Ontario Sex Ed controversy?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by polak

What's their to teach about tea bagging? You don't need to teach details and different methods.

Teach them that anal sex isn't safe sex. Don't teach them about fisting your butthole.

Teach them about the risks of oral (lol worth it) and not about all the gross stuff you can do with the aftermath.

What you are saying is pretty much the same thing that the parents opposed to the curriculum are saying. You are just disagreeing on where the line should be. What is and isn't gross is subjective and you know that as soon as the topics come up, they will be Googling all aspects of it after school. Teaching them about it in class won't stop them from being exposed to the nastier things as well.

Personally, I have a pretty high tolerance for things sexual, but I see the other argument as well. As a citizen, sometimes you have to trust the system so I don't agree with the parents for holding their kids out of school, but I think they have a right to make their feeling heard.

[rubecube]

Do we still have truancy laws?

[polak]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

What you are saying is pretty much the same thing that the parents opposed to the curriculum are saying. You are just disagreeing on where the line should be. What is and isn't gross is subjective and you know that as soon as the topics come up, they will be Googling all aspects of it after school. Teaching them about it in class won't stop them from being exposed to the nastier things as well.

Personally, I have a pretty high tolerance for things sexual, but I see the other argument as well. As a citizen, sometimes you have to trust the system so I don't agree with the parents for holding their kids out of school, but I think they have a right to make their feeling heard.

But what I'm saying is there is a clear cut line in the sand. It's not really up to interpretation. Teach the stuff that is genuinely about health and safety. There is a health aspect to teaching about Consent, Anal sex or Oral sex or Masturbation and their respective risks and the proper measures of preventing those risks. There is no benefit to teaching them about specific sex acts that fall under those categories and I think that's whats happening here.

Do you really think they will have a whole unit on "anal"? No. They'll talk about it for half an hour and move on. Someone more familiar with Ontario's school system can chime in here but Sex Ed is like two weeks of the overall Health Curriculum here.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by polak

But what I'm saying is there is a clear cut line in the sand. It's not really up to interpretation. Teach the stuff that is genuinely about health and safety. There is a health aspect to teaching about Consent, Anal sex or Oral sex or Masturbation and their respective risks and the proper measures of preventing those risks. There is no benefit to teaching them about specific sex acts that fall under those categories and I think that's whats happening here.

Do you really think they will have a whole unit on "anal"? No. They'll talk about it for half an hour and move on. Someone more familiar with Ontario's school system can chime in here but Sex Ed is like two weeks of the overall Health Curriculum here.

There is a health and safety aspect to all sexual acts. I don't see how you can teach health and safety without discussing transmission and transmission can't be discussed without getting into the details (or "gross aftermath" as you called it).

It would be interesting and helpful to see the full curriculum and literature/pictures they will be using though to make a more educated opinion on it.

[polak]

You can talk about semen and bodily fluids without explaining what a facial is. That's what I'm getting at.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by polak

You can talk about semen and bodily fluids without explaining what a facial is. That's what I'm getting at.

Yep. You can't talk about bowel movements without showing everyone 'two girls one cup'

Seriously though I feel bad for the kids who are going to wake up one day and thing 'oh my god i'm bleeding to death!' when they get their first periods. My wifes parents were first generation immigrants and they barely said 'I love you' nevermind actually having any talk about sex.

I don't expect the 'sex talk' from immams or these parents being anything other than 'don't do it until marriage' which helps nobody except those who benefit from their followers being left in the dark. It's borderline child abuse.

[CaptainCrunch]

They should teach it like the old days when the old man would come stomping up the stairs, throw open your bedroom door and fire in a bundle of old playboy magazines and a pack of smokes like they were active grenades, then he grumbles something and slams the door shut and goes stomping to his office where the cracks a bottle of scotch and stares into the fire while hoping that no questions will be asked and the side benefit is that his dirty rotten kid won't ever want to smoke again.

[Dan02]

I'm trying to think I must have been only 10 when a friend and I stumbled on some old playboys. Graphic images are way more accessible these days, but make sex ed optional, if parents wanna plug their ears and stick their heads in the sand I guess that's their prerogative, their kids are just gonna learn from the other kids anyways.

[GGG]

It's a public health issue though. Uneducated kids have higher rates of teen pregnancy and stds than educated ones. Society shouldn't bare the cost of their stupidity

[ernie]

Good for Ontario. Nothing wrong with what they are wanting to teach. It's frankly about time that these things were taught and kids were given proper knowledge at about the proper time. I applaud the curriculum.

If you don't feel a grade 7 or 8 student doesn't need to know those things I have to wonder why. The only reason I can think of is you don't want to be the one having that conversation or answering questions so you'd rather they be kept in the dark.

[photon]

I'd be a bit skeptical of the descriptions of the curriculum, did the reporter verify this or are they taking the word of someone who is against the stuff being taught? That kind of thing has been overstated before.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by polak

You can talk about semen and bodily fluids without explaining what a facial is. That's what I'm getting at.

It's difficult to discuss this topic without getting into R-rated territory, so for the sake keeping it more PG-13, I am not going to dwell on it further except to say that if their lesson on anal sex is just a passing reference to it with describing it how to do it without causing pain or damage, then they are probably not doing anyone a favour. And I am not sure a 12 year old is ready for that type of discussion. Without the details, a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Therefore, if they are going to teach it, it would be better if they get into all the nitty gritty details even if it is divisive.

[ernie]

Do people have an issue teaching vaginal sex at that age (an age where many kids are very much thinking about having sex or have even done so)? Are they only supposed to teach safe heterosexual sex (yes I know heterosexuals may engage in anal sex but you know exactly what I mean? They should be teaching these things or at least introducing kids to this information. But most importantly no one should expect this info to come only from the school. Unfortunately, for most of those kids of upset parents that is the only place they will be free to talk about these things andvask questions.

[indes]

How old are the people who think 12 year olds don't know what anal and oral are? I'm fairly certain that most kids already know what the gist is and think its a proactive, forward idea to inform young people of the health risks involved. I highly doubt the Ontario school board decided to introduce the kids to fun other ways to be sexual. I'm sure the decision to change the curriculum was based on research and what these teachers believe is important to the world these kids live in today.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by indes

How old are the people who think 12 year olds don't know what anal and oral are? I'm fairly certain that most kids already know what the gist is and think its a proactive, forward idea to inform young people of the health risks involved. I highly doubt the Ontario school board decided to introduce the kids to fun other ways to be sexual. I'm sure the decision to change the curriculum was based on research and what these teachers believe is important to the world these kids live in today.

For sure. A 12-year-old knows a little bit about what's going on, and a little bit of knowledge is worse than none at all.

Hell, there wasn't even an internet when I was that age and I knew that the man's pee-pee parts matched up with the lady's pee-pee parts. The poopy parts were kind of a gross idea, but no doubt the suggestion was in the air. No pun intended.

Speaking of, I don't remember getting any sexual education when I was in school and look how I talk about sex! I'm a'sposed to be an adult! There has to be a connection.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by indes

How old are the people who think 12 year olds don't know what anal and oral are? I'm fairly certain that most kids already know what the gist is and think its a proactive, forward idea to inform young people of the health risks involved. I highly doubt the Ontario school board decided to introduce the kids to fun other ways to be sexual. I'm sure the decision to change the curriculum was based on research and what these teachers believe is important to the world these kids live in today.

The link said that the school/neighbourhood is full of "new Canadians with conservative or strong faith-based backgrounds", which is CBCs PC way of saying Muslims. I don't think anyone said that 12 years old don't know those things exist, just that schools might not be the best place to teach it. Having known a few elementary school teachers in my day, I can see their point. Some of them are some of the most perverted people I know.

My standpoint isn't based on morals, religion or anything that is "wrong or right". Just whether it is wise to open up the topics to that age group and in that environment. There can be a huge difference between 12 year old and not all have the same exposure that others do. I would have no problem teaching my own about the facts of life. But if they are just going to mention it in passing as part of a half-hour lesson as one poster said, that is worse than not mentioning it at all. You have to accept that if it is taught in schools, that some kids that otherwise wouldn't have tried it will want to. Because kids are like that.


For example, if the discussion goes like; "Hey kids, some people practice anal sex which is when a man a takes his................... You can't get pregnant that way, but you still need to protect yourself from disease...."

Don't get me wrong, that is a great message but if that is end of the discussion, then little Bubba Jr. and Suzie get the idea to try it because the idea is in their susceptible heads and it is not taboo anymore, you aren't doing Suzie's little 12 year old butt any favours or protecting her from injury if they didn't also teach them about lubricants and proper anal preparation and penetration techniques.

So if they are only teaching it half way, it's probably worse than not teaching it all. And if teaching them the whole thing including the unpleasant x-rated parts isn't appropriate in schools, then is teaching any of it appropriate?

For all I know, they are teaching it all. I haven't seen the text books or material being used.

[undercoverbrother]

I would rather deal with an over education than under education.

[northcrunk]

Not to mention they likely won't go into any details regarding anal sex but will most likely just say that the age of consent is 18 for anal.

[northcrunk]

Also keeping kids in the dark regarding sexual health empoweres pedophiles. If a kid knows what their penis or vagina is and nobody is allowed to touch it they will feel more empowered to tell their parents/teachers when someone tries to. They won't be as easly manipulated than a kid who knows about their bodies and boundries. It's too easy for pedophiles to just say "this is ok" or "this is natural, its always how person x and kids interact"

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Also keeping kids in the dark regarding sexual health empoweres pedophiles. If a kid knows what their penis or vagina is and nobody is allowed to touch it they will feel more empowered to tell their parents/teachers when someone tries to. They won't be as easly manipulated than a kid who knows about their bodies and boundries. It's too easy for pedophiles to just say "this is ok" or "this is natural, its always how person x and kids interact"

Wasn't that pretty much always covered in sex ed though? I am pretty sure that message was always there and isn't what some parents are protesting.

But since you brought the issue up, it also doesn't help the deputy minister of education who worked to develop the new curriculum is a convicted pedophile that was caught teaching other adults online how to properly groom children to accept sexual advances.

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/former-ont...rges-1.2261381

First, in a conversation beginning in August 2012, the officer said she had two daughters aged 8 and 14.

Levin "normalized and encouraged the sexual touching of the girls by their mother," Dellandrea read from the statement of facts.

In June 2013, the same officer logged into an "incest" chatroom claiming to be a mother attracted to her eight-year-old daughter. In that case, court heard Levin instructed her on how to "groom the child to get her 'used to sex,"' to expose her daughter to pornography, to be nude, and to masturbate in front of the child.

"(She) advised Mr. Levin that she had followed his instructions...that she had sexually assaulted her child," court heard. "Levin instructed (her) to 'play' with this child."

"Mr. Levin stated that it was fine if the child cried and the child should understand that more would be done to her," court heard. "The theme of these discussions was sexualization of the officer's child."

So yeah, there are some serious trust issues between many parents in Ontario and the new curriculum, and I can understand why.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/03/02...-ed-curriculum

In a 2009 newsletter, the then-deputy minister said he was “responsible for ... everything that they do” and to “implement” the “new” approach.

This was the beginning of the 63-year-old’s involvement in the controversial curriculum change. Once a professor at the University of Toronto’s Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, there are many interpretations about Levin’s part in the curriculum, but it’s his own definition that should clear it up.

On March 6, 2009, Levin wrote and signed a memo that put himself in charge of Ontario’s school curriculum.

“Dear colleagues, I am writing to provide an update on our sector’s agenda ... I will be filling the ADM (assistant deputy minster) position previously held by George Zegarac ... The division formerly headed by George Zegarac will be renamed as ‘Learning and Curriculum.’ It will have responsibilty for curriculum and for Special Education including Provincial Schools.”

In an interview with OISE’s winter 2009 newsletter, Levin said: “I was the deputy minister of education. In that role, I was the chief civil servant. I was responsible for the operation of the Ministry of Education and everything that they do; I was brought in to implement the new education policy.”