consume a significant amount of hours or days of our lives, but are still potentially important. Sex is not necessarily that important, but it may have extreme effects on one’s life. Sexual abuse can destroy an entire life, so if that .45 can have such ramifications, it is worth educating and talking about it.