Sex Education

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by fartsac, Dec 5, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I was dismayed to see on the beeb this am before jetting off for work, that Bliar's mob are now suggesting that Sex Education in schools be started at the age of 8 8O 8O 8O 8O :x :evil: :twisted: :twisted: :!:

    What's going on in this nanny state of ours?

    Thay claim that it is an effort to cut down on teenage pregnancies, and that they could revise this age to be as young as 5 :!: :!: :!: :!: :twisted:

    What on earth is going on?!!
  2. Here's a novel idea, how about getting the CPS to prosecute the men who have sex with underage girls. Simple really
  3. It's the UK gobment finally taking a (very rare) realistic approach to something, but only because it costs nothing.

  4. may i say this, Holland and Sweden have been doing this for years and they have the lowest rate of teenaged pregnancies.
  5. Hang on, I remember being taught about repoduction in the animal kingdom/child birth when I was at primary school. How about the cutting down on the sexualisation of "Tweenagers" but the media and fashion houses. Parents should take more responsiblity in teaching their children the birds and the bee's. I think a lot of parents think schools are there to teach kids every thing under the sun.
    I still remember my Dad .....
    "Remember to rubber up son, I don't want to be a Grandfather just yet!".
  6. How about actually applying the Sexual Offences Act 2003?

    Sex with a child 13 or under is RAPE (see s.5); there are no consent issues.
    Sex with a child 14-15 comes under s.9 Sexual Activity with a child. Both carry a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment.

    If you don't want to criminalise the father at least make sure the CSA screws him to the wall. Some American states have a novel approach to teen-pregnancy/single mothers that gets my vote... They State will support the first child accepting that "accidents" happen, however no state funding is available for any further children.

    I have a 3-week old daughter and the thought of some of the stuff that she is going to have to deal with in the next few years horrifes me.
  7. Perhaps I'm being rather old fashioned, but it seems a bit young (as young as 5?) to be telling our kids how and where to stick their bits. :?:

    Maj_Boothroyd wrote:
    I know what you mean. When my eldest (a boy) was born at 0400 hrs, me armed with matchstick propped-up eyelids was holding him in the waiting room, getting some well earned rest ( :lol: ) when the Hospital Chaplain (an Irish Catholic) walked in. I was certainly suprised to see him, but even more so when he sat down and started chatting and giving 'fatherly' advice. The point he made which stuck with me (the rest was total bo**ocks, or was it that it was 4am and I was'nt paying much attention :?: ) was something like:

    "Ah well, it's a good thing it's a boy, only one d*ck to worry about, if it was a girl you'd have to worry about a thousand!"

  8. I doubt they actually tell them 'what to do with their bits' at age 5... I'd say at that age its about fluffier ideas such as the differences between men and women or something like that...

  9. RTFQ


    I get quite frustrated that the parents of teenagers turn to the government in dismay when their kids start shagging like burberry bunny rabbits, and I'm normally all for scoring points against the government whether they deserve it or not.

    Something is making children discard their morals and start getting jiggy in an environment of diminished responsibility and perceived inconsequence. Hormones give them the desire, it has always been the case - poor diet and additives may contribute to how bloody retarded some of our offspring are, but horny teenagers have always existed - what stopped them in the past was a set of values, sense of pride and moral courage that was instilled, primarily, by parents; let's call it moral fibre.
    Too many parents are too busy trying to be teenagers themselves to be good parents. Trying to be a parent is hard work, maybe too hard for some people. I'm not being preachy, I'm one of those people who is too busy cultivating my arrested development to make a good dad, but at least I know it and therefore don't breed. The pressures of double (full-time) income households, hedonist lifestyles, stupidity and plain, simple dereliction of responsibility have led to the collapse of many, many families. One of the symptoms of that collapse is teenagers shagging, there are a lot more. The government (and plenty of parents who know it's really largely their fault and whose guilt makes them indignant) think this symptom of a complex disease can be treated by playing with the age at which sex education is taught, like pressing "+" and "-" incessently on the contrast control will fix your telly while the aerial is disconnected.

    3 things are to blame: Hormones, anaemic parent-taught moral fibre and social pressures. Hormones we can't do anything about (actually, we drug our primary schoolers, why not drug our teenagers? it beats addressing the root causes and sets em up nicely for the anti depressants when they grow up), but the other two we can do something about.

    When you're 13 - in fact, when you're any age up until that moment one of you says: "let's try for a child" - sex isn't about reproduction. I'm sure you don't have to travel far from your keyboard to think of examples where sex has been about a great many other things other than sex, love or lust. Control, danger, acceptance, loss, revenge, conflict, fun, tabbo breaking and risk taking. Teenagers are just as fcuked up, more so in fact as the whole point of being a teenager is the inability to express complex and adult emotion. Keanu wants to shag Shania because he thinks(hopes) it will make him feel like a real man, and Shania want's to shag Keanu because that's what all the real, beautiful women do.

    The concepts of manhood and womanhood aren't taught by some naive left wing cnut in a tweed jacket in Sex Education. Mum was going to do it, but she's down the bingo, and dad's too busy asleep in front of "I'm a Celebrity..." Pop culture and the entertainment, cosmetics, fashion and music industries are not so lethargic however.

    I'm going to sound like I'm making huge generalisations here, and I am, so I apologise and acknowledge that much of what I'm going to say doesn't apply to anyone on here, but they're my observations.

    Anyone who's dated foreign women will probably identify with what I'm about to say. I don't mean yanks or western europeans - as much as we don't like to admit it, we're all the same, we just have different statues. Kiwis and South Africans are good examples, and go culturally farther afield to South America and you'll really see a difference. It's in little things, like less time to get ready, more time spent laughing in bars instead of watching her look around at other women's dresses while she tries to see if she's been noticed. It's the (comparable) absence of The Diet, the presence of a lot more genuine female friends. The funny look you get when you pour (because you've been trained to) complements on how she looks, followed by the "yeah alright, stop being weird" or a simple, proud smile that says "I know, I don't need you to tell me." Someone, somewhere told many women in this country that they are ugly, or at least in danger of being ugly, and the only way to be beautiful is to buy clothes/products/a lifestyle that can stop it happening. The verb "buy" gives me a hint of who told them this, but the crime is that no-one told them otherwise. This propaganda has got much worse over the years and much more targetted. You take some-one's self worth away, screw their image of themselves up and make them feel ostracised unless perfect. You then put them in an environment with similarly aged, sexually awakening members of the opposite sex, to some of which they are attracted, they've inherited a massively underdeveloped sense of responsibility and emaciated moral fibre from mum and dad, then nature comes along and injects 100mg of horn into their arm. Where would you go for a little bit of comfort and acceptance?

    Your kids want love, a sense of self worth and to reconcile their 'faults' with this false and avaricious view of beauty. They also need a royal kick up the arrse and to be taught some responsibility - difficult when the apparatus for doing that are a school system and method of parenting that much prefer the word "Rights."
  10. That was a fcuking good rant...feeling better? I do agree at least with some of it and am inclined to blame moral relativism, and therefore a lack of shame. However it is not just kids - soldiers are just as bad/stupid...the STD rate is terrifying, some of my soldiers were not embarassed to tell you what diseases they had had/tested for and the rest simply got pregnant. There were 8 female Junior ranks (of a total of 11 female junior ranks)in my Sqn that became pregnant during my tour and only 2 were married before they sprogged and four more got married as a result. I am not opposed to women being pregnant, but the lack of planning just goes to show how cavalier they are about their health/and that of those they love/sh8g since if there are that many pregnancies imagine how many diseases they all have. What is more it is not as if they don't know how to prevent disease/surprise kids they have all had the 'warty' lecture at sometime during their service. I don't think telling them not to sh8g without protection at five years old instead of 7 will change this.
  11. RTFQ


    Damn right I do, I don't write this cr.ap for anyone's benefit but my own, if I get it all out here, I can go to the pub later and discuss important stuff, like whether Tess Daley is a He/She, without getting punchy.
  12. RTFQ & Postie,
    My thoughts exactly, just didn't have the time or the eloquence to write all that down.
    The bottom line is that bringing in Sex Education at an earlier age will not change things at all (perish the thought, it might make it worse 8O ), society needs to change and parents need to have the b*lls to bring up their children with a good set of morals rather than p*ssing their lives away whilst leaving their kids to get on with things.

    A very contentious issue: Girls/Women are busy ranting about how men should bear some of the responsibility of copulation/conception. Yes quite right and so they should, but it ain't going to happen (pessimist! :? ) and if it were to happen, it certainly isn't going to happen overnight. Endstate therefore reads: Girls/Women, it's a sh*tty world, but if you want to be safe/sure, either don't sh*g, or you take the precautions; because the sweaty, groaning, pre-pubescent, spotty adolescent humping between your legs sure as hell doen't give a f*ck; CSA or no CSA he doesn't care so the onus is on you. That, by the way is not necessarily my POV, it's just a reality check.

    Sorry about that, I don't know what came over me :roll: .

    Has anyone asked Bliar ( :twisted: - actually looks like Bliar!!, anyone else noticed :?: )when he broached the subject with his daughter - if at all :?:
  13. All his children go to private school, they have crap sex education there, I know I went to one and we were taught nothing.
  14. I think we are kidding ourselves if we imagine teenage pregnancy is some sort of modern disease. There's a belief people are having sex in their teens now and a presumption they didn't in the past. But the truth is they're probably not doing as much now and back then were probably having more than people think. It was certainly less well publicised and was probably resolved with a swift shove down the stairs or, if you were lucky, the deluxe option of a hot bath, a bottle of gin and a visit by 'aunty' Gladys and her knitting needles. If you were a bit more well-to-do, a furtive adoption would be the answer.
  15. :lol:
    :lol: :lol: :lol:
    Quite right tho, in the middle ages (and earlier than that) women were regularly having children at the age of 13 or even younger! 8O
    That said, life expectancy was shorter, so you had to get'em out early, and in large amounts (sometimes more than 10). Clearly not the case anymore.
    Why then can't they get a grip of what is really the cause :?: :evil: