School pupils should be taught 'not all porn is bad' advise experts
Page 1 of 1
School pupils should be taught 'not all porn is bad' advise experts
Panda Fri 26 Apr - 10:26
School pupils should be taught 'not all porn is bad', advise experts
Teachers should be aware that “not all pornography is bad” when taking sex
education classes, according to guidance made available to schools.
Pupils as young as 11 should be
taught the dangers of 'sexting' Photo:
PA
By Melanie Hall and Graeme
Paton
10:01PM BST 25 Apr 2013
168 Comments
A publication released by a group of health and children’s charities says
that teachers should bear in mind that pornography is “hugely diverse”.
Pupils as young as 11 should be taught the dangers of “sexting” and
five-year-olds should know how airbrushing in the media creates unrealistic body
image expectations, it says.
Older pupils aged 14 upwards should tackle “real” and “unreal” behaviour in
pornography, says the guide, which directs teachers to a list of online
resources they can use in lessons.
It suggests using a website called TheSite.org, an advice forum for young
people, which tells teenagers that “porn can be great” and aims to tackle a
series of “myths” about the subject. “Sex is great. And porn can be great. It’s
the idea that porn sex is like real sex which is the problem,” says the website.
“But if you can separate the fantasy from the reality you’re much more likely to
enjoy both.”
The guide was published by the Sex Education Forum (SEF), a coalition of more
than 90 organisations, including the NSPCC and Barnardo’s, established to
campaign for better lessons in the subject.
Related Articles
However, critics said many parents would be “horrified” if their children
were taught about pornography in school. Campaigners said it was “playing with
fire” and warned that it could encourage a casual attitude towards sex.
The publication follows the Government’s announcement that it will no longer
include personal, social, health and economic education (PSHE), which is
commonly used to deliver sex education lessons, in the National Curriculum.
Instead, schools will be left to draw up their own syllabuses.
On Thursday the SEF released the first edition of the online publication Sex
Educational Supplement — The Pornography Issue, which is intended to help
schools teach sex education, providing resources on how to broach the
“potentially difficult and controversial subject” of pornography.
The publication includes a “wish list” compiled by teachers about what they
think fellow staff should know, including that “pornography is hugely diverse —
it’s not necessarily 'all bad’ ”.
However, Norman Wells, from the Family Education Trust, said that introducing
pupils to pornography risked undermining children’s “natural sense of reserve”.
“The intention appears to be to steer children and young people away from a
belief in moral absolutes and to encourage them to think that there are no
rights and wrongs when it comes to sexual expression,” he said.
“Many parents will be horrified at the prospect of their children being
taught about pornography within such a framework. To take a no-holds barred
approach to sex education has the potential to break down pupils’ natural sense
of reserve and to encourage casual attitudes towards sex.”
He added: “If we want children to view sexual intimacy as something valuable,
special and worthy of respect, it needs to be addressed with modesty and
restraint. To give lessons on pornography is to play with fire.”
The publication includes lesson ideas for each age group, with suggestions
including discussing the dangers of “sexting” with pupils aged 11 to 14. It asks
students to think about why young people do it, “which may include positive
reasons such as 'for fun’ ”.
The publication features an interview with a state school teacher from
Sheffield, who asks her 15 and 16-year-old pupils to give their views on
pornography.
Boo Spurgeon, the head of personal, social, health and economic education at
Forge Valley Community School, reported that her pupils said they “need the
chance to consider the pros and cons, and there should be balanced teaching
about it, not just negatives”.
Pupils said the subject should be mentioned in the first year of secondary
school, for 11 and 12-year-olds, because “that is the average age that
pornography gets viewed”. Students also noted that “you can learn some helpful
positions from some films”, but added: “It isn’t a model of good sex, but
sometimes people do it because they enjoy it.”
The Department for Education has outlined a system in which schools would be
given the task of drawing up their own PSHE curriculum.
Chris McGovern, a former headmaster and chairman of the Campaign for Real
Education, said lessons on pornography should only be carried out with parental
consent. “This material may be widely available but some responsible parents
will be very careful to make sure their children can’t access it and they would
be horrified to think they are being exposed to it at school,” he said.
Lucy Emmerson, coordinator of the Sex Education Forum, said: “Teachers have
told us they are nervous about mentioning pornography, yet given the ease with
which children are able to access explicit sexual content on the internet, it is
vital that teachers can respond to this reality appropriately.”
Schoolgirls want porn star looks, teachers
told
Pornography online is warping children’s minds,
teachers warn
Teachers should be aware that “not all pornography is bad” when taking sex
education classes, according to guidance made available to schools.
Pupils as young as 11 should be
taught the dangers of 'sexting' Photo:
PA
By Melanie Hall and Graeme
Paton
10:01PM BST 25 Apr 2013
168 Comments A publication released by a group of health and children’s charities says
that teachers should bear in mind that pornography is “hugely diverse”.
Pupils as young as 11 should be taught the dangers of “sexting” and
five-year-olds should know how airbrushing in the media creates unrealistic body
image expectations, it says.
Older pupils aged 14 upwards should tackle “real” and “unreal” behaviour in
pornography, says the guide, which directs teachers to a list of online
resources they can use in lessons.
It suggests using a website called TheSite.org, an advice forum for young
people, which tells teenagers that “porn can be great” and aims to tackle a
series of “myths” about the subject. “Sex is great. And porn can be great. It’s
the idea that porn sex is like real sex which is the problem,” says the website.
“But if you can separate the fantasy from the reality you’re much more likely to
enjoy both.”
The guide was published by the Sex Education Forum (SEF), a coalition of more
than 90 organisations, including the NSPCC and Barnardo’s, established to
campaign for better lessons in the subject.
Related Articles
Schoolgirls want porn star looks, teachers
told
18 Mar 2013
EU to vote for ban on all forms of
pornography
08 Mar 2013
Pornography online is warping children’s minds,
teachers warn
17 Mar 2013
Iceland considers pornography ban
13 Feb 2013
However, critics said many parents would be “horrified” if their children
were taught about pornography in school. Campaigners said it was “playing with
fire” and warned that it could encourage a casual attitude towards sex.
The publication follows the Government’s announcement that it will no longer
include personal, social, health and economic education (PSHE), which is
commonly used to deliver sex education lessons, in the National Curriculum.
Instead, schools will be left to draw up their own syllabuses.
On Thursday the SEF released the first edition of the online publication Sex
Educational Supplement — The Pornography Issue, which is intended to help
schools teach sex education, providing resources on how to broach the
“potentially difficult and controversial subject” of pornography.
The publication includes a “wish list” compiled by teachers about what they
think fellow staff should know, including that “pornography is hugely diverse —
it’s not necessarily 'all bad’ ”.
However, Norman Wells, from the Family Education Trust, said that introducing
pupils to pornography risked undermining children’s “natural sense of reserve”.
“The intention appears to be to steer children and young people away from a
belief in moral absolutes and to encourage them to think that there are no
rights and wrongs when it comes to sexual expression,” he said.
“Many parents will be horrified at the prospect of their children being
taught about pornography within such a framework. To take a no-holds barred
approach to sex education has the potential to break down pupils’ natural sense
of reserve and to encourage casual attitudes towards sex.”
He added: “If we want children to view sexual intimacy as something valuable,
special and worthy of respect, it needs to be addressed with modesty and
restraint. To give lessons on pornography is to play with fire.”
The publication includes lesson ideas for each age group, with suggestions
including discussing the dangers of “sexting” with pupils aged 11 to 14. It asks
students to think about why young people do it, “which may include positive
reasons such as 'for fun’ ”.
The publication features an interview with a state school teacher from
Sheffield, who asks her 15 and 16-year-old pupils to give their views on
pornography.
Boo Spurgeon, the head of personal, social, health and economic education at
Forge Valley Community School, reported that her pupils said they “need the
chance to consider the pros and cons, and there should be balanced teaching
about it, not just negatives”.
Pupils said the subject should be mentioned in the first year of secondary
school, for 11 and 12-year-olds, because “that is the average age that
pornography gets viewed”. Students also noted that “you can learn some helpful
positions from some films”, but added: “It isn’t a model of good sex, but
sometimes people do it because they enjoy it.”
The Department for Education has outlined a system in which schools would be
given the task of drawing up their own PSHE curriculum.
Chris McGovern, a former headmaster and chairman of the Campaign for Real
Education, said lessons on pornography should only be carried out with parental
consent. “This material may be widely available but some responsible parents
will be very careful to make sure their children can’t access it and they would
be horrified to think they are being exposed to it at school,” he said.
Lucy Emmerson, coordinator of the Sex Education Forum, said: “Teachers have
told us they are nervous about mentioning pornography, yet given the ease with
which children are able to access explicit sexual content on the internet, it is
vital that teachers can respond to this reality appropriately.”
Schoolgirls want porn star looks, teachers
told
Pornography online is warping children’s minds,
teachers warn
Panda- Platinum Poster
-
Number of posts : 30555
Age : 67
Location : Wales
Warning :
Registration date : 2010-03-27
Re: School pupils should be taught 'not all porn is bad' advise experts
Panda Fri 26 Apr - 10:32
173 comments......these are three consecutive comments
sohoknights
14 minutes ago
At a concert at the National Portrait Gallery, yes! the NPG! I saw a concert,
that was performed in front of families with children. One song called 'Street
boy' described 'I felt the throbbing from behind' . This is what we have sunk to
as a Nation, promoting child homosexual prostitution! We have had AIDs and HIV,
should we not take notice of these terrible events and get morality back into
our lives?
colinharrow
19 minutes ago
If you have no concept of morality, ie: if being non-judgemental, and
refusing to “stigmatise” any sexual behaviour on the grounds that it's all down
to personal choice, even at times regardless of the age of the participants; if
you are devious enough and you also have an interest in doing so, you can always
cobble together an argument in favour of anything, even encouraging children to
regard some pornography as valid, or no doubt the fashionable buzz word would be
“empowering”.
This week I listened to a piece on BBC 4's Today programme about a debate
that was to be held on the benefits of pornography. I can't remember the name of
the woman who was supporting the argument but, bless her, Germaine Greer was
opposing the motion.
The arguments put forward by the proposer appeared to be two-fold. As people
had different libidos wasn't it good that those with higher sex drives (mainly
men) could get their rocks of by using pornography rather than “worrying” their
less libidinous partners or eying up the woman nextdoor? I'm certain these
partners, rather than claiming headaches, would have been far happier, for their
husbands to lock themselves in the loo with a copy of “Big and Bouncy”,
“Bestiality Weekly” or “Kiddie Porn Pics.” And I'm sure they would have
respected their husbands so much more for doing so. After all nowadays that's
the most important ingredient in marriage isn't it – allowing your partner to
pursue and enjoy their sex drive? Forget all this stuff about commitment and
caring, that's just soooo un-modern!
Her second argument was based on body image. As pornography catered for all
physical tastes, grossly over or underweight, amputees, dwarves, those who are
physically disabled, deformed or mentally impaired, it enabled such people to
feel good about their deformities or abnormalities. She omitted to mention that
as with all such pornography the images were not designed to arouse the subjects
of the sex acts being performed but the physically normal, if not mentally so,
wierdos who enjoyed viewing them. At that point I switched the radio off but you
get the idea about being able to make an argument in favour of anything if you
try hard enough.
So we have on the one hand a movement in favour of pornography which is felt
to be worthy not only of debate but to be given air-time on the BBC, the
country's monopoly, publicly funded, public service national broadcaster, and on
the other we have the following, publicly expressed attitude towards sex with
children from a leading gay rights campaigner that has been printed in a
national newspaper (need you ask its name, it is of course, The Guardian).
In a letter to that title in 1997 Peter Tatchell wrote: “Several of my
friends - gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages
of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their concious choice
and gave them great joy.”
Let's make no mistake according to him children aged as young as nine said it
was their conscious choice to have sex with adults and it gave them great joy.
He has also gone on record as supporting a reduction in the age of consent to 14
“in the interests of children's sexual rights and welfare.” Children's sexual
rights!!! - that just about sums it up, and God, alone knows where the
children's “welfare” comes in?
And this is the non-judgemental world in which we now live where
“stigmatisation” and any idea of shame (unless you're a banker) are unacceptable
as descriptions of any sort of sexual behaviour. The fact that organisations
like the NSPCC and Barnardos have signed up to a policy that would in anyway
support the view that school-children should be encouraged to believe that
pornography of any kind “is not all bad” - ie:some of it must be “good” so go
out and try it kids – is glaring evidence, if any more is needed, of what a
truly sick society we have become.
texas_meat
20 minutes ago
This is so much the thin end of the wedge and unless we raise our voices in
opposition more and more explicit teachings will seep in.
Listening the BBC radio this morning and it's all being discussed as
perfectly natural.
There are certain elements of society who just cannot wait to sexualise our
children and deprive them of their innocence.
Certain vested interests to be satisfied you see - couldn't be anything to do
with our brethren from the sub-continent could it?
Or those from our beloved political classes with a penchant for the
young?
Oppose at all costs
sohoknights
14 minutes ago
At a concert at the National Portrait Gallery, yes! the NPG! I saw a concert,
that was performed in front of families with children. One song called 'Street
boy' described 'I felt the throbbing from behind' . This is what we have sunk to
as a Nation, promoting child homosexual prostitution! We have had AIDs and HIV,
should we not take notice of these terrible events and get morality back into
our lives?
colinharrow
19 minutes ago
If you have no concept of morality, ie: if being non-judgemental, and
refusing to “stigmatise” any sexual behaviour on the grounds that it's all down
to personal choice, even at times regardless of the age of the participants; if
you are devious enough and you also have an interest in doing so, you can always
cobble together an argument in favour of anything, even encouraging children to
regard some pornography as valid, or no doubt the fashionable buzz word would be
“empowering”.
This week I listened to a piece on BBC 4's Today programme about a debate
that was to be held on the benefits of pornography. I can't remember the name of
the woman who was supporting the argument but, bless her, Germaine Greer was
opposing the motion.
The arguments put forward by the proposer appeared to be two-fold. As people
had different libidos wasn't it good that those with higher sex drives (mainly
men) could get their rocks of by using pornography rather than “worrying” their
less libidinous partners or eying up the woman nextdoor? I'm certain these
partners, rather than claiming headaches, would have been far happier, for their
husbands to lock themselves in the loo with a copy of “Big and Bouncy”,
“Bestiality Weekly” or “Kiddie Porn Pics.” And I'm sure they would have
respected their husbands so much more for doing so. After all nowadays that's
the most important ingredient in marriage isn't it – allowing your partner to
pursue and enjoy their sex drive? Forget all this stuff about commitment and
caring, that's just soooo un-modern!
Her second argument was based on body image. As pornography catered for all
physical tastes, grossly over or underweight, amputees, dwarves, those who are
physically disabled, deformed or mentally impaired, it enabled such people to
feel good about their deformities or abnormalities. She omitted to mention that
as with all such pornography the images were not designed to arouse the subjects
of the sex acts being performed but the physically normal, if not mentally so,
wierdos who enjoyed viewing them. At that point I switched the radio off but you
get the idea about being able to make an argument in favour of anything if you
try hard enough.
So we have on the one hand a movement in favour of pornography which is felt
to be worthy not only of debate but to be given air-time on the BBC, the
country's monopoly, publicly funded, public service national broadcaster, and on
the other we have the following, publicly expressed attitude towards sex with
children from a leading gay rights campaigner that has been printed in a
national newspaper (need you ask its name, it is of course, The Guardian).
In a letter to that title in 1997 Peter Tatchell wrote: “Several of my
friends - gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages
of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their concious choice
and gave them great joy.”
Let's make no mistake according to him children aged as young as nine said it
was their conscious choice to have sex with adults and it gave them great joy.
He has also gone on record as supporting a reduction in the age of consent to 14
“in the interests of children's sexual rights and welfare.” Children's sexual
rights!!! - that just about sums it up, and God, alone knows where the
children's “welfare” comes in?
And this is the non-judgemental world in which we now live where
“stigmatisation” and any idea of shame (unless you're a banker) are unacceptable
as descriptions of any sort of sexual behaviour. The fact that organisations
like the NSPCC and Barnardos have signed up to a policy that would in anyway
support the view that school-children should be encouraged to believe that
pornography of any kind “is not all bad” - ie:some of it must be “good” so go
out and try it kids – is glaring evidence, if any more is needed, of what a
truly sick society we have become.
texas_meat
20 minutes ago
This is so much the thin end of the wedge and unless we raise our voices in
opposition more and more explicit teachings will seep in.
Listening the BBC radio this morning and it's all being discussed as
perfectly natural.
There are certain elements of society who just cannot wait to sexualise our
children and deprive them of their innocence.
Certain vested interests to be satisfied you see - couldn't be anything to do
with our brethren from the sub-continent could it?
Or those from our beloved political classes with a penchant for the
young?
Oppose at all costs
Panda- Platinum Poster
-
Number of posts : 30555
Age : 67
Location : Wales
Warning :
Registration date : 2010-03-27
Similar topics» "Phones for all pupils " to close the digital gap
» Pupils caught with weapons in Schools
» Tony Blair to advise next government of Albania
» pOOR PUPILS "BEING SET UP TO FAIL", TOP uNIVERSITY WARNS
» Teacher who taught children to paint with their blood is re-instated
» Pupils caught with weapons in Schools
» Tony Blair to advise next government of Albania
» pOOR PUPILS "BEING SET UP TO FAIL", TOP uNIVERSITY WARNS
» Teacher who taught children to paint with their blood is re-instated
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum