Treading very gently is perhaps the best way to describe the article wanting to avoid the lynch mob hysteria, being tarred and feathered, drawn and quartered and run out of town. Is fair enough.

There are groups who get an emotional high from being outraged. It focuses their anger, and gives them an excuse to be angry, but however as one issue is resolved they have to find another fix, anger, outrage to them is like a drug of addiction. They begin to suffer withdrawal symptoms.

Loose focus and purpose in life, when they are not outraged over something.

At least whilst they are angry and hostile, they do not have to look at themselves too closely in the mirror.

In psychological terms of projection and transference. Would make for an interesting study.

Daphne Patai in Heterophobia pointed out about how claim makers went about creating a problem amd how there is an esculation as society begins to accept, the problem then gets expanded as more and more instances are found.

Emotive annologies are used in order to trick the logical thinking part of the brain, as demonstrated in this article such as associating sea foam, with semen.

These people who make these associations are incredibly warped and sick. but also very dangerous.

Some folks like being aggressive and are constantly looking for a reason to be "outraged". These folks are like snakes lying on footpaths, just waiting to be stepped on so they can strike. This sort of aggression is a power play and the "offence" is nothing more than justifying their egotistical finger waggling.
Sex is a highly variable thing, across cultures, ages and personalities. Indeed the very concept of two sexes: Male/Female is an over simplification when you look at medical records. Many people are in some way in between...up to 10% of us!
There is nothing like a bit of "unnatural" variability to get the snakes all excited. The irony of Christians objecting to God's little jokes like homosexuality and trans-sexuality is amusing. First they must ignore Gods work so they can substitute their own version of "natural" then get all upset about the discrepancy with reality! I can just imagine God tutting every time a Christian decides that a member of His flock is inherently evil because they are born differently or do not act in accordance to a highly arbitrary moral code.
I agree that sexualising tweens is a bad idea...and I really feel for parents under the barrage of advertising that is targeting vulnerable minds but all efforts to curtail adults will fail. As prohibition shows telling someone not to do something that you have *no right* to influence tends to make people do just that: We are primed to rebel against tyranny...and snakes.

Aaah right – thanks Jay Thompson for mentioning Kids Free 2B kids in an article that does not represent the group’s intentions or actions correctly. There is a distinction between sex, sexuality and sexualisation – which are all frequently conflated when discussing this issue. It is important that children and early teens have access to age appropriate sex education and I encourage parents to have open and honest discussions with their children about sex and sexuality. Indirect sexualisation of children is about involuntary exposure to adult sexualised imagery and text which children are not psychologically, emotionally or cognitively ready for. Direct sexualisation is portraying children in adult like poses – adultifying kids or imbuing them with an adult sexualised knowingness that they have no understanding of.
Discussing sex, depictions of sex and attitudes to sex are not the same as discussing the harms of sexualisation.
Kids Free 2B Kids and child development professionals are rightly concerned about the mental health and well being of children who are bombarded with imagery that no generation before has had to deal with. Increasing research and concern from professionals working with children at the coal face validate the need to demand proactive responsibility from advertisers, marketers, retailers and broadcasters.
Raising awareness about these issues is not “warped and sick. but also very dangerous” as suggested by James H in the comments.
Branding those who raise awareness on the issue as ‘outraged, angry or hostile” (James H) or ‘hostile’ (Jay Thompson) merely serve to discredit, and do not accurately depict Kids Free 2B Kids, child development professionals,The Australian Psychological Society and many others who express concern.
Jay – in the future if you want to ”closely examine some of the assumptions underpinning their responses to sex in public” how about you contact me and have a discussion first. This will save you time and energy making up straw man arguments to pull apart....and save me having to read inaccurate representations of my group.
Julie Gale - Director Kids Free 2B Kids

The author writes "imagery which appears on magazine covers and billboards is degrading, especially to women and children. Demeaning public images of any group are unacceptable."

If he is concerned with demeaning groups, have a look at the whole picture. For example TV comercials. These virtually always demean men and maleness.

Sit down with a piece of paper in three columns. Column 1 is for ads with no gender-based power relationships. Car ads which only show cars, or ads where everybody is just beautiful. Ignore these.

The second column is for ads that demean men, that show a man being bashed, insulted, ridiculled. That show a man trying hard and being laughed-at by a woman, despite his best efforts. Where the man is weak and the woman is the ruler.

The third column is for the inverst, the bimbo, the powerful man exploiting women etc.

Almost every ad thet shows a gendered power relationship, or which admires/degrades typical gendered behaviours, show the woman as superior and the man as the slave.

Any wonder why for every ten suicides, nine of them are men (after including estimates of the drug ODs and car crashes that are officially recorded as accidents, but are almost certainly really suicides). Most male suffering and suicide is swept under the carpet, ignored and ridiculed. And often country cops will record a suicide as accidental for the sake of the family, the life insurance or to allow a church burial.

Now try to get some funding for programs to help. To reduce male suicide. Write some journal articles about this and see if you can get them published?

Do something about discrimination... do something to help males.

I suggest that you allow 3 and 4 year old kids to be kids. They don't need to know why auntie is hooked on drugs or uncle Sam has chosen to be a homosexual. Parents are often stupid enough to allow their kids to view music porn on the ABC and go to Ga spew concerts and wonder why they turn out promiscuous. Not rocket science even though the author seems to make out it is.

"We need to think of ways to discuss and represent s*x that do not entail exploitation."

We need ways to talk about the number 'six' that are not exploitative?

Or does the author (editor?) mean; sux as in... nah, that can't be right, or is it 'sox' - put equal pairs of socks in the washer out come singles - like a reverse dating bar.

Ooooooh, penny finally drops; the 's*x' was meant to be 'sex' as if the word 'sex' is some kind of expletive.

Well for as start we can write the word 'sex' without the asterisk. That would at least stop a little of the prudish hypocrisy that abounds these pages about human behaviour.

Sex, sex, sex, lovely.

Some interesting responses already!

Julie, it was never my intention to demonise Kids Free 2B Kids or construct your group as a 'straw man'. As I stated, I'm also deeply disturbed by deliberately 'sexualised' representations of children and adolescents. I mentioned your group (briefly and, yes, perfunctorily) as one of several groups devoted to criticising representations of children and adolescents in inappropriately 'sexual' situations. No offense was ever meant.

JayG, currently there world wide concern over the americanization of mental health.

I use this because the drug companies use a tactic, where they change a cultures perception and the way a culture treats mental health issue.(it maybe a good thing and then maybe not)

There was a very good program on abc radio about this.

So basically mental health issues are being viewed through the lense of the american psychological society. Of which influences the Australian Psychological society view and attitudes.

There is the belief that if a person is exposed too, certain stressors that they will then begin to exhibit certain types of behaviours, this is not necessarily the case, but there is a whole mechanism in place to convince people that they need treatment.

There is a subtle form of brainwashing. One only needs to look at the effects that the recovered memory syndrome created. In the name of 'conscious raising'.

Read Meredith Marans book 'My Lie'.

Secondly what I wrote was taken out of context.

"Emotive annologies are used in order to trick the logical thinking part of the brain, as demonstrated in this article such as associating sea foam, with semen.

These people who make these associations are incredibly warped and sick. but also very dangerous."

Daphne Patai drew on the work of Joel Best. I am sure that there are people who do have very good intentions, but sadly there are many people who do not.

One only needs to look at the numbers of innocent people gaoled for abuses that never happened.

The number of people jailed for abuses that never happened.
If the jury says u guilty then u go to jail. How do u stop that.

Dear Ozandy,
I am sorry mate but you have it wrong, God is a friend of sinners. He loves the person but hates the sin. It is them religious folk who follow the law who hate people not God. The law came through the man of God, Moses. Grace and Truth came through the Son of God, Jesus. He came to seek and save the lost. God is good. All who call on the name of Lord shall be saved. Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the father. People perish from lack of knowledge. So will you follow the twisted word (wick'ed = twist'ed), "has God indeed said", or the Word of God, Jesus. An individual choice on who you chose to trust, God through his son Jesus, or culture and tradition through his son Adam. If Jesus had been conceived by Joseph he could not save for a house divided shall fall. That is why the bible says he was conceived by the incorruptible seed not corrupt seed of sinful man, Adam. If you have all knowledge you are a better man then the rest of us, Gungadin.

Congratulations to Jay Thompson for drawing attention to the downside of groups who are critical of the sexualisation of culture.

While there is much to agree with in their arguments, my experience with some of these people is that they can be quite tunnel visioned, to their own and other's detriment, and they do not take criticism kindly. To the degree that in one instance, a group refused to allow any contrary opinion a voice on their website. This resulted in a very one-sided and tragically inaccurate representation of a serious situation.

It's sad when an ideology takes precedence over reality, but it's not unusual. I find much to support in the arguments of critics of cultural sexualisation of our young. But when they bray for blood, and refuse to deeply examine a situation for fear of it not fitting their paradigm, I'm not interested in them.

We urgently need to address the issues the author raised. Our young are being subjected to intolerable pressures, even our very young. But repression is not the way to go, as we ought to know from our history.

Briar Rose

People from a variety of viewpoints can be quite intolerant of other opinions. The first step in open dialogue about sex might be an acceptance of the right of others to hold different views and an attempt to genuinely understand other people's views without straw man type attacks.

There is nothing wrong with sex and children should not be taught that sex is bad, forbidden or evil as they mature and can grasp the concepts.

However, sexualisation of children/culture is entirely another matter. The two are distinguishable and while sex should not be made the boogey man it is not always suitable for a public arena. Children should be introduced to certain concepts as their maturity allows not when some corporation dictates.

Our society is made of men, women and children. We don't live in an exclusively adult world. That is just a fact of life. It is not just all about us.

Like, briar rose I have had a quick look at 'Collective Shout' and found a mix of people, some share my atheist viewpoint and are concerned about 'culture' and others who come at it from more a religious bent. There really isn't much of a religious agenda on the site. I do agree with the concerns about some of the sexualised products that are now marketed to quite young children including underwear (as opposed to young adults) and inappropriately placed billboards etc.

For debate to continue on this subject it is important to allow contrary opinions and to discuss ways of coming to a consensus (if that is even possible). There is always a chance that the outrage can be over-exaggerated on both sides of the debate if we are to be fair.

The trouble is some sexual images should be for 'behind closed' doors - that does not demonise sex, just means that it is appropriately out of reach of children.

To those who are comfortable with no boundaries in this area - is there anything that would make you say - NO that is going too far!

The outrage metre tends to be just as highly strung among some of the anti-censorship lobby as those who voice concerns about sexualisation of culture or children.

It is bewildering to me that Letting Children be Children has become such a divisive issue when it is really a no-brainer.

Pelican writes: "The outrage metre tends to be just as highly strung among some of the anti-censorship lobby as those who voice concerns about sexualisation of culture or children" - TRUE! Sex will always be a controversial topic. Sex (and particularly youthful sexuality) will always elicit impassioned, and very different responses. And isn't that the great thing about living in a democracy - that this range of voices can be heard!

Our society needs Kids 2B Kids as much as it does more libertarian perspectives on sex and sexuality. How boring would it be if we all nodded our heads in unquestioning agreement!

Ozandy makes a similar point. Unfortunately, I would not recommend Patai's "Heterophobia". This book is simply another opportunity by a so-called "feminist" to demonise other feminists as victimisation-obsessed and anti-heterosexual. That kind of argument is misguided, and what's more, it's getting very old!

The most striking feature of sexuality in Australia is the tension between a tradition of highly restrictive standards, on the one hand, and a climate that values individuality and personal freedom, on the other. Restrictive patterns of sexual behaviour have long been regarded as the cornerstone of public and private morality, yet the pleasures of sexual gratification are constantly extolled, implicitly and explicitly, especially through the mass media. Not surprisingly, the attempt to maintain the standards of earlier generations is largely unsuccessful. As a result, there is a discrepancy between the sexuality that is portrayed in the ideal culture - the norms and values a society adheres to in principle - and the sexuality that is actually expressed in the real culture - the norms and values a society adheres to in practice.

Lexi writes: "The most striking feature of sexuality in Australia is the tension between a tradition of highly restrictive standards, on the one hand, and a climate that values individuality and personal freedom, on the other."

Restrictive/puritanical and individualistic/do-whatever-ya-like approaches to sex are two sides of the same late capitalist coin. There will never be a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to sex, and neither should there be. We should move towards a society that celebrates all kinds of non-exploitative sex. Though exactly what constitutes 'non-exploitative' sex is still subject to heated debate.

Opinion polls show substantial tolerance of diversity in sexual behaviour, but they also show a continued commitment to fidelity and a declining interest in promiscuity. The epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases may have played a part in this trend, but it also seems that the sexual climate now calls for caring and commitment rather than rebellion and experimentation. Possibly the most important result of the preceding years of change,has been wide-spread acceptance of newer concepts of sexual morality. Many people still adhere to the stern rules of earlier generations, and some seem not to believe in sexual morality at all. But increasingly, judgements about right and wrong in sexual matters are based on the attitude that moral behaviour is that which involves mutual affection and respect and does no physical or psychological harm to those involved.