Hull mum disgusted as 11-year-old set 'hardcore porn' homework

A Hull mum is "fuming" over her 11-year-old daughter's school work which asked children to define hardcore pornography - among other "inappropriate" topics.

Children in Years 7, 8 and 9 at Archbishop Sentamu Academy in east Hull were set the work in their Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) class as part of their home learning.

Teachers have asked the 11 to 14-year-olds to "define" pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography, as well as female genital mutilation, wet dreams, trafficking, male circumcision, breast ironing and more.

They were also asked questions about alcohol, drugs and smoking.

Following complaints from parents, the academy has now apologised for any offence caused.


https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/education/mum-disgusted-hardcore-porn-homework-4142348

When you want to teach kids about controversy, you choose controversial subjects.  I mean, who wants to argue about pink roses, pinafore dresses and other Pollyanna topics?

Porn raises prickly questions about freedom of expression and what is decency(?).  Perhaps these questions are more important in the US, as the UK does not have a First Amendment, not to mention a written Constitution.  However, even in Britain, if expression can be suppressed, there goes freedom...helicopter parenting notwithstanding.

Is Lady Chatterley's Lover a classic, or is it pure indecency?  So controversial is the issue of pornography, that an exacerbated Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart announced, I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it.

Excellent topic to teach 11-14 year-olds how to organize arguments, debate issues, and become lawyers.

Thorin wrote:A Hull mum is "fuming" over her 11-year-old daughter's school work which asked children to define hardcore pornography - among other "inappropriate" topics.

Children in Years 7, 8 and 9 at Archbishop Sentamu Academy in east Hull were set the work in their Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) class as part of their home learning.

Teachers have asked the 11 to 14-year-olds to "define" pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography, as well as female genital mutilation, wet dreams, trafficking, male circumcision, breast ironing and more.

They were also asked questions about alcohol, drugs and smoking.

Following complaints from parents, the academy has now apologised for any offence caused.


https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/education/mum-disgusted-hardcore-porn-homework-4142348

Well, they are remiss in their teaching. They left off child pornography.

Shouldn't children be expected to organize their thoughts on a topic that strikes so close to home?

And what in the hell is breast ironing?

What about "genital" mutilation?

Original Quill wrote:When you want to teach kids about controversy, you choose controversial subjects.  I mean, who wants to argue about pink roses, pinafore dresses and other Pollyanna topics?

Porn raises prickly questions about freedom of expression and what is decency(?).  Perhaps these questions are more important in the US, as the UK does not have a First Amendment, not to mention a written Constitution.  However, even in Britain, if expression can be suppressed, there goes freedom...helicopter parenting notwithstanding.

Is Lady Chatterley's Lover a classic, or is it pure indecency?  So controversial is the issue of pornography, that an exacerbated Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart announced, I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it.

Excellent topic to teach 11-14 year-olds how to organize arguments, debate issues, and become lawyers.

I tend to agree with you actually.

I think 11 is a bit young. Maybe 14 is okay. I'd go with 15-16.

But yeah, there's a constant struggle as to what is appropriate to teach kids of a certain age, and how much to shelter them.

I have to think that educators factor in the online lifestyle of the current crop. If topics they might stumble upon literally any second, by accident, on practically any website that exists, aren't addressed in a controlled setting guided by a responsible adult, really wacky chaos could ensue, to say the least.

Ben wrote:I think 11 is a bit young. Maybe 14 is okay. I'd go with 15-16.

Could be, but that's just tinkering with the details.

BTW, it strikes me that this exercise is not about forcing kids to review the actual porn. Notice, it's just about framing a definition, in the abstract, quite apart from viewing the subject matter.

I imagine it's about preparing kids to become aware of freedom of expression, distinguishing prurient content from art, and putting forth those ideas in a persuasive way—all sorts of subsequent lessons. But all it asks for is the threshold question, 'what is pornography?'

Can you define something you haven't seen?

Hell, I don't even know the difference between hardcore and softcore and I'm sure I've seen plenty of both.

No doubt these kids will be better off for knowing the difference.

Maddog wrote:Can you define something you haven't seen?  

Yes, I think so.  "Hardcore" is a simple adjective:

Dictionary.com wrote:
hard-core or hard·core [hahrd-kawr, -kohr]
adjective

1. unswervingly committed; uncompromising; dedicated:
a hard-core segregationist.

2. relating to or containing sexually arousing depictions that are very graphic or explicit:
hard-core pornography.

Compare soft-core.

3. being so without apparent change or remedy; chronic:
hard-core inflation; hard-core unemployment.

4. very intense or extreme:
hard-core workouts at the gym.

5. Usually hard·core. noting or relating to the music genre hardcore, or the subculture, clothing style, etc., associated with it:
hardcore t-shirts and jeans.

6. noting or relating to video games that can only be mastered with advanced skill and are played in longer sessions, or noting a player of such games:
hard-core gaming.

“Pornography” is a noun:

Dictionary.com wrote:pornography[ pawr-nog-ruh-fee ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR pornography ON THESAURUS.COM
noun

sexually explicit videos, photographs, writings, or the like, whose purpose is to elicit sexual arousal.

So, from the dictionary you know the subject is "extreme" and it is "eliciting sexual arousal".  Constructing a definition is quite easy.

However, I suspect the teacher is calling for a discussion of the sociological reaction, confusion with art, and how one rectifies the two for purposes of establishing a standard of freedom of expression.  Those are the important entailments of the matter, in my view.

Once you know the parameters, looking at porn pictures has nothing to do with the issue.  That part of it is just a knee jerk reflex of some helicopter parents.  The subject is really just an exercise in, or a civics lesson.

Well I wouldn't want my 11 year old being set that kind of homework.
Bloody hell, I dont want to see hardcore  porn, why should 11 year olds have to think about it?

Having a class discussion about adult literature like L C lover is one thing, being set homework about hard v soft porn, FGM, and breast ironing???...for 11 year olds....what the hell does that achieve?

Syl wrote:Well I wouldn't want my 11 year old being set that kind of homework.
Bloody hell, I dont want to see hardcore  porn, why should 11 year olds have to think about it?

Having a class discussion about adult literature like L C lover is one thing, being set homework about hard v soft porn, FGM, and breast ironing???...for 11 year olds....what the hell does that achieve?

I guess breast ironing gets the wrinkles out?

OK, I couldn't go any longer not knowing. (Breast Ironing)

One more stupid thing done to women.

Instead of asking kids to explain the difference between different kinds of porn, how about counselors that are available for females being subjected to backwards ass shit being done to them by primitive family members?

I had to google too.
So breast ironing is done to girls to protect them from unwanted male advances.....wouldn't a more appropriate way to treat that problem be to castrate the dirty bastards who prey on young prepubescent girls?

Just a thought.

Syl wrote:Well I wouldn't want my 11 year old being set that kind of homework.
Bloody hell, I dont want to see hardcore  porn, why should 11 year olds have to think about it?

Having a class discussion about adult literature like L C lover is one thing, being set homework about hard v soft porn, FGM, and breast ironing???...for 11 year olds....what the hell does that achieve?

Would you feel more comfortable if it were 14 year-olds? 17 year olds? College freshmen? College seniors? Those are just details...what is the age of delicacy?

It's a civics lesson, aimed at prompting a discussion of what standard makes it legitimate, and what standard makes it illegitimate. Art is hard to calibrate and the students are expected to come up with a solution. If it's too intellectually challenging for 11 year-olds, I understand that.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Well I wouldn't want my 11 year old being set that kind of homework.
Bloody hell, I dont want to see hardcore  porn, why should 11 year olds have to think about it?

Having a class discussion about adult literature like L C lover is one thing, being set homework about hard v soft porn, FGM, and breast ironing???...for 11 year olds....what the hell does that achieve?

Would you feel more comfortable if it were 14 year-olds?  17 year olds?  College freshmen?  College seniors?  Those are just details...what is the age of delicacy?

It's a civics lesson, aimed at prompting a discussion of what standard makes it legitimate, and what standard makes it illegitimate.  Art is hard to calibrate and the students are expected to come up with a solution.  If it's too intellectually challenging for 11 year-olds, I understand that.

No I wouldn't feel comfortable if it was aimed at 14 year ols either. Maybe 16 plus.

How would younger kids know the difference between hard and soft porn?
Are they supposed to google these terms? God knows what images they would see if they did, certainly not suitable for underage kids....and hardly art.

And Quill, who does this promote discussion with? They are not in class, they are in the home, they dont even have the opportunity to discuss or talk through their thoughts with a teacher or their peers.

The school has apologised, and rightly so.

Syl wrote:And Quill, who does this promote discussion with? They are not in class, they are in the home, they dont even have the opportunity to discuss or talk through their thoughts with a teacher or their peers.

Yeah, for the younger ones.  I differ.  I would have been able to understand this when I was 12.

These mums are raising retards.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:And Quill, who does this promote discussion with? They are not in class, they are in the home, they dont even have the opportunity to discuss or talk through their thoughts with a teacher or their peers.

Yeah, for the younger ones.  I differ.  I would have been able to understand this when I was 12.

These mums are raising retards.

No, they are raising kids, and instead of thinking it's very 'woke' to have their heads filled with porn, hard OR soft, they want their childhoods to be innocent and carefree and their learning to be age appropriate.

I can't believe this is actually a thing:

Breast ironing - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Breast_ironing
Breast ironing, also known as breast flattening, is the pounding and massaging of a pubescent girl's breasts, using hard or heated objects, to try to make them stop developing or disappear."

WHY?

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, for the younger ones.  I differ.  I would have been able to understand this when I was 12.

These mums are raising retards.

No, they are raising kids, and instead of thinking it's very 'woke'  to have their heads filled with porn, hard OR soft, they want their childhoods to be innocent and carefree and their learning to be age appropriate.

These moms are probably raising kids that know we don't use the word retard anymore either.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, for the younger ones. I differ. I would have been able to understand this when I was 12.

These mums are raising retards.

No, they are raising kids, and instead of thinking it's very 'woke' to have their heads filled with porn, hard OR soft, they want their childhoods to be innocent and carefree and their learning to be age appropriate.

You haven't listened to what I've said. You have a knee-jerk response to the mention of pornography, while that is not the issue. The assignment doesn't call for anyone to fill 'their heads' with pornography. It calls for kids to consider a contentious topic--who cares what it is--and discuss whether censorship is the answer.

Obviously, censorship is your answer, because that is the position you take. But others don't feel so strongly. Fill in the blank space, the topic is irrelevant. Suppose the topic at issue is Brexit--a hot topic to some--would these mums be so quick to condemn and censor? The issue is how free do you want expression to be?

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

No, they are raising kids, and instead of thinking it's very 'woke'  to have their heads filled with porn, hard OR soft, they want their childhoods to be innocent and carefree and their learning to be age appropriate.

These moms are probably raising kids that know we don't use the word retard anymore either.  

It's a Texas term. Sometimes you have to speak the language of your audience.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

No, they are raising kids, and instead of thinking it's very 'woke'  to have their heads filled with porn, hard OR soft, they want their childhoods to be innocent and carefree and their learning to be age appropriate.

You haven't listened to what I've said.  You have a knee-jerk response to the mention of pornography, while that is not the issue.  The assignment doesn't call for anyone to fill 'their heads' with pornography.  It calls for kids to consider a contentious topic--who cares what it is--and discuss whether censorship is the answer.

Obviously, censorship is your answer, because that is the position you take.  But others don't feel so strongly.  Fill in the blank space, the topic is irrelevant.  Suppose the topic at issue is Brexit--a hot topic to some--would these mums be so quick to condemn and censor?  The issue is how free do you want expression to be?

Gobbledegook

It asks 11 year old's to define pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography etc

So explain how an 11 year old is going to understand mentally how to define this, let alone even understand the above? How to differentiate between them and understand the difference?

Being as the kids are not at school, they were asked to google. Just what do you think said searches will bring up Quill?

What if they click on images Quill when looking up these terms?

Do you thing that is appropriate for 11 year old's?

What is worse here is that the parents were not informed

Parents have the option and right to withdraw children from some aspects of sex education

Major safeguarding issue this

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8336201/Mother-blasts-school-11-year-old-daughter-asked-define-hardcore-pornography-homework.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK

https://www.fpa.org.uk/relationships-and-sex-education/teachers/statutory-rse-england-simple-guide

phil wrote:What if they click on images Quill when looking up these terms?

What if they steal mother's car and kill 5 people? Should we prohibit them riding in cars just because that is a possibility?

An old Swedish Proverb says "Worry gives a small thing a big shadow." Worry is a special form of fear. It is what humans do with simple fear once it reaches the part of their brain called the cerebral cortex. We make fear complex, adding anticipation, memory, imagination, and emotion.

Why does the worrier go on worrying? The mind has, in effect, gone into a spasm, a grip that cannot relax and accept good news. S/he is suffering a kind of "brain burn," because the system is continually pumping out a huge amounts of adrenaline under high pressure.

If you've raised, say, a sixteen-year-old properly, and instilled in them a good sense of right/wrong--including why it is favorable--there should be no worry. If not, the problem is deeper than the availability of pornography, and you should look after your parenting skills.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, for the younger ones.  I differ.  I would have been able to understand this when I was 12.

These mums are raising retards.

No, they are raising kids, and instead of thinking it's very 'woke'  to have their heads filled with porn, hard OR soft, they want their childhoods to be innocent and carefree and their learning to be age appropriate.

These moms are probably raising kids that know we don't use the word retard anymore either.  

In my house we do. It’s just a word and it’s just a joke word here in my house.

Probably get lambasted for saying that.

Most 11 year olds nowadays know what porn is.

No one is asking them to watch it, they’re being asked to discuss it. It would be like asking children what they think of killing animals then putting them on the barbecue.

Don’t we want children to know anything? Are we scared to tell them things?

eddie wrote:Most 11 year olds nowadays know what porn is.

No one is asking them to watch it, they’re being asked to discuss it. It would be like asking children what they think of killing animals then putting them on the barbecue.

Don’t we want children to know anything? Are we scared to tell them things?

Discuss the differences in porn.

Can you explain the differences in two things that you have not seen?

This isn't a discussion about sex education.

And I dont think anyone is telling you what you can discuss with your children.

Can you clarify what you’re asking me please. One question.

eddie wrote:Can you clarify what you’re asking me please. One question.

Can you describe the differences in two things that you have never seen?

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:Can you clarify what you’re asking me please. One question.

Can you describe the differences in two things that you have never seen?

No. Because I haven’t seen them.

eddie wrote:Most 11 year olds nowadays know what porn is.

No one is asking them to watch it, they’re being asked to discuss it. It would be like asking children what they think of killing animals then putting them on the barbecue.

Don’t we want children to know anything? Are we scared to tell them things?

Brilliant post!   It's a case of a coincidence of terms, creating a confusion of concepts.  They hear "porn" and all reason flies out the door.

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:Most 11 year olds nowadays know what porn is.

No one is asking them to watch it, they’re being asked to discuss it. It would be like asking children what they think of killing animals then putting them on the barbecue.

Don’t we want children to know anything? Are we scared to tell them things?

Discuss the differences in porn.  

Can you explain the differences in two things that you have not seen?

This isn't a discussion about sex education.  

And I dont think anyone is telling you what you can discuss with your children.

Who cares?  It exists, so move the fuck on.  Deal with the question: what are the limits of censorship?

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Most 11 year olds nowadays know what porn is.

No one is asking them to watch it, they’re being asked to discuss it. It would be like asking children what they think of killing animals then putting them on the barbecue.

Don’t we want children to know anything? Are we scared to tell them things?

Brilliant post!     It's a case of a coincidence of terms, creating a confusion of concepts.  They hear "porn" and all reason flies out the door.

Thank you and I agree. It’s a knee-jerk reaction.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Discuss the differences in porn.  

Can you explain the differences in two things that you have not seen?

This isn't a discussion about sex education.  

And I dont think anyone is telling you what you can discuss with your children.

Who cares.  It exists, so move the fuck on.  Deal with the question: what are the limits of censorship?

Err - the mother whose 11 yr old girl still loves ‘My Little Pony’, for one? As she’s pointed out, her priority is quite rightly to safeguard her young child and to ensure her daughter knows how to stay safe online.

@lex wrote:

Original Quill wrote:


Who cares.  It exists, so move the fuck on.  Deal with the question: what are the limits of censorship?

Err - the mother whose 11 yr old girl still loves ‘My Little Pony’, for one? As she’s pointed out, her priority is quite rightly to safeguard her young child and to ensure her daughter knows how to stay safe online.

The original question was about 11 to 14 year-old's. Age is just a detail. An 11-year-old is equivocal. I think a 14-year-old can handle it, but if not, try 16-years-old.

The real point of this story is helicopter parents who fear they haven't raised their children right. If at age 14, you can't depend on what you have taught your child, morally, you need to have your license revoked.

So let’s think then....what age is it when a child starts hearing/thinking/seeing/wondering about sex?

Do we all agree on a certain age?

Do we all think every single child is the same?

Do we all agree that most children are different now, because of music videos...for just one example?


Because I don’t think anyone has thought about what has angered them here...

Parents in general loathe the idea of their children becoming sexual creatures. I do! I don't want my baby to grow up -- at least that's my first-blush reaction.

Logically, they will grow up and it's up to us to help them through that sometimes-traumatic process.

In an ideal world, every child would have a teacher who could focus only on them, and gauge when that child is ready to learn certain truths some might consider unsavory.

In the real world, some kids are light years ahead of what teacher is saying, others are light years behind, and we have to pick some cut-off age to the best of our ability.

Some kids will be shocked, others will barely be affected. But that shock will come sooner or later. There's no avoiding it.

Given that, isn't it better for kids to learn such an important lesson from a responsible adult before they get the chance to learn the lesson from their friends and the internet, without a parent or teacher to help it make sense to them, to help them see it properly and fully?

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:What if they click on images Quill when looking up these terms?

What if they steal mother's car and kill 5 people?  Should we prohibit them riding in cars just because that is a possibility?

An old Swedish Proverb says "Worry gives a small thing a big shadow."  Worry is a special form of fear. It is what humans do with simple fear once it reaches the part of their brain called the cerebral cortex. We make fear complex, adding anticipation, memory, imagination, and emotion.

Why does the worrier go on worrying? The mind has, in effect, gone into a spasm, a grip that cannot relax and accept good news. S/he is suffering a kind of "brain burn," because the system is continually pumping out a huge amounts of adrenaline under high pressure.

If you've raised, say, a sixteen-year-old properly, and instilled in them a good sense of right/wrong--including why it is favorable--there should be no worry.  If not, the problem is deeper than the availability of pornography, and you should look after your parenting skills.

1) Stramman

2) No relevance

3) Its called safeguarding children

4) Again no relevance

How about you answer my points

eddie wrote:Most 11 year olds nowadays know what porn is.

No one is asking them to watch it, they’re being asked to discuss it. It would be like asking children what they think of killing animals then putting them on the barbecue.

Don’t we want children to know anything? Are we scared to tell them things?

Most?

Based on the minuscule number of children you know?

How many have you asked?

How many have told you

Ridiculous point to make, when again you are not the centre to base this on. What matters and rightly so is the parents should be advise to decide whether they want their children to know

Again if you were to google hardcore porn and then click to images. Is that something an 11 year old child should see, when we have a minimum age for this Eddie?

Again major missing the point in safeguarding

Does a 11 year old child need to know what hardcore or transvestite porn is?

No

Do they fully comprehend what it means?

At this age a childs mind is still developing

eddie wrote:So let’s think then....what age is it when a child starts hearing/thinking/seeing/wondering about sex?

Do we all agree on a certain age?

Do we all think every single child is the same?

Do we all agree that most children are different now, because of music videos...for just one example?


Because I don’t think anyone has thought about what has angered them here...

Yet again a ridiculous point

A child can certainly learn about human biology and reproduction. Safeguarding them from predators, but porn is an adult industry

That is a major difference from helping a child help learn about the changes they go through and help understand them

I mean do you really think a child of 11 needs to understand what hardcore porn is?

We have minimum age set for specific reasons

Porn often exploits females and is something an older child should learn the dangers of such an industry.

11 is simple to young for that child to understand

So I shall repeat my points

It asks 11 year old's to define pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography etc

So explain how an 11 year old is going to understand mentally how to define this, let alone even understand the above? How to differentiate between them and understand the difference?

phil wrote:A child can certainly learn about human biology and reproduction. Safeguarding them from predators, but porn is an adult industry

Sadly, didge, I think I was a better parent than you are, or were. My daughters had no problem staying away from drugs, bad people and porn. We had no problem talking about freedom of expression, and other rights. It was so refreshing to talk about such things forthrightly.

I musta done something right. I'm sorry about your experience.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:A child can certainly learn about human biology and reproduction. Safeguarding them from predators, but porn is an adult industry

Sadly, didge, I think I was a better parent than you are, or were.  My daughters had no problem staying away from drugs, bad people and porn.  We had no problem talking about freedom of expression, and other rights.  It was so refreshing to talk about such things forthrightly.

I musta done something right.  I'm sorry about your experience.

No relevance again and now you are dick measuring

Third time asking

It asks 11 year old's to define pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography etc

So explain how an 11 year old is going to understand mentally how to define this, let alone even understand the above? How to differentiate between them and understand the difference?

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:A child can certainly learn about human biology and reproduction. Safeguarding them from predators, but porn is an adult industry

Sadly, didge, I think I was a better parent than you are, or were.  My daughters had no problem staying away from drugs, bad people and porn.  We had no problem talking about freedom of expression, and other rights.  It was so refreshing to talk about such things forthrightly.

I musta done something right.  I'm sorry about your experience.

Cheap point scoring their Quill....move along to the ego thread to see where you are going wrong.

I imagine when you were rearing your daughters, access to the internet and all the readilly available porn on it wasn't available, so it was a very different way of teaching sexual education back then.

Obviously kids should be taught about the hard facts of life. There will be a time when discussion about various porn, wet dreams, breast ironing and so on will happen ....but 11 to 14 year olds, sat in a room alone, half of them wondering what the heck most of it is about, the other half googling God knows what...is not only morally wrong, it's bloody ridiculous.

By the way, that's not a knee jerk reaction, I have given it careful thought.

eddie wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Can you describe the differences in two things that you have never seen?

No. Because I haven’t seen them.  

Then how would a child do it?

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Sadly, didge, I think I was a better parent than you are, or were.  My daughters had no problem staying away from drugs, bad people and porn.  We had no problem talking about freedom of expression, and other rights.  It was so refreshing to talk about such things forthrightly.

I musta done something right.  I'm sorry about your experience.

Cheap point scoring their Quill....move along to the ego thread to see where you are going wrong.

I imagine when you were rearing your daughters, access to the internet and all the readilly available porn on it wasn't available, so it was a very  different way of teaching sexual education back then.

Obviously kids should be taught about the hard facts of life. There will be a time when discussion about various porn,  wet dreams, breast ironing and so on will happen ....but 11 to 14 year olds, sat in a room alone, half of them wondering what the heck most of it is about, the other half googling God knows what...is not only morally wrong, it's bloody ridiculous.

By the way, that's not a knee jerk reaction, I have given it careful thought.  

He started a thread about his daughter and hiw she didnt even return his calls. He should have had his Thai servant call her, maybe his daughter would have called her back?

Ben Reilly wrote:Parents in general loathe the idea of their children becoming sexual creatures. I do! I don't want my baby to grow up -- at least that's my first-blush reaction.

Logically, they will grow up and it's up to us to help them through that sometimes-traumatic process.

In an ideal world, every child would have a teacher who could focus only on them, and gauge when that child is ready to learn certain truths some might consider unsavory.

In the real world, some kids are light years ahead of what teacher is saying, others are light years behind, and we have to pick some cut-off age to the best of our ability.

Some kids will be shocked, others will barely be affected. But that shock will come sooner or later. There's no avoiding it.

Given that, isn't it better for kids to learn such an important lesson from a responsible adult before they get the chance to learn the lesson from their friends and the internet, without a parent or teacher to help it make sense to them, to help them see it properly and fully?

Pornography doesnt equate to sexual education.

You're conflating teo different topics.

Syl wrote:Cheap point scoring their Quill....move along to the ego thread to see where you are going wrong.

Just because I told it like it is to a friend of yours?? No doubt, if I had said that to Wolf, you would have cheered. I'm not concerned about petty politics. The fact is, you think porn is a hot stove and kids should be taught it is taboo just to mention it. If we approached everything as taboo, we would have never discovered the uses of fire.

Someone needs to approach all issues intelligently, and rationally. They used to say that those with leprosy should not be studied, but be put away and never touched. Well and good. But to then say that we should not include leprosy in a book of infectious diseases is insanity.

But what you are doing here is assuring the teenager gets the infectious disease.

Here, you are putting pornography in a class of taboo, as if that is going to protect teens. The mere fact that you make it taboo, without discussing anything about it with the teenager, is going to pique his or her curiosity all the more. Ultimately, it's an abdication of a parent's responsibility.

But here, in this issue, pornography is not even a focus. The exercise in question is using pornography as an object--a place-holder--in order to ask a question about freedom of expression. To go into a panic just because pornography is mentioned, is to push the teen in the direction of getting into porn. Teenagers don't see the taboo, they see the intense focus of the parent. In their developing minds, they see a parent keeping candy away, and they want to share it.

I’ve always shared information with my daughters. They are partners, not wards in a prison. That's the philosophy that I raised my daughters with, and they just shrugged and learned…and were better for it. I suggest that the reason didge's teens--or anyone's teenager, similarly--didn't respond the same, is because the actions of the parent put it out there as candy. One has to be smarter with teenagers.

[quote="Original Quill"]

Syl wrote:

But here, in this issue, pornography is not even a focus.  The exercise in question is using pornography as an object--a place-holder--in order to ask a question about freedom of expression.  

Gobbledegook, you simple invented that claim to this exercise. Even more so if you had bothered to read the actual links

Again fourth time asking


It asks 11 year old's to define pornography, soft pornography, hardcore pornography and transsexual pornography etc

So explain how an 11 year old is going to understand mentally how to define this, let alone even understand the above? How to differentiate between them and understand the difference?