School going 5-year-old children performing oral sex on each other

Gosub wrote: »

I think when they say "it went down... " they are using the Americanisn in the same way as "the drug deal went down..." Not the sexual act known as "going down on"

Or am I just being all innocent, like?

That's the joke

5 year old kids dont randomly start going down on eachother, this is a learned behaviour. Either an older kid told them about it, or they stumbled accross some porn or they were abused.

Its weird but its kind of funny, kids these days are mad.

The chicks will be called sluts, while the guys will be bragging all their lives saying ahhhhh yeah got blown when i was 5 mate.

They'll be legends :pac:

suicide_circus wrote: »

That's the joke

5 year old kids dont randomly start going down on eachother, this is a learned behaviour. Either an older kid told them about it, or they stumbled accross some porn or they were abused.

Really? Why does it have to be? Kids experiment. They shove marbles in strange places.
http://www.splitcoaststampers.com/forums/family-matters-f64/uuumm-my-son-stuck-marble-up-his-bum-t111612.html

They eat dirt, they eat snot. They'll try licking anything, including pets. they may even do other things to pets.

Kids are just weird and do all these things without it being sexual at all. As adults we tend to view everything that way, but kids are a blank slate that have no preconcieved notions and will do all these things without ever having witnessed the behaviour in adults.

Grayson wrote: »

My point was that just because something involves genatils does not mean it's a sexual act. What the kids did was as unsexual as a doctors exam. But you obviously have your head stuck in sexville. For some reason what two kids did "has" to be sexual. That's just weird.

Oh I have my head stuck up in sexville? So you would allow this to continue because you perceive this as normal behaviour? So if it isn't sexual, then it is just "imitating adults"? That is also weird

And are you saying that just because adults do it, its not sexual?

Grayson wrote: »

Really? Why does it have to be? Kids experiment. They shove marbles in strange places.
http://www.splitcoaststampers.com/forums/family-matters-f64/uuumm-my-son-stuck-marble-up-his-bum-t111612.html

They eat dirt, they eat snot. They'll try licking anything, including pets. they may even do other things to pets.

Kids are just weird and do all these things without it being sexual at all. As adults we tend to view everything that way, but kids are a blank slate that have no preconcieved notions and will do all these things without ever having witnessed the behaviour in adults.

You're not the only one 'enlightened' enough to realise that kids must be socialised in order to learn what is right/wrong in society.

However, your argument is simplistic, and is only ONE theory as to what occurred at this school. Implying other posters are perverted, and projecting adult notions on the children is pretty hysterical.

I agree that it is possible that the kids were just being naturally curious. I would imagine its not uncommon to catch children doing all manner of things they haven't been "trained" not to do yet.
However, it's not hysterical or perverted to suggest that these kids were acting out abuse (on each other) that they may have been subjected to by an adult. It's actually highly possible this is what happened, as abused children often do things like this.

While all kids experiment/play doctor, I find it unfeasible that kids would perform full on oral sex on each other (they are very unlikely to understand it as sex, but still).
Do you know any five year olds? Mention the word "willy" to most 5 year olds, and they'll crack up laughing. Most kids at that age have at least some notion of "private parts", and that some areas are "naughty", or whatever. Especially when you consider this is a religious school.

While you may be 100% correct that the kids were just messing about completely innocently, it's still ridiculous to suggest that other posters have an "obsession with sex", and that there is no reason to investigate, or even suspect anything more dubious going on.

Rocket19 wrote: »

You're not the only one 'enlightened' enough to realise that kids must be socialised in order to learn what is right/wrong in society.

However, your argument is simplistic, and is only ONE theory as to what occurred at this school. Implying other posters are perverted, and projecting adult notions on the children is pretty hysterical.

I agree that it is possible that the kids were just being naturally curious. I would imagine its not uncommon to catch children doing all manner of things they haven't been "trained" not to do yet.
However, it's not hysterical or perverted to suggest that these kids were acting out abuse (on each other) that they may have been subjected to by an adult. It's actually highly possible this is what happened, as abused children often do things like this.

While all kids experiment/play doctor, I find it unfeasible that kids would perform full on oral sex on each other (they are very unlikely to understand it as sex, but still).
Do you know any five year olds? Mention the word "willy" to most 5 year olds, and they'll crack up laughing. Most kids at that age have at least some notion of "private parts", and that some areas are "naughty", or whatever. Especially when you consider this is a religious school.

While you may be 100% correct that the kids were just messing about completely innocently, it's still ridiculous to suggest that other posters have an "obsession with sex", and that there is no reason to investigate, or even suspect anything more dubious going on.

There is absolutely no evidence, absolutely no suggestion that the kids were abused.

There is absolutely no suggestion at all that the kids were acting in a "sexual" manner.

The only place all this is coming from is the heads of the posters. They're incapabale of thinking that it could have an innocent explanation.

The kids involved in this will probably never live it down. Rumours spread and hang around. By the time they're teens, they could be labeled for life. Their parents too. And it's because of people guessing and suggesting. But yeah, I'm the one that's overreacting and being ridiculous. .

nucker wrote: »

So you don't think it should be illegal for them to engage in sex?

Can't see why it should be. You think a "trial" and a sentence are needed for these children- to punish them appropriately or dissuade other 5 year olds from following down that path?

just to mess with your heads

there is a tribe called the sambia who believe to become a man you most consume semen so the boys are talking away at about 7 years old and spend the next few years of their lives giving and receiving blowjobs from other boys and older men. It is viewed as cultural not a sexual act

try get your head around that one

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Illegal? They're five years old! I was only joking wen Ic suggested the sex offenders register.

Wile not exactly ideal, it's probably pretty harmless although obviously something you don't want the kids to engage in.

There was a case in the US where teenage girls were charged with making and distributing child pornography.

they has a sleepover and took photo's of each other on their phones. As far as I'm aware there was no nudity.

They mailed them to each other on their phones.

They then did something in school that involved their phones being conviscated. The teacher examined all the photo's on the phone and called the police who charged them.

the girls only shared the photo's within their own group, but they were charged with production, possession and distribution of child pornography. Nothing happened to the pervy teacher.

There is something seriously messed up with that scenario. I think too often we apply adult rules to kids.

Then again, there have vbeen cases of teenage girls sending naked photo's to their boyfriends. is that child porn distribution? In this case it's definitely sexual, but do we really want to lock up a 13 year old girl and put her on a sex offenders list for that? It's a messed up and confused situation.

Grayson wrote: »

There was a case in the US where teenage girls were charged with making and distributing child pornography.

they has a sleepover and took photo's of each other on their phones. As far as I'm aware there was no nudity.

They mailed them to each other on their phones.

They then did something in school that involved their phones being conviscated. The teacher examined all the photo's on the phone and called the police who charged them.

the girls only shared the photo's within their own group, but they were charged with production, possession and distribution of child pornography. Nothing happened to the pervy teacher.

There is something seriously messed up with that scenario. I think too often we apply adult rules to kids.

Then again, there have vbeen cases of teenage girls sending naked photo's to their boyfriends. is that child porn distribution? In this case it's definitely sexual, but do we really want to lock up a 13 year old girl and put her on a sex offenders list for that? It's a messed up and confused situation.

There was also a case of a 14 year old boy who too a nake picture of himself and was done with possessino of child porn. And he never sent it to anyone.

I honestly think this is an over-reaction and prudish respone to somethign that involes ess ee ex.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Illegal? They're five years old! I was only joking wen Ic suggested the sex offenders register.

Wile not exactly ideal, it's probably pretty harmless although obviously something you don't want the kids to engage in.

Probably harmless? Sexual diseases are not harmless, oral sex is not normal even for heterosexual behaviour, so define "harmless"

nucker wrote: »

Probably harmless? Sexual diseases are not harmless, oral sex is not normal even for heterosexual behaviour, so define "harmless"

Harmless as in we're not talking about deranged perverts here. And who says oral sex is not normal behaveiour for hetrosexuals? What are you defining as "normal"?