Jump to content

Recommended Posts

But why do you think that sounds odd? Is it just b/c that's not what you grew up with? If I heard that on the playground, I would think, Hurrah for that little girl who knows what her body parts are called!!


Sorry, to me the word 'vulva' sounds too adult and medical coming out of a small child's mouth. It's like if a child talked about their anus instead of their bum, or defecating instead of pooing. Technically correct, of course, but just ... weird.


But you're right, Saffron, different strokes for different folks!

And also different names for different times. When we're having a laugh in the bath together, we call it 'mummie fanny' and 'baby fanny'. But when we're pointing and naming body parts, we call it a vulva. That's just as we might say 'footsies' when we play with eachother's feet, but I'd say 'foot' when naming the body part.
sophiec, funny as i thought about it after and i actually told him several names i told him vagina, and penis at the time (I don't know annyone who actually uses the term vulva) but when we mentionn these bodily parts, I realises i also use the terms minnie, noonie, and willy. so I just told him several names that other people used he understands penis but just uses the word his most comfortable with which is minie and willy, works for me.
thanks for everyone's contributions! Having given it some thought I agree with redjam - the point is probably less what actual term you use, and more the way in which you use it to create open and free communication that makes the difference. So i am just going to go with the name that I use confidently for myself, and see how we go. :)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • he's not on the general radar - not with the Labour tax scandal and the new Tories wanting to buddy up with Starmer (on their terms). if anything, he's a irrelevant distraction from some real alarms
    • Let me rephrase this He does not seem to be personally bothered by the impact he has.  Rather than immune from somebody taking action against him.  Although the bar had to be raised and raised before anyone did anything, and there are still those in his party who think it was wrong to get rid of him. He delivered a poor Brexit so didn't get that right.  He didn't believe in it, in the first place, he was just getting one up on his chum Dave.
    • 1. No he's not, he made a pigs ear of things, his leadership was poor and his behaviour was unbecoming of the highest office in the land.  2. No they don't,  he was a prime buffoon 3. Not a messiah, in no way. He caused great damage to both the Party and Country after three years of differing by May. The only thing he completed was B  r  e  x  i  t.  Are we paying the price. Don't ask me, I was in an induced coma at the time, fighting for my own life.    
    • My comment is trying to not take any political side but rather be objective on what I see, hear and read. If the Government made a positive difference to people's lives, people would be pro this Govt, but sadly the majority don't see an improvement since they have been in Office, but rather the opposite so people's opinions of the Government are poor.  I think if you did a straw poll of users on here, the result for those in favour of the Government is likely to be unfavourable, but I may be totally wrong, quite possible. No one I speak or am in contact with has a single good word to say about the current Administration. In fact the calls for a General Election just become stronger and stronger. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...