Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Anyone else feel that parents shouldn't be allowed to opt their kids out of sex ed?

  • 29-05-2018 04:14PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I've been thinking about all the talk lately around better sex ed, free contraception, etc "to make sure abortions are as rare as possible" in the aftermath of the referendum. One thing that's struck me is the fact that parents are still allowed to opt their children out of school sex ed.

    This is purely anecdotal, but the one teenage pregnancy in my own year in school was fathered by the one guy whose parents I vividly remember not allowing him to attend the school's RSE, either in primary or secondary school. I can't help but wonder if the lack of neutral guidance (without moralising around the subject) may have contributed to this - it always stayed with me that out of the whole year, there was only one person whose parents denied him the chance to attend sex ed in school, and there was only one person who got someone pregnant. Go figure. The girl was in a different year, so I don't know her circumstances around sex ed.

    I honestly feel that this is something which should be compulsory in this day and age. I have to assume that most - probably not all, but most - parents who refuse sex ed for their kids are either (a) hopelessly naive in assuming "my kid is too young to be thinking about sex", or (b) conservative types who don't want their kids being taught that sex isn't wrong and something they shouldn't be thinking about until they get married or whatever. Both of these ideologies are well known to actually increase risky sex and teenage pregnancy (certain parts of the United States come irresistibly to mind here, abstinence only and all that sh!te), and in my view are also extremely harmful to psychological development (telling a kid that their natural desires are somehow "wrong" or "sinful" when they're about to experience puberty is psychologically abusive as far as I'm concerned) - I've been with women whose mothers hammered the whole slut shaming "no man will touch you if he finds out your 'number'" sh!te into them and who were traumatised as a result. Horrible stuff to have a partner confide in you to be honest.

    With all that being said, does anyone else feel that we should no longer allow parents to dictate if, when, and most importantly how their children are taught about sex? We don't allow parents to choose to not educate their kids in reading or arithmetic - an ultra-conservative Muslim family who believe that their daughter shouldn't have a standard education, for example, will be getting a swift visit from social services if their kid isn't being properly schooled - so why do we still allow it when it comes to something as important, central to the human experience, and where ignorance is extremely dangerous, as sex education? I'd argue that if we can make a legal and political case for it being neglectful not to have one's children educated in how to read, write and do simple mathematics, all of which are important for life, it's an absolute no brainier that we can make a similar case for a fully rounded sex education, and that teaching a young boy that he'll go blind if he touches his weiner, or a young girl that having too many partners in her lifetime renders her somehow "tainted", is emotionally and psychologically abusive and neglectful.

    Should this be something we work on changing? Given the overwhelming yes vote at the weekend, along with the gay marriage result a few years ago, it strikes me that the national mood is firmly against sexual conservatism at the moment. Might be the optimum time to have a national debate over denying children a neutral, facts-based sex education, and whether this is something we should continue to allow as an exception to the general requirement that children receive an education in other vital areas of life knowledge and skills.

    Thoughts?


«13

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,442 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

    Interesting, I didn't know that went on. Is the sex ed curriculum not set by the Dept of Ed? I don't have kids so I'm clueless on this topic. (Sex ed in schools not sex)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    I think it should be mandatory but should come from the parents.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

    Absolutely. I'm talking about if, as Leo has indicated, we're going to have a state mandated sex ed which gives kids the facts and answers their questions without putting a moralistic spin on the whole thing. I was lucky enough to have that in my own school, and absolutely feel that it should be a compulsory subject.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    Interesting, I didn't know that went on. Is the sex ed curriculum not set by the Dept of Ed? I don't have kids so I'm clueless on this topic. (Sex ed in schools not sex)

    This is going back 6/7 years, the school outsourced its sex ed to a Catholic group, we got a letter home about the content and I wasn't happy with it so I opted her out.

    I think sex education should be covered in school because you can't rely on parents unfortunately. I think it needs to cover everything from the biology of pregnancy to contraception, lgbt issues, abortion, consent, abuse etc but I appreciate some parents don't want their kids exposed to that.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I think it should be mandatory but should come from the parents.

    The problem with this is that it still leaves the door open to parents with ultraconservative ideologies to traumatise their kids with fire and brimstone style crap about sex. I'm only speaking from personal experience here, but I once had a girl "confess" to me, on the verge of tears, how many guys she'd been with before - because her mum had apparently told her repeatedly that no man would ever want to touch her if he found out that she was such a "slut". We were in our early twenties when this happened and it's haunted me ever since - that's why I advocate a neutral sex ed in a school setting with other kids, so that this kind of psychologically abusive sh!te doesn't get lumped in with "by the way, this is where babies come from".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I think it needs to cover everything from the biology of pregnancy to contraception, lgbt issues, abortion, consent, abuse etc but I appreciate some parents don't want their kids exposed to that.

    Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

    Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,580 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    I'd be 50/50 about it to be honest.
    Would it be mandatory for home schooled kids?
    If it wasn't it might encourage parents who were overly conservative to opt of school where kids might learn about things off their peers.

    People who'd be overly conservative will start teaching their kid that sex outside marriage, homosexuality, etc are wrong from an early age and will continue to do so. They'd tell their kids that if you follow what that teacher said. You'd go to hell.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,580 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

    Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

    Didn't teenage pregnancies fall in the UK when funding was cut for sex education?

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-education-funding-cuts-drive-decline-in-teenage-pregnancies-n67v6mnzr


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,219 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Kids should not be able to skip sex ed (nor PE and other classes).
    If a parent have a problem with the way it is taught then he/she needs to bring it up with the school, not withhold necessary information from their kids.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

    Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

    You see the way I look at it, I don't want say Iona coming into my kids school to give sex ed because they don't represent the kind of message I want to give my child. So I can understand a religious parent having an issue with a liberal sex ed curriculum. I don't think their position is right but I can understand their point of view to an extent.

    Maybe the solution is to give teenagers the right to self consent without the need for parental approval.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I'd be 50/50 about it to be honest.
    Would it be mandatory for home schooled kids?
    If it wasn't it might encourage parents who were overly conservative to opt of school where kids might learn about things off their peers.

    People who'd be overly conservative will start teaching their kid that sex outside marriage, homosexuality, etc are wrong from an early age and will continue to do so. They'd tell their kids that if you follow what that teacher said. You'd go to hell.

    This I'd argue should be considered child neglect. I actually feel that it's inevitable that it eventually will be. For those of a right-leaning sensibility who feel that this is a nanny state proposal, I'd ask if they'd feel the same if we were talking about an ultraconservative family of Middle Eastern immigrants teaching their daughter that she has to cover her face in public and that she must obey a man at all times, etc - I think most would agree that this is emotional abuse, so we can establish that parental autonomy in instilling cultural values does in fact have some hard limits. If we can agree on that, it's just a question of establishing where that line is, and I'd argue that sexual repression, with all the psychological damage that comes with it, is definitely over the line.

    Obviously that's just my own opinion and largely born out of personal experience and not just theoretical politics. Maybe others have different experiences, but I'm always surprised at how many young women in my age group have parentally-inherited fears and hangups around their own sexuality. I'd imagine there are guys who have different but related hangups as well. And to be honest any time I've had a conversation about this with a woman who was terrified about being seen as a slut or "damaged goods" because of some right wing sh!te her mum drilled into her as a kid, it just breaks my heart. It's harrowing stuff if you're the kind of person people are comfortable opening up to - some of the things you hear about the lies people were taught about sex are just awful.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Didn't teenage pregnancies fall in the UK when funding was cut for sex education?

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-education-funding-cuts-drive-decline-in-teenage-pregnancies-n67v6mnzr

    Wow. That's one I'll have to look into... World view on slightly shaky grounds right now :eek:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Sex ed is just one piece of the picture. There's no point in teaching students about safe sex when they have to be a certain age to buy condoms, need parental permission to get the pill and have to pay a fairly high cost for both.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,315 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Didn't teenage pregnancies fall in the UK when funding was cut for sex education?

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-education-funding-cuts-drive-decline-in-teenage-pregnancies-n67v6mnzr
    I'd wonder what sort of sex-ed was given, and how much of it recommended the "no sex" approach?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭ Fernanda Quaint Gnu


    Depends whose teaching it, wouldn't want a left wing loony like LON/Mullally or a right wing/religious moron doing it


  • Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Damon Plain Wildflower


    eviltwin wrote: »
    You see the way I look at it, I don't want say Iona coming into my kids school to give sex ed because they don't represent the kind of message I want to give my child. So I can understand a religious parent having an issue with a liberal sex ed curriculum. I don't think their position is right but I can understand their point of view to an extent.

    Maybe the solution is to give teenagers the right to self consent without the need for parental approval.
    Yeah i can understand especially if it's like that abstinence only sellotape nonsense they do with kids in some of the states.
    Even govt mandated education can be a bit suspect as they will always have an agenda also eg the whole food thing pushing more cereals.
    I suppose we all agree it should be done it's just a question of how


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    How did we survive the 80s when our school sex ed came from an awkward prim married couple squirming at the top of the room and telling us about Gods greatest way of showing love? And yet we did and worked out which peg into which slot miraculously without hearing one single word about the gender unicorn.

    Compulsory anything in education kind of reeks of fascism.....


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭judeboy101


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Dont know. I suppose it depends on the content. I've opted out my daughter of sex ed in the past not because I have an issue with sex ed but because it was being delivered by a group with a right wing agenda. As a parent I think I should have that right.

    Absolutely. I'm talking about if, as Leo has indicated, we're going to have a state mandated sex ed which gives kids the facts and answers their questions without putting a moralistic spin on the whole thing. I was lucky enough to have that in my own school, and absolutely feel that it should be a compulsory subject.
    What facts? Liberal facts or conservative facts or just scientific facts.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,453 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    Absolutely. I'm talking about if, as Leo has indicated, we're going to have a state mandated sex ed which gives kids the facts and answers their questions without putting a moralistic spin on the whole thing. I was lucky enough to have that in my own school, and absolutely feel that it should be a compulsory subject.

    Consent is a moralistic spin.

    You really think we should teach buological facts without touching on on it?

    Emotional consequences of sexual activity is believed to be a scientific fact by some (usually those with some understanding of brain chemistry) and a fairy tale by others. Do we include it or not?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    eviltwin wrote: »
    This is going back 6/7 years, the school outsourced its sex ed to a Catholic group, we got a letter home about the content and I wasn't happy with it so I opted her out.
    Depends whose teaching it, wouldn't want a left wing loony like LON/Mullally or a right wing/religious moron doing it

    It's a thin line between education and indoctrination when it comes to these things.
    You really think we should teach buological facts without touching on on it?

    Emotional consequences of sexual activity is believed to be a scientific fact by some (usually those with some understanding of brain chemistry) and a fairy tale by others. Do we include it or not?

    I was actually going to comment just that....but you're right...wouldn't be much of an education if they're taught just the what and how without the why and when.

    hmmm


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,778 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Malayalam wrote: »
    How did we survive the 80s when our school sex ed came from an awkward prim married couple squirming at the top of the room and telling us about Gods greatest way of showing love? And yet we did and worked out which peg into which slot miraculously without hearing one single word about the gender unicorn.

    Compulsory anything in education kind of reeks of fascism.....
    Depends on the nessecity of the subject. English and Maths should be compulsory for a start. Probably science too. Sex Ed? I'd argue yes.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Parents are the primary educators therefore have the right to withdraw their child from any class or subject that goes against their wishes or beliefs.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Depends on the nessecity of the subject. English and Maths should be compulsory for a start. Probably science too. Sex Ed? I'd argue yes.

    Nope. Either all are compulsory or none. Either parents get to pick and choose or students who sign up for State education do all. Cant have it both ways. Never get universal agreement on it.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,732 ✭✭✭BarryD2


    If it wasn't it might encourage parents who were overly conservative to opt of school where kids might learn about things off their peers.

    Well they already do! Home Education is a broad church with almost as many views as families involved.

    The Irish Christian Home Educators Association https://www.ichea.net/ caters for those with a biblical bent.

    We home educated our children but more from the POV that there was too much religion in primary schools as opposed to too little as with above.

    However each to their own :)

    Re OP, I think kids these days are remarkably switched in to what their age peers think and know. It's like osmosis sometimes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Personally, I really don't. Shutting one's kids off from such education is not only psychologically abusive (in my opinion) but is also a very obvious catalyst for all sorts of potential issues down the road.

    Again, I realise this is only anecdotal, but the one guy in my year who wasn't allowed to attend RSE was the one guy who had a kid on the way before he turned 18. I'd love to see statistics if there are any available on a lack of sex ed and the practise of unsafe sex by teenagers, with all the unintended consequences of that. I know you can't use anecdotes to prove a point but I really can't help feeling that it would be utterly bizarre for there to be no correlation there.

    I personally think that sex education has no effect whatsoever, your anecdote aside.

    Kids will learn about sex from each other or the internet. They will know that sex causes pregnancy.

    The class will have little or no effect.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,778 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Nope. Either all are compulsory or none. Either parents get to pick and choose or students who sign up for State education do all. Cant have it both ways. Never get universal agreement on it.

    Why so? Unless you're saying that all subjects are of equal importance, I don't really understand why this is the case? (Bearing in mind, I'm only talking secondary here - with the exception of sex ed, which obviously would be secondary)

    As it is, a lot of subjects in secondary are optional anyway.

    I'm also curious as to why it's the parents who should choose: why should the students not get to choose what they study themsleves? Why shouldn't a kid of about 14-15 get to present their own case as to why they should learn about sex education?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    In terms of what people shouldn't be allowed to do (regarding whatever) we should ask ourselves exactly how much personal power we wish to cede to the state. To interfere in the lives of families, for example. I know that we cede a certain amount of control to the state in return for protection, reasonable governance, public services and so on but I do find it kind of odd that whenever an issue is perceived that the reflex is to look to the state to impose regulations or in this case indoctrination. We are free beings, with dignity and sovereignty, and the least amount of compulsory things is best, once allowance is made for functional civil society. It's peculiar to me that people would not look first to themselves for guidance.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Parents are the primary educators therefore have the right to withdraw their child from any class or subject that goes against their wishes or beliefs.
    Nope. Either all are compulsory or none. Either parents get to pick and choose or students who sign up for State education do all. Cant have it both ways. Never get universal agreement on it.

    What'd I miss here? Are these two posts not a bit contradictory?

    I kinda agree with the last one, think the first one would just be a recipe for disaster. What if they don't agree with evolution? Think the earth is flat?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,394 ✭✭✭Pac1Man


    My sex ed was the teacher making is watch a video tape of a woman giving birth.

    Nothing was blurred out.

    I remember the colour green.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    wexie wrote: »
    What'd I miss here? Are these two posts not a bit contradictory?

    I kinda agree with the last one, think the first one would just be a recipe for disaster. What if they don't agree with evolution? Think the earth is flat?

    first one is the constitution based one. Parents rights with education

    Second one is that it would be logistics nightmare if not impossible. Students should do all subjects on offer.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭mohawk


    first one is the constitution based one. Parents rights with education

    Second one is that it would be logistics nightmare if not impossible. Students should do all subjects on offer.

    Disagree strongly here. I am biased of course as I have opted my son out of religion. I wouldn't mind him learning about religion in general but that's not what is taught in a Catholic Primary school.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    mohawk wrote: »
    Disagree strongly here. I am biased of course as I have opted my son out of religion. I wouldn't mind him learning about religion in general but that's not what is taught in a Catholic Primary school.

    That's fine. But then you've to respect another parents choice to remove their child from RSE, SPHE, CPSE, Science, PE, etc, etc.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    Pretty sure forcing children to attend sex ed regardless of the parents wishes would be unconstitutional.

    Parents, not need the state, are the primary educators.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Sex ed is just one piece of the picture. There's no point in teaching students about safe sex when they have to be a certain age to buy condoms, need parental permission to get the pill and have to pay a fairly high cost for both.

    Wouldn't the sex ed be of continuing advantage to those 18 and over?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    AllForIt wrote: »
    Wouldn't the sex ed be of continuing advantage to those 18 and over?

    I'm talking about those under 18


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Sex ed is just one piece of the picture. There's no point in teaching students about safe sex when they have to be a certain age to buy condoms, need parental permission to get the pill and have to pay a fairly high cost for both.

    Of course there is. CSPE teaches them how to vote, they cant do that until 18. They still need to understand how it works

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    That's fine. But then you've to respect another parents choice to remove their child from RSE, SPHE, CPSE, Science, PE, etc, etc.

    Do you really see that as the same thing or are you just making the point that they are all subjects and should all be treated the same?

    FWIW growing up for me there were a number of subjects that were mandatory for everybody (depending on year and stream) and then some optional ones.

    I don't see why the same couldn't be done here and personally I wouldn't put religion education in the mandatory category. (unless it was teaching about all religions rather introducing into one.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Of course there is. CSPE teaches them how to vote, they cant do that until 18. They still need to understand how it works

    I'm not saying don't teach sex ed, I'm saying let's make sure they can have safe sex by allowing them access free contraception.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    wexie wrote: »
    Do you really see that as the same thing or are you just making the point that they are all subjects and should all be treated the same?

    FWIW growing up for me there were a number of subjects that were mandatory for everybody (depending on year and stream) and then some optional ones.

    I don't see why the same couldn't be done here and personally I wouldn't put religion education in the mandatory category. (unless it was teaching about all religions rather introducing into one.)

    They should all be treated the same. Either you sign up for all or go private.

    And yes im well aware of peoples views on religious education, but you must be aware that people could have a similar view on another subject like you have with religion.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,275 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I'm not saying don't teach sex ed, I'm saying let's make sure they can have safe sex by allowing them access free contraception.

    At what age?

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I'm talking about those under 18

    Yes I know you are. You are saying that sex ed is given to those under 18 just because they are under 18. I'm saying that the sex ed they are given just like every other subject they are taught is meant to apply after they are 18 indeed for life. It's not like just because one turns 18 that somehow they magically know it all without any ed, so what I'm saying it the the ed is useful whether practised under 18 or not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21,448 ✭✭✭✭Cupcake_Crisis


    At what age?

    I think around 15-16 tbh. I know I’d have benefited from a decent sex Ed class in transition year.


  • Site Banned Posts: 20 american ninja warrior


    What is the curriculum based on?
    Straight sex, go ahead, no need for parents approval.

    If they are going into Anal , Anallingus ,Bondage, and other non standard acts, its a strong yes from me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,778 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    What is the curriculum based on?
    Straight sex, go ahead, no need for parents approval.

    If they are going into Anal , Anallingus ,Bondage, and other non standard acts, its a strong yes from me.

    So... they need their parents permission to be gay?

    What if they haven't actually told them yet?

    The bondage is a bit of a slippery slope fallacy for me because we're talking sexuality and relationships here - not kinks (which don't nessecarily have to be sexual).

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Site Banned Posts: 20 american ninja warrior


    So... they need their parents permission to be gay?

    What if they haven't actually told them yet?

    The bondage is a bit of a slippery slope fallacy for me because we're talking sexuality and relationships here - not kinks (which don't nessecarily have to be sexual).

    you have issues if that is the conclusion you jumped to!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,778 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    What is the curriculum based on?
    Straight sex, go ahead, no need for parents approval.

    If they are going into Anal , Anallingus ,Bondage, and other non standard acts, its a strong yes from me.
    you have issues if that is the conclusion you jumped to!

    Seems like a fairly accurate conclusion based on what you wrote. If t's the wrong conclusion, please clarify

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    wexie wrote: »
    What'd I miss here? Are these two posts not a bit contradictory?

    I kinda agree with the last one, think the first one would just be a recipe for disaster. What if they don't agree with evolution? Think the earth is flat?


    So? What matter to you?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,705 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    OP I'd be 50/50 too.

    I was thinking of that the other day as I got annoyed at Ciara Kelly and co on the radio, as you do...
    They had a segment about sex ed and finished off with a woman saying how inadequate it was, and if the teacher didn't broach whatever subject who would ?
    And so on...

    Really that should be a parent's job.
    This recourse to the state to take charge of people's lives really pi$ses me off. It's like the easy solution that's going to iron out all problems for now, but in reality it just creates more problems down the line.

    I think the conclusion I came to for myself, although it is a fanciful one (but sometimes good ideas come from fanciful ideas no ?) is that there should be a mandatory test on sex ed awareness at various stages of the child's life.

    The onus would be placed on parents to educate their child, with a state designed pack provided just in case they need it, and a big campaign.

    Parents would know that at age 10, their child is expected to know about such and such, at age 15 such and such, etc... They are free to approach this as they wish : use the pack, use their own experience and knowledge, whatever.

    Let the parents do their job, and simply have some kind of assessment at age 10.
    If the child is not up to date, well then, have compulsory courses to attend for parents, and child (respectively, not together !), after school hours if needed, to catch up.
    Most parents would probably hate the inconvenience, intrusion, and imposition, and chances are they will prefer to prepare their child adequately for the next stage rather than have to go through the ordeal again.
    Wash and repeat at each stage until end of school days.

    School taking complete and compulsory charge of sex ed is just not right imo, but it's also not right that some parents do not deliver on their parental duties as primary educators. Just because it's hard for parents to do it should not mean they don't have to do it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Graces7 wrote: »
    [/B]

    So? What matter to you?

    well....yes...I believe education should aim to leave well rounded and stable (young) adults.

    Otherwise what's the point?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement