I saw how an argument on another board moved toward identifying people's moral stance on issues relating to Sexually Transmitted Diseases, or STD's, and this made me reflect on how much our attitude towards sex, influences our society in general.

On the radio this morning a talk show host was pillorying an academic who had been raising sex related issues with toddlers as young as three and four years old.
The virtually unanimous response was one of outrage and anger, which I think is pretty reflective of the attitude we have towards sex as being something a bit dirty, and inappropriate.
Now without knowing the details of what the academic in question was actually doing, or saying to these kids, I would not presume to judge one way or the other on it's appropriateness, but I certainly sympathise with people being concerned about it.

Inappropriate sexual activity is very hard to quantify, as it may range from mildly inappropriate behaviour, to the most criminal assault imaginable, and we as a society have to set the boundaries of what is and is not appropriate, and just where to draw that line.

We see some cultures, like the muslims, whose belief that people, and men in particular, are so sexually deviant, that all possible arousing stimulants should be suppressed as far as possible, hence the requirement for women to hide any features which may be attractive to men.

I do not know how effective this practice is, because I do not have figures to compare sexual assaults in muslim, and non-muslim countries, but the fact that they place the onus on women, to try and appear unattractive, rather than on men to exercise control, shows us that simplistic desire to combat a problem can lead to consequences which may not be the fairest, or best way to address an issue.

So if we accept that most people have strong sexual desires, and impulses, how do we go about educating kids to have the confidence to express their sexuality in an acceptably appropriate way?
How do we steer people toward wholesome natural sexuality, rather than toward harbouring bizarre and troubling sexual behaviour, that would be generally considered as perverse?

Many would consider any form of homosexuality as being perverse, but as a society we have come to accept it as a sexuality that people identify as a part of who they are, rather than a simple choice of preference.

Some people are very adventurous and inquisitive, and pursue an almost hedonistic indulgence of almost all sexual exploits in what we would classify as a "swingers" lifestyle, with sex parties where consenting adults indulge in consensual sex with numerous partners, and this too, while not openly acknowledged by many, is neither seen as criminal, or evil.

So where do we get our desires from?
How do they develop, and can we control them?

That is the question, control, how do we gain it?

If we gain control, we may be able to steer people away from inappropriate and damaging behaviour, to more acceptable behaviour.

In Western society, we've almost completely absorbed John Stuart Mill's position: do whatever you want as long as it doesn't bother anyone else.

The boundaries of "appropriate" sexual behaviour have now been drawn around children. The permissiveness that has been granted to adults has met an equal enforcement in the sexuality of children. A child-protection discourse has come to define children's sexuality, and the big change now is the policing of childhood sexuality, which is largely defined in terms of "abuse," even if occurring between similar-aged children. There are many children now in treatment programs for having sex with each other.

A hundred years ago, the legislated age for marriage was 12. The age of consent is now 16. Many have been arrested for child pornography for having pictures of their children in the bath, as have many teens who've sent nude photos of themselves to their friends.

The Henson debate highlighted this dillema: images of "sexualised" children must be banned. Any pictures of nude children must be banned. Childhood sexuality itself must be hidden. Children are seen as "innocent," which means they cannot be seen to have sexual desire. Sexual desire in children is increasingly being seen as pathological.

Excellent points Karnal, and the fact that our attitudes towards sex as something that children are to be totally isolated from, leaves kids confused and disturbed.
Sexplay is a natural part of growing up, and little boys and girls have been comparing equipment since they shared a cave together.

Just how we can foster healthy sexual attitudes in children is a different thing altogether, as we really would be experimenting with what is appropriate and not.

Perhaps we need to revisit old anthropological studies of tribal peoples, and see what developed with no restrictions, then adapt what seems may be natural, with what will be in the best interests of the kids.

Now real little kids just looking and touching is probably natural inquisitiveness, what we must try and do is have people reach adulthood without repressed sexuality that they are too afraid to interact with anyone but kids.

These people are so afraid of sexuality that they target children as the only ones that they are not intimidated by, and sexual predators develop, which harms all involved greatly.

Protecting children needs to always be the foremost concern of all people, and developing healthy attitudes right from childhood, may help to foster a more mature and protective society.

The problem with age of consent issues, as raised by Karnal, is that more often than not it is adult males seeking to meet their own desires that drives them, and not any concern for the well being of the children involved.

Enquiring mind wrote on May 18^th, 2010 at 4:33pm:

The Henson debate highlighted this dillema: images of "sexualised" children must be banned. Any pictures of nude children must be banned. Childhood sexuality itself must be hidden. Children are seen as "innocent," which means they cannot be seen to have sexual desire. Sexual desire in children is increasingly being seen as pathological.

Should we make September 23rd Freud night... where we burn effigies of Sigmund Freud... Followed by a feast of grilled chicken, Kentucky style... mmmm... mother-fvckin good.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 18^th, 2010 at 6:55pm:

Enquiring mind wrote on May 18th, 2010 at 4:33pm: The Henson debate highlighted this dillema: images of "sexualised" children must be banned. Any pictures of nude children must be banned. Childhood sexuality itself must be hidden. Children are seen as "innocent," which means they cannot be seen to have sexual desire. Sexual desire in children is increasingly being seen as pathological. Should we make September 23rd Freud night... where we burn effigies of Sigmund Freud... Followed by a feast of grilled chicken, Kentucky style... mmmm... mother-fvckin good.

LOL. Sounds good. Throw in some veggie burgers too.

It's a fine line. I think the case of Roman Polanski illustrates how society attitudes towards underage sex have changed over the last 30 odd years.

If that incident had happened in 2010, they would have 'burnt him at the stake' regardless of how famous he was.

mozzaok wrote on May 18^th, 2010 at 5:47pm:

The problem with age of consent issues, as raised by Karnal, is that more often than not it is adult males seeking to meet their own desires that drives them, and not any concern for the well being of the children involved.

The problem of "abuse" is gradually being redefined by social workers and psychologists. I've known kids to be classed as abusers for touching other kids outside their clothes, or even taking other kids' underwear out of the laundry basket.

What usually follows is a mandatory treatment program where the object of the program is to obtain a confession that abuse occurred. Like all sex offenders in treatment, children must admit that they have performed a crime.

What is "normal" sexual curiousity or experimentation, and what is defined as "abuse" is often clouded. Workers will nearly always go with "abuse" as it manages any potential fallout if children "reoffend."

This is the new frontier of sexuality: the increased surveillance of children, and the label of "sexualised behaviours."

Quote:

I do not know how effective this practice is, because I do not have figures to compare sexual assaults in muslim, and non-muslim countries, but the fact that they place the onus on women, to try and appear unattractive, rather than on men to exercise control, shows us that simplistic desire to combat a problem can lead to consequences which may not be the fairest, or best way to address an issue.

You're oversimplifying a bit, but I agree with your general argument. People should be responsible for their own sexual choices and their outcomes.


Quote:

So if we accept that most people have strong sexual desires, and impulses, how do we go about educating kids to have the confidence to express their sexuality in an acceptably appropriate way? How do we steer people toward wholesome natural sexuality, rather than toward harbouring bizarre and troubling sexual behaviour, that would be generally considered as perverse?

It depends on their ages. Children are exposed to sex everywhere. You can't pay for petrol without being confronted (usually at a child's eye level) by half naked women on the cover of softcore porn magazines. Not exactly an ideal role model.

Healthy sexual attitudes and behaviour depend at least partly on being allowed to go through the natural processes.

muso wrote on May 19^th, 2010 at 8:14am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 18th, 2010 at 6:55pm: Enquiring mind wrote on May 18th, 2010 at 4:33pm: The Henson debate highlighted this dillema: images of "sexualised" children must be banned. Any pictures of nude children must be banned. Childhood sexuality itself must be hidden. Children are seen as "innocent," which means they cannot be seen to have sexual desire. Sexual desire in children is increasingly being seen as pathological. Should we make September 23rd Freud night... where we burn effigies of Sigmund Freud... Followed by a feast of grilled chicken, Kentucky style... mmmm... mother-fvckin good. LOL. Sounds good. Throw in some veggie burgers too.

Yeah, why not... Dunno where veggie burger fits into the Freudian lexicon, but no doubt it'll turn out to be a metaphor for a vagina.

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 19^th, 2010 at 12:39pm:

It depends on their ages. Children are exposed to sex everywhere. You can't pay for petrol without being confronted (usually at a child's eye level) by half naked women on the cover of softcore porn magazines. Not exactly an ideal role model.

And then there's on the beach with bloody Krauts. The first feeling of sand under their feet and they're overcome by the compulsion to drop their daks.
;D

Basically, I would tend to lean to Freudian explanations.
I don't believe for a second that a child that is not capable of sexual reproduction doesn't have sexual urges as an adult would understand it.
I am a case in point. And so was my mate at the time where we looked at naughty magazines under his house and he told me of peeking on his nebulant sister (who at the time seemed to be a grown up) through a hole he'd made in the shower.
And I got the 'orn at 10yrs of age (4 or 5 yrs before my late actualisation of puberty). I desperately wanted to go have a look at his developing sister, but jerking off didn't really enter my mind. I just wanted to be around those wonderful developing boobs.
Even earlier at 6 yrs of age, when I was having a bath with mum's friend's daughter, I got the 'orn and the parents decided to seperate our bath times. The daughter was loving it. "Make it go big, make it go big", she squealed.
Then even before that, there were a few "doctor's and nurses" games. I'll show you mine if you show me yours. I got the 'orn back then too.

For me, sexuality has existed as far as I can remember. It only became a disappointment, an insult, and a crime when money became the motive.

You were one dirty, filthy, sick, perverted puppy. 2000 years of Christianity... For what??

;D ;D ;D

Quote:

You were one dirty, filthy, sick, perverted puppy. 2000 years of Christianity... For what?? ;D ;D ;D

I was an 'orny little kid, I make no boners about that. But I attended Sunday school and church, so it was OK.
Maybe mum took me to too many service stations in the bassinet, maybe that was my problem  ;D

Subjects such as this can be very scary in a way.

Of course children are sexy.  Sex makes the world go round even more than money,  great men have fallen because of their sexual escapades,  just ask the NSW labor government!!  they cannot win the next election, I don't believe,  and one of the biggest reasons will be their pollies just can't keep it in their pants, this latest crapola is just the nail.

What worries me is this.

We are so sexually liberal now! in the past 20 years we've forgiven the gays (to an extent) and made laws to protect them and allow them their sexual freedom.

What would happen if we allow this for the paedophiles?  if the peds all get together and decide to lobby parliment and have their own mardi gra.  Don't scoff!  :-[   We never believed it would happen with the gays either.

Sexually, there seems to be no where else to go, kids are all that are left to "liberate".  We've already had cases of artists painting nude kids and calling it 'art' etc.


Do we say it's ok for children to have sex with other children?  do we say it ok for 16yr boy, 14yr old girl?

Do we say it's ok for 20,30,40yr old male with 12yr old girl, as long as the girl consents?

The scenarios could go on and on but where do we draw the line? and how do you control the hormones in young kids of both sexes?  I dunno!  it bothers me!   :(
The only way parents know how to control it, is to say 'NO! don't touch.'!  therefore instilling in the child's mind sex is something secretive, naughty and pretty much a bad thing to do.

Which, of course, it aint!     :'(

Quote:

What would happen if we allow this for the paedophiles?  if the peds all get together and decide to lobby parliment and have their own mardi gra.  Don't scoff!     We never believed it would happen with the gays either

What is it with people trying to tie paedophilia and homosexuality together?
The difference is, its none of your  business if i shag my mate,we are adults, on the other hand if you shag a thirteen year old boy you should be charged with it,as you should if you shag a thirteen year old girl.
The gender has sweet fa to do with it, its the age of the person. ::)

It's all to do with steps I think. Once you couldn't swear on the telly, they do now. Once you were not allowed by law to be gay, you are now, once they didn't talk about sex in the media, well only mildly, now it's there every day. In huge bold letters. It's everywhere.

Some steps are good, some are maybe not so good.
It's ok to be sexy and feel good about yourself, gay or otherwise and between consenting adults, of course that's a given, and I don't judge nor do I care about that.

The point I'm trying to make is how to handle it with kids. Stupid to go back to the old ways where it was all hidden away and treated as some big adults secret, but what do the kids make of all this.

Sex in almost all it's guises is so in your face now your kids can't help but be exposed to it all. So what's the best way to handle it so they see it all in perpective?

Maybe you explain it like driving?  some things you just need to wait for.

I have 2 sons, 9 and 11, I would like them not to see sex as something dirty and secretive so do I let them read and discuss everything? or do I just say 'be a kid and leave the sex subject to the adults.?  and how do I curb their curiosity about it, or do I let them have free rein?  

What do I do?  what do I hide and what do I allow?

My sister is having trouble with her 13yr old daughter wanting to wear makeup and wearing clothes more suited to a 20yr old. Does she allow her to follow her 'sexy' impulses (which are probably natural but could cause sexual trouble, men already look at her  :-[) or does she rein them in.  

It has nothing to do with being gay or not, it's more to do with the liberal and sexual steps the world has taken in the past 20 years, and as a young parent, I do worry about it.

If I'm confused at 33 how confused do children get?

Quote:

The point I'm trying to make is how to handle it with kids. Stupid to go back to the old ways where it was all hidden away and treated as some big adults secret, but what do the kids make of all this. Sex in almost all it's guises is so in your face now your kids can't help but be exposed to it all. So what's the best way to handle it so they see it all in perpective? Maybe you explain it like driving?  some things you just need to wait for. I have 2 sons, 9 and 11, I would like them not to see sex as something dirty and secretive so do I let them read and discuss everything? or do I just say 'be a kid and leave the sex subject to the adults.?  and how do I curb their curiosity about it, or do I let them have free rein?   What do I do?  what do I hide and what do I allow? My sister is having trouble with her 13yr old daughter wanting to wear makeup and wearing clothes more suited to a 20yr old. Does she allow her to follow her 'sexy' impulses (which are probably natural but could cause sexual trouble, men already look at her  ) or does she rein them in.

You're the parent, you know your kids better than anybody else, so it's up to you to draw the line where you see fit.
As long as you don't apply cruel and unusual punishment they probably won't give a damn about what you think anyway.
Wherever you draw the line, they'll probably also get some personal satisfaction from crossing it. So I wouldn't stress out about it too much, there's a large range within that bell curve in which to draw your line.

No doubt capitalist forces have moved that line further across than that which most parents feel comfortable with, becasue sex sells better than oil.
Sooner or later most of us realise that the most boring sex with somebody that you love is far more exciting than the advertised ultimate orgasm, nomatter how saturated we've become with media bs.

Good parents are always concerned to some extent about their kids making sexual mistakes, and for good reason. But what else can you do except for trying to impart your knowledge and experience?
Everything you've mentioned falls within the boring mean of the bell curve, so what's to worry about? There's nothing worse than a worry wart parent.