Thursday, March 11, 2010

Are Children Too Sexually Aware?

June 29, 2009 by Karlynn Johnston  
Filed under Super Informed

I often worry about the effect that the media is going to have on my childrens perception of sex . .This is a good snippet article, but my main worry is not that my children know about sex young, because sex is a normal part of life, big deal,  but I worry that they are getting a skewed perception of it. The role models for relationships out there aren’t exactly prime material (aka Chris Brown and Rhianna, lets solve an argument with our fists and hit a woman) or moronic TV commercials where one man is being pursued by a hundred salivating women because of his cologne . I completely agree that a comprehensive sex-education program will give them the information they need to make decisions based on fact, and help them navigate safely armed with the facts, not fiction, or even complete denial,  like the abstinence only programs.  The author also has an excellent point in mentioning that our son’s sexual morality is almost never an issue in the news, and she is right, when is the last time you read a news article on that topic?

Read the original article here:

Many hip parents have confessed when they see their young daughter dressed in little wisps of clothing, gyrating in front of the TV while singing along with the Britney Spears song If you seek Amy, it gives them pause. I often hear comments such as, “I don’t want to be a prude, but it’s really unnerving to see her be so sexual.”

I sincerely appreciate how difficult it is to watch your child try-on their sexuality — especially when it’s so in-your-face.

Yet, it’s probably the same way your parents fretted when you listened to Madonna, Led Zeppelin, Elvis or whatever music or movie you were into at the time.

Kids figuring out their sexuality is an age-old parent/teenager dilemma.

It certainly doesn’t help that at least once a year, headlines blare about the latest thing that will compromise your daughter’s sexual morality. (Please note: there’s rarely anything in the news about your son’s sexual morality. Is it just me, or is there something fundamentally wrong here?)

To get a balanced perspective, I spoke with sexologist Brian Parker, PhD, who has been teaching sex education in high schools and universities for many years. I asked him if kids are more sexual and/or more sexually active than they were 10 years ago.

He replied with an emphatic no, adding: “Studies show today’s teenagers are no more sexually active than teenagers of the last few decades. The average age of first intercourse is 16.”

Parents would undoubtedly argue that we are living in a hyper-sexualized society. That kids have more access to sexual information than any generation before them. (By the way, every generation of parent has probably said something similar.)

Parker agrees, and cautions parents about two things. The first is to be age appropriate. “If a seven-year-old is provocatively dancing to Britney Spears, they probably don’t understand what they’re doing. If it’s an eleven-year-old, they probably do. It’s important to ask your child, ‘Why are you doing that?’”

Parker adds a second gem: “During your ongoing conversation about sex, make sure your kids understand what your morals and values are. Don’t assume they will mirror what you want or believe. And don’t just say ‘That’s inappropriate’ — tell your kids why.”

Sex education starts at age zero and goes until your kids are out of your house. You must cram the maximum amount of information into their heads before they turn 13, when their friends become their reference point.

Appreciate that as much as you would like to protect your teenager from getting a sexually transmitted infection, becoming pregnant or earning themselves a bad reputation, they will most likely have sex with or without your knowledge.

Take heart — research proves a comprehensive sex education will keep them safe and help them to make the best choices for themselves, their bodies and sexual self-esteem.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • BlinkList
  • Kirtsy
  • Propeller
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Related posts:

  1. Majority of Parents Will Not Vaccinate Their Children For H1N1
  2. Are Children Hazardous to a Father’s Health?
  3. Adult Book Review: Talking To Your Kids About Sex
  4. 3 Part Series on Bullying: Part 2
  5. One H1N1 Vaccine Enough for Kids Age 3-9. Supposedly.

  • mmm
    I have a real problem with this because those pictures of kids trying on their sexuality are often 3-5 years old. They did not choose the clothes or the trappings parents did. They only hear the music at that age and see the movies if parents choose to show it to them. I have raised 4 children and 5 younger brothers and sisters so I think I have a little authority. Babies do not need to explore their sexuality. And when I was listening to Led Zeppelin my Mom was going to Deadhead concerts so don't think me a prude either. My 3 daughters never did those things, did not have an pre-occupation with sex and did not deal with it directly tell in late teens where it should begin.

    There is a wide gap between sexualizing infants and teens exploring their natural tendencies and these stories often try to wash over the differences and combine the two as if one and the same. No infant or child has a natural tendency to explore sexual things unless it is introduced by adults in various forms. Parents make excuses for their poor education because they don't want to edit what they watch and do. However parents who do raise much more well adjusted children who do at the right age and maturity find sexual things on their own.

    We do have a moral responsibility to raise well adjusted children. part of that is protecting them from knowledge that robs them of childhood until they are mature enough to manage the information. Sex is no different. What we choose to expose our kids to completely effects the age at which they will become active and interested in sexual things.

    Everyone dose not allow or expose their children to sexualized material despite what our liberalized media would have us believe. Using the Britteny or Madonna example is a perfect one, it made news because it was so revolting to so many people. It had truly been the norm it would not have gotten any coverage and on one would have carried about it. I dont try to restrict the natural progression of my children, I do however restrict a forced progression or sexual indoctrination by managing age appropriate access and morally grounded choices.

    The proof is in the results I let my kids make their own choices, they tend to be much more conservative in their moral views than me. By they time the were each 11 or 12 they were mostly free to decide for themselves, having been taught correct, ethical, and moral principles they could make more informed choices and decisions that they could comprehend. At this age and older they could weigh out the choices and repercussions of they way they behave and decide what is right for them.
  • Jeff
    I think you have to define what you mean by "kids". Yes, the role models are troubling when kids are 5-10...but I think the biggest concern for kids that age is the flood of info that comes in when they have older siblings whose hormones are already switched on. I think most parents are a bit unaware of how much kids that age get an eyeful of...from peeking around the corner when R-rated movies are being watched by teens...to online porn-viewing that often kicks in in the early teens. The modeling of older siblings probably carries more weight than that of celebrities.

    But I think the real concern kicks in around 11-15 (still "kids", in my view)...especially with young girls. I'm not particularly concerned with young girls enjoying showing off their developing bodies in the real world...that's been around forever. But I think most parents are almost completely unaware of the sea change introduced by webcams and broadband internet over the past decade. I'm not referring to pros who are over 18 who wear tiny dresses and pigtails and charge by the minute. I'm talking about honest-to-goodness young girls...especially in their early teens...who get drawn into online conversations with somewhat-older guys, and getting involved in stripping down (and often much more) on their webcams right under your own roof. At the risk of appearing too blunt, I think it should be required that all parents of preteens spend a bit of time viewing videos on sites like motherless-dot-com (ironic name, eh?) or msnchicks-dot-com. These videos are recorded by the guys on the other end of the webcam connection (without the girl's knowledge) and distributed all over the internet (I'm not sure if there's a financial incentive to the guys who record, or if its just some sort of power trip for them). There's simply no way to make these videos go away from all the sites they end up on. This is the kind of thing that will be haunting the next generation well into their adult lives. This doesn't even begin to address issues of actual physical danger...where a young girl may not be willing to give out her name or city...but gets on the webcam wearing a t-shirt from her high school. Kids are dumb. Parents need to be aware in order to protect them from themselves. Webcams, where they may be appropriate, should be kept in public areas of the house, not in the kids' bedrooms.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes