A sex education CD-ROM designed for 9 to 11-year-old schoolchildren is getting some flack from government officials after it was discovered that the presentation contains realistic, computer generated and cartoon fucking. Sorry — "lovemaking."
One Conservative Member of Parliament who watched the film herself said she was embarrassed when she saw the images, comparing them to a "blue movie," which is old-timey talk for "porn." Andrea Leadsom wants sex education materials to be given ratings so that teachers know which films will make parents the angriest and which films will just feature nervous British adults facing the camera and stuttering disconnected, confusing nature metaphors for half an hour while their faces redden.
While prudish government hysterics in the face of medically accurate sex education is pretty much a given, this time the MP's reaction is less off-base than usual.
For one thing, the materials actually contain pictures of genitalia, just like real porn! Except these images of genitalia are used to illustrate changes the body undergoes during puberty, as a way to show kids that their bodies aren't dirty.
Another scene shows two computer generated human bodies having sex, as a way to demonstrate how babies are conceived and born. Which, I suppose, is sort of like porn in that penetration is involved, but sort of not like porn in that the man ejaculates into the woman's vagina and not on her face, and the woman isn't a terrible actress.
The film also discusses emotional aspects of sexuality, including same-sex crushes, marriage, and sexy-type feelings. During one segment, a couple of naked cartoons lie around hugging each other alongside text that explains that sometimes people have sex to show how much they love each other. There are cartoon nipples.
Leadsom says that films such as the one currently being shown to schoolchildren are robbing them of their innocence and ruining childhood, and the Minister of Education has vowed to investigate.
BBC Active says they stand behind the film, as they worked with education and health experts to develop it. Further, they say, a ratings system isn't necessary because their materials already come with age-appropriate ratings.
While some may balk at the notion of showing 9-year-olds depictions of actual sex acts, this sort of exposure is much more healthy first-time introduction to sex than, say, huddling over a Hustler magazine your friend stole from her dad. Discussion of emotional as well as the physical aspects of sex is healthy, as is seeing sex in the context of a loving rather than exploitative context. But is it fair to assume that every single 9-year-old is ready for exposure to the graphic truth about sex? Or is the truth about sex tantamount to pornography?
BBC sex film for kids is 'like porn' [The Sun]