See Catholic and Loving It for more commentary. If you don't want your 9-year old to see material like this, don't send him or her to a Catholic school where Archbishop Nichols' ideas on sex education have influence.
Don't say you haven't been warned. Wake up!
Now the Government are promoting masturbation for teenagers - yes you read that right. How long before the Catholic Education Service either catches up with that one or realises that the attempt to produce a 'Catholic' sex education is a hopeless one? Here's an image from a leaflet produced by the NHS in Sheffield.
9 comments:
Check out what Eric Hester writes on my blog please http://catholicmomof10militant.blogspot.com/ Do you mind updating to my newest blog?
Do you think that girls should learn about menstruation before or after their first period?
L
Anonymous,
Do you think they should learn about it by being flashed computer generated images of, shall we say fully developed women?
Do you think they should learn about it in a room full of boys?
Do you think there is even the slightest possibility that it might be better for parents to tackle such a subject rather than DVDs?
JamesP
Please answer my question straightforwardly - if you can.
I know a few women whose parents were unwilling/unable to explain about periods until after they happened - very frightening for the girls concerned.
"... images of, shall we say fully developed women?" As much as we might like to keeps our children innocent, the environment we live in is so saturated with such images and discussion, that children need to get the facts of life and the values of life sooner that we might like.
"... room full of boys?" many schools separate boys and girls for some or all sex ed.
"... better for parents ..." It's not an either/or. I learnt to read from both my mother and my school. Do you think that parents can delegate some of their child's education to school eg maths, RE (hence Catholic schools).
L
L you are missing the point. There are many ways of conveying the necessary information, but this is evidently the wrong way. If you can't see it, too bad.
Few schools separate the sexes for sex ed. None separate those who know it already from those who are too young to hear it at all. Classroom sex ed cannot be done in a good way - that's why the Church has condemned it. If parents are unable to do it it must be one-to-one with a person the child trusts.
Or is that too much trouble?
Hercules,
I obviously "can't see it". Maybe this is because my classroom sex ed at the age of 11 was done in a a full and excellent manner in a Jesuit school. For a whole week we had sex ed for a couple of lessons each day - there was no secret (mis)information to share in the playground! Very few (if any) parents could have imparted that breadth of reliable biological information nor enabled the spiritual and moral reflection and discussions.
The Church does not condemn classroom sex ed.
Perhaps significantly, no one has yet given a straightforward answer to my original question:
Do you think that girls should learn about menstruation before or after their first period?
L
Can you read? The answer is Yes but but not this way.
The Church condemns classroom sex ed. Get over it. See The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality from the CDF.
Do you think that girls should learn about menstruation before or after their first period?
Clearly the answer is that they should learn about it before their first period. Nobody here is disputing that.
What is being debated is the manner in which these things are done. The "stick the kids in front of a video" method is clearly problematic.
"The Church does not condemn classroom sex ed"
The Church says quite clearly...
"The normal and fundamental method, already proposed in this guide, is personal dialogue between parents and their children, that is, individual formation within the family circle. In fact there is no substitute for a dialogue of trust and openness between parents and their children"
and also
"the most intimate aspects, whether biological or emotional, should be communicated in a personalized dialogue."
(Both quotes from Truth and Meaning in Human Sexuality)
Classroom education is not a "personalized dialogue".
It is possible to find quotes referring to sex education being provided by schools but these must be taken in the wider context of the document. Don't make the mistake of reading the word "school" and hearing the word "classroom".
The Church envisages schools giving some help and support with personalised dialogue between trusted persons, not schools sitting children in a room together and showing them a DVD.
Is that "personal dialogue between parents and their children"? I think not.
James P
I had a traditional catholic education (local primary and ex-grammar secondary) and recieved no sex ed at all whatsoever. I am 40 now. My parents told me nothing and I learnt about the facts of life in the playground. Much of which was factually incorrect and rather lewd. It was an appauling situation and I welcome the CES addressing the issue. There is nothing in this video that is objectionable. It does not show full frontal nudity of adults as claimed. It shows an animated cross-section of male and female anatomy. It is age appropriate - addressing the issue of menstruation and puberty when children will be facing these issues in their own physical development. This is a resource to be used by schools in conjunction with parents as part of a wider educational programme. Schhools do not just put kids in a room and play the DVD and that's it.
Post a Comment