VivaHedone

Childhood innocence is in my opinion best defined by James Joyce, as a 'soul capable of simple joys'. However, the term is commonly used to mean 'ignorance of sex'.

Sex is generally regarded as a good thing. Yet it is universally seen a corrupting and harmful to the 'innocence' of children. Is it really sexuality which destroys the 'soul capable of simple joys'? If so, then how?

Even if sexuality does destroy innocence, then does this mean that children need 'protection' from it? Knowledge of sex is the not the same as sexuality. Sexuality is caused by hormonal changes inside the body. So what possible harm can knowing about, or even watching sex do to childhood innocence?

I know that this might seem a little perverse, but that is because this is a taboo that is very deeply ingrained into society today. I'm just interested in whether this taboo has any logical, or for that matter evolutionary, justification.

I'd also be interested to hear from anyone with anything to say about any of our other strange hang-ups and sense of shame about what is, really, a very basic act of physical pleasure.

Salmon of Doubt

I think it is just adulthood that leads to loss of innocence- having to deal with the world with a mature perspective instead of living in a world of imagination and having people do things for you.

My view on it is just that sexuality is a handy 'defining point' between childhood and adulthood. When puberty hits, that kind of signifies the end of the childhood age and the start of growing up into an adult. I don't think you can protect children from the idea of sex, or even if you have to.

I suppose the taboo about sexuality and innocence in particular is just linked to the general taboos about sexuality, I don't think there's a logical or evolutionary reason for it.

Oxymoron

A very interesting question.

Children are, in a sense, sexual beings. Male babies can - and do - get erections. Females contain all the eggs they will ever ovulate with (if that's a verb).

Sexual awareness is something that grows with an individual. One's sexual power comes with an awesome amount of responsibility: sex creates life; sex can kill via STDs. A child that is introduced early to the ways that adults responsibly (or otherwise) deal with their feelings towards other humans will not understand, and (worst case) it might be like leaving them alone in a sweet shop and telling them not to eat anything.

So I think the true desire is not to protect children from what is, after all, their own identity as humans, but to pace it, allow their voyage of discovery to progress along with the physical changes that take place over the first two decades of their lives.

Of course, the theists have had our culture in a tizz about sex for centuries; the whole Adam and Eve thing, for one. And all that stuff about women being unclean whilst menstruating. And so on. However, sex is a broadly private act. I've never seen porn that is genuine without false noise and acting (which is why it bores me so). We are very vulnerable (physically and emtionally) during sex, probably because a bit of our brain is thinking about being jumped by sabre-tooth tigers. So we do it indoors, away from the eyes of others.

The other thing about sex is that it is very ancient. The bits of our brain that control it are the 'oldest' in evolutionary terms and our poor cognitive systems that search for patterns and reasons so they can figure out why things happen just can't understand what the hell is going on. People don't feel as if sex is 'them' - the rational, decison-making model that we use to model the world - it is a beast with its own agenda out of our control, and it is therefore a bit scary.

The combination of a private act, with vulnerability and a good sprinkling of theist moralism results in us being very messed up.

Loren Pechtel

Originally posted by VivaHedone
Childhood innocence is in my opinion best defined by James Joyce, as a 'soul capable of simple joys'. However, the term is commonly used to mean 'ignorance of sex'.

Yeah, "innocence" is just another code-word for trying to banish sex.

Sex is generally regarded as a good thing. Yet it is universally seen a corrupting and harmful to the 'innocence' of children. Is it really sexuality which destroys the 'soul capable of simple joys'? If so, then how?

Not one bit. Actual sexual behavior (as opposed to sex-related behavior such as playing doctor) in children is normally the result of it being forced on them by adults. While the actual harm of this is probably fairly minor or even nonexistant in most cases, the secrecy that goes with it is quite harmful.

Even if sexuality does destroy innocence, then does this mean that children need 'protection' from it? Knowledge of sex is the not the same as sexuality. Sexuality is caused by hormonal changes inside the body. So what possible harm can knowing about, or even watching sex do to childhood innocence?

About the only way it could cause any harm at all is that it's one of those things that shows the world isn't all good and pure. Kids have to learn that at some point anyway, I don't think the mechanism is relevant.

I'd also be interested to hear from anyone with anything to say about any of our other strange hang-ups and sense of shame about what is, really, a very basic act of physical pleasure.

Sex is one of the great sources of pleasure in life. Those who can control it gain power over others. Control of sex is a very common aspect of religion for this reason.

Talulah

It is my opinion that children who engage in sex before puberty up to 14-15 or so are just doing what an adult has taught them, i.e, they have already been sexualized. I am sure there are rare exceptions.

In regard to 'playing doctor,' someone once told me that her and her brother were put in the bathtub by her mother and then her mother walked out of the room. They decided to look at each others parts and when their mother, the good Catholic, came back and caught them she freaked out, making them stand on the top of the table, both dripping wet and naked until their father came home so he could beat them. That to me, is a classic example of how Christianity takes something normal (curiousity about the opposite sex) and creates shame. Obviously, the experiance became traumatic.

dangin

I think it is equally interesting that some adults feel shame about going to the bathroom and the associated sounds and smells.

It really takes some of the punch out of those who argue that sex is special because of the shame they feel, when they feel the same shame about passing waste.

It speaks to a generic body process shame, and not to a specific sexual shame.

ybnormal

It is my opinion that children who engage in sex before puberty up to 14-15 or so are just doing what an adult has taught them, i.e, they have already been sexualized. I am sure there are rare exceptions.

There are way more than rare exceptions. Yes, many of us are "sexualized by adults" at a very early age, but your above comment fails to cover the great numbers of other children that a single sexualized kid will likely engage sexually over many ensuing years while growing up. These encounters seem to be viewed mostly as innocent sex play between age peers and considered mostly harmless, as it should be. IOW, I am sure that the overwhelming majority of sexually active kids, first became active in the company of other active kids.

Since parents in general are unable to do their duty in proper sex education, forcing the government to instruct insane abstinence, kids are in turn forced to and WILL learn all this from other kids who often only pretend to have some knowledge and experience. If a guilt-ridden society is forcing kids to learn from other kids, it is more insanity to blame said kids.

And talk about rare exceptions... the type of shameful and abusive trauma in the story you related is rarely matched in peer sex play, and IMO, almost as rare if and when being sexualized by adults. I trust folks know that I exclude here, those who suffer abject coercion and/or force.

Of course, this entire issue is so dependent on broadly dissimilar participants regarding age/maturity, that it is a crime in itself that a better system for handling sexual maturity can't be found. We can't tell the many 13 and 14 YO boys who are fully physically developed, to wait with a painful erection for 5 or 4 years, and not expect the associated anger, psychological trauma and uncontrollable frustration. It is completely insane for example, for a society to continue to shame and prosecute an 18 YO for making love to his/her 17 YO partner.

Loren Pechtel

Originally posted by Talulah
It is my opinion that children who engage in sex before puberty up to 14-15 or so are just doing what an adult has taught them, i.e, they have already been sexualized. I am sure there are rare exceptions.

I think your 14-15 doesn't correspond to current development. I do agree that sex before puberty is almost certainly what an adult has taught them.

In regard to 'playing doctor,' someone once told me that her and her brother were put in the bathtub by her mother and then her mother walked out of the room. They decided to look at each others parts and when their mother, the good Catholic, came back and caught them she freaked out, making them stand on the top of the table, both dripping wet and naked until their father came home so he could beat them. That to me, is a classic example of how Christianity takes something normal (curiousity about the opposite sex) and creates shame. Obviously, the experiance became traumatic.

Of course. If said father was going to beat anyone, he should have beat the mother for setting up the sitaution and then thinking it was wrong.

VivaHedone

Why is sex bad and impure?

Talulah

ok. so shoot me.

Take it down to 11. I meant pre-puberty anyway.