sexualisation of young teens/kids

I can't even believe Media Studies is a subject - the school I went to didn't have it as a subject purely because it was a pointless subject that doesn't really open your career path, more like narrows it. It is extremely easy and involves very little activity of the brain.

Excuse me I take great offense to that. I work as a Media Technician and part-time teaching assistant at a Media Institution that teaches Media Studies in both AVCE and BTEC. I will agree that students join it because they think it's going to be a 2 year easy ride, but it's not. It's very hard work and you learn many things including such things as Single Camera drama all the way to the workings of Ofcom and the BBFC. You learn how to operate cameras, sound equipment, all the different types of microphones. You learn about aspect ratios, sound recording techniques and all sorts of other things. The people who aren't serious about the subject dissepear VERY quickly, at least over here. Media Studies is not a mickey mouse course, and students who have left our institution at least have become very successful in the field.

I apologise. But the simple fact that most people sign up for Media Studies to get an easy GCSE / A-Level because they believe it is a Mickey Mouse course, and I would guess there are less people, like you, that actually want to get it to get a career in the Media. Trust me, everyone I know, when asked why they did Media Studies, they said because it is an easy A in their grade card.

I have never studied Media Studies so those are my views and probably the majority of students in schools. If I were given a chance, I would take it not to get an easy A as the majority of people do it for (and probably the topic poster), but for, simply, my interest in the Media and journalism. Some people do the course, but have no intentions of being a journalist.

Well although i hate to admit it, that is true. A lot of people do join it to get an easy grade. Joining at GNVQ or even GCSE level it is quite an easy course to pass, very easy infact. It's just on the AVCE and higher BTEC levels where you really have to work. Thankfully our institution is phasing out the lower levels so we don't have to put up with the lazy people.

It is nice though when we see most of our ex-students obtain brilliant grades and move on to a Media related job.

It's a shame that they have to go to the mainland to do it most of the time. Over here we don't have many opportunities for such things.

My viewpoint was coming from the direction of whether or not sex should be portrayed on TV and 'exposed' to children, not whether or not 14 year olds should be steered by fashions in magazines.

Any my 'mouthing off' about parents not doing the best for their children was referring to parents who avoid their children from being 'exposed' to the concept of sex, which is protecting them from nothing other than a bit of education which might go on to protect their daughter from adding yet another notch to our disastrous teenage pregnancy rates, or their son from a nasty surprise.


Exactly, which is why it's all the more important for them to be properly educated on the subject firstly to an appropriate level, and secondly for this to be delivered by a suitable age (i.e. not when it's allready too late for many people).


Surely it depends on your area? The sex education I received consisted of a video for the boys about erection and ejaculation, a video for the girls about periods, and a video for both boys and girls which might have allowed you to label parts of a diagram but left you absolutely none the wiser as far as sex was concerned. This was delivered in late year 7 science (by which time everyone was 12 years old) and was the first time ever that using the word 'sex' was not a tabood word which would get you a telling off.

That was it. It would be another 4 years (by which time several people in the year group would have lost their virginity) and year 11 before sex education was revisted. This time it was delivered via PSE and tackled the social issues of teenage pregnancy, but left young people who are, as you acknowledge, 'experimenting' completely unequipped to help avoid getting caught up in this trap.

Finally, when I was in sixth form, at which time we were all 17 (yes, that's SEVENTEEN years old, by which time half the year group were having regular sex) we got a useful talk about contraception - or rather, it was useful for some people, but it came too late for many.

Since I've left I've discovered that sex education has evolved. Oh yes. The videos on periods and erections have been moved to late year 6. That's it. I suppose it's a step on from the days when I moved to junior school, we were handed out copies of the prospectus which we were told firmly by our infant school teacher that it was for our parents and we absolutely were not allowed to read it (indeed I remember feeling that she was pretty much telling us off in advance lest we be tempted). I found out why several years later - the prospectus contained the junior school's sex education policy and we might read it (which for the record was 'Sex Education - No formal sex education is taught although pupils are counselled on an individual basis if they show real concern in this area' Brilliant, what a useful policy which will ensure these children won't get into trouble 5 years down the line).

At present, the children of this country are being greatly disserviced. They go through 10-11 years of finding no adult willing to talk about sex with them, and as such quite expectedly become conditioned to believe it is some vile nasty practice engaged in by bad people, then suddenly that's taken away from them and they're asked to accept that actually sex is something which virtually everyone will engage in, and actually that's how they got here in the first place. Having dropped that bombshell on them so late in the day (in contrast, most children in Germany are vaguely aware of something between two people called sex and that that's how they got here by the age of 3), rather than making up for lost ground and ensuring that they're properly clued up on it before they start getting tempted to experiment, they instead get a cursory outline with no practical advice, and then that's it until a time at which it's allready too late for half of them - and of course they may not even get that, because for no apparent reason it's still considered a right of the parent to actually withdraw their children from these sessions.

It leads to some extremely dubious misconceptions. I've heard this story from a friend who insists 100% that it's true. He was on holiday with a group of friends when they were 16/17. One of the friends met a girl whilst out, and after a week or so on holiday they ended up having sex. They stood up whilst doing. Why? 'Because she can't get pregnant if she's standing up'. Seriously. That was said.

I realise this has now strayed beyond the original intention of the thread, but this is a subject I feel needs addressing. Badly. And if there ever is justification for the government taking a nanny state approach, this is it.