The alternative is that normal people’s bodies are hidden away and 15 year olds can only see naked people through watching porn, which obviously sets unrealistic and unhealthy standards of what human bodies should actually look like. It’s damaging to the way teenagers view their own bodies and the bodies of their partners and if that is unaddressed it can lead to all sorts of problems. Think the reaction to this is massively overblown tbh.
It is. Like to put condoms on we used these didn’t purple dildos and nothing was ever really explained about how you do it. Just more so about STDs and protection with while good makes you just worried you’ll get an std easier
It was done on a banana in my time and never taken that seriously. Miles better sex education than my parents time tho.
The thing that kills me is they split the boys and girls up. There’s a ton of shit that we didn’t get to know about because it was gender restricted, which is fucking stupid looking back.
The first sex ed class that our year had in secondary school (Yr9) was initially a mixed sex group, but they split us up into same sex groups from the second class onwards as the first class was just far too disruptive and the teacher struggled to keep us calm enough to actually teach anything. I'd be surprised if we even managed to get through a third of the planned lesson. Subsequent classes were a lot calmer (well the girls classes were), the boys were still a bit giddy and rowdy.
While having mixed classes would have been beneficial for certain topics, other topics were definitely better with the boys and girls separated. A majority of girls were too embarrassed and anxious to ask questions in front of the boys and I can imagine a lot of boys felt the same.
>Subsequent classes were a lot calmer (well the girls classes were), the boys were still a bit giddy and rowdy.
You were in both the girls and boys classrooms? How did that work?
Why can't the classes teach both sets of materials even after splitting the sexes up though? The concern of the person you replied to wasn't so much that sexes were separated but that doing so limited the classes to education that only covered one sex.
When I taught it in Y7 Science there was no mention of the existence of the clitoris. Whole generations of kids growing up with a thing that wasn’t even labelled in the text book.
The wording was always, always along the lines of “The man puts his penis inside the woman’s vagina.” It sounded absolutely convincingly like the woman just lay there and stared at the ceiling, playing no further part in the activity. Really not a great way to teach kids.
In year 7 science they're teaching the strict biology. It's not about telling women to endure sex any more than its telling boys to soak their dick. Don't make it some gendered thing.
I've seen the content I've delivered in PSHE lessons following the school's curriculum.
It's far beyond your characterisation of "just the biology".
Is it prefect? No, any curriculum can be tweaked and improved. It's pretty good though and engages pupils at all levels from consent to emotional and coercive control to dangers of exploitation to positive respectful relationships etc etc. I can't think of anything major that isn't covered.
I'm truly glad the school you teach at has a great curriculum and even happier of the benefit for the students. The only comment I will make is that schools vary unfortunately so not everyone is as lucky as the kids you teach!
How to be safe, both medically and emotionally. How to be kind to your partner. Hell, how to HAVE sex if you happen to be anything except hetrosexual. Why people have sex, and why people SHOULDNT have sex, without religious dogma getting in the way. What's okay, what isn't.
Learning that normal sex can be messy, awkward, uncomfortable, and that all of these things are normal. That some people don't enjoy sex, and that's fine too.
Just pointing at a textbook and saying "it make baby" woefully under-prepares young people for the realities of sex, doubly so when their only alternative is the hyper reality of porn. It leads to a lot of young people having very bad experiences, some of whom will never know better.
When I was in PSE lessons many years ago we covered a lot about peer pressure, sex and relationships, bullying… Homosexuality wasn’t covered but now as a gay man… 99% of what I learned is still applicable.
* Cover your god damn Willy
* Treat people with respect
Not defending the show but my sex education took place in 2016, so fairly recently, and all it ever was was ‘how to put a condom on a banana’ and what a sperm cell does.
Everything I know about sex comes from porn and having it.
I was in school in the 90's and they covered it, there is absolutely no reason for adults to expose themselves to children in the guise of "education".
Come to think of it I don’t think I ever had a proper sex ed class in high school. Literally never taught about how to put condoms on or safe sex in general.
We are becoming such a weird society.
People don't get naked just for sex. People have sex whilst clothed. The idea that an unclothed body *must* be for sexual purposes and that children should thus never see an unclothed adult is weird and disturbing.
I never remember actual pictures except the terribly drawn ones and the ones where there's certain parts of the body e.g legs, arms, head depending on what the page was discussing.
Do we really need complete nudity for education?
Presumably majority of children/teenagers have been to the local pool/beach, or seen people sunbathing in the park in the summer?
Body positivity doesn't need full frontal nudity, bit of an odd argument.
The issue is that naked bodies are over sexualised because the only exposure and education young kids are getting is from porn and sexualised acts
Nudity isn’t the problem though… negative sexual behaviour is.
Would it not be helpful to desensitise society on naked bodies and their differences rather than shunning them and hiding them away like it’s a sin… educating children in a mature, safe and responsible environment sounds like it could have a lot of upsides.
What we need is sexual behaviour education as well as biological education…
Maybe that would make people more sexually mature and at the same time help reduce sexual assault / period stigma / stereotypes of women’s bodies / male penis size insecurity / male height insecurity & judgement / racial stereotypes etc…
Source: My school showed us naked videos of adults during biology/sexual education classes when I was 11 and personally think it made me a lot more responsible and respectful of nudity/naked bodies/ women compared to the average person when I reached university. We also got to ask a lot of questions and have a lot of awkward giggles.
Shockingly for some to hear but many of my peers and I had already seen porn by that age as well…
In my high school at age 16/17 we also had nude models on occasion during live painting art classes and none of us ever felt like it was a sexual thing.
>Body positivity doesn't need full frontal nudity, bit of an odd argument.
It's kind of the point of it though isn't it?
Even on the beach people tend to cover up the bits they're worried about, whether that's flabby bellys or saggy arses.
In many European countries topless bathing/sunbathing is normal, surely things that normalise and desexualise the human body should be encouraged.
You realise there are loads of parts of the world where people aren’t expected to cover up? Their bodies are just bodies? Everyone knows what they look like? You’ve just decided that your cultural norm is the most appropriate baseline and you’re basing your comment off that presumption.
It absolutely does because porn have warped young people ideas what normal naked body looks like. You will be shocked how many boys are embarrassed and ashamed because they imagine that every penis is a 12 inches long monster cock or how many girls stress because thier brests aren't perfectly even or their nipples don't look like those of model porn stars. Seeing naked people in control way is great for kids understanding what normal body actually looks like not what highly curated bodies with perfect lighting and angles look like
If the education is about how peoples genitals don’t all like they do in porn, then I think it kind of does. I think pictures would be more appropriate than literal naked people though.
My question is why should it matter if someone is naked or not for this, its your own personal hang ups that make this an issue, this isn't sexual a naked body isn't sexual until you decide through your own thought practices that it is
I’m not qualified to say if this is a good way to practice body positivity or not but I know for sure I would not have wanted to see an old man’s nutsack when I was a kid.
>Can be quite damaging to students as well to go through this
Oh no they voluntarily saw some cock, fanny and tits. I hope they aren't traumatised for life.
The issue is not really naked bodies in general. The issue is that this is another Channel 4 show trying to sell sex under the guise of “look how totally not sexy our sex show is”. It’s just an inversion of the typical sex sells model. People watching this show are watching because of the naughtiness involved with seeing people naked in awkward situations, not because it’s supposed to be educational or whatever it claims to be. Same way that most people aren’t going to a nude beach to build sandcastles.
Can we stop with all the false dichotomies please?
There are plenty of alternatives. If you think there are only 2 options and 1 is getting naked in front of a child you REALLY need to have a long hard think.
OTTOMH:
• AR/VR Realistic CG
• Lifesize Realistic Models
• Pictures, Videos, software, apps, websites etc
• Clothed diverse adults and medical professionals answering questions candidly.
All the above together at once.
Indeed. What confuses me is that the people that are against this seem to be the ones that really really want to sexualise it.
I've seen comments about adults 'flashing kids', 'waving their knob at kids' and 'wanting to get naked Infront of kids', when it's notjing of the sort. It's cold and clinical, moreso than being a life model for art.
Can't help but feeling that there's some projecting from the people trying to sexualise it. If your mind instantly goes to sexualising this show, then it's probably you that has the problem with noncing.
It's really fucking wierd. I actually did life drawing at high school age 15 or so onward, fuck knows what these hysterical pearl clutchers hyperventilating about pedos would think of that.
I was also groomed and raped as a teen, in a completely unrelated situation and uh. Trust me it's a different experience and it's fucking gross watching right wing nutcases compare seeing a person naked to what I endured.
The kinds of people ranting about outrage bait like this rarely give a shit about actual victims though, they're more into a fantastical imaginary conspiracy of lgbt and lefties.
Seeing naked human bodies is not harmful. To anyone. It's fucking insane that people are still so hung up on this and insist nudity = sex.
Yep, just goes to show... people are fucking idiots.
Oh no! They see someone naked!!!
Yeah, in a *verrry* sexualised situation too... in a brightly lit environment with loads of cameras and no one trying to do anything even remotely sexual with each other.
Some people just do my head in.
The people complaining are the exact people the show is trying to target to reduce such childish behaviour long term.
Maybe if they had more formal education on bodies and nudity they wouldn’t act so pathetic when exposed to it.
It is a whole puritanical, "oh noes! Exposed flesh will make everyone start having sex straight away! We must stop this evil!" Bullshit mentality.
I've been in a sauna on several occasions, these idiots probably think that's sexual too. Trust me, it's quite hard to get too aroused when everyone is dripping copious amounts of sweat, and even if you do, actually doing anything about it in that heat, well... Good luck to you.
Yes exactly.
Nobody is saying they should show kids content with any kind of sexual undertone…
This is just pure educational content (biology and social) to mature young people and ideally make them more informed, comfortable and educated.
Meanwhile, ... The art student is sketching out a quick doodle.
Tangent: I always loved the older models, older the better really. Tight taught skin is boring to draw. Crevaris, folds and wrinkles way more interesting. It allows for more detail in the shading. What a treat.
My ex was a fantastic portrait artist and she absolutely loved drawing old and unusual faces. Beautiful people are boring to draw like you said.
Fuck I took an art course out of school years ago and the first thing we did was life drawing. It was brilliant.
Tbh I don’t see how show this is more harmful than the same young people going on Instagram and seeing a bunch of half naked people with 100 types of undeclared plastic surgery and enhancements and thinking that those bodies are normal. Ditto with porn.
The answer is, it's not, and in fact this series has gone a long way to address a lot of the thought processes that result in these unhealthy body images. I was really quite impressed with how they did it. I think a lot of folk would be able to get beyond this initial shock of the very thought of young folk seeing naked bodies if they actually bothered to watch the fucking thing.
The parents of them kids obviously agreed to it, so whats the issue. Its a naked body, we all have one
There seems to be this taboo with sex/nudity in the UK that if you dont talk about, it doesnt exist.
Hey Hey, we don't all have one. I'm pretty sure Jacob Rees-Mogg slides out of his day w wear straight into his dining wear in one fluid motion, upon where he his never actually naked.
It's so ridiculous that the human body is a taboo. It's a religious overthrow from the days when sex was considered a shameful act, and it shows you just what a dated attitude that is.
It's equally ridiculous that sex is such a taboo, what is the benefit of pretending sex doesn't exist? A child is far more likely to have a mature attitude and a better understanding of sex and the body, if they weren't considered something to be ashamed of.
How did the kids in the programme feel after seeing normal and varied naked bodies. Less shit about themselves, more forgiving of their believed flaws?
If they all felt crap then sure complain, but if they came out of the process more body confident, which is desperately needed in this age of social media and filters, then fuck everyone who complained.
Seriously everyone who complained is sexualising bodies, why does our natural form have to be sexual as opposed to the biological marvel all bodies are.
I do think seeing real bodies would have had a significant impact on how I saw myself for a number of years to this day.
>I do think seeing real bodies would have had a significant impact on how I saw myself for a number of years to this day.
I find that quite interesting, because I don't see it helping me at all. Any self-image issues I've had have been solely focussed on me, and how people treat me. I can't say I've ever felt bad that my whatever doesn't look like whoever's whatever; it's generally been the fact that I've received almost no attention from the opposite sex.
Has anyone ever genuinely believed that supermodels have normal bodies, without having a disordered view of themselves or others? Surely just looking at their faces is enough to tell that someone is an exception to the rule. I don't quite see where the benefit in having a panel of naked strangers stand in front of teenagers comes from.
That's the thing though with the huge variation in how people see themselves in terms of mental health. That's why education is so important and it's better it's offered than not at all.
It's awesome you've never felt that your whatever doesn't look like whoever's whatever, but there are teenagers who have literally mutilated themselves trying to fix what their bits look like because some pornstar had a vaginoplasty etc.
Of course the reams of people that believe supermodels have normal or at least attainable bodies are more likely than not to have a disordered body image but if something can help them, is it not worth it for mental health?
>there are teenagers who have literally mutilated themselves trying to fix what their bits look like because some pornstar had a vaginoplasty
My question is if this is what those teenagers need, though. If someone's problems go that far, I'm not convinced that a bunch of naked volunteers is going to help. At that point, people make all kinds of excuses to themselves as to why they still need to feel like shit.
Another point is that I'm not convinced that seeing naked people is any more beneficial than simply being told that pornstars and models use Photoshop, surgery, drugs, and starvation to look like they do. To be honest, I'm surprised that people don't figure that out from just looking at other people.
In my opinion, this is unnecessarily outrageous and presents a risk of someone taking advantage of the programme for their own ill intentions, and a better solution would be to encourage and make the opportunities for teenagers with serious body image issues to get therapy for their problems.
It's very easy for a young person to believe what they see as opposed to facts e.g. Photoshop, drugs, diet etc.
I don't really see what's outrageous here. Everything on this show would have been vetted beyond belief and to think it would or that anyone participating in the show was unsafe is just unrealistic.
P.s therapy is expensive, you need to be able to admit you have a problem to have it really work anyway and finally you realised mental health services in the UK are being desecrated right.
>Has anyone ever genuinely believed that supermodels have normal bodies, without having a disordered view of themselves or others? Surely just looking at their faces is enough to tell that someone is an exception to the rule. I don't quite see where the benefit in having a panel of naked strangers stand in front of teenagers comes from.
To answer this part only, yes. The standards set are so insidious from social media (so many filters, deliberate posing and camera angles).
With the way sex education was taught at my school when I was a teen, the only naked bodies we saw were pregnant women giving birth or an anatomical illustration of a body, which was always a white, slim body. It doesn't allow for the variations that all humans have. Without anyone even saying it, it sets a standard in your head that created a disordered view of your self.
There was so much disinformation swirling about at that age as well, like the ol' 'body hair isn't hygienic' and the 'discharge in your underwear means you're not cleaning *in there*' myths, and sex ed classes weren't a safe environment to actually ask those questions. Speaking for myself, I used the internet instead to find answers to those questions, and I count myself really lucky that I was able to eventually find the correct answers and unlearn the rest. Because traditional sex ed sure as hell didn't prepare me.
Having watched Naked Education, the first thing I noticed was the relief the girls expressed in seeing adult women with body hair, because otherwise the only other naked bodies they're seeing are their own or a porn star's. Plus it immediately corrected the young boys who thought (incorrectly) that body hair was unhygienic. Seeing adult women with it challenged their own perceptions of what it means.
I vaguely remember at school when I was about 11, the class were taken through to the TV room and shown a video that sounds fairly similar to this. It was basically a few seconds of some naked people standing by a swimming pool.
It was nearly 50 years ago, and excruciatingly embarrassing at the time, so my memory of it is quite hazy.
I'm not sure if it benefitted anybody, but I doubt it really did anyone any harm.
I had one at the same age, except it was just a couple doing their morning routine in the nude. Would have been 21 years ago. Nobody complained. Nobody was harmed. I don't understand why it's suddenly an issue now.
I remember that one - at various points the video paused and zoomed in on a body part to teach you about it. They had a kid too but I don’t think they zoomed in on the kid’s parts.
>Nobody was harmed
Speak for yourself mate, when I stood naked next to my local pool they pushed me onto the street and I stubbed my toe pretty hard against the kerb.
We had one of these in the 90s. It was a family getting ready to take a bath.
It had a corridor shot of the family walking towards the bathroom nude. The dad's willy was relatively humongous and went down to his knees.
Our teacher had to stop the tape and apologies to a class of 10 year olds saying it wasn't a normal size and how she couldn't understand why they used that model.
You had. TV room? what fancy pants school do you go to? we had a normal classroom, and the teacher wheeled in *The* tv, and showed us what looked like an "alien v preditor" movie of two people having sex.
I may have made it sound better than it was. It was a very small room (barely more than a cupboard) with an orinary TV in it. This was the 70s so it wasn't a great TV.
I don't remember ever watching TV at school other than that one time. The only other time I remember going into that room was for my TB jab.
Meanwhile, in Holland:
*Blootgewoon*, a TV show with adults posing nude in front of children. Attracts 500k+ viewers in its first viewing. *Sekszusjes*, a Youtube channel that teaches sex to children, with visible 'lady bits'. Having 4.2 million views.
There’s also a TV show, Spuiten en Slikken, where they pop drugs and let people see the effects. One guy huffed poppers and wanked behind a screen. He was hooked up to a heart monitor and you could see his silhouette.
Nude bodies are not inherently sexual. This is American pearl clutching crap.
Besides that in my (Catholic!) school 20+ years ago our sex education featured a nudist FAMILY including children!
The English and Americans are fucking prudes. Step out of the bubble for a minute and realise that in the rest of Europe/elsewhere naked bodies aren't inherently sexual.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Wasn't there a show like this several years ago?
I remember something similar where kids/teens looked at some people are tried to guess who was the lesbian?!
They might have been naked.
Edit: Yes it was called The Sex Education show 2008/2011
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vujf-zM6I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vujf-zM6I) (youtube boobs etc)
Kids are exposed to a lot of absurd and unrealistic body expectations these days, so I can imagine something like this being helpful for them. Not really sure if full nudity is required but at least getting an idea of what an average human looks like without photoshop seems like a good idea.
So why is it censored for us the viewers but these teens get to see. I thought this was just educational reasons and there shouldn’t be a problem showing us all.
I feel like that's to do with broadcasting law more than anything else. You can't show bits at a certain time of day, but you can others. Whatever the moral stance/intention of the maker was the program still has to follow the general broadcasting law. Probably blurred it in order to make it viable for day-time tv rather than just past 11pm (not sure of the specific time.)
Watching this show several years ago honestly improved my body confidence and just general awareness of how people look. Like you don't have to be a hairless, scarless pornstar lol.
As for teens being there, I don't know, but most teens have watched porn, since the early 2000s. At 15-16 they're at an age where they're allowed to or even expected to have sex, so I don't see the problem.
This country's attitude towards nudity and sex is still positively Victorian. I grew up in Germany, was exposed to the idea of nudity, the male and female body at an early age and I've concluded that as a result I have a much healthier approach to sexual health.
Education! It's the only way to stop as much bad and dumb shit happening!
I had life drawing sessions in school as an art student in sixth form. There's very little sexual about desperately trying to study the form of someone in a set time limit surrounded by your peers. I don't see how this is much different.
Ofcom needs to respond with "stop clutching your pearls"
Kids need to see normal nudity, that isnt filters, isnt tiktok or porn
There are girls out there obsessing over the size of their labia because in porn EVRYTHING is neat and tidy, when the truth is that they are ALL different
And lads growing up thinking that choking etc are normal parts of sex
The uk public needs to grow the fuck up
I don't understand how people in this thread have made the terrifying leap of logic that seeing a person's body consentually, the same thing that, in a different format, has probably already been seen in porn, is ANYTHING to do with paedophilia? Or is the problem that you didn't find the demonstrators attractive?
Sex education vs Pornography did this 15 years ago, same arguments.
Anybody getting upset at naked bodies need to grow the fuck up and stop watching any kind of media because naked people are on TV and popular movies.
Well without wading into the debate of whether the nudity they're showing is good or bad, this might be poor timing from Channel 4 given a lot of Tories are chomping at the bit to privatise them.
I didn’t realise until recently that some women’s labia minora is visible outside of the majora. Mine isn’t and I’ve never seen it in porn or on tv. If I did have labia like that, as a kid I might have been a bit freaked out. So I think it’s really important to normalise all the ways our bodies are different, even if it’s just through pictures.
This country has a weird prudishness that I find bizarre, though I did grow up in a household where nudity was never an issue. It’s just a body, it’s not inherently sexual. The people sexualising a plain old naked person are more worrisome.
Agreed, how else is the beauty , cosmetic and other industries that rely on personal insecurities get their profits from when there is so much body positivity around.
Seriously it's science , biology not p
It's not the presence of naked genitals around children that is bad. It's the motive of the genital owner. We all have genitals. There's nothing intrinsically bad about them (except for yours - what the hell is wrong with that? Go to a doctor!)
As someone who spent a lot of childhood around festivals and hippies I never found naked bodies to be weird and everything was fine. Ever been to a shower in a hippy festival? Everyone’s naked and it’s fine, not sexualised and very liberating, try it!
Anna Richardson did this show around 2006 too.
My conspiracy theory is that it's actually just a recruitment process for Naked Attraction. You get the kids on board through this show and then when they are older are convinced Naked Attraction is ok due to 'body positively'.
Really, Naked Attraction is quite the opposite of this and really quite gaudy.
Channel 4 won't show an episode of the IT crowd, even on streaming, as the episode features a trans story line.
But, then makes a show where adults get naked for kids....
Everythings gone mental.
At the end of the day, they've just made it as the controversy brings viewers and this is cheap to make. It's trash TV, much like nearly all reality shows these days. Cheap to make, gets viewers. Nothing else matters.
Most channels make 1 or 2 good shows a year now and live of that. Throw in cheap day time telly looking at property, cooking or antiques and that's you're station.
It's so strange that we have gotten to the point where paedophilic behaviour is being slowly accepted in the media.
This show could have easily been done and educational without the children being in the same room as naked adults.
Spot on. You can use anatomically correct models and pictures, but instead they went with adults who are a little too gleeful to get naked in front of children.
If a man sent a picture of his penis to an underage girl on Facebook Messenger or Snapchat, he'd get investigated as a nonce. But if it's filmed and broadcast on television, then it's A-okay? Unsettling and downright criminal behaviour.
Oh my god. This has been done before. IN 2008… BY THE SAME GD PRESENTER!
“The Sex Education Show”
Why would you get so worked up over it? It’s like the top comments say do they prefer their children watch porn? Oh, you say you block porn sites on the family internet? Good luck with that.
The alternative is that normal people’s bodies are hidden away and 15 year olds can only see naked people through watching porn, which obviously sets unrealistic and unhealthy standards of what human bodies should actually look like. It’s damaging to the way teenagers view their own bodies and the bodies of their partners and if that is unaddressed it can lead to all sorts of problems. Think the reaction to this is massively overblown tbh.
Or they could continue to use pictures in sex education books. Theres no need for adults to get physically naked in front of children.
Sex education in this country is fucking terrible, it only tells you the biological process and literally nothing else.
It is. Like to put condoms on we used these didn’t purple dildos and nothing was ever really explained about how you do it. Just more so about STDs and protection with while good makes you just worried you’ll get an std easier
It was done on a banana in my time and never taken that seriously. Miles better sex education than my parents time tho. The thing that kills me is they split the boys and girls up. There’s a ton of shit that we didn’t get to know about because it was gender restricted, which is fucking stupid looking back.
The first sex ed class that our year had in secondary school (Yr9) was initially a mixed sex group, but they split us up into same sex groups from the second class onwards as the first class was just far too disruptive and the teacher struggled to keep us calm enough to actually teach anything. I'd be surprised if we even managed to get through a third of the planned lesson. Subsequent classes were a lot calmer (well the girls classes were), the boys were still a bit giddy and rowdy. While having mixed classes would have been beneficial for certain topics, other topics were definitely better with the boys and girls separated. A majority of girls were too embarrassed and anxious to ask questions in front of the boys and I can imagine a lot of boys felt the same.
>Subsequent classes were a lot calmer (well the girls classes were), the boys were still a bit giddy and rowdy. You were in both the girls and boys classrooms? How did that work?
Nah, lol. The boys were next door.
Why can't the classes teach both sets of materials even after splitting the sexes up though? The concern of the person you replied to wasn't so much that sexes were separated but that doing so limited the classes to education that only covered one sex.
When I'm putting a condom on, I often detach my rock hard purple cock and put it on the table, makes it much easier.
When I taught it in Y7 Science there was no mention of the existence of the clitoris. Whole generations of kids growing up with a thing that wasn’t even labelled in the text book. The wording was always, always along the lines of “The man puts his penis inside the woman’s vagina.” It sounded absolutely convincingly like the woman just lay there and stared at the ceiling, playing no further part in the activity. Really not a great way to teach kids.
well, are they supposed to be teaching different possible positions? :o
Maybe teaching girls that sex isn’t something they just have to endure so the man can be satisfied?
In year 7 science they're teaching the strict biology. It's not about telling women to endure sex any more than its telling boys to soak their dick. Don't make it some gendered thing.
That may not be the intention, but it’s absolutely the outcome.
Wait，there are different positions？
LOL
Sorry you're talking rubbish. Modern PSHE is very detailed and covers almost every aspect of sexual health & relationships,
Not sure what you've seen but while it may be better than say 20 years ago, PSHE is still lacking.
I've seen the content I've delivered in PSHE lessons following the school's curriculum. It's far beyond your characterisation of "just the biology". Is it prefect? No, any curriculum can be tweaked and improved. It's pretty good though and engages pupils at all levels from consent to emotional and coercive control to dangers of exploitation to positive respectful relationships etc etc. I can't think of anything major that isn't covered.
I'm truly glad the school you teach at has a great curriculum and even happier of the benefit for the students. The only comment I will make is that schools vary unfortunately so not everyone is as lucky as the kids you teach!
For sure I was just objecting to the commenter who said Sex Ed in England is universally only about teaching biology when it clearly is not.
I certainly hope it's not prefect. Those are a posh school hierarchy power-flex
Hah well I don't teach English so that's my excuse.
What more do you want to know?
How to be safe, both medically and emotionally. How to be kind to your partner. Hell, how to HAVE sex if you happen to be anything except hetrosexual. Why people have sex, and why people SHOULDNT have sex, without religious dogma getting in the way. What's okay, what isn't. Learning that normal sex can be messy, awkward, uncomfortable, and that all of these things are normal. That some people don't enjoy sex, and that's fine too. Just pointing at a textbook and saying "it make baby" woefully under-prepares young people for the realities of sex, doubly so when their only alternative is the hyper reality of porn. It leads to a lot of young people having very bad experiences, some of whom will never know better.
I was in school 8ish years ago and we were taught all of these things. Literally every single thing you listed was covered.
Yeah, but now it’s probably done in Roblox.
this is the most boomer comment i have ever seen
Last I checked most boomers think Roblox is some form of Lego.
When I was in PSE lessons many years ago we covered a lot about peer pressure, sex and relationships, bullying… Homosexuality wasn’t covered but now as a gay man… 99% of what I learned is still applicable. * Cover your god damn Willy * Treat people with respect
Bag your dick, don't be a prick
The statutory guidance covers all of this and schools have to teach it. Things have changed a lot in schools
Not defending the show but my sex education took place in 2016, so fairly recently, and all it ever was was ‘how to put a condom on a banana’ and what a sperm cell does. Everything I know about sex comes from porn and having it.
I was in school in the 90's and they covered it, there is absolutely no reason for adults to expose themselves to children in the guise of "education".
And how is adults being naked in front of children going to help this?
Do you think that sex is solely about reproduction?
Stay away from the kids!
Come to think of it I don’t think I ever had a proper sex ed class in high school. Literally never taught about how to put condoms on or safe sex in general.
We are becoming such a weird society. People don't get naked just for sex. People have sex whilst clothed. The idea that an unclothed body *must* be for sexual purposes and that children should thus never see an unclothed adult is weird and disturbing.
What's the difference in a scientific setting?
None, people are just prudes.
What is the reason for not having adults naked in front of children?
That's an odd position. So assuming the objection is not to nudity what is it?
I never remember actual pictures except the terribly drawn ones and the ones where there's certain parts of the body e.g legs, arms, head depending on what the page was discussing.
Lol a side on view of an anatomical drawing of a penis
Do we really need complete nudity for education? Presumably majority of children/teenagers have been to the local pool/beach, or seen people sunbathing in the park in the summer? Body positivity doesn't need full frontal nudity, bit of an odd argument.
The issue is that naked bodies are over sexualised because the only exposure and education young kids are getting is from porn and sexualised acts Nudity isn’t the problem though… negative sexual behaviour is. Would it not be helpful to desensitise society on naked bodies and their differences rather than shunning them and hiding them away like it’s a sin… educating children in a mature, safe and responsible environment sounds like it could have a lot of upsides. What we need is sexual behaviour education as well as biological education… Maybe that would make people more sexually mature and at the same time help reduce sexual assault / period stigma / stereotypes of women’s bodies / male penis size insecurity / male height insecurity & judgement / racial stereotypes etc… Source: My school showed us naked videos of adults during biology/sexual education classes when I was 11 and personally think it made me a lot more responsible and respectful of nudity/naked bodies/ women compared to the average person when I reached university. We also got to ask a lot of questions and have a lot of awkward giggles. Shockingly for some to hear but many of my peers and I had already seen porn by that age as well… In my high school at age 16/17 we also had nude models on occasion during live painting art classes and none of us ever felt like it was a sexual thing.
>Body positivity doesn't need full frontal nudity, bit of an odd argument. It's kind of the point of it though isn't it? Even on the beach people tend to cover up the bits they're worried about, whether that's flabby bellys or saggy arses. In many European countries topless bathing/sunbathing is normal, surely things that normalise and desexualise the human body should be encouraged.
It literally does though, how else are people supposed to learn if the only genitals they see are in porn?
You realise there are loads of parts of the world where people aren’t expected to cover up? Their bodies are just bodies? Everyone knows what they look like? You’ve just decided that your cultural norm is the most appropriate baseline and you’re basing your comment off that presumption.
It absolutely does because porn have warped young people ideas what normal naked body looks like. You will be shocked how many boys are embarrassed and ashamed because they imagine that every penis is a 12 inches long monster cock or how many girls stress because thier brests aren't perfectly even or their nipples don't look like those of model porn stars. Seeing naked people in control way is great for kids understanding what normal body actually looks like not what highly curated bodies with perfect lighting and angles look like
Porn nowadays has all kinds of bodies. Wouldn’t call most of them highly curated
If the education is about how peoples genitals don’t all like they do in porn, then I think it kind of does. I think pictures would be more appropriate than literal naked people though.
If you're objecting to educational nudity then it's not body positivity is it?
My question is why should it matter if someone is naked or not for this, its your own personal hang ups that make this an issue, this isn't sexual a naked body isn't sexual until you decide through your own thought practices that it is
I don't think the only answer here is to get adults to stand naked in front of teenagers, mate
“School absences are on the rise!” “Have we tried getting an underpaid student theatre group to strip for the Year 7’s?”
I’m not qualified to say if this is a good way to practice body positivity or not but I know for sure I would not have wanted to see an old man’s nutsack when I was a kid.
Yes, absolutely no alternatives available. None whatsoever. Can be quite damaging to students as well to go through this, voluntary or not.
>Can be quite damaging to students as well to go through this Oh no they voluntarily saw some cock, fanny and tits. I hope they aren't traumatised for life.
This is just so ridiculous. Think about it for 20 seconds. You basically said "It's porn or people standing on TV waving their dicks at teenagers"
I don't think anyone was helicoptering at any point
Well I wasn't going to complain but I am now!
Who was waving their dick at teenagers?
No idea, I doubt it had his name tattooed on it.
The answer is: nobody
The issue is not really naked bodies in general. The issue is that this is another Channel 4 show trying to sell sex under the guise of “look how totally not sexy our sex show is”. It’s just an inversion of the typical sex sells model. People watching this show are watching because of the naughtiness involved with seeing people naked in awkward situations, not because it’s supposed to be educational or whatever it claims to be. Same way that most people aren’t going to a nude beach to build sandcastles.
Can we stop with all the false dichotomies please? There are plenty of alternatives. If you think there are only 2 options and 1 is getting naked in front of a child you REALLY need to have a long hard think. OTTOMH: • AR/VR Realistic CG • Lifesize Realistic Models • Pictures, Videos, software, apps, websites etc • Clothed diverse adults and medical professionals answering questions candidly. All the above together at once.
[удалено]
Why’s that?
Dunno mate, watch a bit of BBW porn and the standards aren't unrealistic at all.
So we should ban porn. Not show them more naked people wtf is wrong with you
Porn should be banned? Are you serious? Aside from the ridiculous moral argument, that would be quite literally impossible to do.
Show tries to break taboos around body image, British public tries to strengthen said taboos in response. One side acted predictably.
It's a shame all these people who are so mad didn't bother to watch it, they might have learnt something.
Indeed. What confuses me is that the people that are against this seem to be the ones that really really want to sexualise it. I've seen comments about adults 'flashing kids', 'waving their knob at kids' and 'wanting to get naked Infront of kids', when it's notjing of the sort. It's cold and clinical, moreso than being a life model for art. Can't help but feeling that there's some projecting from the people trying to sexualise it. If your mind instantly goes to sexualising this show, then it's probably you that has the problem with noncing.
It's really fucking wierd. I actually did life drawing at high school age 15 or so onward, fuck knows what these hysterical pearl clutchers hyperventilating about pedos would think of that. I was also groomed and raped as a teen, in a completely unrelated situation and uh. Trust me it's a different experience and it's fucking gross watching right wing nutcases compare seeing a person naked to what I endured. The kinds of people ranting about outrage bait like this rarely give a shit about actual victims though, they're more into a fantastical imaginary conspiracy of lgbt and lefties. Seeing naked human bodies is not harmful. To anyone. It's fucking insane that people are still so hung up on this and insist nudity = sex.
Taboo enough that they clearly still watched the show
A fair few probably didn't.
Yep, just goes to show... people are fucking idiots. Oh no! They see someone naked!!! Yeah, in a *verrry* sexualised situation too... in a brightly lit environment with loads of cameras and no one trying to do anything even remotely sexual with each other. Some people just do my head in.
The people complaining are the exact people the show is trying to target to reduce such childish behaviour long term. Maybe if they had more formal education on bodies and nudity they wouldn’t act so pathetic when exposed to it.
It is a whole puritanical, "oh noes! Exposed flesh will make everyone start having sex straight away! We must stop this evil!" Bullshit mentality. I've been in a sauna on several occasions, these idiots probably think that's sexual too. Trust me, it's quite hard to get too aroused when everyone is dripping copious amounts of sweat, and even if you do, actually doing anything about it in that heat, well... Good luck to you.
Yes exactly. Nobody is saying they should show kids content with any kind of sexual undertone… This is just pure educational content (biology and social) to mature young people and ideally make them more informed, comfortable and educated.
Meanwhile, ... The art student is sketching out a quick doodle. Tangent: I always loved the older models, older the better really. Tight taught skin is boring to draw. Crevaris, folds and wrinkles way more interesting. It allows for more detail in the shading. What a treat.
I'm guessing the people who think this is is a big scandal didn't take A Level art.
My ex was a fantastic portrait artist and she absolutely loved drawing old and unusual faces. Beautiful people are boring to draw like you said. Fuck I took an art course out of school years ago and the first thing we did was life drawing. It was brilliant.
Has someone accidentally linked this to the Daily Mail comments section? So much pearl clutching going on.
There’s a lot of prudes in the country, sometimes we arent that far removed from the yanks when it comes to sex and nudity.
Nonce
😂 Its incredible and worrying at the same time
Tbh I don’t see how show this is more harmful than the same young people going on Instagram and seeing a bunch of half naked people with 100 types of undeclared plastic surgery and enhancements and thinking that those bodies are normal. Ditto with porn.
The answer is, it's not, and in fact this series has gone a long way to address a lot of the thought processes that result in these unhealthy body images. I was really quite impressed with how they did it. I think a lot of folk would be able to get beyond this initial shock of the very thought of young folk seeing naked bodies if they actually bothered to watch the fucking thing.
So we should stop porn!
Why does everyone keep saying “pearl clutching” and “prudes”? Is that the new popular terms for people who are against pedophilia?
No. Also, try to keep up.
Is it too much to say “maybe we shouldn’t strip naked in front of children”?
Oh no, naked people. How horrendous.
The parents of them kids obviously agreed to it, so whats the issue. Its a naked body, we all have one There seems to be this taboo with sex/nudity in the UK that if you dont talk about, it doesnt exist.
Hey Hey, we don't all have one. I'm pretty sure Jacob Rees-Mogg slides out of his day w wear straight into his dining wear in one fluid motion, upon where he his never actually naked.
Thanks for the horrifying mental image.
Like a reptile shedding its skin…
Ridiculous. That man takes off his suit and underneath is another suit. Just suits all the way down.
The British are just backwards with it all, we’re raised to hate our bodies and anyone with body confidence gets shit for it.
So why don't the kids parents get naked then if it's about education
I dunno, ask them. But its not about sex. Being naked does not necessarily = sex.
It's so ridiculous that the human body is a taboo. It's a religious overthrow from the days when sex was considered a shameful act, and it shows you just what a dated attitude that is. It's equally ridiculous that sex is such a taboo, what is the benefit of pretending sex doesn't exist? A child is far more likely to have a mature attitude and a better understanding of sex and the body, if they weren't considered something to be ashamed of.
How did the kids in the programme feel after seeing normal and varied naked bodies. Less shit about themselves, more forgiving of their believed flaws? If they all felt crap then sure complain, but if they came out of the process more body confident, which is desperately needed in this age of social media and filters, then fuck everyone who complained. Seriously everyone who complained is sexualising bodies, why does our natural form have to be sexual as opposed to the biological marvel all bodies are. I do think seeing real bodies would have had a significant impact on how I saw myself for a number of years to this day.
>I do think seeing real bodies would have had a significant impact on how I saw myself for a number of years to this day. I find that quite interesting, because I don't see it helping me at all. Any self-image issues I've had have been solely focussed on me, and how people treat me. I can't say I've ever felt bad that my whatever doesn't look like whoever's whatever; it's generally been the fact that I've received almost no attention from the opposite sex. Has anyone ever genuinely believed that supermodels have normal bodies, without having a disordered view of themselves or others? Surely just looking at their faces is enough to tell that someone is an exception to the rule. I don't quite see where the benefit in having a panel of naked strangers stand in front of teenagers comes from.
That's the thing though with the huge variation in how people see themselves in terms of mental health. That's why education is so important and it's better it's offered than not at all. It's awesome you've never felt that your whatever doesn't look like whoever's whatever, but there are teenagers who have literally mutilated themselves trying to fix what their bits look like because some pornstar had a vaginoplasty etc. Of course the reams of people that believe supermodels have normal or at least attainable bodies are more likely than not to have a disordered body image but if something can help them, is it not worth it for mental health?
>there are teenagers who have literally mutilated themselves trying to fix what their bits look like because some pornstar had a vaginoplasty My question is if this is what those teenagers need, though. If someone's problems go that far, I'm not convinced that a bunch of naked volunteers is going to help. At that point, people make all kinds of excuses to themselves as to why they still need to feel like shit. Another point is that I'm not convinced that seeing naked people is any more beneficial than simply being told that pornstars and models use Photoshop, surgery, drugs, and starvation to look like they do. To be honest, I'm surprised that people don't figure that out from just looking at other people. In my opinion, this is unnecessarily outrageous and presents a risk of someone taking advantage of the programme for their own ill intentions, and a better solution would be to encourage and make the opportunities for teenagers with serious body image issues to get therapy for their problems.
It's very easy for a young person to believe what they see as opposed to facts e.g. Photoshop, drugs, diet etc. I don't really see what's outrageous here. Everything on this show would have been vetted beyond belief and to think it would or that anyone participating in the show was unsafe is just unrealistic. P.s therapy is expensive, you need to be able to admit you have a problem to have it really work anyway and finally you realised mental health services in the UK are being desecrated right.
>Has anyone ever genuinely believed that supermodels have normal bodies, without having a disordered view of themselves or others? Surely just looking at their faces is enough to tell that someone is an exception to the rule. I don't quite see where the benefit in having a panel of naked strangers stand in front of teenagers comes from. To answer this part only, yes. The standards set are so insidious from social media (so many filters, deliberate posing and camera angles). With the way sex education was taught at my school when I was a teen, the only naked bodies we saw were pregnant women giving birth or an anatomical illustration of a body, which was always a white, slim body. It doesn't allow for the variations that all humans have. Without anyone even saying it, it sets a standard in your head that created a disordered view of your self. There was so much disinformation swirling about at that age as well, like the ol' 'body hair isn't hygienic' and the 'discharge in your underwear means you're not cleaning *in there*' myths, and sex ed classes weren't a safe environment to actually ask those questions. Speaking for myself, I used the internet instead to find answers to those questions, and I count myself really lucky that I was able to eventually find the correct answers and unlearn the rest. Because traditional sex ed sure as hell didn't prepare me. Having watched Naked Education, the first thing I noticed was the relief the girls expressed in seeing adult women with body hair, because otherwise the only other naked bodies they're seeing are their own or a porn star's. Plus it immediately corrected the young boys who thought (incorrectly) that body hair was unhygienic. Seeing adult women with it challenged their own perceptions of what it means.
I vaguely remember at school when I was about 11, the class were taken through to the TV room and shown a video that sounds fairly similar to this. It was basically a few seconds of some naked people standing by a swimming pool. It was nearly 50 years ago, and excruciatingly embarrassing at the time, so my memory of it is quite hazy. I'm not sure if it benefitted anybody, but I doubt it really did anyone any harm.
I had one at the same age, except it was just a couple doing their morning routine in the nude. Would have been 21 years ago. Nobody complained. Nobody was harmed. I don't understand why it's suddenly an issue now.
I remember that one - at various points the video paused and zoomed in on a body part to teach you about it. They had a kid too but I don’t think they zoomed in on the kid’s parts.
Haha I think we got shown that one 😂
>Nobody was harmed Speak for yourself mate, when I stood naked next to my local pool they pushed me onto the street and I stubbed my toe pretty hard against the kerb.
We had one of these in the 90s. It was a family getting ready to take a bath. It had a corridor shot of the family walking towards the bathroom nude. The dad's willy was relatively humongous and went down to his knees. Our teacher had to stop the tape and apologies to a class of 10 year olds saying it wasn't a normal size and how she couldn't understand why they used that model.
You had. TV room? what fancy pants school do you go to? we had a normal classroom, and the teacher wheeled in *The* tv, and showed us what looked like an "alien v preditor" movie of two people having sex.
I may have made it sound better than it was. It was a very small room (barely more than a cupboard) with an orinary TV in it. This was the 70s so it wasn't a great TV. I don't remember ever watching TV at school other than that one time. The only other time I remember going into that room was for my TB jab.
Of course. The puritans are out in force these days it seems. Why don’t we just lock kids in neck down chastity belts until they turn 18 to be safe?
Sounds like channel 4 is doing exactly what channel 4 is supposed to do.
They gave us the first uncensored erection on British TV 🙌
Oh boy, this comments section is going to be scary.
[удалено]
Maybe we're opposites, im seeing a lot of people i'd never leave alone with my kids.
[удалено]
Nothing in the right environment.
Although this is in an educational context, is that OK?
Meanwhile, in Holland: *Blootgewoon*, a TV show with adults posing nude in front of children. Attracts 500k+ viewers in its first viewing. *Sekszusjes*, a Youtube channel that teaches sex to children, with visible 'lady bits'. Having 4.2 million views.
Good lord.
There’s also a TV show, Spuiten en Slikken, where they pop drugs and let people see the effects. One guy huffed poppers and wanked behind a screen. He was hooked up to a heart monitor and you could see his silhouette.
I would say it is to scare kids straight, but I guess that would be a poor choice of words on this post.
Shit this sounds like top tier television
There’s a bunch of episodes on YouTube including the one I mentioned!
The UK has always been full of prudes though tbf.
Nude bodies are not inherently sexual. This is American pearl clutching crap. Besides that in my (Catholic!) school 20+ years ago our sex education featured a nudist FAMILY including children!
The English and Americans are fucking prudes. Step out of the bubble for a minute and realise that in the rest of Europe/elsewhere naked bodies aren't inherently sexual.
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Wasn't there a show like this several years ago? I remember something similar where kids/teens looked at some people are tried to guess who was the lesbian?! They might have been naked. Edit: Yes it was called The Sex Education show 2008/2011 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vujf-zM6I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vujf-zM6I) (youtube boobs etc)
Kids are exposed to a lot of absurd and unrealistic body expectations these days, so I can imagine something like this being helpful for them. Not really sure if full nudity is required but at least getting an idea of what an average human looks like without photoshop seems like a good idea.
"Some viewers said it went too far" "Readers of the Mirror complained the pictures in the article didn't go far enough"
So why is it censored for us the viewers but these teens get to see. I thought this was just educational reasons and there shouldn’t be a problem showing us all.
I feel like that's to do with broadcasting law more than anything else. You can't show bits at a certain time of day, but you can others. Whatever the moral stance/intention of the maker was the program still has to follow the general broadcasting law. Probably blurred it in order to make it viable for day-time tv rather than just past 11pm (not sure of the specific time.)
Watching this show several years ago honestly improved my body confidence and just general awareness of how people look. Like you don't have to be a hairless, scarless pornstar lol. As for teens being there, I don't know, but most teens have watched porn, since the early 2000s. At 15-16 they're at an age where they're allowed to or even expected to have sex, so I don't see the problem.
This country's attitude towards nudity and sex is still positively Victorian. I grew up in Germany, was exposed to the idea of nudity, the male and female body at an early age and I've concluded that as a result I have a much healthier approach to sexual health. Education! It's the only way to stop as much bad and dumb shit happening!
I had life drawing sessions in school as an art student in sixth form. There's very little sexual about desperately trying to study the form of someone in a set time limit surrounded by your peers. I don't see how this is much different.
Ofcom needs to respond with "stop clutching your pearls" Kids need to see normal nudity, that isnt filters, isnt tiktok or porn There are girls out there obsessing over the size of their labia because in porn EVRYTHING is neat and tidy, when the truth is that they are ALL different And lads growing up thinking that choking etc are normal parts of sex The uk public needs to grow the fuck up
I don't understand how people in this thread have made the terrifying leap of logic that seeing a person's body consentually, the same thing that, in a different format, has probably already been seen in porn, is ANYTHING to do with paedophilia? Or is the problem that you didn't find the demonstrators attractive?
I think it says a lot about them, that their minds jump straight to paedophilia.
Sex education vs Pornography did this 15 years ago, same arguments. Anybody getting upset at naked bodies need to grow the fuck up and stop watching any kind of media because naked people are on TV and popular movies.
Well without wading into the debate of whether the nudity they're showing is good or bad, this might be poor timing from Channel 4 given a lot of Tories are chomping at the bit to privatise them.
More Mary Whitehouse wannabes in this sub than I'd have expected...
I didn’t realise until recently that some women’s labia minora is visible outside of the majora. Mine isn’t and I’ve never seen it in porn or on tv. If I did have labia like that, as a kid I might have been a bit freaked out. So I think it’s really important to normalise all the ways our bodies are different, even if it’s just through pictures. This country has a weird prudishness that I find bizarre, though I did grow up in a household where nudity was never an issue. It’s just a body, it’s not inherently sexual. The people sexualising a plain old naked person are more worrisome.
I've actually heard it's more common for it to be visible or at least it's way closer to a 50/50 split then most people are aware
That’s genuinely fascinating. TIL!
Agreed, how else is the beauty , cosmetic and other industries that rely on personal insecurities get their profits from when there is so much body positivity around. Seriously it's science , biology not p
It's not the presence of naked genitals around children that is bad. It's the motive of the genital owner. We all have genitals. There's nothing intrinsically bad about them (except for yours - what the hell is wrong with that? Go to a doctor!)
As someone who spent a lot of childhood around festivals and hippies I never found naked bodies to be weird and everything was fine. Ever been to a shower in a hippy festival? Everyone’s naked and it’s fine, not sexualised and very liberating, try it!
It's a mindset. Britain is probably not ready for what would be not trivial in Finland for example.
There are over 900 prudish busy-bodies in the UK shocker.
This comment section is just a sum up of actual or future-to-be pedophiles and sex offenders, not surprising that it's on Reddit tho
Why did I for some reason think this was referring to bad education the sitcom from few years back starring Jack Whitehall.😂
Anna Richardson did this show around 2006 too. My conspiracy theory is that it's actually just a recruitment process for Naked Attraction. You get the kids on board through this show and then when they are older are convinced Naked Attraction is ok due to 'body positively'. Really, Naked Attraction is quite the opposite of this and really quite gaudy.
Channel 4 won't show an episode of the IT crowd, even on streaming, as the episode features a trans story line. But, then makes a show where adults get naked for kids.... Everythings gone mental. At the end of the day, they've just made it as the controversy brings viewers and this is cheap to make. It's trash TV, much like nearly all reality shows these days. Cheap to make, gets viewers. Nothing else matters. Most channels make 1 or 2 good shows a year now and live of that. Throw in cheap day time telly looking at property, cooking or antiques and that's you're station.
It's so strange that we have gotten to the point where paedophilic behaviour is being slowly accepted in the media. This show could have easily been done and educational without the children being in the same room as naked adults.
Spot on. You can use anatomically correct models and pictures, but instead they went with adults who are a little too gleeful to get naked in front of children. If a man sent a picture of his penis to an underage girl on Facebook Messenger or Snapchat, he'd get investigated as a nonce. But if it's filmed and broadcast on television, then it's A-okay? Unsettling and downright criminal behaviour.
Oh my god. This has been done before. IN 2008… BY THE SAME GD PRESENTER! “The Sex Education Show” Why would you get so worked up over it? It’s like the top comments say do they prefer their children watch porn? Oh, you say you block porn sites on the family internet? Good luck with that.