Sadly it’s not quite that simple. The shame is that all the focus is on the moral outrage at a great new rule change. The big important changes, however, are the content and delivery of the syllabus. About which, I can find virtually no information.

The UK Youth Parliament commissioned a survey not long ago – 40% of respondents said the sexuality education they received was poor or very poor, and 33% said it was average.

I’m sure the new syllabus will be better (what little information there is sounds very promising), and hopefully the teachers delivering it will actually be trained properly, so I’m cautiously optimistic.

Also: from the post – “I also believe it’s tantamount to neglect that in this day and age a girl of 16 can find herself pregnant because she ‘only did it the once and everyone told me I couldn’t get pregnant the first time,’ as happened to a friend’s daughter.”

Hmmm. Just hazarding a guess: is that what she *told her mother* had happened, perchance?

Because OmG picture of VULVA! HAIRY vulva! That is EXACTLY THE SAME as teaching kids that it’s a vulva and not a fanny, front bottom, vagina or the origin of the world! EXACTLY THE SAME! Can you see it, can you, can you?

Seriously.

Mike, to your point about abusing the attorney, when he’s in contempt of court then contempt seems to be an appropriate response. Or, you know, maybe this is actually reality and not some wonky LA Law analogy.

“Although must confess I’m glad my older monkey is only 6, so the serious conversations are still a little way off yet…”

My boys were six when it was clear the shit tales we tell kids to get away from telling the facts weren’t working and they were able to take in all the basic facts. . So I wouldn’t think they are even a little way off. Do brace yourself not to laugh at the questions though – they were hilarious

To answer your question – about ten years too late to start sex ed. Definately too late by adolescence as teenagers can’t take in the actual facts too well as are too embarassed, and also not trusting of adults.

And yes, (male-dominated) society has always been afraid of, and sought to control, female sexuality. As the little girl in the cartoon said: “with one of these I can get as many of those as I want”.

No, wait, I know: it could only have been improved by trotting out the shotgun-wielding father of a teenage daughter to prove how irresponsible fathers are, and the out on the town ladette mom to show how women ar ethese stick in the mud control freaks. Then it would be perfect.

Although yeah, like Unity says, there are fewer ugly lables about parents of sons than those of daughters (the green meany mother in law is about it). Could be because our society is less invested in controlling the sexuality of boys than that of girls, but then again nah – that would just be feminist paranoia, wouldn’t it? After all, if that were the case, you’d see people up in arms about life saving vaccination for girls who may be sexually active, wouldn’t you?

Oh, wait.

Also, the amount of myths along the lines of “you can’t get pregnant the first time” that are actually believed by teenagers cannot be underestimated.

I’m really not sure that men and women are that different in their attitudes other than in the sense that men are often rather more hypocritical about things, i.e. relaxed about their sons ‘sowing their wild oats’ but obsessively overprotective of their daughters.

I say women because the equivalent male irresponsibility is of course simply to run away from child-rearing tasks altogether.

It’s exactly the same as the drugs problem: it’s so much easier to excoriate the supplier than it is to address the issue of why the demand exists in the first place.

According to Express readers it’s “Time to get together and fight these deviants who are out to destroy our children”, it’s the “institutionalised sexual abuse of children”, oh, and it’s also Marxist apparently.