Thursday, May 20, 2010

QUOTE OF THE WEEK! - and that leads to stupid shit about 3 year olds being sexual!

Quote of the week -

This article has scored loads of ridicule this week. It's all about how pre-school kids were asked if they were a flirt and all about sex.

How fucking ridiculous!!!!

Here's some of Susie O'Brien's report -

No sex please, we're tots

HOW would you react if you found out an adult had been in your three or four-year-old's childcare centre asking the following questions:

"Do boys give you the dreamy eye?"

"Are you a flirt?"

"Have you ever kissed a boy?"

So why is it acceptable for Monash University academic Mindy Blaise to be asking three and four-year-olds these exact questions, as part of her ongoing study into what she calls post-structuralist and queer theory?

Sure, the questions come from an illustration in a popular Clarice Bean book by Lauren Child. But it doesn't make any difference. Regardless of the source, they are still inappropriate.

As she details in a paper in the latest Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, Blaise wants to show that young children are already sexual beings and that she is just creating a safe space for them in which they can express their "sexual knowledge".
In fact, she even wants the early childhood curriculum to be changed to give teachers a chance to "engage with children differently about their sexual knowledge".

In one experiment in an Australian childcare centre (she won't say which one), she gets the children to photograph objects or dolls they think are cool, sexy or pretty, and in another to respond to a photograph of two crocodiles kissing. One of the children notes that "one is a boy and one is a girl".

Blaise responds: "Heather (the child) has drawn upon the heterosexual matrix in her naming of the crocodiles as complementary genders. In doing so, the possibility of imagining same-sex desire has been closed off."

Is it just me, or does Blaise actually seem disappointed that some kids aren't showing signs of being gay?

Now I know one in 10 kids will end up being gay, and I sincerely wish them well with it. But maybe we could wait a few more years before we need to encourage them to use their own bodies and minds to challenge the "heterosexual matrix".

Now don't get me wrong. I think we need to support gay people to feel free to live life as they are. But we are not talking about teenage sex ed, we are talking about three and four-year-olds.

I would suggest to the Monash University researcher that probably none of the kids is showing signs of being straight either, other than copying the roles they see around them, which are mostly heterosexual.

These kids aren't thinking about sex. They're thinking about role play, and trying to get them to talk about sex in any form seems misguided and potentially damaging.
Blaise talks about the "myth" of childhood innocence. Now, I am not sure about childhood innocence being a myth. I think parents like me work long and hard to keep young kids from thinking (and acting) about desire and sexuality.

I have three kids, including a four-year-old girl and a six-year-old boy, and I can tell you they thankfully know precious little about sex. And that's the way I want to keep it - for a while, anyway. Sure, the kids seem aware of basic gender and relationship issues. But not in the way most adults are.

MY daughter thinks having sex is what happens when you love something, so if a kid loves muffins or the colour pink, then she'll chant out loud: "You love muffins, you want to marry muffins, you want to have muffin babies." That said, she also talks about food babies when she's had a big meal, so I am not sure she knows much about how the baby actually gets in the stomach.

The point is, kids should be kids, and research like that seems to be trying to impose an adult view of sexuality on to kids who are too young to be drilled by some researcher. In her defence, when I spoke to her yesterday, Blaise said children are already talking about gender and sexuality, and she was just using tools of the classroom like books and toys to prompt them. Yes, she had parental consent, and yes, the children's teacher - Elaine - was involved.

But in any case, I think it's totally inappropriate for a Victorian researcher to audiotape children talking about desire, sex, kissing and sexuality. And I think Blaise's queer theory research should be directed towards an older survey group.
But I can tell you one thing, as an academic researcher I wouldn't for a second be chatting with other people's kindergarten-age kids about sex, gender and sexuality. Blaise said Monash University approved the researcher's methods. It shouldn't have. Kids have plenty of time to worry about sex when they get older. If they can't be left blissfully ignorant in childhood, when can they be?

Dr Blaise notes in the article that she has "intentionally brought a topic into the preschool that adults usually ignore or shut down, rather than encourage". She's got that right. But her judgment is way off. There's a reason why adults don't want teachers or strangers to talk about these issues with young kids. It's up to us as parents to have the sex talk - when the kids are 12 - not when they are three or four. And there is absolutely no place for these topics in the early childhood curriculum.

And I completely agree. I think it's BULLSHIT that this was done to children, an absolute atrocity. What the hell do children that young know about such things.
Looking back on my childhood, colour, race and sexuality were never discussed in my household. My sisters dated guys, my brother dated girls. My parents were a normal couple, so I never had gay thoughts, hell, I never had sexual thoughts until I hit puberty coz I reckon that's when sexual feeling start happening, when the body starts feeling it.

This is just stupid, and I hope all the parents revolt. And Dr. Blaise should be shot.

Jewels xxoo


  1. This discussion will create heated debate, I'm sure!

    I too think kids should be kids. What's the urge of wanting kids to grow up SO fast nowadays?! It's totally safe and healthy to have an innocence about sexuality UNTIL the sex-talk moment comes. What worry me is that more parents are afraid to have it mainly because they don't know how to tackle the subject with their kids (or they have issues with sexuality themselves). If any research should be done, it should be about THAT. I would be scared shitless if I would hear a three year old discuss boys like I do or talk about sexuality in a mature way. I just think it's wrong, awkward and inappropriate. I'm sure kids are aware of those things but they express and comprehend it with a child's mind and THAT IS PERFECTLY NORMAL AND FINE THE WAY IT IS.

    We should be careful what surrounds our children but whatever shapes them into unique human beings, we shall accept them as they come and help them when the situation calls for it.

  2. Absolutely!

    Kids should kids while they can be kids. Too many adults want their kids to be adults when they're not.

    Reminds me of the move Hook, with Robin Williams. He was Peter Pan and did grow up and there's a scene on the plane where he tell's his kid to grow up. AND HE'S A KID!!!!

    So wrong!!!!

  3. This is absolutely ridiculous! Kids are just so innocent. They should just be left alone to play with their toys. They don't need to be taught about sexual orientation and the likes at such a young age. Hmp! tsk tsk...

  4. And they wonder why kids are having kids at the age of 11 these days. Must be really hard to work out for stupid people. Let kids naturally discover sex when their bodies say they should, when they hit puberty.


  5. I'm appalled!

    It's like STEALING their innocence! Why oh! why? And I'm totally with anonymous! Let nature takes its own course. Goddammit!

    With abominable researches like that, no wonder many will lean towards home-schooling!

  6. Wow! How fucked up is this??


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...