I was reading the Sunday Straits Times during dinner. Specifically, it was an article on sex education in Malaysia.
DEBATE: Let’s talk about sex
ARNI ABDUL RAZAK
Does sex education belong in public schools? Academicians and medical practitioners wrestle with different perspectives on a very touchy subject.
When the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development recently announced its intention to introduce sex education in schools, it raised a few eyebrows.
While some academicians and medical practitioners feel that sex education in schools is long overdue, others think that it is not necessary, saying that all religions have guidelines on matters relating to sex.
Nothing new about this issue. The writer was merely presenting the opinions of academicians and experts, from both sides of the divide.
A few paragraphs later, someone even raised a few very valid points:
Dr Kamaruzaman, who is also chairman of the Federation of Family Planning Associations Malaysia, explains that what most people don’t understand is that sex education does not concentrate on lovemaking.
Reproduction and contraception, STDs, homosexual and heterosexual relationships as well as adolescent issues of teenage pregnancy and puberty are matters that should be discussed in sex education.
I was getting quite a good impression of the learned personalities in this field.
But of course, never count your eggs before they hatched.
Towards the end of the article, this appeared:
Psychologists agree that children learn so much during the first 12 years of their life, deemed as the “crucial” stage.
What children learn during this period will determine their lives as adults.
Dr Ong (a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist) provides an example.
If a son is closer to his mother while he was growing up, chances are that he will grow up to be effeminate.
The father must step in and teach his son to be a man — play football, be a little tough in sports and such. Parents must inspire the boy to want to grow up to be like dad.
The son can play all the football or sports he wants and still be effeminate. Or gay, even.
He can also be academically-inclined and not touch a football with a ten feet pole, yet be masculine.
Clearly, I have a beef to pick with that last sentence there.
In this age of sexual equality and breaking down of gender roles, that is not a very appropriate example.
If I were inspired to grow up to be like my dad, I would be very different from what I am today.
I would never lift a hand to do household chores.
I would be in front of the telly after work. Every day.
I would watch English Premier League matches till midnight on weekends.
I would also wake up in the wee hours of the morning to catch World Cup or Euro matches.
I would be extremely cautious and risk-adverse. Every other activity besides eating, sleeping and working is dangerous. Which means no hiking, snorkelling, squash, etc.
I would not trust anyone. I would think that people are out to get me and they have ulterior motives when they show kindness.
I would have the man-of-the-house, the-one-wearing-the-pants-in-the-family kind of attitude. Uncompromising and unyielding.
I would be stubborn and unwilling to admit mistakes.
I would be jumping to conclusions when I have not even heard half the story.
I would have immense difficulty seeing something from another person’s point of view. In short, unempathetic.
I would never listen to other people’s opinion and always think that I am right.
I would have dreadful taste in fashion and décor. Or anything that needs aesthetic valuation.
Last but not least, I would be straight. Eckk.