Me thinks Timkins doth protest too much, too much worrying about womens' and teenagers sexuality, and about controlling their behaviour.

Teenagers were also having sex at 16 when I was young and thats over 30 years ago. The implication that there is no love involved has no basis in reality, for those of us with teenage children we know that they often think that it is everlasting love mind you a lot of adults think that as well even if it does not eventually work out. The assumption that teenagers go through sex like automatons is ignorant. Feelings generally run amok at that stage, the best that caring parents can do is make sure they are safe and be there to sooth hurt feelings if it comes to an end.

Given the amount of tutoring and the expense/sacrifice a lot of parents go to make this happen (so kids get into Uni science / medicine even though they can't write) we don't have a uniform outcome on this front, despite syllabi etc. Some children have a natural bent to certain subjects (no pun intended re sexuality.)

Comprehensive sex education "with the most up to date information and research" appears to be set in a moral vacuum as seen by academic values neutral (but not bias free) scientific puritan articles on this website.

Does this mean that we may well have a lot of students that are good at (safe) sex, but, amoral (cf immoral) and don't appropriately value what they are doing.

What is the current TER for student recreational sex degrees anyway...and is their a families major open to students?

I would aim to remove sex education from what some would describe as "morality" (but in reality "ideology") as much as possible. The infection of ideology into education is a feature of totalitarian regimes. We've even seen totalitarian fundamentalists in the US attempting to infect science with their bizarre views of our planet's origins and biology (quaintly known as "creationism").

Obviously it may not be possible to totally remove sex education from ideology anymore than history or science. Nonetheless, I think it is worth the effort.

A lucid and realistic article that clearly demonstrates the need for better quality, universal sex education to be delivered via the school curriculum. As Anne Mitchell indicates, studies indicate that young people are engaging in sexual activities at a generally younger mean age than at previous periods in our social history, and that this seems to be a global phenomenon. Whether or not this is an undesirable trend is at one level irrelevant to the topic: kids are having sex earlier and will therefore reap the consequences. As a parent, I would much rather my kids approach the prospect of sexual relations from an informed perspective, including some sense of the social, moral and ideological contexts in which sex occurs. And I would be comforted to know that this knowledge was being imparted in a controlled and dispassionate way - like in a classroom.

As a divorced parent with 1/3 custody of my two youngest kids, I'm pleased that my kids can acquire a broader view of sex and sexuality than either I or their mother could give them. Unfortunately, their mother still labours (mostly subconsciously) under a Catholic socialisation, such that open discussions about sex are uncomfortable for her and are generally restricted to anatomical issues. While my communication with my teenage son is somewhat easier in this regard, he's only with me 1/3 of the time - and I'm not at all sure that I would be comfortable having similarly intimate conversations with my daughter when the time comes. I can only imagine the kinds of miscommunication and disinformation that occur in families that practise fundamentalist religions or are otherwise sexually repressed - both Christian and non-Christian.

Knowledge is power, and kids need to be equipped to deal with important issues like sexuality from a perspective that is informed, realistic and oriented towards their own well being.

Morgan

Lititia,
Is what you say about me or teenagers true is it? Could you please supply specific, non-anecdotal evidence.

As well as not mentioning families, the author did not mention a certain person who once ran a very good sex education program, which has subsequently been shown to reduce such things as teenage pregnancy, starting from a factor of 2 and going up to a factor of 8.

See http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20030515-000003.html

These research findings have been repeated in many other studies also, and I would think the author knows it.

And as well as reducing the chances of teenage pregnancy, this person also reduced the chances of teenage drug taking, STD’s, poor school performance and a whole range of other potential teenage problems, and they did it for free without costing the taxpayer anything.

However you can’t mention that person much anymore, as it produces too much negative reaction, (particularly in OLO), and they are becoming fewer in number within families, (is it still acceptable to mention this word?), with their roles now being taken over by the state. Although a state run sex education program will not stay up waiting for a 16 yr old son or daughter to arrive home sober and on time.

Unfortunately it is quite probable, that even this person cannot adequately counteract current teenage media, and a review of this media (eg magazines, movies, music etc) does show that the majority of it is being targeting towards teenage or preteen girls, and does use sex as a major selling point (thereby artificially encouraging it) like never before in the past, and the majority of it is coming from women. (eg everything from “Girlfriend” to “Brittany Spears”)

Unfortunately if males say something about this, then they are usually labelled misogynists, ignorant, GB’s etc, or it is inferred that they are trying to take away the rights of women.

So men are being forced out of this issue, like so many other issues to do with parenting, and now it is basically up to women, with their media, state run programs, and complete knowledge of everything.

When people talk about morality, whose morality are they talking about? Why is it people who are outspoken about their own morals are so hell-bent on imposing them on the rest of us?
I have an open relationship with my teenage daughter precisely because I do not attempt to impose my own values and morals on her. I talk about my own views and beliefs and listen - with respect- when she tells me hers. I do not always agree, she is very vehement and black and white and adolescent, but her values and beliefs- morality, if you must- will mean much more to her if she is allowed to work it out for herself. I also believe I have much more influence on her behaviour by not laying down the law.
If you want to have a good relationship with your kids, you must recognise that they will change you at least as much as you change them. If you refuse to change, you risk losing your kids and losing any influence over their behaviour. Many more rigid parents I know have a fantasy relationships with their kids. The kids tell them what they want to hear, and then go out and do the opposite. Who is being protected here? Ann is quite right, the nuts and bolts of sex (like the nuts and bolts of digestion) should be taught at school, morality at home.