AntiWailer:
That is a sex education text book innit ?

What were you expecting in the Text Book ?

John 3 : 16 ?

Hypocrites.
If we are so pure. Which country are the rapists, baby mamas and baby papas from ?

Which country idolised tuface and call him a role model ?

Which country sing jollof rice and tomato with flavor.

They are screaming but they engaged in pre-marital sex in one form or the other.

Hypocrites

maasoap:

Why do we need to teach them anyway? So that they can practise it or what? That alone can make them to be curious. It doesn't even look like a sex education.

DollarAngel:


When has sex education become allowing a child watch pronography, don't be impulsive with your response, reason along as you type..

menxer:
what are we shouting?

do we want our children to grow up ignorant of these things or get to know by trial and error?

how many of us are bold enough to discuss sex in a positive way with our teenagers?

i believe it is better it is mentioned in class where the teenagers can ask questions without feeling ashamed

Yampotatocarrot:
I was going through the physics textbook (new school), I think, and I found out some words were printed on all d pages. Tried reading them n was surprised what I saw, "My father is a kidnapper and my mother is a harlot........."

Dont know if someone else has also noticed that

proffemi:


Good God. No!

I wasn't planning to contribute to this thread, but I see so many posts pushing a (IMO) wrong idea: wantonly expose kids to sexual topics and strange, intriguing-sounding sexual terms just because you want them to get it "from the right source". I agree 100% that kid can pick these things from other kids, and make all manners of wrong choices if they are not properly educated. But the reverse ("over-education" ) is also just as dangerous: carelessly expanding their sexual vocabulary with so many topics that simply invite them to fill in the gaps, thereby creating a self-fulfilling prophesy!

If the point is to help them to make the right calls, then consider this: there is scientific evidence that the circuits that help adolescents link action to consequence (i.e. circuits aiding sound judgment) are still underdeveloped at this stage. You want to give them enough to make the right calls IF THEY HAVE TO, but you shouldn't, by the teaching of the course itself, increase the chances that they'll be making those calls. Why? If they have to, chances are, they make the wrong call anyway. So, for me, the policy guiding sex education should be "responsible and restrained exposure". Expose to the basic stuff: sex (NOT the details and sex styles!!! I've heard horror stories about this), pregnancy, STI etc.

Sexual education should be a careful dance to educate the kids without kindling dangerous curiosity where such didn't previously exist.

proffemi:


I disagree completely sir!
If you (or I) can't discuss this with your (my) teenage kids, then, that's your (or my) failure as a parent!!!
It's your job, or your spouses, to introduce this topic to your kids, because:

1. Most of the teachers are not competent enough to handle in a responsible manner, and can get unnecessarily lurid.
2. The time they spend in class, teaching ~25 - 50 students, will not be sufficient to answer the questions generated in so many curious and precocious minds. Those minds will fill the gaps. If daddy and mummy cannot do it for them (see my first point), God help daddy, mummy, and kid.

Moving4:

Weda dey r taught or not dey will still practice it, so it's beta to teach dem...

PMWSpirit:
Iranu

proffemi:


I disagree completely sir!
If you (or I) can't discuss this with your (my) teenage kids, then, that's your (or my) failure as a parent!!!
It's your job, or your spouses, to introduce this topic to your kids, because:

1. Most of the teachers are not competent enough to handle in a responsible manner, and can get unnecessarily lurid.
2. The time they spend in class, teaching ~25 - 50 students, will not be sufficient to answer the questions generated in so many curious and precocious minds. Those minds will fill the gaps. If daddy and mummy cannot do it for them (see my first point), God help daddy, mummy, and kid.

Moving4:
Hmm
It's 4 Educational purpose now, even those JSS1 students know of what is masturbation. The earlier dey teach dem d beta dey will bcom...

AkinPhysicist:
what's the problem here? Is it not a fact that mutual masturbation is a form of abstinence?

naijalander:
Your advocating for don't ask don't tell. When has that ever worked.

Some of these kids are already masturbating ( maybe not the JSS1s but JSS3 for sure.

You haven't even read the whole book you are already making judgment

AkinPhysicist:
what's the problem here? Is it not a fact that mutual masturbation is a form of abstinence?

campbelljosh:
I tire o. Some people go dey form holy holy and most of them sleep with their maids

proffemi:

I am advocating for no such thing. I already said what I am advocating: responsible and restrained exposure . Some of us are smart enough to think out of the box, and suggest effective approaches to problem-solving that don't require lumping into boxes ready-made by the Americans!

An illustration of responsible and restrained exposure from your own submission (hope you see the irony there):

You accept that most kids in JS1 are (probably) not masturbating, but in order to teach *the few* kids who are having sex, you welcome the whole class to the topic of masturbation with a partner . I guarantee you that for every sexually-aware kids you thereby save from premarital sex, you create another who soon graduates from "just" mutual masturbation to sex.

Possible solution: base the development of intended educational outcomes on sound scientific studies which determine the typical age of risk for most classes of sexual behavior, and appropriately target those ages. Using your example, mutual masturbation would be more responsibly taught at JS3, not JS1.


Chief, I am an educator of many years, and an author myself. When I see an author and publisher who take the path of least resistance when formatting their book, I automatically see a pair who are unlikely to pay attention to details, nor be smart and/or painstaking enough to teach a nuanced subject like sex education.

What I see is a generation of parents and teachers who are abandoning the teaching of important, character-building attributes (discipline, delayed gratification, sound work ethics) in favor of pumping more and more information into kids. When this same attitude seeps into sex education, we create a bigger mess than we met.

but the few kids not masturbating will eventually masturbate

Again your judging the whole book based on one page.

PapiSmith:
It's called sex education you bloody illiterates

Most of you never had one so I am not surprised

Iamzik:


Then it should be a subject on its own. The whites we are trying so hard to copy have it as a separate subject in their curriculum. So is this social study text book or sex education text book?

Edu3Again:


The author dey go christ embassy or what,
na for christ embassy dem dey consider this kind rubbish.

No be Christ Embassy dem say Self Service no be sin?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwbYW5nmU4Y