Norway: Debate flies over 'sex play' in kindergartens

[Norseman]

So says this article in Aftenposten (a very reputable Norwegian newspaper). So what's the debate all about?

It's about whether or not children should be allowed to, or encouraged to (And I am translating directly from the Norwegian version, the English version is Bowdlerized) "Children may look at and explore each others body. They can play doctor, mother and father, ass games, fucking games, they can dance naked and masturbate."

There is some controversy about it in Norway, but I thought I'd show this to you lot, and see what you think.

[Gil Hamilton]

Sounds like they got possessed (possibly by way of the anus) by the Ghost of Sigmund Freud. Hence, I also think that kindergarteners should be allowed to shit on the floor, as not to stifle their creativity.

But seriously, no. It's kindergarten. That's not the time or place for kids to be humping each other. It's the time for children to learn to keep themselves under control, so they can learn things like the alphabet and that cows go moo. Really, half of kindergarten is learning not to do things just because the instinct to take off your pants or to hit someone crosses your brain. It's not stifling them, it's teaching some measure of self-control.

After all, pretending to have sex and such is what high school is for.

[Molyneux]

That is some seriously messed-up thinking there.

I hope they get shot down, and fast.

[Nathaniel]

I dunno, there's a lot more to clild sexuality than you might think. Even babies masturbate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexuality

[Stark]

There's a difference between babies masturbating and encouraging infants to simulate sex, methinks.

[Spin Echo]

That is some seriously messed-up thinking there.

I hope they get shot down, and fast.

The responses I've read to this proposal have been unanimously negative.

[Nathaniel]

There's a difference between babies masturbating and encouraging infants to simulate sex, methinks.

There is and there isn't. It's all part of accepting that sexuality is relevant at all stages of life and not trying to repress natural human behaviour.

[Stark]

Not repressing != encouraging. Can you not see this? For most people, there's a significant jump between 'letting kids do shit' and 'encouraging kids to do that same shit'.

[Xisiqomelir]

Shit, what does this remind me of?

Found it!

[Nathaniel]

Given that in current preschools there's absolutely no time given to sexuality, it could be considered repression by omission. I'd agree that there is a difference between allowing and explaining sexual activity and having a forced masturbation break but I can't see why children shouldn't be encouraged to at least get acquainted with their own sexuality if they want to.

[Norseman]

I should add that Muslims are incensed against this, and some liberals worry that this may work against integration! I'll also quickly translate some other objections:

- We are entirely against such suggestions. The parents will not accept this. Sexuality has to be linked to certain mores, it's part of a greater whole, and not just isolated games. We're all in favour of a questioning and open relationship to your body, but a public area is not the proper venue for expressing your sexuality. Says Lindstad.

I mean some people talk about "being permissive" and "letting things develop naturally" and "issuing guidelines." However all of that boils down to one thing: adults will interfere with it. Whenever there's an official stance on something the average worker will view it as policy, or will see it as normative.

It's really, really a bad idea...

[Justforfun000]

I think the simplest answer to this situation is to look at it in context. Do we do ANYTHING sexual in normal society when fraternizing with fellow co-workers? Relatives at social functions? No. For whatever reason, and no matter what your morals are, sexuality remains a fairly private thing most of the time, and the average person is uncomfortable with public demonstrations of that kind of behaviour.

So in relation to the kids, they should be encouraged to not display their private parts in public, or to experiment with each other. They are simply too young to need the issue of sex addressed in any serious manner. Of course exploration will lead to many circumstances of that nature, but that doesn't mean stopping them at that time from happening will do any harm to their psyche.

This is just another example of psychology gone to bat-shit extremes. "Oh noes! Any repression of natural urges will cause hangups in the future".
Ridiculous.

[Spin Echo]

Maybe my baseline is just skewed from coming from the states, but the Norwegians (excepting the very religious down south) seem to have a very healthy attitude towards sex already. I don't see why these people think encouraging this sort of behaviour in children is necessary.

[Starglider]

Given that in current preschools there's absolutely no time given to sexuality, it could be considered repression by omission.

And this is a problem because? There is plenty of time to 'get acquainted with sexuality' immediately post-puberty. There is nothing to be gained and potentially a lot of harm to be done by sexualising childhood.

[Nathaniel]

I think the simplest answer to this situation is to look at it in context. Do we do ANYTHING sexual in normal society when fraternizing with fellow co-workers? Relatives at social functions? No. For whatever reason, and no matter what your morals are, sexuality remains a fairly private thing most of the time, and the average person is uncomfortable with public demonstrations of that kind of behaviour.

That might just be the problem that this idea addresses. People in every situation are so reluctant to engage with sexual issues in that it does cause problems of ignorance and insecurity. If children are taught not to be embarassed about sex then many of these problems would just evaporate.

So in relation to the kids, they should be encouraged to not display their private parts in public, or to experiment with each other. They are simply too young to need the issue of sex addressed in any serious manner. Of course exploration will lead to many circumstances of that nature, but that doesn't mean stopping them at that time from happening will do any harm to their psyche.

The simple fact that children are already engaging in sexual behaviour by that age suggests that it isn't too early to address the issue of sex. Surely it's better to deal with it in a controlled environment and start at a preschool age than it is for it to emerge as children approach puberty and face all the troubles that brings at the same time.

This is just another example of psychology gone to bat-shit extremes. "Oh noes! Any repression of natural urges will cause hangups in the future".
Ridiculous.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "hangups" but the lack of discussion and understanding of sex and one's own sexuality does bring lots of problems for people and society. So there's a good chance it might not be "bat shit insane".

[Nathaniel]

Given that in current preschools there's absolutely no time given to sexuality, it could be considered repression by omission.

And this is a problem because? There is plenty of time to 'get acquainted with sexuality' immediately post-puberty. There is nothing to be gained and potentially a lot of harm to be done by sexualising childhood.

Wait, post puberty? What exactly do you mean by that? And could you clarify and expand on what you mean in terms of potential damage?

I'm a little confused.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

Reminds me of the 'erotic play' in Brave New World. All aboard the Freud-train, first stop Norway.

[Justforfun000]

Nathaniel Wrote:

That might just be the problem that this idea addresses. People in every situation are so reluctant to engage with sexual issues in that it does cause problems of ignorance and insecurity. If children are taught not to be embarassed about sex then many of these problems would just evaporate.

I understand that, and I can even empathize with the general idea they are going for, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that it still won't really WORK. The problem is that even if sexuality should be "loosened" up, it will not happen overnight. In fact, it may never happen if you're dealing with religious issues.
I see nothing wrong with sex being discussed in open terms, or even "pictures of genitalia being used for demonstration, etc....but actual touching, examining, displaying, or even simulating sexual situation in a kindergarten environment is just inappropriate. It's not prudery, it's just unnecessary. Don't you agree?

The simple fact that children are already engaging in sexual behaviour by that age suggests that it isn't too early to address the issue of sex. Surely it's better to deal with it in a controlled environment and start at a preschool age than it is for it to emerge as children approach puberty and face all the troubles that brings at the same time.

Well..that's not...I mean, I don't think it's accurate to say that they are "engaging in sexual behaviour" in the way that you would normally think. Children do not get HORNY in the true sense of the word until they reach puberty. Horseplay is common of course, and the game "doctor" is one example, but this is still something that is usually done away from parental eyes and I'd daresay, rarely leads to anything more than casual touching.

Don't get me wrong. Sex should ALWAYS be addressed if it's asked about, or potentially of interest and able to be understood. I'm of a firm belief that education in that regard is far more beneficial than potentially negative. Actually I see nothing negative about it at all in and of itself.

I'm just trying to say that any kind of curriculum involving the demonstration or allowance of unbridled sexual exploring between children is not a good idea. Don't forget that these are CHILDREN. They blithely do what they think is interesting at the time with little concern or understanding of consequences.

To be uncomfortably blatant, what if one kid injured another by yanking back his foreskin when it's still fused to the head? What about insertion of fingers in a young girl by another explorer? See this is the problem with this kind of idea. Shit, some of these kids could have herpes passed down from parents and spread it to other kids. It's just not a simple situation. There are serious consequences to consider when dealing with sexuality.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "hangups" but the lack of discussion and understanding of sex and one's own sexuality does bring lots of problems for people and society. So there's a good chance it might not be "bat shit insane".

I agree with you in the main, but again, it's the issue of children and the appropriateness of timing. This is not the age to allow this kind of sexual exploration. It's simply too young to be of benefit, and potentially of harm.

[Aaron]

Most kids in Kindergarten don't even understand what sex is, let alone the mechancs of it. Unless sex-ed in Norway is radically different than in Canada , I think their putting the cart before the horse here.

[Justforfun000]

Cpl Kendall Wrote

Most kids in Kindergarten don't even understand what sex is, let alone the mechancs of it. Unless sex-ed in Norway is radically different than in Canada , I think their putting the cart before the horse here.

I agree. I just think it's too young to address in any serious manner.

[Elaro]

Reminds me of the 'erotic play' in Brave New World. All aboard the Freud-train, first stop Norway.

YES. This is all a part of Norway's plot to take over the world! We must be vigilant against the Nordic menace!

[Aaron]

I agree. I just think it's too young to address in any serious manner.

Well the kindergarten age group is when questions about their bodies and about sex start popping up, so schools start addressing the "good touch, bad touch" side of things as well as a general run down of the body and the private areas. But it's obviously not done in too serious manner. I have a child in Grade One and one in Junior Kindergarten and attended the parent briefing on the class they were going to be giving themand it's pretty basic and done at a level that obviously a child could understand. It's really nothing more than girls have x and boys have y and don't let people touch you there.

As for explaining the workings of sex, you could do it for a four year old but they probably won't understand or show much interest. My children have accidently interrupted us and wanted an explanation and half-way through were wanting to play with something else. Chances are that their going to forget most of it anyways at that age as well. Children have a very short attention span.

[Sriad]

Given that in current preschools there's absolutely no time given to sexuality, it could be considered repression by omission.

And this is a problem because? There is plenty of time to 'get acquainted with sexuality' immediately post-puberty. There is nothing to be gained and potentially a lot of harm to be done by sexualising childhood.

Just like there's a lot of time to learn how to drive immediately after getting on a highway? Six may be a tad young, but kids can get pregnant by the time they're in sixth grade.

[Spin Echo]

Given that in current preschools there's absolutely no time given to sexuality, it could be considered repression by omission.

And this is a problem because? There is plenty of time to 'get acquainted with sexuality' immediately post-puberty. There is nothing to be gained and potentially a lot of harm to be done by sexualising childhood.

Just like there's a lot of time to learn how to drive immediately after getting on a highway? Six may be a tad young, but kids can get pregnant by the time they're in sixth grade.

There's a difference between teaching kids about sex and where babies come from and encouraging them to have sex play. These kids would be more in the age range of 1-5, btw. Barnehage may translate directly to kindergarden, but it's much more like daycare in the states.

As an aside, when I visited the local family science museum in Norway, there was one corner of it devoted to where babies come. In particular, there was a wooden cutaway diagram, where it shows how a penis fits inside the vagina. On the male sex organs there was a handle so you could move it back and forth, simulating sex. I thought that was hilarious. I think my partner thought I was weird. Seriously, I think the Scandinavians have the sex ed covered pretty well already.