View Full Version : channel 4 to screen teen sex programming
channel 4 is to devote a season of programming about teen sex
one of the programmes will be called adult at 14 which will offer a 'realistic examination of teenage sexuality'
also a documentry about the age of consent in which a presenter will argue that sex below the age of 16 should be legalised
but the most contraversial program IMO is called 14 alone where 10 boys and 10 girls aged 14 will spend 5 days and nights without adult supervision
they will be under the spotlight of the cameras channel 4 maintain they are not introducing a big brother style program but simply offering an insight in to teenage lives
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_806353.html?menu=news.weirdworld.sexlife
so what do you all think of the program above many questions are left unanswered are the producers trying to find out how children of that age respond to each other gender wise ? or tempting them in to activitys infront of the cameras ?
grum1978
08-08-2003, 21:13
I think this programme is a total outrage!!
Which parent in their right mind would let their children take part in it :shrug:
It asks alot of serious questions about the way life is now and how children are made to grow up too early
Originally posted by grum1978
I think this programme is a total outrage!!
Which parent in their right mind would let their children take part in it :shrug:
It asks alot of serious questions about the way life is now and how children are made to grow up too early
children grow up alot earlier then people think there emotions also evolve at an early age this is why teenage pregnancy rates are high
but the program seems a bit strange to me the timing of it and the nature of it what they really are trying to prove you could say im questioning there intentions
Richard M
08-08-2003, 21:25
It is a bit stupid but I bet those kids aren't complaining. :D
Originally posted by kronas
children grow up alot earlier then people think there emotions also evolve at an early age this is why teenage pregnancy rates are high
but the program seems a bit strange to me the timing of it and the nature of it what they really are trying to prove you could say im questioning there intentions
Wouldn't the high rates of teenage pregnancy denote an absence of maturity rather than an excess?
Just because you can have sex doesn't mean that you're mature or ready.... it's means you're biologically able :shrug:
Having said that... i don't personally have a problem with teens talking about their sexuality and relationships.. their opinions about how they feel and their peer relationships are as valid if not more so, than those of others.
My fear is that the younger people/children? who are interested in experimenting sexually... weren't we all? ;)....... and freely discuss their feelings openly will perhaps lend even more credence to the views and opinions of paedophiles who try to convince others that the children they abuse are willing accomplices in their criminal acts because they are sexually and emotionally mature therefore actively participate in these acts.
Channel 4 seem to want to spearhead this type of programming.... i'm probably wrong.. but did they not screen the film 'Kids' which was the subject of much critcism for it's portrayal of sexually active teenagers?
[Disclaimer]: When i say weren't we all... i obviously don't mean me..... beacause i'm an :angel:... :p
Originally posted by kink
[B]Wouldn't the high rates of teenage pregnancy denote an absence of maturity rather than an excess?
Just because you can have sex doesn't mean that you're mature or ready.... it's means you're biologically able :shrug:
i never said/meant they are mature
Originally posted by kink
[B]
Having said that... i don't personally have a problem with teens talking about their sexuality and relationships.. their opinions about how they feel and their peer relationships are as valid if not more so, than those of others.
i agree
Originally posted by kink
[B]
My fear is that the younger people/children? who are interested in experimenting sexually... weren't we all? ;)....... and freely discuss their feelings openly will perhaps lend even more credence to the views and opinions of paedophiles who try to convince others that the children they abuse are willing accomplices in their criminal acts because they are sexually and emotionally mature therefore actively participate in these acts.
yes we are ;)
this is the type of thing i meant i just think channel 4 are sending out the wrong message by screening that particular program maybe im wrong its all inncocent but only time willl tell once the program is screened
Originally posted by kronas
i never said/meant they are mature
Oh ok... i'd just assumed when you said growing up that you meant maturing both emotionally and mentally not just physically.... probably because i was always being told to Grow up!! in a loud screeching voice.... i just assumed that she [mum] didn't mean to develop breasts earlier and get taller ;)
But your point is taken :)
Originally posted by kink
Oh ok... i'd just assumed when you said growing up that you meant maturing both emotionally and mentally not just physically....
But your point is taken :)
ah the old assumption game i hate it when people do that but alas all is well i meant kids grow up faster and 'turn on' ( bad choice of words :p ) there emotions alot earlier
Originally posted by kink
probably because i was always being told to Grow up!! in a loud screeching voice.... i just assumed that she [mum] didn't mean to develop breasts earlier and get taller ;)
IMO you have not grown up at all just as well then because........:p ;) :naughty: ;)
Ok, here we go with another controversial one...!!! :D
Firstly, however, I want to ensure that I get on record the fact that I do *NOT* in any way support, condone or approve of anyone being persuaded, forced or influenced into doing anything against their will or without their agreement and informed consent.
Now, having said that, the fact is that our society considers children to be incapable of giving informed consent, but there is, IMO, a fault in that reasoning because if we deny them the information they need then *of course* they can't make an informed decision!
However it should be pointed out here that modern ideas of childhood are exactly that, *modern*. For the majority of human history children have been working in the fields or workshops or factories as soon as they were old enough to help, it was only post the industrial revolution that we could afford the luxury of universal education because we could finally spare the children from the need to work.
The result of this is that we have effectively *created* this thing called childhood and whilst it's a laudable thing and should be protected, IMO we've taken this concept too far because we are now preventing children from learning things that, in the past, would have been every day events to them.
(And I'm not just talking about sex. In the past death was, if you'll pardon the expression, just part of life, but now we seem to think that children have to be "protected" from it, with the result that it's *more* traumatic when they first really encounter it)
But what happens now in this country is that children do not learn about sex (and, more especially, relationships) until *after* puberty when the hormones are already starting to rage and all they've really learned is what they've picked up in the playground (which is, of course, almost certainly wrong).
Some years ago I saw a documentary which showed a group of Dutch children watching a British "sex education" film and they were laughing their socks off at how twee and repressed it was. Dutch schoolchildren get taught about sex education *and* more importantly, relationships, much earlier and they're given the *full* facts, not just those "sanitised" ones that have been foisted on British children.
Guess which country has the lower rate of teenage pregnancy?! (In fact, IIRC, it's one of the *lowest* full stop!)
The fact is that, despite the "well meaning" efforts of certain parts of our leadership, children are *still* going to grow up and experiment with sex and trying to stop them from doing so by denying them the information they need makes about as much sense as saying "well if I don't teach my children about swimming, they won't go near the water and drown"!!
So my point is that we should stop treating children at the age of puberty as if they were still infants, but, instead, treat them as *young adults* as they deserve to know the truth about the facts of life *before* they need the information, not after!
SICK, no more to say on the subject!
Is Channel 4 full of Paedophiles?
Originally posted by Graham
[Snippity snip].......Firstly, however, I want to ensure that I get on record the fact that I do *NOT* in any way support, condone or approve of anyone being persuaded, forced or influenced into doing anything against their will or without their agreement and informed consent.
Now, having said that, the fact is that our society considers children to be incapable of giving informed consent, but there is, IMO, a fault in that reasoning because if we deny them the information they need then *of course* they can't make an informed decision!........[Snippity snipped]
Can i ask you a question graham? While i agree with most of what you're saying ... i wanted to clear something up that i'm not sure is clear... but that might just be me :eek:
When you say that informed consent is essential, which of course it is regardless of age, does that mean that you would advocate sexual relations between an adult (let say over 18 or 21) and an 'informed' child ( pubescent.... or not)? Are you saying that as long as they are aware of the nature of the act, possible reprecussions and actively choose do go ahead etc.. that this should be legal?
Just a question.... no criticism intended... as yet :naughty:.... but i wanted to clearly understand what you meant :)
Maybe i should now stand back and let you and ramrod take over? :D :p
I do agree with Graham that Children do need adequate sex education, that is basically because they will have sex at some point, especially if we tell them not to, so, working on the assumption they will, we should try and make sure they take adequate precautions.
I don't agree, however, that an adult should be allowed to have sex with a child (inforned or not)
Back on topic: I think, if Channel 4 don't go for thrills and handle it intelligently, this teen sex programming could be a good thing.
Edit: I didn't mean to imply that anyone on this forum would suggest allowing adults to have sex with children.
Originally posted by scastle
I do agree with Graham that Children do need adequate sex education, that is basically because they will have sex at some point, especially if we tell them not to, so, working on the assumption they will, we should try and make sure they take adequate precautions.
I don't agree, however, that an adult should be allowed to have sex with a child (inforned or not)
Back on topic: I think, if Channel 4 don't go for thrills and handle it intelligently, this teen sex programming could be a good thing.
Before i get flamed for implying that graham said that... i was just trying to clear that point up because i think i may have misunderstood :confused: but if that isn't what he said... then i apologise if my question implied it.
At the risk of continuing :notopic:.... it would be interesting to know at what ages people think being a child ends... and the young adult phase begins....
But no matter.... i agree with stu.. and if handled responsibly then a programme dealing with the issues of teenage sexuality should be a good thing. Perhaps it could be used as a part of a sexual eduation programme in schools.
yep i agree young people need to be educated at an early age about the implications of sexual activity but the age of consent should be at 16 and stay that way
i think the programming will be interesting to watch the only slight concern i had was the 10 girls 10 boys under surveillance program
darkangel
09-08-2003, 14:59
Originally posted by kronas
i think the programming will be interesting to watch the only slight concern i had was the 10 girls 10 boys under surveillance program don't really think that is a big deal sort of lord of the flies indoors might be interesting to see how really grown up they are and how they react and interpret things without adult boundaries.
Originally posted by kronas
yep i agree young people need to be educated at an early age about the implications of sexual activity but the age of consent should be at 16 and stay that way
i think the programming will be interesting to watch the only slight concern i had was the 10 girls 10 boys under surveillance program
Well they know they're being filmed don't they?
It's not like they'll be totally unsupervised.... and if they do anything they shouldn't in that environment.. then it would only be something they would have done anyway... whilst sneaking away from the adults.... that's what they do at adult supervised parties.... *er hem* remembers many a childhood party :naughty:
timewarrior2001
09-08-2003, 15:13
Originally posted by MikeyB
SICK, no more to say on the subject!
Is Channel 4 full of Paedophiles?
Where the hell does paedophilia come into it, its kids talking to other kids about how they feel about their sexuality, you know the thing millions of kids do every hour of every day just without the cameras.
Personally I dont see what the problem is, ok so no adults will be in this "house" but they are watching, and if anything illegal was about to happen CH4 would HAVE to step in and prevent it.
Which is a hell of a lot more than can happen on the streets these days. I'd estimate from things I have seen that there wont be many 14 year olds that havent tried some sort of sexual experience.
Originally posted by kink When you say that informed consent is essential, which of course it is regardless of age, does that mean that you would advocate sexual relations between an adult (let say over 18 or 21) and an 'informed' child ( pubescent.... or not)?
No, and I'm glad you brought the point up.
There are some countries, eg Canada which have what I've heard referred to as a "two year gap" law, ie that provided there's no more that two years difference between the participants, then the (consenting) act is acceptable eg for a fourteen year old to have sex with a sixteen year old would be ok, but not with a twenty two year old.
For more information (and a lot of reading!) see http://www.ageofconsent.com
Just a question.... no criticism intended... as yet :naughty:.... but i wanted to clearly understand what you meant :)
No problems :)
Maybe i should now stand back and let you and ramrod take over? :D :p [/B]
Ah, now *here* on the other hand, I *do* have a problem...!!! :D
Originally posted by Graham
No, and I'm glad you brought the point up.
There are some countries, eg Canada which have what I've heard referred to as a "two year gap" law, ie that provided there's no more that two years difference between the participants, then the (consenting) act is acceptable eg for a fourteen year old to have sex with a sixteen year old would be ok, but not with a twenty two year old.
For more information (and a lot of reading!) see http://www.ageofconsent.com
No problems :)
Ah, now *here* on the other hand, I *do* have a problem...!!! :D
I almost didn't bring it up... was hoping not to open a can of paedophilic worms ;)
Am very glad that we've cleared that up *phew* :spin:
I know.... :notopic: :notopic: :blah:
Just wanted to give you the opportunity to get rid of those worms regardless .. :p
Originally posted by Graham
No, and I'm glad you brought the point up.
There are some countries, eg Canada which have what I've heard referred to as a "two year gap" law, ie that provided there's no more that two years difference between the participants, then the (consenting) act is acceptable eg for a fourteen year old to have sex with a sixteen year old would be ok, but not with a twenty two year old.
Oddly enough, a 35 year old man could get away with having sex with a 14/15 year old in the UK - he can only be prosecuted if the girl makes a complaint to the police. She could go as far as admitting to 100 police that he did it, but unless she agrees to a prosecution, he'll get away with it.
The final twist in the 'Section 6' (unlawful sexual intercourse) act is that more than 12 months after the offense is commited, she can no longer bring a case against him and he'd get away with it, such are the UK's curious laws.
Originally posted by kink
Maybe i should now stand back and let you and ramrod take over? :D :p we havent finished the last one yet:rolleyes: :D
though I think that it is coming to a gentle close soon:) (bloody well hope so:D )
Originally posted by Russ D
[B]Oddly enough, a 35 year old man could get away with having sex with a 14/15 year old in the UK - he can only be prosecuted if the girl makes a complaint to the police.
Oh you don't need to tell *me* that the UK's laws are serious screwed up in places!
Apropos of the Age of Consent discussion, IIRC up until just before the second world war it was actually still legal for a girl to be married at the age of twelve!
Originally posted by Ramrod
we havent finished the last one yet:rolleyes: :D
though I think that it is coming to a gentle close soon:) (bloody well hope so:D )
It can come to an end any time you want. All you have to do is admit that I'm right and you're wrong...! :spin: :D
Originally posted by Graham
Oh you don't need to tell *me* that the UK's laws are serious screwed up in places!
Apropos of the Age of Consent discussion, IIRC up until just before the second world war it was actually still legal for a girl to be married at the age of twelve!
Back in the days when if the mother died, the eldest daughter would take over her role (completely).
So there's a lot more inbreeding in society than you may think!
Originally posted by Xaccers
Back in the days when if the mother died, the eldest daughter would take over her role (completely).
So there's a lot more inbreeding in society than you may think!
Hmm, is this your banjo?! :D
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.