Facts of life chat - what age?

[civilservant]

I'm with Saffron re terminology, and calling things by their right names IF one is using the terminology.

However, there's the whole issue of medicalising female reproduction, and so why not use 'common' or 'vulgar' terms to designate the different bits? IMO it just indicates that these are normal body parts that are referred to in ordinary language. You can call a femur a thigh bone after all and no one will contest you on that.

And why isn't anyone asking anyone else to talk to their little boy about his 'penis' rather than his 'willy'?

[dulwichgirl2]

We all agree what is medically called what, Saffron. There is no need to enlighten any of us.

Where the confusion arises is as to the accuracy of the answer to the actual question the child has, given that the child is unlikely to ask specifically the name of the internal canal or indeed the generic name for external organs etc.. We are at cross purposes.

[Saffron]

No, actually, that wasn't really the point I was originally making. To clarify:

We call it what it is: It's a vulva. A friend (who only has a son!) told me this was perverse, to which I replied that it's not perverse. It's anatomical. And, actually, the more you say it, the less weird it sounds.

I'm not disparaging other terms that people use, I'm simply saying that it's not perverse or wrong in any way to describe the genitals with the correct terminology.

[dulwichgirl2]

Agreed.

However if your child asks a vague or unclear question about anything do you answer the question put or what you think he or she is really driving at? With most people, I do the latter, including ch.

[Saffron]

Fuschia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This discussion and our own slight coyness brings

> me back to an ongoing sub issue.. Naming female

> genitals. While we are chat happily about willies,

> most women are more circumspect about girls' bits

>

> Why is that? What do you call them?

The fact that even some adults aren't sure to what other adults are referring when they say "girls' bits" is very interesting.

[civilservant]

sorry - should have read back a bit further on thread than I did

[dulwichgirl2]

But you raise a good point Civil servant. We don't dislocate our scapula(e) or break the clavicle.

And in general why are genitals the subject of jokes or fun or embarrassment? Did the Victorians start all that? And if so, why? What was in their culture of work, development and altruism (to a point) plus severe sexual judging that made succeeding generations prudish? I have no idea.

[civilservant]

I think we've forgotten what it could be like for girls and women in the days before the pill and readily available contraception.

In those days, if a girl from a 'respectable' family 'fell', the consequences were so much more serious for her than for anyone else. So maybe being mysterious and prudish about sex and reproduction might have had a protective function. I don't know for certain. All kinds of things have been done in the name of 'protecting' men and women from themselves. It's good to know that openly talking about this is helping to move us away from that.

I saw this the other day - advice from the excellent Mariella Frostrup - and remarked to my partner that this was exactly what I would tell my daughter when she is older. http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/jun/10/mariella-frostrup-stable-tempted-ex. However, this is parental advice that I can permit myself now at the beginning of the 21st Century. A hundred years ago, I know that my advice would have been very different.

And my partner agreed. A hundred years ago, what might he have said!

[dulwichgirl2]

Very interssting article! thanks.

She says "your relationships can only be as stable as you are going into to them".

She could have added: the same goes for the other party. Often strong people end up compensating for the issues, "complexities" or flaws of others.

[ryedalema]

So...ummm. I got the books (three of them) and read them with Madam, nice and casual-like while we were doing her sewing project.

You're right Nappy Lady - most of the content fine, but I skipped over the hormone stuff (think that's a bit complex and will return to that in a couple of years), also the 'grown ups 'fit' in many positions' (gulp!)

She got most of it I think - but thought a willy going into Mummy was very silly (!)

Loved the bits about same sex relationships but am now wondering whether overall she knows way too much now and I'll get a word in my ear from teacher as she gives a class of her own in the playground.

So hope not - but yes I am again a total worry wart.

[Fuschia]

ryedalema, I did fear that with mine, but no come back

I don't think anyone could have a problem with a child knowing he truth Nyway, gently explained

[The Nappy Lady]

LOL yes I know what you mean but to be honest I think they sort of dismiss most of it pretty quickly - what seems a BIG conversation to us isn't to them (especially if we've approached it from the "this is all totally normal" point of view..so they remember bits and then will ask for clarification on other points again later.

What I've found between the children is that it's only come up rarely and then there may be a brief discussion or 1 correcting the other on some point before they move on to something else! I suspect it's less interesting once they think they know it all! LOL

[Pickle]

My son is in the same class as Ryedalema's daughter. I haven't been regaled with facts of life stories, so I don't think she educated the whole class today ;)

[ryedalema]

Ha ha phew!

She's got the attention span of a forgetful goldfish anyway - so unless I put Barbie and Ken in some compromising positions or Hello Kitty got it on with Miffy - I doubt much 'stuck'.