Winkles & Winkies

Having spent a considerable amount of time on recent Protective Behaviours training days with Early Years practitioners talking about the barriers that some people experience or think they might encounter teaching children the correct anatomical names for their 'private parts', I agreed to start a forum discussion about this - and now wondering why I didn't do this sooner.

I feel really excited about what is hopefully about to ensue as I know Ann & Judith will have lots of fantastic ideas and anecdotes to share with our wider PBPeople community - I'm also hoping this will draw more PBPeople into the discussion – Hi Anna, Beth & Paula.

For my part, the names Mary & Peter always bring a smirk to my face as these were the names my mum gave to my vagina and my brother’s penis. You can imagine the look on my face the first time I ever met a person called Mary or Peter :ohmy: (Must remember to ask her where this idea came from).

I’m also aware that some people might say ‘it’s not a vagina, it’s a vulva’ – at least this could be a way into a more productive biological discussion! And I’m also not insisting we tell children or parents they mustn’t use the word they’ve grown up with – it may well be called a ‘winkie’ or a ‘noo noo’ at home, but to ensure people have a chance of having shared meaning, lets agree to teach the correct anatomical names too.

The article in Let’s Talk magazine, one of Warwickshire’s Taking Care resources, has proved really helpful - thanks again Ann and I now make sure I have copies available for settings and parents to purchase on training.

Really looking forward to hearing your thoughts - think will also be one of our most engaging discussions :woohoo:

Cant resist....... The top one looks like a poo!
Agree we need to be using both correct anatomical names as well as people pet names.
When doing training related to sexual abuse disclosure we had some really fun games free thinking every name we knew to describe vagina, (vulva) , penis and sexual intercourse. By the end of the game we could use all the words without laughing or embarrassment. It certainly gave me some words I had never heard of. Most helpful. My name was simply down below!! Oh dear....

Hi. We are definitely in the encouraging correct terminology. We have our family words but I have explained that other people might not understand our words so if we are speaking with others we try and use the 'proper' words. When my eldest was 3 and we visited a nurse she said "I'll do this mum and I'll use the other word because she's a nurse!' My youngest, who is currently 3 has her own version which I think should replace the true anatomical name and become an acceptable term: "vaginasaur" - love it!!

Well, finally better late than never I have got around to 'penning' (typing doesn't sound so creative ) a response.

I do take a different view to some of you - more extreme perhaps. I believe we should aim to get rid of all 'pet' names for body parts as they confuse the issue for some children and there is no need for them.

Let's just teach children the correct names from day 1 then they don't have to learn twice. If we use 'pet' names we are reinforcing that there is something rude/ embarrassing/ wrong/ naughty about using the correct name. I believe it will be more difficult for a child to disclose using the 'correct' language if they are more familiar and comfortable using the 'pet' names.

We know that people who sexually offend against children choose children to groom who are not comfortable in talking about their bodies and who would be unlikely to use terminology that would be understood by anyone they may disclose to. If a child already knows a 'pet' name and the correct anatomical name (but they are not used to using and saying that correct name out loud) surely they are more vulnerable to another 'pet' name being added to their vocabulary? This plays into the hands of people who want to groom children for sexual abuse because they rely on teaching/ using language for body parts and sexual acts which will be misunderstood if a disclosure were made.

To talk feely and confidently we need to be very familiar with the language we are using. To be familiar with language we need to be using it regularly. Using any 'pet names' interferes with that confidence and heightens vulnerability.

You'll not be surprised (I'm sure!) to hear I have strong views about never using any 'baby' language with children. Woof woofs, baa lambs and moo moos are way off my radar. A dog who says 'woof', a lamb who says 'baa' and a cow who goes 'moo' is much more like it

If anyone reading this post would like a copy of the parent magazine 'Let's Talk' which has a large section on 'Talking about our Bodies' I'd be happy for them to get in touch via the PBTP website or a reply to this post.

Interesting article in news today backing up our view. I have made contact with the MP directly asking her to get in touch as we have been so successful here in Warwickshire

www.itv.com/news/2016-03-04/tory-mp-call...-in-primary-schools/

Changes are afoot.....I hope.....

Would like this guidance to go further in terms of not waiting 'til age of 5. People working in pre school settings are regularly involved in 'toilet-training' so have many opportunities to use the correct anatomical names
SA