When boys only learn about male bodies and girls only about female bodies, ignorance breeds misinformation. Boys who understand menstruation are less likely to tease or feel disgusted. Girls who understand erections are less likely to feel confused or ashamed of male partners later.
The film is a documentary-style educational video designed to be shown in classrooms or watched by families. It covers the biological and emotional changes that occur during puberty.
Key Topics Covered:
If you are a parent or teacher looking for resources similar in spirit to Sexuele Voorlichting, here are guiding principles:
Part 1: The Announcement
For thirteen-year-old Luna van der Berg, the world was divided into two eras: Before the Letter and After the Letter.
The Letter arrived home on a Tuesday, tucked inside a plain white envelope stamped with the school’s logo. Her mother, Marijke, read it while stirring a pot of pea soup. “Ah,” she said with the casual tone of someone discussing the weather. “Next week is voorlichting. The puberty block. You’ll learn about periods, erections, and how to say ‘no’ without hurting someone’s feelings.”
Luna wanted to sink into the linoleum floor. “Mam. Please. Stop using the actual words.”
Her mother just laughed. “What else would I use? The ‘special flower’ talk? You’re not a tulip, Luna. You’re a person.”
That was the thing about growing up in Utrecht. Sex education wasn’t a single, horrifying gym-class video. It was voorlichting—literally “lighting the way.” It started in groep 7 with basic anatomy, continued in groep 8 with consent as a game (asking to borrow a pencil, then escalating to a hug), and now, in the first year of secondary school, it was about feelings. The messy, glorious, humiliating feelings.
Luna’s best friend, Finn, texted her that night: Did your parents get the letter? My dad said he’d ‘demonstrate how to put a condom on a cucumber’ and I almost moved to Belgium.
Luna replied: At least a cucumber is a vegetable. My mom compared me to a tulip. I’m in hell.
But she wasn’t in hell. She was in Ms. Hendriks’ biology classroom, and that was worse.
Part 2: The Lessons
Ms. Hendriks was a legend. She was sixty-two, wore cardigans with planets on them, and had zero shame. On Monday, she drew a giant diagram of the reproductive system on the board. “This is not a secret,” she announced. “This is plumbing. Fascinating plumbing, but plumbing nonetheless. If you giggle, you owe the class a cookie.”
No one giggled. The threat of public carbohydrate debt was too severe.
But Wednesday was different. Wednesday was the relationship day.
Ms. Hendriks dimmed the lights and pulled up a slide that read: Relationships: More Than Just a Mutual Interest in Each Other’s Genitals.
“By now,” she said, “some of you have had a crush. Some of you have held hands. Some of you have had a full-blown romantic storyline in your head that the other person knows nothing about.” Her eyes twinkled. “That last one is called a ‘situationship with your own imagination.’ It’s very common.”
The class laughed nervously. Luna felt her cheeks burn. Because Ms. Hendriks had just described the past six months of her life.
The crush was on a boy named Sven de Wit.
Sven was not the obvious choice. He wasn’t the loud football captain or the brooding artist. He was the quiet one who sat two rows over, the one who fixed the broken leg of the class pet’s cage with duct tape and a piece of a ruler. He had a soft laugh and hands that were always stained with ink from his fountain pen. Last week, during a fire drill, he had held the door open for Luna and said, “After you.” Just that. After you. Three words that replayed in her head on an endless, torturous loop.
Part 3: The Exercise
Ms. Hendriks handed out slips of paper. “We’re going to do an anonymous question box,” she said. “Write down anything about puberty, relationships, or sex that confuses you. No names. I’ll read them aloud.”
The questions started safe: Why do voices crack? Is it normal to not have a period yet?
Then came the ones that made the room go quiet: How do you know if someone likes you back? What if you’re afraid of rejection?
Ms. Hendriks read the last one slowly. “This is the core of it, isn’t it?” she said. “Fear. The bravest thing you can do is be honest. But voorlichtung isn’t just about biology. It’s about lighting the path to that honesty. So here’s your homework: For one week, pay attention to how you feel when you’re around a person you admire. Not what you think you should feel. What you actually feel. Write it down. It’s not a confession. It’s data.”
Data. Luna could do data.
Part 4: The Data
That afternoon, she sat in the library with a notebook. Finn plopped down beside her. “What are you doing?”
“Collecting data on my feelings for Sven.”
Finn blinked. “That’s either the most autistic or the most Dutch thing I’ve ever heard. I’m in. What’s the hypothesis?”
Luna bit her pen. “Hypothesis: The feeling in my chest when he walks into the room is not, in fact, a fatal arrhythmia.”
For the next four days, she observed. She noted:
On Friday, during a group project about ecosystems, she got paired with him. Her hands went cold. He just smiled. “Hey. I’m glad I’m with you. You actually do the work.”
They spent forty minutes drawing a food web. Their elbows touched twice. Luna recorded the second touch in her head: Elbow contact, 0.8 seconds. Mutual, not accidental. No retraction. Hypothesis gaining weight.
Part 5: The Confrontation
The final day of the voorlichting block, Ms. Hendriks asked them to form a circle. “Today is about communication,” she said. “We’re going to practice saying what we need. Not what we want the other person to hear. What we actually need.”
She went around the circle. One girl said, “I need my friends to stop asking if I’ve kissed anyone yet.” One boy said, “I need permission to not be ready.”
When it was Luna’s turn, her throat closed up. She looked at her notebook. The data. The truth.
“I need,” she said, her voice a whisper, “to know if it’s okay to tell someone you like them even if you’re terrified they don’t like you back.”
The room was silent. Ms. Hendriks nodded. “That’s not a need, Luna. That’s a question. The need is underneath it.” She waited.
Luna took a breath. “I need… to feel brave enough to be rejected.”
Ms. Hendriks smiled. “There it is.”
And then, from across the circle, Sven de Wit spoke. He didn’t raise his hand. He just said, quietly, “I need the same thing.” When boys only learn about male bodies and
Their eyes met. For a full three seconds, the rest of the class dissolved. No one snickered. No one whispered. Even Finn held still.
Part 6: The Aftermath
After the bell, Luna packed her bag slowly. She was the last one out. In the hallway, leaning against the lockers, was Sven. He was fiddling with his fountain pen.
“Hey,” he said.
“Hey,” she said.
A long pause. The fluorescent lights hummed.
“So,” he said. “The data.”
Luna’s stomach flipped. “You heard that?”
“Finn has a loud whisper.” He smiled, then looked at his shoes. “For the record, when you’re in the room, I also perceive a change in the quality of light.”
It was the most romantic thing anyone had ever said to her.
She thought about Ms. Hendriks’ lessons. About consent, about bravery, about the difference between a crush and a connection. She thought about her mother’s tulip analogy and decided it wasn’t so stupid after all—tulips, after all, grow toward the light.
“I don’t have a script for this,” Luna admitted.
Sven held out his hand, palm up. An offer, not a demand. “We can write one together.”
She placed her hand in his. It was warm. It was terrifying. It was exactly the right amount of brave.
Part 7: The Epilogue – A Few Weeks Later
Ms. Hendriks found a note on her desk after class. It was written on a torn piece of notebook paper, in two different handwritings.
Ms. Hendriks –
Thank you for the voorlichting. We used the communication worksheet. It was less awkward than we expected.
Data point: A first handshake that lasts 4.7 seconds can turn into a first real kiss after 2.3 seconds of mutual, verbal consent.
We are lighting the way.
– Luna & Sven
P.S. No cucumbers were harmed in the making of this relationship. Overlap:
Ms. Hendriks smiled, pinned the note to her bulletin board, and wrote at the bottom: A+.
Seksuele Voorlichting (1991) is a Belgian educational documentary directed by Ronald Deronge that serves as a pedagogical tool instructing adolescents on the biological and emotional changes of puberty. The 28-minute film uses characters Els and Jan to guide viewers through anatomy, personal health, and relationships, reflecting a frank, 1990s approach to European sex education.
Sexuele Voorlichting (1991), also known as Puberty: Sexual Education for Boys and Girls, is a Belgian documentary that aims to provide instructional information on human sexual development from infancy through puberty. Released by Studio Landstar Films, the video has gained modern notoriety and controversy for its explicit and unconventional approach to sex education. Overview of Content
The documentary follows a young boy named Els who narratively introduces his family and discusses biological and anatomical changes. Key topics covered in the production include:
Anatomy and Development: Detailed focus on male and female genitalia.
Puberty: Explanations of physical changes, including menstruation and ejaculation.
Sexual Health: Discussions on hygiene, masturbation, and the process of giving birth. Controversial Approach
Unlike typical educational films of that era which often used diagrams or "innocuous line drawings," Sexuele Voorlichting uses abundant real-life nudity and explicit demonstrations to convey its message.
Explicit Material: It features full-frontal nudity and a demonstration of reproductive sex by an adult couple.
Critical Reception: Reviewers on platforms like IMDb have noted that while it purports to be pedagogical, its depiction of underage actors and explicit scenes can feel exploitative rather than instructive.
Educational Context: Despite the graphic nature, some viewers find it a "straightforward documentary" for its genre, though it has been criticized for outdated health advice, such as a scene showing a pregnant woman consuming alcohol. Availability
While parts of the film or its script (SRT files) are occasionally found on platforms like Scribd or referenced on MUBI, it is not widely available on mainstream streaming services due to its graphic content. Sexuele voorlichting (Video 1991)
The 1991 film you are referring to is titled Seksuele Voorlichting Puberty: Sexual Education for Boys and Girls ), directed by Ronald Deronge.
It is a Belgian documentary that aims to educate preteens (ages 11+) on puberty and sexual development through explicit visual demonstrations and informal discussions. While it purports to be an educational tool, it has remained controversial due to its graphic depiction of nudity and sexual health topics. Film Overview and Topics
The documentary is approximately 28 minutes long and covers a wide range of sexual health and biological topics: Biological Development
: Anatomy of infants, children, and adolescents, including physical changes during puberty. Sexual Hygiene
: Detailed hygiene practices for uncircumcised boys and menstruation care for girls. Sexual Health & Behavior
: Discussions and demonstrations related to masturbation, wet dreams, erections, and the proper use of birth control and tampons. Reproduction
: The film includes segments on sexual intercourse (demonstrated by adults) and childbirth. Context and Availability Production
: Produced in Belgium with an amateur cast, the film uses a "normal family" setting to present topics sequentially. Narrative Style
: It is narrated by teenagers in the original Dutch/Flemish and was released with English subtitles for international audiences. Viewership : While listed on platforms like Letterboxd
, it is frequently "not available to watch" on mainstream streaming services due to its explicit nature. Critical Reception : Reviews on In 1991 English-language materials
Knowledge reduces vulnerability. A boy or girl who knows proper names for body parts and understands that no one should touch them without consent is better equipped to report abuse.
In 1991 English-language materials, terms like “VD” (venereal disease) were still used alongside “STD.” “HIV-positive” was well understood by 1991. The word “gay” appeared rarely in school materials; when it did, it was clinical (“homosexual”). The concept of transgender was absent from puberty education. “Consent” was not yet a standard lesson (it began entering curricula in the late 1990s/2000s).