Child Sexuality

[sixtyandaquarter]

Then you most certainly better never use one!
If the drug addicts in math say so, damn, well that closes the book on that one don't it.

 

[Ellie]

In England, a girl ends up getting pregnant... so I wouldn't say curious

What the fuck has England got to do with anything?

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

Well, we all know that South of the Equator and all, the men put the eggs in their pouch and give a sort of "birth" to the kids.
He's just letting us know that, north of it and all, by England, it's the girl who get's pregnant and gives birth.

 

[rey meustrus]

wtf sixty, how did you get your name upside down like that?

Enjoying your funniness.

 

[Ellie]

¿ʞ 'ɔıdoʇ uo ÊŽÉ

 

[harbino]

I don't because:

A) I ain't a druggie
B) I am not stupid
C) They are idiots, who have no life

 

[Despain]

what.

what.


what.

using the pill makes you a druggie?

 

[harbino]

No.  I don't listen to them at school.

 

[arbiter]

;D

 

[harbino]

NVM

 

[___]

Er, I knew kids who, innocently or otherwise, emulated sex by the age of 8. Explaining to them the implications of those acts is no different than explaining to a child what it means to shoot a person with a gun when they go around playing cops and robbers. Not telling a child what a gun is, and what the results of using one are, can have horrible consequences should they get access and opportunity to use one. The whole thing is children *are* innocent, but that doesn't stop them from doing harmful things in their innocence, it actually increases the potential that they will because they have no idea why they shouldn't (or when they should).

You can't depend on the idea that you can stop a child from learning what something is or getting the opportunity to do something potentially dangerous. You can choose to teach them as much as you're able to and hope they make good decisions, and that's all you can do. Choosing not to acknowledge that is irresponsible in regard to your own child, and creates children who are potentially dangerous to other children which is even worse.

 

[Dissonance]

These are just my views we dont need to have a debate over whats wrong or right you have your views and I have mine and they are clearly different I just dont think it right for little kids to have that knowledge.
Its better when they can properly comprehend it and understand it without pissing there pants with words like penis and vagina.
I just think its not right

- Josh :P

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF RAAAAAAAGEEE

WORDS like penis and vagina?  The WORDS themselves being about 'corruption'?  Then holy shit, I guess everybody is corrupt from birth, because guess what - everybody is born with a dick or a cunt!  That's right, the very moment you slip out of your mom's baby pipe you got one of those two things attached to your torso!

Guess what - little kids have that knowledge from birth.  We all know, on a certain level, what sex is and what sex does.  Sex education isn't about SHOWING YOU A MIRACULOUS NEW CONCEPT (like hey you can put your guy's dick in your cunt) but saying "listen you know about this, we know you know about this, let us give you the scientific side of it and show you how to use it responsibly."

Why is it bad for kids to have sex with eachother?  Really?  Hell, if they're pre-puberty it's ACTUALLY BETTER for them to do it because there's no cance of them gettin' knocked up.

 

[FlippyD]

If Dissonance was right me and my friends wouldn't have thought the man pees in the woman's vagina until 5th grade.

 

[rey meustrus]

You're still a kid when you're in fifth grade.  It sounds like you got some introduction to sex from your peers, since there's no way in hell any squeemish parents or teachers are going to teach you in fifth grade.  The point is that you already know about it when you're comparatively young, and the purpose of sex education isn't to tell you what your friends probably already did, but to tell you what you shouldn't do, tell you what the consequences are, things you're not likely to get from your older brother's attempts to corrupt your little mind.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

You're still a kid when you're in fifth grade.  It sounds like you got some introduction to sex from your peers, since there's no way in hell any squeemish parents or teachers are going to teach you in fifth grade.

Health class.

 

[Dewoor]

(And, a little tidbit of info: The Pope gave Pokemon his official blessing when it became popular in Italy)

Lol, this

I laughed much on this :D
I imagined the Pope giving blessing to every pokemon.
After that, italian kids give their amen and get their GBA from under the bed and turn it on :D

It was funny.
Sorry for being offtopic.

 

[FlippyD]

You're still a kid when you're in fifth grade.  It sounds like you got some introduction to sex from your peers, since there's no way in hell any squeemish parents or teachers are going to teach you in fifth grade.  The point is that you already know about it when you're comparatively young, and the purpose of sex education isn't to tell you what your friends probably already did, but to tell you what you shouldn't do, tell you what the consequences are, things you're not likely to get from your older brother's attempts to corrupt your little mind.

I have no older-brothers. My point was that we had no idea what sex was really, unlike Dis' claims that all kids "kinda-sorta know." In fifth grade students are taught sex-ed in health/science classes because that's when kids start to hit puberty and that stuff matters. They didn't cover condoms until 6th grade though.

Yeah, it might be nice if we could all drop the bullshit and go "hey Timmy, you can use that boner on little Susie there and it feels 'FUCKING FANTASTIC!' Just remember to pull out when your balls drop and shit starts shooting out of there", but sex is such a guarded topic nowadays that we can't really pull back. It's like getting everyone to stop telling their children about Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Not to mention sex has, y'know, some emotional consequences with certain folks which is the only good reason I can think of as to why kids shouldn't do it (until girls can start getting preggers.) <-- By that I mean kids shouldn't have sex until they know how to protect themselves.

The problem is as kids get older they can actually get pregnant, which is why it's important to teach them safety and what's going on. Letting kids know about sex early might help because they'd be familiar with it, but they're still forgetful irresponsible kids. Adults are irresponsible too, but accidentally getting pregnant can't damage them as much as it would a 14 year old.

Though if kids practiced early the only benefit I could see is that some would preform better in the sack. Which would be really keen cause I knew this one chick that didn't know about sex until late high school, and so she was really inexperienced and I PRAY TO GOD SHE NEVER READS THIS POST.

How many times have you had sex with this one chick I knew in college and afterwards she was all like "I thought there was something between us" and I was you're like "No, I'm just a guy and I thought you were hot, but I didn't think this would go anywhere" and then she said says "Well, me too... But now I really love you, and I'm not on the pill" and I was like "Shit, time to break out the Falcon Punch." and then you feel guilty about it, or you don't and she feels worse because you don't care now...

Or something.

 

[___]

I have had sex zero times with that one chick you knew in college Ixis

Denying the emotional bond that is naturally a part of sex is denying biology as surely as denying that children have naughty bits. With discipline or abuse the natural chemical responses to sexuality can be suppressed or subverted, but it is in our nature to grow emotionally attached to people we are sexually intimate with. It's the way we evolved, and the way many other animals, especially mammals, have evolved. The chemistry is pretty well-understood. Not that I'm trying to moralize or anything, I'm just saying, don't act shocked and amazed when you bang someone and they expect you to feel some sort of connection to them. It'll take a long, long time for biology to catch up with society, if today's social structure even manages to outlive its biological counterpart, which is unlikely.

 

[FlippyD]

I never said I was surprised people had that bond, it's just that it's a complex emotional thing that can cause people to get hurt (no matter how young or old.) Breaking up can be as hard if not harder than your parents divorcing, or a grandparent becoming ill. Such things affect children negative already, so why open them up to something else that could potentially hurt them emotionally and mentally? Adults are hardly qualified to make adult rational decisions about who to be with and when, so why expect better from children?

This isn't even getting into the complex social dynamics of the thing. The pandemonium of high school without the expectancy of responsibility.

 

[rey meustrus]

I would propose that children are just as good at dealing with these things as adults are.  Just because they're younger doesn't mean their emotions are different from those of adults.  We tend to think that our experience makes us better equipped to deal with it, but we still act impulsively like any 14 year old.