I asked the boys, about 40 of them, aged from 16-18 if they'd ever watched Media, and they all laughed.
'Shall I take that as a yes?' I asked, and there were further chuckles and nodding heads all round.
You see, as the school nurse, I'd been asked to talk to the senior boys about 'sex and all that sort of stuff.' With such vague guidelines, I chose to talk about an area that has been coming an ever increasing concern.
'Do you like it?' I asked, and no one said outright they liked it.
'Do you think it's healthy or harmful?' They all said it's harmless, because the participants were consenting adults. So I asked them what's their favorite type of Media, and the answers were varied, although hot young blondes, and horny teens topped the list of favorites.
'Was that 'horny teen' legal?' I asked, and the laughter died away. They'd never thought of that before, they'd also never thought of sex-slavery, but now wasn't the right time to talk about that, as I felt they would stop listening if I started lecturing.
Although Ivan, one of the Russian lads raised his hand in protest. 'But sir, I only watch **** Media.' The room erupted, and the merits of **** Media were briefly discussed. I decided to get personal.
I asked them to raise their if they wanted to get married and have kids one day, and they all raised their hands.
'So what age is it okay for your son to watch Media?' They paused, giving it serious thought, before generally deciding that around 14yrs old is good.
'And what age is it okay for your daughter to watch Media?' I was greeted with silence.
No one wanted their daughter to ever watch Media, because deep inside of them, they know Media is not good, and they know it is degrading to women, regardless of consent.
We talked about other things, from relationship to STD's, but only briefly, because there's only so much you can teach them in one-off, one hour session.
But I wasn't there to lecture them, but hopefully to get them to think.
In other words, the students' own responses were the facts he was asking them to think about.
Facts? These are facts about Media:
- Media is legal for individuals over the age of 18.
- Media can be unhealthy for some people who don't know that it may not depict sexuality or intercourse in a healthy or realistic way. [insert factual talking point about protection methods and STI risk.]
Asking a student to respond to something as "it is okay for [insert anything here]" phases it as right vs. wrong. Sex education is not about right vs. wrong. It is about presenting the healthiest choices. I do not use the words "okay to" with my students; it can translate as a value statement.
My point is, from what was written in the OP, he didn't present anything. He asked questions. Didn't even follow up on the answers, just asked the questions. He presented opinions to us in his posting, but not, that I could see, to the kids.
I don't suppose I should be as surprised as I am at the various interpretations I'm seeing here. They killed Socrates for the same behavior.
FWIW, the OP comes across to me as somewhat of a social conservative, and I disagree with most of what he's stated as his own opinions both in this thread and in the others some of us are obsessing over.
However, I refuse to fault him for raising questions, here or in his school. I have to say it again, it's a pretty flimsy morality/philosophy/practice that can't deal with a little critical thinking.
- Media is legal for individuals over the age of 18.
- Media can be unhealthy for some people who don't know that it may not depict sexuality or intercourse in a healthy or realistic way. [insert factual talking point about protection methods and STI risk.]
Asking a student to respond to something as "it is okay for [insert anything here]" phases it as right vs. wrong. Sex education is not about right vs. wrong. It is about presenting the healthiest choices. I do not use the words "okay to" with my students; it can translates as a value statement.
Fact: the students' own views about the OK-ness of Media change when it's their own daughters doing it.
Fact: the students' own views about the OK-ness of Media change when it's their own daughters doing it.
But there's not any follow-up to the question. The OP just assumes the kids aren't giving him an answer because they are coming to some conclusion about the morality of Media and female exploitation when they could just be embarrassed about the question or thinking "but girls don't watch Media."
Specializes in M/S, LTC, Corrections, PDN & drug rehab.
Facts? These are facts about Media:
- Media is legal for individuals over the age of 18.
- Media can be unhealthy for some people who don't know that it may not depict sexuality or intercourse in a healthy or realistic way. [insert factual talking point about protection methods and STI risk.]
Asking a student to respond to something as "it is okay for [insert anything here]" phases it as right vs. wrong. Sex education is not about right vs. wrong. It is about presenting the healthiest choices. I do not use the words "okay to" with my students; it can translate as a value statement.
This &
But there's not any follow-up to the question. The OP just assumes the kids aren't giving him an answer because they are coming to some conclusion about the morality of Media and female exploitation when they could just be embarrassed about the question or thinking "but girls don't watch Media."
He is the one teaching the class so he should be directing it, not the students.
*the second quote is from dirtyhippiegirl, I don't know why it says Jen-Elizabeth.
But there's not any follow-up to the question. The OP just assumes the kids aren't giving him an answer because they are coming to some conclusion about the morality of Media and female exploitation when they could just be embarrassed about the question or thinking "but girls don't watch Media."
This.
If a student thinks it is "okay" (again, I'd rephrase the response, with the student's permission to "why is it healthy for") for his future 14 year old son to watch Media, but not his 14 year old daughter, perhaps the teacher can lead the discussion from Media specifically to another follow-up discussion about gender roles.
Some teen boys think girls don't watch Media because it cool for them to watch, but girls watching it is gross. Sexuality is something everyone experiences. Normalizing that is important, and curiosity is normal for both girls and boys at that age. I have also factually reviewed the age of consent for my state; the Media topic came up this past year for me when talking about gender roles and sexuality in the media.
And then I also sent home a letter to parents about what we talked about in class that day and additional talking points if they would like them to help any further conversation. That is very key in any of these discussions.
Specializes in M/S, LTC, Corrections, PDN & drug rehab.
This.
If a student thinks it is "okay" (again, I'd rephrase the response, with the student's permission to "why is it healthy for") for his future 14 year old son to watch Media, but not his 14 year old daughter, perhaps the teacher can lead the discussion from Media specifically to another follow-up discussion about gender roles.
Some teen boys think girls don't watch Media because it cool for them to watch, but girls watching it is gross. Sexuality is something everyone experiences. Normalizing that is important, and curiosity is normal for both girls and boys at that age. I have also factually reviewed the age of consent for my state; the Media topic came up this past year for me when talking about gender roles and sexuality in the media.
And then I also sent home a letter to parents about what we talked about in class that day and additional talking points if they would like them to help any further conversation. That is very key is any of these discussions.
All of this!
I would be really happy with you teaching my son sex ed. The OP, not so much.
But there's not any follow-up to the question. The OP just assumes the kids aren't giving him an answer because they are coming to some conclusion about the morality of Media and female exploitation when they could just be embarrassed about the question or thinking "but girls don't watch Media."
I would say he expressed the hope that some of the students might be thinking about the discrepancy. The reality is that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Going further is getting closer to the line where he really is lending his authority to a particular value system ... which is what I thought every one was objecting to in the first place. Plus, dropping the subject there lets those who are too embarrassed to answer off the hook, gives them a chance to think about it privately, if they want to.
He is the one teaching the class so he should be directing it, not the students.
See my comment above. We have different ideas of what the appropriate goal of sex ed should be. For me, thinking critically about ones' own behavior is perfectly appropriate. In an ideal world, kids would be able to take that thinking home with them and discuss it with their parents - or whoever else might be a moral guide. It's their responsibility to do the directing.
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD=colspan: 2]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
The oldest, and still the most powerful, teaching tactic for fostering critical thinking is Socratic teaching. In Socratic teaching we focus on giving students questions, not answers. We model an inquiring, probing mind by continually probing into the subject with questions.
I would be really happy with you teaching my son sex ed. The OP, not so much.
Aw, thanks. I have attended a LOT of training this school year to implement the sex education curriculum. I really recommend that to any nurse/health teacher teaching (much needed) sex ed in the schools.
Fact: the students' own views about the OK-ness of Media change when it's their own daughters doing it.
The OP presents this as their conclusion, but it doesn't necessarily follow from the question. There could be other reasons that the students didn't have an answer to that question, and maybe OP asked them (and had an enlightening conversation on gender stereotypes, the dichotomous expectations we place on women to be both chaste and wanton, etc), but as written it's not mentioned how he came to this conclusion, and thus it appears to be only his opinion. So, in my view, it's not a fact. Facts are supported by evidence, testable, reproducible.
The OP presents this as their conclusion, but it doesn't necessarily follow from the question. There could be other reasons that the students didn't have an answer to that question, and maybe OP asked them (and had an enlightening conversation on gender stereotypes, the dichotomous expectations we place on women to be both chaste and wanton, etc), but as written it's not mentioned how he came to this conclusion, and thus it appears to be only his opinion. So, in my view, it's not a fact. Facts are supported by evidence, testable, reproducible.
Point taken. Let us say then that the boys could not answer, for whatever reason, when the question concerned their own daughters. Still a fact.
JenTheSchoolRN, BSN, RN
3,035 Posts
Facts? These are facts about Media:
- Media is legal for individuals over the age of 18.
- Media can be unhealthy for some people who don't know that it may not depict sexuality or intercourse in a healthy or realistic way. [insert factual talking point about protection methods and STI risk.]
Asking a student to respond to something as "it is okay for [insert anything here]" phases it as right vs. wrong. Sex education is not about right vs. wrong. It is about presenting the healthiest choices. I do not use the words "okay to" with my students; it can translate as a value statement.