Walter Hinteler wrote:When I worked on such subjects (in youth clubs etc, outside school), I really wondered how young children were who knew all "those" words - but mostly without knowing wht they meant.
My work was under the motto "emancipating girl's and anti discrimating boy's social work' - I had to start with that work with younger children than I origianally thought.
I think that a bad terminology indeed is the breding ground that e.g. girls are just sexual objects for boys.
And that girls feel like being only sexual objects.
That would be a really bad start in adulthood, I think.
And I do belive that some media do/could support such a bad start.
Thanks, Walter, I think that is one thing I was trying to get at. I want my daughters to feel positive about themselves as people, and not only sexual objects. It is bad enough with cosmo, and other media sources that emphasize how a woman should look and that they need to look like that. It is difficult enough to begin growing into a woman without having derogatory titles associated with how your body is changing.
In addition, I felt some of the articles were a bit old for her. It is geared for teens, not pre-teens. But that is another debate - what is the right age?
I think it is important to discuss with children about their bodies and hide things. I do think though you need to discuss in a way that is appropriate for each child and their age. I don't think she had an issue with us taking the magazine because I honestly think she agrees with us. That and I told her I would buy her another that would be better suited for her.