can minimize to a single attribute and belittle, but he melts like a snowflake when someone does it back? ;(

Where will the parents whom you believe should impart sexual health education, receive their own education?

that whack book called the bible

There should be sex education in schools imho, but it should be at age 11 or 12 or so, not for pre-pubescent children.

Having taught sex education between elementary to high school age, I can at least share that 'sex education' for younger kids is only described as such for the parents' understanding. It is mostly about the basics of consent, in the broadest of senses, and building confidence that they can talk to their teacher or other trusted adult should someone touch them inappropriately or make them uncomfortable. Late pre-pubescence is about puberty education, as it is ideal for the kids to have the knowledge prior to experiencing puberty.

That said, my experience was that nearly 100% of parents were supportive of the education we provided. I do think that our process afforded trust though, as we provided our curriculum in advance to parents, offered two separate parent meetings where they could come and ask questions, and framed our education as information-based and not values-based (aside from some basics, such as our stance that the kids have the right to sex education as applicable to their lives). I believe out of the classes we provided this service to, amounting to over 1,000+ kids in total, I can only recall 1 parent who did not sign the waiver for their child to participate--and, according to the teacher, it was due to general religious beliefs and not a reaction to our specific curriculum.

Parents were overwhelming curious about what we'd teach out about abortion in particular. The kids were rarely ever curious about that, and instead asked more about masturbation, puberty, and whether some birth-control strategy they heard from peers is actually legit or not. Lots of kids hearing they could use Coca Cola or Mountain Dew as a spermicide; or, confusingly, that a girl could do a handstand after sex to prevent pregnancy.

Well, there have been lots of cases in recent years in which schools taught stuff like various sex practices to children younger than 10 and moved heaven and earth to hide the content of their sex ed classes from the parents, so that's indeed night and day compared to the open, trust-building approach you and your colleagues used.

The handstand idea is cute though.

I've heard it's just as bad in private schools, good luck

Big HELL NO. If my children are only offered 4 day public school, then the limited curriculum time should focus on developing critical thinking and core math, sci, language, arts. Gender Ideology in K-12 is antithetical to developing critical thinking skill. Perhaps a elective in Highschool or for colleges post secondary.

One thing that is really sad is the USA has seen an increase in districts resorting to 4 day school weeks due to budgets. Think it was near 800% rise since late 90s. Meanwhile, FED turned on the money printing garden hose and yet this trend is still happening. Better to focus on advancing curriculum agendas then time in classroom for all American children.

This post was edited by RedFromWinter on Sep 30 2024 06:13am

It's a big No for me too. Even the option of stay away from my Kids is a big NONO.
Because early childhood brainwashing on the kids will have a huge almost irreversible impact on them and when my kids grow up , their kids grow up, their kids will harm my kids if they turn wacko.

The first part of any "sexual education" should show the list of diseases(with images) you can contract if you don't attempt to procreate naturally or do "weird stuff". If they're already been telling/showing kids in Illinois schools at a young age the dirty stuff you can do. Show them the potential result of such actions.

By law a child should know that if they choose to identify with a gender/sex that isn't male or female that their life will be impacted in more negative ways then positive. Anyone who says things will be more positive should face a fine for "dishonesty".

I think the same people that are pushing "gender affirming care" in my state should be held liable if a child transitions or is led into believing something contrary to their own biology and then harms themselves as a direct/indirect result. Depending on the variation of the hell they deal with the person who "affirmed the care" should pay the price.

As an example let's say a doctor agrees to remove the genitalia of a male under the age of 12 for gender re-assignment. When that child turns 18 they are forced to take a test where questions would reveal an "underlying level of trauma". If the child now adult is %100 satisfied then there is no penalty to the surgeon/state. If the child feels the state ruined their life and they were forced into something because of state mandated or state sponsored material they can apply for "Gender Security Disability" and the surgeon/state pay.

Make the surgeon and state pay. If the parents helped or coerced or were otherwise redundant in the decision of the child then have them pay accordingly.

It costs a lot of money to play games with genders and the results are often disastrous. Where is the LGBTQ+ to donate an anual 10% of their income when young people want to kill themselves because they listened to their teacher and school about sexual education.

Hmmmmmm?

This post was edited by SwamiVivekananda on Sep 30 2024 08:40pm