I Live In a Sexless Marriage Forum & Chat Board | Sex exhibit at sci-tech museum causes furor

One of our local museums is getting an unexpected publicity boost because groups like "The Institute for Marriage and Family Canada" have condemmed this exhibit.  Sigh.  God forbid marriage and the family should have anything to do with sex. 

The full story, copied from the CBC website:

- - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - -  - - - - - -  - --  - -

"Canada's Science and Technology Museum in Ottawa has raised the age limit for admission to a controversial sex exhibit after dozens of complaints about the content.

As well, animated video informing children about ************ has been removed.

The moves followed complaints about the exhibit called Sex: A Tell-All Exhibition.

"The museum has received a higher-than-expected amount of expressions of concerns from the public," spokesman Yves St-Onge told Reuters.

“We take the feedback of our community seriously, and so we have carefully considered their suggestions, and taken appropriate action that we believe will best serve our audiences."

Not appropriate viewing without parents: Moore

Heritage Minister James Moore said during question period Thursday that he was invited to view the exhibit and expressed his concerns.

"I respect the independence of the museum, but they asked me my opinion, and in my opinion it's not appropriate for young underage children to be exposed to sexually explicit material without the consent of their parents," said Moore.

"I've made my views known, it's up to the museum to decide now where they go," said Moore.

Moore's spokesman, James Maunder, had earlier said the purpose of the Museum of Science and Technology is to foster scientific and technological literacy.

"It is clear this exhibit does not fit within that mandate," Maunder told CBC News. "Its content cannot be defended, and is insulting to taxpayers."

The age of admission has been raised to 16 from 12.

The exhibit was originally produced for the Montreal Science Centre.

The exhibition is interactive, and includes videos of couples kissing pasionately and large photographs of penises and clitorises. It also explores puberty and hormonal changes, contraception and how to say no to sexual advances in language teens understand.

Parent changes mind after viewing exhibit

Suzanne Watson of Russell, Ont., said she had written to her children's Catholic school board to ask them to ban tours of the exhibit and also threatened to cancel her membership at the museum after hearing negative reviews of the exhibit.

But Watson, who describes herself as a pro-life mother of five who advocates abstinence to her own children, said she revised her opinion after seeing the exhibit.

"I like the fact it's telling children ... that we can say no — we can say no to sex — and there are other options and it talks about peer pressure and how to deal with that," said Watson.

Watson said she'll keep her membership at the museum, but said still believes schools shouldn't take children to it, saying it's something she thinks parents should do instead.

Mylene Côté, 18, was also touring the exhibit on Thursday, was unfazed by what she saw.

"I think they're showing us healthy sexuality ...they aren't sexualizing it," said Côté. "I mean they're showing the facts, we all have bodies and we all go through this stuff."

The Institute for Marriage and Family Canada, which visited the show last week, also complained, saying it believes the "erotic and titillating" exhibit doesn't belong in a museum.

Dave Quist, the institute's director, said the exhibit approves and promotes anal sex, multiple partners and sex without emotional and marital commitment."

 

Gah, these things make you despair of the human race sometimes.  Sigh indeed.

I was struck by the person who thought it was OK even though they were "conservative" - on the basis that it was in part emphasising a saying-no message.

And I wondered if the glorification of that kool-aid has in fact been infectious and damaging - at least providing some self-justification for refusers.

 

I dunno hl, I can't see too many refusers ponying up the admission price !!

Tread your own path.

 

Yeh, you're right Bazz, they're most likely admirers of parthenogenesis and have no interest in spending any time on the sticky stuff, especially if they have to pay.

 

Maybe our Ottawa ILIASM group will do a field-trip to the Science & Tech museum, and evaluate this for ourselves.
: )

 

Even better, it might be a way of smoking out a prospective partner if a refuser by taking them along and observing their reaction!

 

What is seriously stupid about this whole thing is that they seem to believe that 12 year olds know nothing about sex. In this day and age of sex saturated advertising and an internet that has sex available just a keystroke away these people are seriously misinformed. Most 12 year olds could tell them things that would shock them down to their twisted little souls. But there is always a desire to censor sex and it should be just the opposite. The more factual information that's out there the better because then it will keep the misinformation and the lies from being accepted as facts. Part of the problem we have now is that people want to keep their kids completely in the dark about sex and then say OK you are married now you can have sex. How's that supposed to work? It surely would result in some really crappy sex. Sex should be a part of every humans education and they should know it all so that they can make intelligent decisions about what they will do in their own lives. This is a personal matter and should be open to personal choices not dictated by anyone else. We insist on trying to keep so called children in the dark yet in earlier days those same so called children would have been married and already been having children of their own. Our idea of protracted babyhood does a disservice to young people who are intelligent and capable of thought. Sexual material presented in a forthright and truthful manner is neither pornographic nor the sleazy stuff that many of these prudes would label it. It's just useful information and should be freely available. Perhaps if we were a little less hung up about censoring sex and making it "Dirty" there would be less of a problem with these freaks we call refusers.

 

WP, I remember knowing at the age of 5 that I was sexual.  Not in the sense of either wanting or being able to express that, but having that orientation.

Consequently, I was NEVER innocent, only ignorant.  And the ignorance cost me too, and the lack of information - even at a basic biological level.

I think it's wildly irresponsible to restrict this information, granted that you would want to mediate the messages - but ain't that what being an involved parent is?  Not having some idealised notion of the purity of kids, and trying to protect them from something they're all too eager to find out about- with good reason!

The only thing I hope to do is give them full information plus the tools to make good choices.

 

This has been a hot topic on the news and at work today! 

My 8-year old has already had questions - she's heard things in the schoolyard about sex ALREADY - and I am SO HAPPY she talks with ME about it! I want her to grow up confident and owning her own sexuality, whatever that may be, and I do NOT want her to feel it is something to NOT talk about like in my family.

I will not be taking her as it is for older kids, but I will certainly welcome an ILIASM field trip LOL!

 

I despair of society when it is unwilling or unable to look at the honest and factual elements of sex and not to judge this through puritanical societal mores.

I wonder if the same people who are so aghast about this exhibition would demonstrate the same outrage had the museum chosen a war exhibit.   I wouldn't be surprised if violent death and suffering are acceptable, whereas healthy sex is not . . . !!

The points about ignorance are well founded IMO.  Having taught adolescents over the years, I am continually amazed at both their levels of knowledge and their levels of ignorance.  At one time,  I was showing a group of fourteen year old boys the Robert Winston series "The Human Body" in Science.   One of the boys wanted to ask a question after the episode about "human reproduction".  I was well primed for the usual questions devised to embarass me (the teacher) and expected one of this nature.

However, this boy asked, in all seriousness: "Miss, when a man sticks his **** in a woman, where do the bosoms go?"   Fortunnately I realised that, whilst about half the class were sniggering, the other half were waiting for my answer . . .   Well, what do you say?!!  I said "The boobs just flop over to the side."   This concise scientific response caused my Classroom Aide huge mirth!!

After further discussion, it was clear that the boy (and some others) thought that there would need to be a corresponding concave aspect to the male body to accommodate the (presumably rigid) breasts! a bit like fitting Lego pieces together!!

The comments and questions like this revealed to me that, whilst some students had a knowledge of sexuality that far exceeded my own ( I recall one young man explaining "*******" to me!), many of them were not only ignorant about sexuality but also about their bodies.

Exhibitions like this are extremely useful and valuable resources in addressing these issues.  So sad that some people see this as unhelpful. . . . .

 

You make a highly relevant point SA.

In my jurisdiction there are similar 'single policy' organisations with names like "The Institute of Family Studies" or some other grandiose and misleading title.

Pushing their single policy barrows in front of the nearest tv camera for a 5 second grab of airtime.

They are "against" many many things, and "for" very little that is identifiable.

As ever, such groups are well entitled to put their view forward, but having done so it is incumbent upon them to then defend their position by way of rational debate.

This is where it usually goes guts up. The concept of free speech is only observed partially. They embrace the concept of saying what they like, but reject the other bit where rational reasoning is required to back up what they say.

A bit like dysfunctional marriages in some ways. "I accept this part of the deal, but not those parts"

Tread your own path.

 

Enna, Ottawa has a War Museum, so no problem here with presenting military exhibits. 

We also have a Museum of Nature - perhaps that would have been a more appropriate venue, but probably the Institute of Marriage and Family would have said sex isn't natural.  Besides the Museum of Nature is busy with a big whale exhibit (Whale of a big exhibit?) 

Maybe the Museum of Civilization would have worked out better.  A recent exhibit there was "God:  a user's manual". 

The part I don't get is this exhibit was last presented in Regina, and apparently no one got hot and bothered about it.  Regina!  Saskatchewan!   (And no, that's not a sneeze, that's a Canadian Province - the rectangular one in the middle of the country.)
 

 

" probably the Institute of Marriage and Family would have said sex isn't natural. "

So very true!!   lol

 

I am fairly conservative in  my attitude concerning sexuality, but i believe  correct information for our youth  is better than  them being  sexually ignorant and just guessing.

  Today's kids are very sexually active and at a very early age, and need correct information. Pretending they are not sexually active helps no one, and is especially harmful to the kids,

What i also find troubling is that   To me, to  be  a well adjusted adult, requires an understanding that sexuality is a normal expression shared by normal adults.. a sexual life is  important  to having a full and complete l;life. But i think there are a lot of adults out there, that are very  sexually mal -adjusted  adults. and it is this kind of attitude..expressed by the community that breeds this prudishness concerning sexuality.. It infers that prudishness is desirable and normal, and should be encouraged.