1

I know I might sound all motherly and such, but isn’t articles about “How to kiss in elementary school” too much? I mean, what kids would want to kiss? At my age, we always thought "Ew cooties! and that was it. We didn’t even notice boys until we were in late middle school. 

What are your opinions about this?

2

I absolutely agree. Children in grade school are still really small not to read articles about "how to properly kiss " Transfer to middle school , it’s the right time because they are more mature, and I dare say that in most cases knows what they are doing.:slight_smile:

3

“Elementary school” and “middle school” are generic terms that differ from place to place. What’s considered an elementary or middle school in your state or part of the world may differ from someone else’s. 

That said, the article  http://www.wikihow.com/Kiss-Someone-in-Elementary-School specifically states it is for people in 6th-8th grade; again, this varies from location to location but in the U.S. is generally age 11-16 or so, and most of these articles are sensitive about describing these activities to young children, which is why they will typically add age or grade disclaimers or, like this articles does, state in the warnings:

  • You may want to just kiss her on the cheek. Lip kissing may be too much for this age.

Beyond all of that, there isn’t anything about these articles that violate any aspect of the Deletion Policy. We have tons of articles that some people “don’t like” or don’t think are appropriate for them or wouldn’t advise their children to do so. As a community, we have decided that we err on the side of usefulness and providing accurate information for those seeking it. 

In an age where young children, I’m talking not even old enough to read, are comfortable using smartphones, tablets, and computers, it seems like making a comparison about “when I was that age” is hardly relevant to most situations. When I was that age, the Internet and smartphones didn’t exist. It is up to parents to parent their children and observe what they do online, not wikiHow.

4

The title is kinda confusing though because some of the tips and warnings talk about 5th graders, which could vary in different parts of the world, like you said, so somebody might get confused.  The article states that you could use the article “even if you’re in 6-8 grade” so any youth could use the article regardless of grade level, its not just for younger kids. Shouldn’t the title be changed to something more general, like “how to kiss for youths” or something like that?

5

I’d say the title should be changed since this is talking about 5th-8th grade youths.

6

Nah, I wouldn’t change the title, especially to “Kiss for Youths” because it is too general. We have this article  http://www.wikihow.com/Kiss-at-a-Young-Age , which would be considered a duplicate if the title were changed, as well as many others that are more specific in the category  wikihow.com/index.php?title=Category:Kissing-(Youth)&viewMode=text

If we start by changing one title, others will have to be shifted and I don’t think there is really much confusion about this. Any confusion could be cleared up simply by editing the article to include the relevant information.

7

I tried to raise similar issues a LONG time ago. You are on a hiding to nothing protesting about this sort of thing. You are not alone. There are wikiHow users who think under 16s shouldn’t be encouraged to flirt, date, kiss passionately, form quasi-serious relationships etc but we’re in the minority. Many wikiHow users will argue that children will do all these things any way and that the internet and the media in general provide them with all manner of inappropriate advice but my point has always been that articles with specified ages are TARGETED at children. Post watershed TV shows and magazines such as Cosmopolitan, music videos and video games, whilst they have appeal to children are not intentionally targeted at them, but that argument doesn’t cut it here and no action has been taken to remove these types of articles. I’ve tried to clean up a couple, but, there’s always the risk that a mentally immature 16 year old will think that their advice on kissing, dating, sex etc is useful to an 11 year old and that the articles will be continually adjust back to what mature adults would generally consider to be inappropriate for children.

8

I agree 100% HumanBeing. Too make things slightly worse, I’m pretty sure all of the “Youth dating” articles are heteronormative, which is harmful to LGBTQ youth. It might give them the impression that their sexuality is “fake” or “that they should be straight” which could be very damaging. If there are no articles for gay youth, then I know there is none for aromantic or asexual youth, which is twice as damaging because it’s pretty much saying “If you dont experience attraction, you’re broken”

I mean, jesus christ, it’s gross to see how much  the media inflicts romance and all this other stuff. I can see that with shows like degrassi, because mainly older teens watch that show but with shows like Icarly and victorious with younger audiences watching them, It’s like “Really?” I swear, every show with younger audiences has done the whole “girl likes boy and love triangle and other complicated relationships” thing and it gets so repetitive as if they HAVE a secret agenda.

I think I even saw article in the youth dating category on how to hook up with somebody. If this is what goes through children’s minds, I feel like we should all be very worried because something’s not right.

I wouldn’t even be surprised if a 10 year old reads cosmopolitan now since this generation is so corrupted, they think things that they should probably wait on applies to them at such a young age.    

9

I’m probably going to sound like a rebellious, disrespectful adolescent, but please allow me to express my opinion. It’s a fact that times have changed. Younger children grow up faster and feel the curiosity and the desire to explore much eariler than, perhaps, their parents or their older siblings did. This, however, doesn’t mean that our generation is corrupted. It just means that we’re mentally developing, or growing up faster. So I say that the titles of these articles shouldn’t be changed and nothing should be deleted yet.

10

Point taken @Worldsgreatestnerd and well said. Times indeed change. There was a time a fourteen year old had to work for a living, knew how to cook, clean and care for younger siblings and didn’t have a right to an education, granted, that was the 19th century, things have, mercifully, changed since then. Today’s under 16s are, largely, dependent on a parent and incapable of making good life choices, for the long term. They worry about who’s got a crush on who, whether or not at boy looked at them and other pointless trivia, because society says they should! Where is the desire to explore coming from? Does a child who has never heard of French Kissing wake up one morning and decide they want to try sticking their tongue into someone’s mouth? You can only be curious about what you have access to. Some of your generation, which is everyone 25 and under incidentally, has been corrupted. They yearn for what they are told to yearn for, letting things develop naturally just doesn’t happen. Be perfect, look perfect, have the perfect date. @Jax Smith is right, everything seems to need a definition today. Why can’t things just be? I disagree that any generation in the last 100 years has developed mentally faster. Childhood suicide rates are higher than ever now, if children had developed mentally, at a natural pace, surely this wouldn’t be an issue? Bullying too, do well balanced, mature, mentally developed youngsters bully? No, but bullying now is practically epidemic. Childhood obesity, there’s another one, little Johnny is mature enough to have a girlfriend but too stupid not to stuff his fat face with chips and cookies all day? I think these articles should be written for over 13 year olds only and be entirely factual with no conjecture, assumptions or opinions.

11

@Jax_Smith You do understand that you have the power to edit heteronormative articles, yes? And even make new ones? WikiHow is still WIKI how even if the community has expressed in the past that articles like this do have a place on the site.

12

I think the articles are fine. People do date and kiss in elementary school (ages 5-11). I had my first boyfriend in kindergarten and had my first serious kiss in third grade. They are fine and are highly useful to kids who are looking for the topic. Even though you have to be 13+ to be on wikiHow, little kids do come on here and their is nothing anyone can do about it. WikiHow is better of embracing their audience of all ages and provide articles for everyone, even if they might be questionable to some people.   

13

^ To echo Rhi’so comment, it’s not our job to be the Internet police. It’s our job to provide safe methods of doing things for people of all ages.

14

@Marina

I understand how wikis work because frankly I’ve used and had a wikipedia account for over 2 years. But thanks for the reminder.

@Worldsgreatestnerd

I understand where you’re coming from, but why are these kids “growing up so fast” when the media and all this other internet stuff is being shoved down kids throat? They’re literally TARGETING children. I mean, if these kids aren’t corrupted then I don’t know any other words for it. I think brainwashing would be a great word for it too. Like HumanBeing said, what kid would wake up and want to french kiss? 

@Rhi0410

If kids are actually kissing in kindergarten then parents need to step up their game, because that’s ridiculous. I worked in a daycare at one time, and some of the kids said they were “dating” eachother but at the very most all they did was hug or play together at play time. I think its almost impossible for anyone under 13 to even be considered “mentally mature enough” for a relationship, let alone elementary school kids! 

These are just my opinions though, I know others have very different opinions from me. Sorry if I offend!

15

@HumanBeing said: “Childhood obesity, there’s another one, little Johnny is mature enough to have a girlfriend but too stupid not to stuff his fat face with chips and cookies all day?”

I actually can’t believe this statement was made; it shows that you have no understanding or appreciation for childhood obesity and its root causes if you think it is as simple as a kid being too stupid not to eat junk food all day.

Ridiculous!

16

It really seems like we’ve gone past discussing the issue of why we allow these types of articles on wikiHow. Now we’re on the part where we talk about how the world is different now, and different for the worse, and next will be the part when we are doomed… all of which has very little to do with wikiHow. Unless you think wikiHow is the reason…

By the way, we have tons of non-heteronormative articles, on LGBT dating for teens and much more, if you care to search for them, you’ll find that they are actually pretty helpful articles. They aren’t in the youth dating category because they fit better into an LGBT category, but they are definitely there. And we have articles on being asexual and aromantic.

I’d like to kindly suggest that we veer back on topic on this thread. If you want to debate how different the world is now, or what parents should or should not be doing, or whether kids should kiss, we can do that on General Chat. The articles don’t violate our community adopted policy, so where are we going with this discussion?

17

+1. @HumanBeing , I understand what you’re saying, but a child’s intelligence can’t be judged on the basis of SOME of their actions. Just because a child chooses to eat junk food doesn’t automatically make them stupid. What about adults who indulge in food packed with calories? Also, elementary school relationships aren’t really seen as a sign of maturity, in any way. People usually see them as adorable and innocent. To get back on topic, I’m gonna repeat myself by saying that I feel as if these articles shouldn’t be deleted and should remain unaltered.

18

@Isorhythmic I wouldn’t say that wikihow is the cause of the world ending cause thats just silly, but wikihow could be influencing kids on things they haven’t even known about naturally. Which isn’t wikihows fault, wikihow is doing what wikihows goal is, I understand that. And I am willing to help wikihow get to said goal. But, sometimes I draw the line with some articles and the way they are presented to people, and I turn into a little bit of a critic. I’m not one to scream my opinion from the rooftops, but I had to say just something. Sorry about the whole topic going out of control, I tried sticking to the article but I lead the debate on to more general and wide spread areas that caused an even bigger debate. Once again, I apologize! I don’t think this debate should be moved to another category because it will just go on and on, closing the discussion will probably be best.