Having watched my nephew's puberty start around 11, yes its too early to be asking kids their sexual orientation, no its not too young for kids to be having sexual feelings. Acting on them, yes, but feeling them, no.

Having watched my nephew's puberty start around 11, yes its too early to be asking kids their sexual orientation, no its not too young for kids to be having sexual feelings. Acting on them, yes, but feeling them, no.

As far as my kids are concerned - exactly right.

And if I had questioned them about this at age 11/12/up to about fifteen, I would probably have been pushing them one way or the other, not allowing natural development.

To allow government appointees, even if they are the teachers of the kids, or social workers or nurses, as the original article, to do so would be puzzling to the kids, lead to answers that deflected the questions and make the whole exercise a waste of time.

At least with the kids I have known all their lives. (And some are now around 40 yrs old)

I doubt that questioning them would push them one way or the other, but given the confusion that young people feel about these new feelings, I don't think questioning them is wise unless there is an obvious problem.

A supportive environment where young people know that sexual feelings are normal is what's needed. Sexual feelings are quite fluid at an early age.

To expand on the above post -

The sort of question I would anticipate would be along the lines of 'Who are your best friends at school/at home' - 'Do you like playing with football / cricket / stay at home / other'.

Sorry Humph but 'do you like football' is just too stereotypical. What's the alternative? 'Do you like needlework'? Where do Gareth Thomas and Ian Roberts fit in?

So what is the alternative?

If you want someone to tell you whether they're gay or not the question you have to ask is:

"Are you gay?" - possibly suitably dressed up for the consumption of 14+ year olds. It has to be asked by someone they trust who they know won't be judgemental. If you ask teenagers whether they like football they'll assume you're asking them whether they like football. Asking them them a straight (pardon) question avoids all the subterfuge and coy questions that probably won't make any sense to them at all. The main reason people hesitate to ask this question is that they're still of the mindset that an answer of 'yes' is somehow shameful rather than a simple statement of fact.

Note that I don't think it's sensible to ask this question to 11 year olds but by the time most kids are 14 they have a fair idea about sexuality especially if they've had decent sex education lessons at school. If the question is asked by someone they trust it's often a huge relief to be able to confide their 'secret' to someone else. I wish I'd have had someone around to confide in when I was 14 - mind you they were still locking us up then

The mantra that 14 year olds don't know what they want is a bit suspect as far as I'm concerned. Lots of kids realise from the age of about 12 that they might be gay and they do something that straight kids never need to do - they think a lot about their sexuality. If you're straight you don't need to think very much about it - it's the default mode.

Maybe this shows the difference between America and other countries. The entire country was constructed on the premise that one should not trust the government. It's all gone sideways now, but that's a pretty good starting point IMO.

Sorry, double post.

Maybe this shows the difference between America and other countries. The entire country was constructed on the premise that one should not trust the government. It's all gone sideways now, but that's a pretty good starting point IMO.

Yes what ever happened to that premise?

The great masses are for the most part now too fat & too lazy to get off the couch.

Everything spewed by elected officials & bankers is swallowed whole.

I worked on a ranch when I was a kid. We bred horses and castrated pigs. It gave one a pretty good idea of how things were done. I had it in my mind that I got on from the back but a young lady straightened me out. Farm kids may be better grounded than city kids early in life.

My father talked to me about sex after I had already been with three members of the opposite sex. It was only luck they didn't get pregnant. Druggists were a bit put off at selling a boy at my age condoms.

I think it is great that condoms are now sold openly most places.

I always assumed as soon as they can they will. Teach and provide protection first and worry about morals and sexual preference later.

I was sleeping in a 9th grade history class when the teacher was warning the boys (all boys school) about perverts picking up boys after school. He was trying to be hip and used the word blowjob. That woke me up and I said, “blowjobs where?” The teacher rolled his eyes and said, “go back to sleep Mark.” At that age I was not too serious about sex and figured a BJ was a BJ.

I am beginning to think I was not a typical young teen. I fit in better in a Thai agricultural community where everyone is bonking like rabbits regardless of gender.

My parents and school completely ignored sex for the most part and my education was from the farm and library. Although my parents were never gay bashers and the priests at school were half swish so I never became homophobic. The alter boys did make fun of the gay priests and kidded each other about getting a hummer after mass. The good fathers never bothered me and I had a fantasy about a couple of novice nuns but nothing ever came of it.

I really can't relate on a personal level about problems about sexual identification. Quantify or quality issues I can understand. Why a child would make fun of another because of gender issues is foreign to me. I can understand the issue from an academic sense but think the whole thing is founded in religious nuts trying to sell morals to an unsuspecting public. Same as people trying to save hookers from a life of sin. It is a silly exercise in futility.

Don't ask them anything. Test them by hooking them up to one of those eye-tracking machines and flash them various pictures of men and women together. You'll have your answer soon enough.

Techniques such as that don't work on early adolescent age children. They are too fluid in their sexuality to have a specific focus of interest. There is a point when boys, for example, are curious about penises. Is mine bigger than yours? etc.

There was a little gizmo that was used primarily with sex-offenders to determine their level of attraction to certain groups/activities. It was a small elastic-type ring put on the penis than could measure the % of arousal from certain images. It worked reasonably well with adults, but with teens it was of no value--they showed arousal to all kinds of images that were not sexual--like birds, scenery etc..

Techniques such as that don't work on early adolescent age children. They are too fluid in their sexuality to have a specific focus of interest. There is a point when boys, for example, are curious about penises. Is mine bigger than yours? etc.

There was a little gizmo that was used primarily with sex-offenders to determine their level of attraction to certain groups/activities. It was a small elastic-type ring put on the penis than could measure the % of arousal from certain images. It worked reasonably well with adults, but with teens it was of no value--they showed arousal to all kinds of images that were not sexual--like birds, scenery etc..

I read about that...they also used it to determine that the % of men aroused by homoerotic images was alot more than the % that claim heterosexuality. So many in denial.

Techniques such as that don't work on early adolescent age children. They are too fluid in their sexuality to have a specific focus of interest. There is a point when boys, for example, are curious about penises. Is mine bigger than yours? etc.

There was a little gizmo that was used primarily with sex-offenders to determine their level of attraction to certain groups/activities. It was a small elastic-type ring put on the penis than could measure the % of arousal from certain images. It worked reasonably well with adults, but with teens it was of no value--they showed arousal to all kinds of images that were not sexual--like birds, scenery etc..

I read about that...they also used it to determine that the % of men aroused by homoerotic images was alot more than the % that claim heterosexuality. So many in denial.

Don't mind the gays but the ones that get aroused by birds and scenery might be a concern.

Don't mind the gays but the ones that get aroused by birds and scenery might be a concern.

Mark:

They are called 'tree huggers' in polite society.

It's my considered opinion that homosexuality ought to be compulsory - apart from the ugly fuggers of course