Ontario Sex Ed Curriculum Uproar

[Pyrrho]

That still does not really explain it.  I was taught the concept of "the World versus Christians" also.  My mother did not tightly control the TV we watched, but she did control it some.  Of course, TV was pretty tame the many years ago when I was young, but she still would not let us watch whatever we wanted.

As for the church's teachings, what church teaches sex education?  They often tell you not to have sex before marriage, and not to have homosexual sex ever, but they do not usually teach about venereal diseases and so forth.  Did yours?  My mother had no objection to me learning about all of the diseases and how one could get them.  And about the fact that sex can lead to pregnancy, and she did not want me to believe any of the nonsense that I was shocked to learn other people believed (e.g., "you can't get pregnant the first time you have sex" and other such ridiculous drivel; I was amazed to learn from my sex ed class in school that people actually believed that).

Did your mother want you to be unaware of the venereal diseases that you could get having sex?  Did she want you to believe nonsense, like that you cannot get a girl pregnant the first time you have sex?  Or did she teach you these things herself?

Actually, my mother did teach me about it, when I was ten. At least, to a degree. She read through a book from Focus on the Family that explained about Godly marriage, etc., and the various issues from a "Christian perspective". She skipped the 2/3rds of a page in which the author actually describes how sex works, but she did give me the book to read again for myself. Since I had gotten a full set of encyclopedias for my 8th birthday, which came two per month for a year, I already knew the mechanics of it. Nevertheless, I found out a year after getting the FotF book, when I went to the library to read real books about human sexuality, that not much had been included in my religious guide to the subject, other than a lot of moralizing and "traditional values" stuff.

That makes it even more puzzling.  She wanted you to know a bit about sex (and at 10, she likely was not waiting until after you were having sex, so good for her on that), but she did not want the school teaching you about sex.  I do not understand why she had a problem with the school teaching you about it.

I certainly understand that there are people who do not want their children to be taught about sex at school, but I have never understood why.

Looking back on it all (and reading about substandard programs in some parts of the country now), I really had a pretty good sex education in school.  They tried to give accurate information.  Most of it is applicable today (though some of the hormonal birth control methods are delivered in more ways now, like subcutaneous implants, and there is also HIV that was unknown when I had sex education, but all of the old diseases still exist, as well as the old birth control methods).  They certainly did not encourage anyone to have sex, and I have not heard of any school program that does.

What seems to be the case is that people who are against sex education in schools believe that schools encourage children to have sex.  Yet I have never seen any evidence that any sex education program does that.  A good, accurate one will tell people that abstinence is a method of preventing unwanted pregnancies and will help prevent the transmission of some diseases.  They do not forget that when they talk about condoms being 90-something percent effective for birth control when properly used (and whatever percentage effective it is as a prophylactic), and the pill being 90-something percent effective for birth control when properly used, etc.  It is not like they take everyone to a whorehouse and make everyone copulate.  It is not even close to that.

[Iroscato]

Divinity, were I currently wearing a hat, I would take it off to you. I could do it with my scalp but I kinda need it where it is.

But either way, that's one hell of a life you've had. Bloody good show

[MTL]

What seems to be the case is that people who are against sex education in schools believe that schools encourage children to have sex.

Of the parental objection in Toronto,

They either think, as you say,
that the curriculum is actively encouraging premarital or even promiscuous sex,
or at the very least, they believe that the schools is actively downplaying the consequences and severity of the diseases
...and neither of these are true.

Any parent who believes that is either an idiot, grossly misinformed, or is maliciously spreading misinformation.

However, a step down from that,

many of the objecting parents would not go so far as to accuse the school of such things,
but they DO object to ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE not being stressed ENOUGH;
AND they object to the kids being taught TOO MUCH about sex, by the schools,
including various sexual acts, including anal and oral;

But first, last, and most of all,
the objecting parents take issue with ANY degree of normalcy or tolerance being taught to their kids,
about the LGBT.

It really is transparent that this is the real kernel of the issue,
with some parents very vocal about it,
and some parents trying to deny this is the case.

[vorlon13]

If I may,

regarding teaching about, let's say, gonorrhea,

I'm assuming they start with the genital variety, and I suppose the kind that gets transferred from mother to infant.

But what about gonorrhea of the throat?

Rectal gonorrhea?

Ostomy gonorrhea?

[Pyrrho]

If I may,

regarding teaching about, let's say, gonorrhea,

I'm assuming they start with the genital variety, and I suppose the kind that gets transferred from mother to infant.

But what about gonorrhea of the throat?

Rectal gonorrhea?

Ostomy gonorrhea?

Once one learns about gonorrhea and how it is transferred from one person to the next, one will likely be able to infer these things.  Of course, one can also just do an online search for "gonorrhea" (without the quotation marks) and this is what was at the top of the list with my search:

http://www.cdc.gov/std/gonorrhea/stdfact-gonorrhea.htm

It mentions all of your examples except the last.

Just like once one knows that semen of an HIV infected male contains a lot of the HIV, one will know that contact with such semen is going to be risky.  How risky will, of course, depend on the nature of the contact, but it will be risky to touch infected semen.


This ability to make inferences is a good thing.  For example, the idiocy of the idea that a pregnancy cannot occur the first time one has sex is seen to be idiocy by understanding reproduction and what it takes for a pregnancy to occur.  A sperm fertilizing a egg that gets implanted results in a pregnancy.  How the semen got there or whether it was the first time are both irrelevant to the process.

Education is a good thing.

[JuliaL]

---

What seems to be the case is that people who are against sex education in schools believe that schools encourage children to have sex.

Of the parental objection in Toronto,

---

They either think, as you say,
that the curriculum is actively encouraging premarital or even promiscuous sex,
or at the very least, they believe that the schools is actively downplaying the consequences and severity of the diseases
...and neither of these are true.

Any parent who believes that is either an idiot, grossly misinformed, or is maliciously spreading misinformation.

---

However, a step down from that,

many of the objecting parents would not go so far as to accuse the school of such things,
but they DO object to ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE not being stressed ENOUGH;
AND they object to the kids being taught TOO MUCH about sex, by the schools,
including various sexual acts, including anal and oral;

---

But first, last, and most of all,
the objecting parents take issue with ANY degree of normalcy or tolerance being taught to their kids,
about the LGBT.

It really is transparent that this is the real kernel of the issue,
with some parents very vocal about it,
and some parents trying to deny this is the case.

Up until a couple hundred years ago (and possibly today), any society that failed to optimize fertility simply faded away or was overrun by one that did.

A couple hundred years is too short a time to change biology much.  Even culture has sizable inertia.
It has yet to be determined if we are smart enough to survive the excesses enabled by science and its handmaiden, engineering.
I find it unsurprising that culture is slow to catch up with technological changes in reproduction and food production.
Hence the attitude:
If it was good enough for my pappy's pappy, it's good enough for you!

[MTL]

---

Of the parental objection in Toronto,

---

They either think, as you say,
that the curriculum is actively encouraging premarital or even promiscuous sex,
or at the very least, they believe that the schools is actively downplaying the consequences and severity of the diseases
...and neither of these are true.

Any parent who believes that is either an idiot, grossly misinformed, or is maliciously spreading misinformation.

---

However, a step down from that,

many of the objecting parents would not go so far as to accuse the school of such things,
but they DO object to ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE not being stressed ENOUGH;
AND they object to the kids being taught TOO MUCH about sex, by the schools,
including various sexual acts, including anal and oral;

---

But first, last, and most of all,
the objecting parents take issue with ANY degree of normalcy or tolerance being taught to their kids,
about the LGBT.

It really is transparent that this is the real kernel of the issue,
with some parents very vocal about it,
and some parents trying to deny this is the case.

Up until a couple hundred years ago (and possibly today), any society that failed to optimize fertility simply faded away or was overrun by one that did.

A couple hundred years is too short a time to change biology much.  Even culture has sizable inertia.
It has yet to be determined if we are smart enough to survive the excesses enabled by science and its handmaiden, engineering.
I find it unsurprising that culture is slow to catch up with technological changes in reproduction and food production.
Hence the attitude:
If it was good enough for my pappy's pappy, it's good enough for you!

I encountered that specific attitude from my own grandparents.

My response:

If every single generation of humanity was exactly like their parents,
there would be no progress.

And we wouldn't be here, in North America,
because our great grandparents would have taken the world of their great great great grandparents
.....that the Earth was flat.

[MTL]

A gay teacher at Thorncliffe Park Public School in Toronto,
one of the hardest-hit schools by the parent protests against the new sex-ed curriculum,
resolves to be a "lightning-rod" for truth,
saying the protests are more about homophobia than about sex-ed:

http://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/educa...tests.html

[brewer]

However, a step down from that,

many of the objecting parents would not go so far as to accuse the school of such things,
but they DO object to ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE not being stressed ENOUGH;
AND they object to the kids being taught TOO MUCH about sex, by the schools,
including various sexual acts, including anal and oral;

But first, last, and most of all,
the objecting parents take issue with ANY degree of normalcy or tolerance being taught to their kids,
about the LGBT.

It really is transparent that this is the real kernel of the issue,
with some parents very vocal about it,
and some parents trying to deny this is the case.

Bold mine.

For me, they could have stressed the abstinence crap until they were blue in the face and I never would have listened. They weren't living with my penis. My penis over rode bullshit every time.

[Rhondazvous]

My mother, a devout Southern Baptist fundamentalist, not only refused to sign my permission form in the 6th grade (I was eleven) for me to attend the SexEd class with the rest of my grade, she personally took the form in to the Principle of the school to ensure that I would be given other duties during the time (two hours every Wednesday) the rest of the kids were in the auditorium learning about SexEd.

Unfortunately for my mother, this backfired, as I was immediately teased for what I did not know by the other children, and thus requested (and got) permission to go next door to the Public Library during my two-hour session for a "study hall" time, during which I would look up books on human sexuality. While the other kids were watching "Fuzzy Bunny Gets Hair in New Places" videos (Simpsons joke), I was reading Dr.Ruth, books about Kinsey and Masters & Johnson, etc.

In future, before reading your posts, I will make sure my bladder is empty.