At What Age?

[tenni]

In my province of Ontario, it has just been announced that the provincial wide school education curriculum will begin to discuss sexual orientation at the grade 3 level. (age 8 or 9) I'm sure that it will be broken down and introduced in a simple manner suitable for the age. It will be built on in following years. I believe that sex education may begin in grade one but that is more likely body gender awareness education.

What are your thoughts on the beginning of formal school discussions about sexual orientation?

[wildwestgoob]

WOW.. third grade???

I think it should wait till puberty sets in at LEAST... but that's just ME.

Now I know there are all kinds of degrees of "sex education"... from the mundane and generic to the more explicit.... but c'mon, cant we just let em be kids for a while?

:eek:

[tenni]

Just so you know how simple the present curriculum is and it isn't identified as a "sex curriculum" but part of the Health curriculm. It is quite basic and connected to other aspects. I think that this would be the part of the curriculum.

Present curriculum
Grade 1
Growth and Development
– describe simple life cycles of plants and
animals, including humans;
– recognize that rest, food, and exercise affect
growth;
– identify the major parts of the body by
their proper names;

Grade 2
Growth and Development
– distinguish the similarities and differences
between themselves and others (e.g., in
terms of body size or gender);
– describe how germs are transmitted and
how this relates to personal hygiene
(e.g., using tissues,washing hands before
eating);
– identify the five senses and describe how
each functions;


grade 3
Growth and Development
– outline the basic human and animal reproductive
processes (e.g., the union of egg
and sperm);
– describe basic changes in growth and
development from birth to childhood
(e.g., changes to teeth, hair, feet, and
height);

[cliffordmontero]

Personally I learned in detail where babies come from the summer after kindergarten . . . but not really about sex . . . i was given a book about pregnancy, and told that a man gave sperm to the woman and then the egg was fertilized . . . the book explained everything after the egg was fertilized for me . . . the whole process, including child birth . . . i remember feeling of pure horror when i realized that girls shoot a baby out of a hole that on the paper looked no bigger than a toothpick . . . i was like "why would anyone wanna do that" "thats has to hurt more than anything" "that would be like pooping a lumpy watermelon" "i am never having children" LOL

[TwylaTwobits]

Sounds to me like it's covered under Health Class which is how it's presented in American schools. It's a sad fact that no matter how we try to avoid acknowledging the issue...puberty is onsetting younger and younger all across the world. ( Earlier Puberty (http://www.center4research.org/children11.html) )

I see absolutely no problem with the curriculum you posted, Tenni, if parents want to get more detailed at home they can. Health class in school is where a lot kids first come to hear about the "birds and the bees" and they take their questions to their parents.

[tenni]

Yes it comes under Health but not necessarily a formal health class. Remember that sexual orientation will be added to grade 3 and that is not shown in the curriculum that I posted. Somewhere in grade 3, I wonder if heterosexual and gay will be introduced. I don't know if more sexual orientations will be introduced at that age or later on. I suspect that bisexual may not be introduced until later but time will tell. Since transgendered is not a sexual orientation, it may be introduced later but I suspect before grade 7. Remember that same sex marriage is legal in my province and country. There will be kids in school who have same sex parents who are married. A local newspaper has asked a question whether grade 3 is appropriate age to introduce sexual orientation and 42% say yes while 58% say grade three is not the grade.

[cliffordmontero]

Oh, and before anyone asks, my family gave me this material and answered nearly all my questions . . . i actually got in trouble cause i took the book to school . . . they considered medical diagrams of pregnant uteruses (uteri?) pornographic material

[TwylaTwobits]

Yes it comes under Health but not necessarily a formal health class. Remember that sexual orientation will be added to grade 3 and that is not shown in the curriculum that I posted. Somewhere in grade 3, I wonder if heterosexual and gay will be introduced. I don't know if more sexual orientations will be introduced at that age or later on. I suspect that bisexual may not be introduced until later but time will tell. Since transgendered is not a sexual orientation, it may be introduced later but I suspect before grade 7. Remember that same sex marriage is legal in my province and country. There will be kids in school who have same sex parents who are married. A local newspaper has asked a question whether grade 3 is appropriate age to introduce sexual orientation and 42% say yes while 58% say grade three is not the grade.

I certainly hope they include heterosexual and gay as both are completely normal, so is transgendered from what we are coming to know. For some reason a person is born into the wrong body, that's something that kids need to know about as well. I think grade 3 is very appropriate given all the reasons you listed. Kids need the information and the young mind is better able to process things than some expect.

So are you saying they will have a separate class just about sex? The reason I equated it to Health, is that Health class (one period a day about an hour) was where we learned about sex, the body, the prevention of AIDS/STD's and talked about unsafe sex leading to pregnancies resulting in the end of your childhood. I can remember specifically a film we were shown around grade 4 or 5 which is roughly 9-11 years of age in the US, the film clearly depicted the consequences of one tiny mistake. The film showed the teen girl going through the jeers of peers, eventually going to school as she was in her last trimester in a special school for unwed mothers to be. It showed how her friends got dressed up for dates and she was home with the baby. It showed how life passed her by while she was sitting home with the baby. Propaganda?? Yeah, but it was effective. Conversely, when AIDS prevention came about, every different class had material about the disease, it's origins, what was known about it, the side effects of it and how to prevent the spread of it.

[tenni]

Here is the present website.
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health18curr.pdf

How sex education is taught varies depending upon the age. Often in earlier years it may be connected to a theme in the class. It depends upon what strategies are used.

I didn't check but I think that some more formal sex education use to happen around grade 5 that dealt with menstration and wet dreams. Boys and girls were taught this by a public health nurse and separated but both received information about the opposite gender and their own. Sometimes, the kids may be separated and at other times taught together. Societies change and become more open. Still, I'm expecting menstration to be taught separately but I'm not sure.

Since sexual orientation is new to the curriculum, I expect them to introduce it simply. I'm sure that a lot of research is being done now discussing which pieces of information are introduced in grade 3 and beyond as well as how to present it. Adults sometimes get the wrong idea because they are thinking about everything connected to sexual orientation while kids are interested in just the basic information....ie sometimes boys like girls...sometime boys like boys. sometimes girls like boys. Sometimes girls like girls. (I guess that it would be simple enough to add sometimes they like both boys and girls). Most 8 and 9 year olds are somewhere between the yuck stage for the opposite gender...some are open about it...some secretly have crushes. I think that the KISS principle will be used but factual.

Kids at this age will use the word "homo", "fag" as a derrogatory statement to someone who they don't like without even knowing its real meaning sexually orientation wise. Some have a simple understanding but are really more interested in offending or putting down (even as a joke) someone their age.

[TwylaTwobits]

Yes, the KISS principle will probably be used. But only after they have many committee meetings regarding said curriculum with doctors/nurses, parents/activists who all want their side presented in a certain way.

Might be too late though....kids on the net....or reading a paper. They will always know more than you think. I would personally prefer that my children were taught enough to be safe but wouldn't want them given advice on which brand of rubber to use :)

Editing to list the ages of my children. Oldest 11, Middle 8, Youngest 6.

[tenni]

I suspect that a lot of educators and medical people have been discussing this in advance of the announcement. The Premier made the announcement today. His wife is actually a kindergarten teacher and so I don't think that this announcement is coming out of a left corner. He is quite pro education spending compared to some former leaders. Our education system is funded provincially rather than locally. Local taxes are collected but the dispersement is done equally on a provincial level to local school boards.

Parents and activists will have their say more at the individual school level if not already from the activists. Some parents tend to be slower understanding and it is often left up to individual school staff to explain how it is dealt with. There have been books in school libraries for decades about such titles as "Bobby has two daddies" etc. written for young kids.

Sometimes kids get information on the net but lack a deeper understanding. They sound like they know a lot but it is sometimes only surface knowledge without the details.

[bemyonlyone]

I keep forgetting that a lot of people here basically live as heterosexuals, and that's likely to affect their view on this.

I don't see anything wrong with teaching kids that some people fall in love with and marry the opposite sex, some the same sex, and some can love/marry both. Kids are exposed to heterosexuality at an early age. I see nothing wrong or indecent about teaching them that different kinds of love exist.

Why do people always treat non-heterosexuality as though it's all about sex? It's not as though anyone's going to discuss sex acts with kids. *shakes head*

[TwylaTwobits]

I keep forgetting that a lot of people here basically live as heterosexuals, and that's likely to affect their view on this.

I don't see anything wrong with teaching kids that some people fall in love with and marry the opposite sex, some the same sex, and some can love/marry both. Kids are exposed to heterosexuality at an early age. I see nothing wrong or indecent about teaching them that different kinds of love exist.

Why do people always treat non-heterosexuality as though it's all about sex? It's not as though anyone's going to discuss sex acts with kids. *shakes head*

I am a heterosexual and even I am offended by this post. There are many many bi men and women on this forum are not only out but out and proud. There are bi males in relationships with females but that doesn't mean they are living like a heterosexual. Just open your eyes and see how many posts reflect the issues and the resolutions to issues when people are balancing more than one sexual partner regardless of gender.

And finally the "why do people always" is a dangerous generalization. There are many here who realize that the just because bisexual has the word sex in it that it is not the whole thing. Do some research on the forums before you throw out statements that are only going to gain you a negative reaction.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

We're straying from the original subject here guys...
Some may argue that its safest to teach our kids and grand kids early about the ways of sex for safety sake, but I think 3 rd grade is a little young. Reminds me of the little kid in Kindergarten Cop. "Boys have penises, girls have Vaginas"

I believe kids should be taught about sex and love and lust, but good grief, they grow up too fast nowdays as it is. They dont have time to be kids because they are being treated like little mini-adults much too quickly, and thats such a shame..:( If this is being taught, then the parents have the right to give the go ahead on if they Want their child/children taught these things or not. But I say let them be kids for a little while longer. And on a bad note, most kids at 11 or 12 know more abour sex than most of us knew at 13 or 14 or more...
Some may hear "Ok class, let talk about sex" and the kid might retort, "Sure, whadda ya wanna know?"

Go outside and get dirty Playing fer Gods sakes..leave the adult shit behind for a while..go out and be a kid while ya still can.......:(
Cat

[TwylaTwobits]

Agreed Cat but when you actually look at the proposed curriculum it's about the existence of things. Kids these days are questioning earlier and earlier their orientations and having the information, imo, would be helpful. Especially if it came from an unbiased source. Just the facts, nothing slanted, just the facts.

[bisexualman]

My theory in raising my own kids was that you answer the question asked with as much information as is important to them. So when they ask a question, don't overwhelm them with too much information; just answer the question and let them ask more questions if they want.

Both of my kids took in different amounts and types of information at the same ages. So no time frame or curriculum is going to match any group of kids perfectly.

I personally was very curious, very aware of sex and reproduction, at a very early age. I began seriously asking at age 7. I went to the library and checked out books. I was very precocious.

Unfortunately, like some kids, I was molested and sexualized by age 8.
Not a surprise that I was sexually active by 9.

If we had had the curriculum proposed by Tenni in my school, I may have felt different about my sexual orientation at an earlier age. With more acceptance, I may actually have come out and been settled in my orientation by 25 instead of at 48. I already knew at age 6 I liked both boys and girls.

Know way to really know though.

I guess my point is that it is not so much the curriculum but the way it is presented and supported that will make a difference.

[bemyonlyone]

Whether you agree with it or not, for a great many people the subject is of a religious nature. I certainly would not want my son or daughter being taught something in public school that I believed to be sinful or against what God's plan is for us. That's not hate filled, and that's regardless of the particular issue being discussed.

If you believed that X was a sin (eating pickles, for instance) and yet your third grader was taught that eating pickles is ok, you would probably be upset. That's not hateful. That's just the nature of having a belief in the way you and your family should live their lives.

I'm not against sexual orientation being taught. But, I won't act shocked, nor will I blame people when they come out strongly against it.

Pasa

Why are you such an apologist for homophobic straight people? Ah, probably for the same reason you're a Republican.

And when I said living like a heterosexual, I mean espousing views that homophobic heteros would have, not being in a hetero relationship. Treating non-heterosexuality any differently from heterosexuality is by definition homophobic.

[TwylaTwobits]

and your response is in no way heterophobic? hmmmm. I have seen a lot of your posts and right now I did some research....I know why you were booted. Do us a favor and straighten up here and lay off the personal attacks or it might happen here as well. Til then it's best I ignore you before I go off on you. Maybe when you stop being part this and part that, you will be a whole person who can actually understand there are always many sides to different issues.

[bemyonlyone]

Part this and part that? Okay then...

I am a whole person, thanks. And I have nothing against heterosexual people (I'm in love with one, actually), only against homophobic heterosexual people.

I should have qualified what I said by saying homophobic heterosexual. Sorry.

[tenni]

bemyonlyone
I'm not sure if you are misunderstanding the point of this thread. The new curriculum is designed to teach equality to all regardless of their sexual orientation. It is to give children a healthy attitude about sexual orientation and that the variety of sexual orientation is normal. At this point it is to teach that there is such a thing as sexual orientation starting at a grade 3 level. It may introduce the term sexual orientation and what that means. (not sure yet as nothing has been released)

This is certainly not about some US political system. It is beyond a political belief other than starting from the point that various sexual orientations exist in society and all are equal under the law. (actually I doubt that it would go that far at grade 3. That may be discussed in grade 8 or hight school)

Of course, there are people who may not support this curriculum but legally they do not have a right to deny it. The only question might be at what age should students be taught about sexual orientation regardless what the home is teaching. Within my province there are two publicly supported education systems. The public system and the Catholic system. The Catholic system will be expected to teach the curriculum but permitted to add their own way of interpreting it. The delicate part will be that the Catholic education system may not teach intolerance of differences in sexual orientation. I believe that they may teach that although the society accepts same sex marrige the Church believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. (or something along that line.) So, in the reference to the point of religion that Pasa pointed out a society needs to acknowledge what areas religion has a role and where secular equal rights of the society come first before any religious belief. If the society is not secular enough to acknowledge equality, then it has work to do.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

Why are you such an apologist for homophobic straight people? Ah, probably for the same reason you're a Republican.
And when I said living like a heterosexual, I mean espousing views that homophobic heteros would have, not being in a hetero relationship. Treating non-heterosexuality any differently from heterosexuality is by definition homophobic.

Where did This come from? And why is Pasa's political preference any relivance to the thread??? And theres those words already....
Stay tuned Ya'll.
Cat

[TwylaTwobits]

Cat, love, remember the CLICK. Now to get the thread back on topic. There are a lot of intersting posts here and bisexualman's statement

If we had had the curriculum proposed by Tenni in my school, I may have felt different about my sexual orientation at an earlier age. With more acceptance, I may actually have come out and been settled in my orientation by 25 instead of at 48. I already knew at age 6 I liked both boys and girls

Is a more effective reminder to us all that information that would have made any life decision easier to comprehend is better given at an age where they are starting to become aware of their own bodies. What Tenni has posted has said it would be the simple stuff at first and moving on to more in depth knowledge as the child ages, what any responsible school curriculum should do. I applaud our Canadian neighbors and wish them luck with this. Please keep us posted on how it goes, Tenni.

[Bi_Druid]

Over this side of the pond, I personally knew the basics about sex, i.e. where do babies come from, since the day I could talk and ask my folks.

I was formally taught basic Sex ed, like what the boys and the girls bits are and how they work together to make babies, in year 5, which is mid Primary School, which is about 7 going on 8 years of age children.

As for more detailed stuff about the risks of catching nasty STI's and things and how to use contraceptives and condoms to prevent catching STI's or getting pregnant, this was taught through out Secondary School, which is when most kids are going threw their teens.

Things like what it was to be gay/bi/lesbian etc was still left for us to find out on our own. The government was more immediately concerned with the rising amount of teenage pregnancies that had hid the press at the time.
I've heard they are now thinking of introducing LGB issues and things alongside current sex ed.

Personally, from having experienced it from the pupils end of things, I have no gripes with teaching kids about such things in a mature and educational way. I openly welcome it.
I do feel it is also as much the parents responsibility to also play their part too in teaching their children and making them aware of the risks and how to play safe.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

Personally, from having experienced it from the pupils end of things, I have no gripes with teaching kids about such things in a mature and educational way. I openly welcome it.
I do feel it is also as much the parents responsibility to also play their part too in teaching their children and making them aware of the risks and how to play safe.

Wonderfully said, Druid. Come get a cookie..lol
Cat

[still_shy]

As a mom of a 9 year old (third grade) girl who is already coming home asking questions about sex, I see no problem with the proposed curriculum. It doesn't seem like they are planning to get very in depth with things and I agree with the above when it was said that parents bear the responsibility for further educating their children as they see fit. I'm also a firm believer in letting kids be kids for as long as they can be and not forcing them to grow up any quicker than they already are.

[tenni]

"If you do something like forcing sexual preference education (not the same thing as sex ed) into public schools"

Pasa
This strikes me as very strange word selection. Looking at this as an "orientation" is quite different than using the word "preference". The point that you see sexual orientation as being "forced" on to students shows your base perspective of resistance to this education. Sexual orientation is part of sex education but more exactly if you look you see that it falls under "Growth and Development". "Growth and Development" is far broader than what you are restricting this to. Just as children want to discuss growth of their bodies and the life cycle from birth to death, they are able to discuss sexual orientation and develop an attitude that this is normal. People have different sexual orientations is a normal possibility just as having blue or brown eyes. As each human matures, we develop our sexual orientation. Every single person is going to make decisions about their sexual orientation. To believe that this is forcing something is the same as telling a blue eyed person that they are not blue eyed but brown eyed like the rest of us. There are no blue eyed kids. Sexual Orientation is natural and unavoidable as is gender identity. How can that be forcing? It is part of an education process that each person will go through. Without having it as part of your formal education process, it not only leaves bisexuals and gays ignored and not educated about themselves but fails to teach acceptance and tolerance of differences to heterosexuals.

I wonder if you have some issues that you have not resolved yet but I may be wrong. I don't intend to offend you. I find your perspective puzzling...but then it wouldn't be the first time that we have seen a difference. :bigrin:

[Long Duck Dong]

sexual orientation.... lol you can teach what its about.... but you can not teach that its right or wrong... to do that, would be seen as *taking sides *

pasa is a teacher in a us school so I trust what they say as they are in a position to understand the school system better than me.... and I am assuming that what they are saying is that is if you are *pushing * a agenda of sexual orientation and expression into schools, you are looking for trouble

I am making that remark while viewing private schools as in nz they have the legal right to choose the stance of views on what they teach..... ie they can choose to teach about lgbt orientations or not, but they can also teach the bible teaching on them as part of a official school stance and class lesson..... in a public school, that can be viewed as a teacher expressing their personal viewpoint ( strangely enuf, a teacher can be spoken to, if they speak about lgbt negatively and positively in a class lesson )

[TwylaTwobits]

Wow, y'all were busy while I was snoozing. The way I'm reading this, and correct me if I'm wrong Tenni, is that there is no effort to push one sexual orientation over another. Merely the fact that in his province there is already same sex marriages/civil unions, this would be something that would equalize things. Letting kids know at a younger age (two daddies or two mommies)that things are considered normal and a part of the human genetic differences in no way implies forcing a belief on someone or indoctrinating them to become LGBT. It's simply stating that everyone exists and from what was posted on the curriculum, the differences in sexual orientations would be talked about further into the program. Personally, I think that if this were going on in the US and the rest of the world, we just might have a new generation of people that realize we are one race and that there is more than one way to live your life. When that happens we will no longer have the need for the news stories to publish horrific stories about people slaughtered because they chose to love someone of their own sex or to become who they are inside. My :2cents:

[elian]

The "church" I go to is very liberal - they actually teach age appropriate curriculum with required parental permission and mandatory parental involvement if the parent's child is enrolled in the class.

http://www.uua.org/religiouseducation/curricula/ourwhole/
http://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/144607.shtml

Sorry to say, they have a lot of textbooks for sale but no sample curriculum - I have read one of the books that was designed for middle school age children. It gives very straightforward, honest answers to questions that most people are afraid to talk about. It isn't pornographic, it doesn't talk about the overt mechanics of sex (although it does talk about things like menstruation and secondary sex characteristics in puberty.) There is a chapter about "families" that talks about traditional families, single parent families, step-families, adopted families and families with same sex partners - something along the lines of "families come in all shapes and sizes"

I have to admit, when I first thought of a church teaching sex ed to children I was a bit unsettled but then again - where else are they going to learn respect for themselves and others and get an honest, age appropriate answer to the question?

One or the core tenets of UU faith is respect for ohers and affirmation of celebrating diversity in all people, including LGBT folks so of course that value is ALSO built into the fundamental structure of the course material.

I just learned that apparently the curriculum was developed in partnership with the United Church of Christ - interesting.

[mikey3000]

As a parent of a 12 y/o and an 8 y/o, this is something I already teach at home. Not deliberately, but very casually. "some people like the same sex, some like the opposite sex, and some like both. No biggie. Really." And they absorb it like sponges. If you don't make a big think of it, they accept it better I think. Nice to see the schools will be reinforcing my teachings now.:bigrin:

[tenni]

Well, it look like I was wrong. There was a backlash from Christians and Muslims. The programme has been shelved for now by the government. The older programme will continue in the fall even though this new programme has been operating quietly since the fall of 2009.

[TwylaTwobits]

That is a shame, Tenni. Is there any word on maybe a modification that would suit everyone or have they just totally abandoned the concept?

[tenni]

Yes, I saw on the news tonight that the Premier stated that there had been consultations with parents and medical experts but there was a need for more consultation with parents. I suspect that he may wait until the fall and then the Ministry of Education will try to reach out to parents from more fundamentalist backgrounds ..both Muslim and Christian to hear their concerns. There may be a need for more parental education strange as that seems. My guess is school councils(similar but more powerful than the ol PTA) having discussion nights with parents with medical people present, etc. There was also a parent stating that she wanted the programme started at the age that I gave. Those parents and parent education groups who lobby for educational improvement who supported this programme expressed disappointment that the government caved in due to a few days of complaints. Some of the programme intended for older students seemed also sensitive to some parents. Terms like "vagina lubrication" taught at grade 6 or 7 seemed to make some parents uncomfortable. On the other hand, the argument is that not only are kids maturing earlier but they have street talk myths without the proper education or terms by these ages. One parent didn't want menstration taught until grade 7 or 8. More girls experience this by age ten or eleven these days than in earlier generations. The educational position is to prepare girls (and boys) to understand their body changes well before it happens to them; not after they personally experience it. There is some denial on the part of parents that what their kids are experiencing is not what they experienced. That seems to be an eternal on going situation though. I'm sure most of us did not experience "bullying" the way kids today experience it. It is much more serious today than in past generations.

[TwylaTwobits]

It's hard to find a middle ground. You will always have some parents being more open and honest with their children than other parents. I just hope they can reach a compromise in the best interests of the children while keeping in mind that in the end it's the parents who are raising the children.

[tenni]

That is true. On the other hand, some parents are ill equipped to deal with these subjects. Parents have probably a more significant role in communicating their values about sexual relationships than when the child is in need of understanding their body changes and such things as sexual orientation. I would suspect that a lot of parents would rather not discuss sexual orientation at all with their kids. If it is left to the parents alone, there can be a lot of serious damage done to both gay and bisexual kids but also hetero kids in accepting and tolerating differences. It is a tough, tough balancing as Twyla states. I wonder how many men on this site had vagina lubrication as part of their chats on sex with their father (or mother)?

[bemyonlyone]

That is true. On the other hand, some parents are ill equipped to deal with these subjects. Parents have probably a more significant role in communicating their values about sexual relationships than when the child is in need of understanding their body changes and such things as sexual orientation. I would suspect that a lot of parents would rather not discuss sexual orientation at all with their kids. If it is left to the parents alone, there can be a lot of serious damage done to both gay and bisexual kids but also hetero kids in accepting and tolerating differences. It is a tough, tough balancing as Twyla states. I wonder how many men on this site had vagina lubrication as part of their chats on sex with their father (or mother)?

Lubrication? Most parents are way too embarrassed to even say the word "sex" in front of their kids, let alone go into detail like that.

[Pasadenacpl2]

That is true. On the other hand, some parents are ill equipped to deal with these subjects. Parents have probably a more significant role in communicating their values about sexual relationships than when the child is in need of understanding their body changes and such things as sexual orientation. I would suspect that a lot of parents would rather not discuss sexual orientation at all with their kids. If it is left to the parents alone, there can be a lot of serious damage done to both gay and bisexual kids but also hetero kids in accepting and tolerating differences. It is a tough, tough balancing as Twyla states. I wonder how many men on this site had vagina lubrication as part of their chats on sex with their father (or mother)?

It is not the government's place to make up for what a parent may/may not tell their child. Sex education, for better or worse, should be a matter of choice for the parents. And no...I found out abut lubrication from my first partner. She seemed pretty well versed in the topic. ;)

Pasa

[tenni]

Hey Mr & Mrs Pasa
Good to see you even though my next words may seem like I don't :bigrin:

"It is not the government's place to make up for what a parent may/may not tell their child."

Well, these words are the crux of a differing view. You may have wanted to add "In my opinion":eek:

In my opinion, it is society's (government's) place to educate all children equally. It happens every day that the school system presents ideas that maybe not all parents agree with. However, in such cases as sex education, the parent's have the right to withdraw their child if they disagree from that specific part of the curriculum. It would be silly "in my opinion" if parents withdrew their child from a science class because they do not believe in evolution but instead believe in "creationism". It would be even sillier if some values made some parents think that 2+3=6 and they wanted their children taught that. The parents probably would be allowed to withdraw their child on religious grounds but I'm not sure. This should not lead to cases where in one school location a religious belief would be taught in schools that contradicts science or facts. Kids should not be taught that babies come from being found under a cabbage in a cabbage patch because the majority of parents want it that way in one community or religion. In Ontario, the Roman Catholic church was told that they would have to teach the same course(we have two education systems). This type of difference will have to be resolved. I hope that a solution is found. Values should not trump facts. When they do in some cases, it should be the parent who needs to take action to withdraw their child for that section than values overriding facts and science. I don't really know how to comprehend this when it grows larger than a few families in a school. That just seem sad that narrow mindedness might rules in a community.

[dafydd]

When are they going to put anal sex into the curriculum? Now that's inclusive. I think it's important to know how to do it safe. Lots of young gay men leave school not knowing a thing about this.

d

[tenni]

When are they going to put anal sex into the curriculum? Now that's inclusive. I think it's important to know how to do it safe. Lots of young gay men leave school not knowing a thing about this.

d

Believe it or not but anal sex was in the curriculum at the grade 7 or 8 level. You can see that introducing the term" sexual orientation" at grade 3 leds to concepts of anal sex by grade 7 or 8. If you leave menstruation/wet dreams to grade 7, you would never get to sexual orientation or anal sex without overwhelming the students. (plus a lot of students would have experienced these body changes already) All this type of education ends at grade 8 as "Health" or Growth and Development is not compulsory in High School as a required subject.

[dafydd]

Believe it or not but anal sex was in the curriculum at the grade 7 or 8 level. You can see that introducing the term" sexual orientation" at grade 3 leds to concepts of anal sex by grade 7 or 8.

I am gobsmacked. that's seriously cool!

d