As the car passes, I look out the window and see a little girl clad in uniform. Green. She looks about 6 or 7. She has no shoes on. Understandable, we too used to throw them off once the teachers were gone and school was out. She walks for a bit. Stops. Bends over and looks up her dress,concentrating. The look on her face gives nothing away, she’s merely observing, intently.
It’s then I notice the three little boys under a tree, watching her walk away. They’re age mates. They’re young. But what’s going on. Why is she looking at herself that way, in public, after leaving those boys?
I wonder if I think too much, then remember the world we live in.
What do we teach kids about sex?
It’s only for Mummies and Daddies?
It should only occur when you’re in love? Only after marriage?
Or is it still a taboo topic, never to be brought up? “Dirty things”..Sinful acts.
A month or so ago on the BW Government Facebook page there was a post about how young girls are engaging in sexual acts with both their age mates and those slightly older. It went on to say the girls sometimes have more than one “partner” and they were looking into programs to do something about these “shocking” cases.
My response was: “Does it make sense to act shocked when pupils engage in unsafe sexual activities when there are no Sex Ed classes in schools and all they know about it is from Biology, Facebook groups, movies and peers? But then it being this country, even if there WERE such, they’d preach the same shit, the ABC’s, inter-generational relationships being bad and such, without bothering to focus on what’s REALLY going on in the kids’ minds and what would benefit and help them.”
I still feel the same way.
We’ll teach girls not to take money from older men, but neglect to mention not to take abuse from their peers. We’ll teach them they have a right to say “No” but not that sometimes your “No” will fall on deaf ears and you have to protect yourself. Well teach them that boys will like them, but not that sometimes these boys will lie. We forget to teach that their bodies are their own and even though they may mature early, this does not mean they should be used. That physical maturity does not equate to mental maturity and sex isn’t just about spreading your legs.
We’ll teach the boys about where the penis goes, but not that no girl HAS to give them sex. That just because they have pubic hair, or even before that, just because they’re curious, doesn’t mean they NEED to discover that early. That no, sex does not make you a Man. It is not an accomplishment, even animals do it. And the idea of obtaining sex without the girls full consent should shock and disgust them. That they should be able to judge a female’s maturity and care enough, respect enough, to not take advantage.
Does it even seem fair and sensible?
That we teach girls that they can and will be taken advantage of, but boys don’t get the same lecture? We’ll teach boys about the importance of circumcision and overlook to teach the girls about how to take care of their bodies?
AIDS is not the only danger that’s associated with sex. By not teaching the kids the negative emotional effects this may have on them, are we also teaching them that sex has no emotions involved? Which would be contrary to the “Have sex only when you’re married to the one you love” mess they’re already taught and kids pick up on hypocrisy. Future advice would fall on deaf ears.
Often these things are swept under the rug as “They’re just kids, they don’t know what they’re doing” and I don’t know how I feel about that. It makes me nervous. It bothers me because the fact that they’re just children doesn’t mean that they’re exempt from harm.
If we overlook a girl child’s curiosity regarding sexual matters and don’t bother to explain things to her, do we still have the right to complain when teenage boys take advantage?In a way, we did not interfere nor help.So are we not partly to blame?
Does “Teach a child the way he should go” only apply to your own?
And where do we begin?