At what level should public schools students begin receiving instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity?

[Dans La Lune]

If not those who've reared, and who are responsible for them, who? Some member of a teacher's union? Some government official? Some "sex-scientist" with a PhD in deviancy? Who?

Not anyone remotely resembling you.

 

[Felis Leo]

Since this has been a hot debate in the last few weeks....

At what level should public schools students begin receiving instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity?

Explain your vote (or non-vote) below, please.

On sexual orientation? I don't see why there should be a bottom limit, because sexual intercourse does not need to be (and should not need to be) explicitly discussed vis-a-vis romantic relationships. The youngest school aged kids know about mommies and daddies/husbands and wives. So it's as easy as saying "Most kids have a mommy and a daddy, but a few kids have two mommies, and a few kids have two daddies." I do not think such a revelation would necessarily cause little kids to fall to the ground rolling and frothing in seizures.

On sexuality in general and sex education, I would mirror @tacomancer. Sixth Grade is perfectly acceptable.

As far as "gender identity"? I have no idea when that would be appropriate, because such discussions would probably serve to draw attention to children who identify as transgender. So I will demur on that.

 

[Ginger Ale]

Well, children aren't hostages until they're 18. You're raising people, and they won't be the same people their parents are without some hardcore brainwashing. They'll make choices for themselves, and they need to.

They will be part of adult society eventually, and schools have an obligation to help your child understand and participate in society from a very early age so that they're well adjusted.

They need to know that touching is wrong when it's unwanted, or not age appropriate. They need to know that not all people identify as the gender they're sex as. They need to learn how to protect their boundaries.

Therefore, I'd say first grade. That way it's natural and subtle. They can accept others differences, and their own without much thought. Normal is what society accepts. Education is an important tool in teaching what society accepts. Parents, can be bias, abusive, or neglectful. The parents that aren't should be grateful that kids from parents who are will still get taught these issues at school so they fit into society later in life.

It can be taught at age appropriate levels without much of an issue.

Many parents may not agree with what society accepts, but they have the option to isolate their children at home. They can teach them at home, away from society.

 

[Bullseye]

Because it were up to parents, there wouldn't be a history class.

 

[Slartibartfast]

On sexual orientation? I don't see why there should be a bottom limit, because sex does not need to be (and should not need to be) explicitly discussed vis-a-vis romantic relationships. The youngest school aged kids know about mommies and daddies/husbands and wives. So it's as easy as saying "Most kids have a mommy and a daddy, but a few kids have two mommies, and a few kids have two daddies." I do not think such a revelation would necessarily cause little kids to fall to the ground rolling and frothing in seizures.

On sexuality in general and sex education, I would mirror @tacomancer. Sixth Grade is perfectly acceptable.

As far as "gender identity"? I have no idea when that would be appropriate, because such discussions would probably serve to draw attention to children who identify as transgender. So I will demur on that.

If we are just talking about various types of relationships, I agree with you, there is no minimum age. I interpreted the OP to mean issues more specific to an individual.

 

[Bullseye]

What's the confusion? If children are old enough to understand a relationship between a man and a woman (parents), they are older enough to understand a relationship between same sex couples.

If their parents think so, fine - they'll explain it.

 

[Dans La Lune]

The OP question operates under the assumed fact that homosexuality is age inappropriate. Why should theocratic bigotry even be a factor in establishing an education curriculum?

 

[The Mark]

Since this has been a hot debate in the last few weeks....

At what level should public schools students begin receiving instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity?

Explain your vote (or non-vote) below, please.

I would say that children generally should be given an overview of the known information at or slightly before puberty, and an explanation of what to expect when it occurs.

And a refresher/Q&A session each year after that until graduation from high school.

That includes the known information about sexual orientation and gender identity, and the limits of what we know.

Edit: If at all possible this should be presented in a "what to expect/this is how things work" way, and should not be optional education.

 

[reflechissez]

Instruction meaning what it has always meant. A curriculum purchased or written and teachers writing lesson plans and teaching and leading a discussion on such issues however many times a week.

Ah. So you're referring to a hypothetical that has never happened and is not currently happening.

Thanks for the clarity.

 

[reflechissez]

That implies that it’s a fly by the seat of your pants kind of thing with no formal curriculum in place. What if that teacher they’re asking has a different opinion than yours?

So, you want a "stand-by" curriculum in case a students ask questions? How will that work?

 

[reflechissez]

If not those who've reared, and who are responsible for them, who? Some member of a teacher's union? Some government official? Some "sex-scientist" with a PhD in deviancy? Who?

the internet

 

[Josie]

So, you want a "stand-by" curriculum in case a students ask questions? How will that work?

No, I don't want that.

 

[Josie]

Ah. So you're referring to a hypothetical that has never happened and is not currently happening.

Thanks for the clarity.

You think there's no public school curriculum about sexuality?

 

[Loulit01]

That implies that it’s a fly by the seat of your pants kind of thing with no formal curriculum in place. What if that teacher they’re asking has a different opinion than yours?

You asked for my opinion, I gave it. You want a teacher's opinion ask a teacher.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Depends on what we're talking about.

If the subject is human relationships they begin learning from birth about heterosexual relationships - not what goes on in bed between a man and a woman of course, but the fact that men and women couple up and build families and lives and societies together.

In that context I find it perfectly appropriate for them to begin to understand at the same time that happy, healthy families can also be created by two women, or two men.

 

[Josie]

You asked for my opinion, I gave it.

Yes, and on a debate forum we discuss the reasons for our opinions and listen to other people's opinions.

You want a teacher's opinion ask a teacher.

Well, I am one.

 

[reflechissez]

Depends on what we're talking about.
If the subject is human relationships they begin learning from birth about heterosexual relationships - not what goes on in bed between a man and a woman of course, but the fact that men and women couple up and build families and lives and societies together.

In that context I find it perfectly appropriate for them to begin to understand at the same time that happy, healthy families can also be created by two women, or two men.

The OP has been trying to shoehorn the specifics of sexuality activity into this discussion; not in this thread, but in another one.

Talking about having 2 moms isn’t a discussion about sexual orientation. Talking about how the two moms sleep in the same room, kiss, etc. would be. There’s no reason to have a class discussion about what any of the parents do romantically or sexually.

 

[Josie]

The OP question operates under the assumed fact that homosexuality is age inappropriate. Why should theocratic bigotry even be a factor in establishing an education curriculum?

It does nothing of the kind. You know you just called everyone here but yourself a bigoted theocrat, right?

 

[Lycanthrope]

The OP has been trying to shoehorn the specifics of sexuality activity into this discussion; not in this thread, but in another one.

Ah. Well in that context, what is appropriate for a preschooler to know and see about a straight romantic relationship? Same rules apply for a gay one.

 

[Josie]

Ah. Well in that context, what is appropriate for a preschooler to know and see about a straight romantic relationship? Same rules apply for a gay one.

Nothing, really. They should be learning to sit down quietly for a few minutes, play with others, hold a pencil, write their name, letters, numbers, etc. There's no reason for them to learn about anything romantic or sexual.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Nothing, really. They should be learning to sit down quietly for a few minutes, play with others, hold a pencil, write their name, letters, numbers, etc. There's no reason for them to learn about anything romantic or sexual.

There's the rub - they see it everyday in society when a couple hold hands, hug or kiss in public. They see it in the stories and lessons in school whenever couples/families are depicted. They see it at home when their parents/relatives interact, and they see it when other families do the same thing.

 

[Josie]

There's the rub - they see it everyday in society when a couple hold hands, hug or kiss in public. They see it in the stories and lessons in school whenever couples/families are depicted. They see it at home when their parents/relatives interact, and they see it when other families do the same thing.

Yes, they see families in books - they shouldn’t be seeing anything romantic or sexual at that age at school. Just like they shouldn’t be introduced to horror films that young either.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Yes, they see families in books - they shouldn’t be seeing anything romantic or sexual at that age at school.

And I'm not suggesting they be given a crash course in the Kama Sutra.

But if lesson materials depict a family headed by a man and a woman then there's nothing wrong with seeing a depiction of a family with two women. If it's okay for them to see straight parents holding hands, it's okay for gay parents too.

 

[mrjurrs]

Since this has been a hot debate in the last few weeks....

At what level should public schools students begin receiving instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity?

Explain your vote (or non-vote) below, please.

What do you mean by instruction?

 

[Josie]

And I'm not suggesting they be given a crash course in the Kama Sutra.

But if lesson materials depict a family headed by a man and a woman then there's nothing wrong with seeing a depiction of a family with two women. If it's okay for them to see straight parents holding hands, it's okay for gay parents too.

I agree that there’s nothing wrong with seeing depictions of and talking about different kinds of families. It’s the romantic and sexual part that’s unnecessary at that age.