Parents have to do something about this!

[tosca1]

 

[countryboy]

Can there really be any doubt at this point about modern liberalism being a mental disorder? This is some sick stuff. What is this obsession with libs to sexualize children? Serious question.

 

[Medusa]

Can there really be any doubt at this point about modern liberalism being a mental disorder? This is some sick stuff. What is this obsession with libs to sexualize children? Serious question.

conservatives have tried to avoid this for hundreds of years ,it has been their obssession too.

 

[KevinKohler]

Anyone wanna give me a brief synopsis? I don't have 30 minutes to watch the vid. I watched the first 3 minutes, and am slightly alarmed that apparently they think sex ed needs to start at kindergarten.

So far for my daughter, they have simply gone over what they call "bad touching", which is not really sex ed, per say, as it is more...education to prevent molestation. And they way they teach it and present it, I am perfectly fine with it.

 

[countryboy]

conservatives have tried to avoid this for hundreds of years ,it has been their obssession too.

What are you talking about exactly? Please be specific.

 

[Medusa]

What are you talking about exactly? Please be specific.

I would like to ask the same question to you

 

[OrphanSlug]

Anyone wanna give me a brief synopsis? I don't have 30 minutes to watch the vid. I watched the first 3 minutes, and am slightly alarmed that apparently they think sex ed needs to start at kindergarten.

So far for my daughter, they have simply gone over what they call "bad touching", which is not really sex ed, per say, as it is more...education to prevent molestation. And they way they teach it and present it, I am perfectly fine with it.

Basically, the Ontario government’s new sex-ed curriculum has freaked everyone out to the point that about a month ago a bunch of parents kept their kids home from school in protest. The basic platform for the program is at 3rd Grade student learn about same-sex relationships, at 6th Grade kids hear the terms masturbation and gender expression, and at 7th Grade kids are warned about the dangers of sexting and the dangerous ease of availability of pornography on the internet.

The reality is Ontario's program may be taking things a bit to far but that does not mean they are entirely offtrack here.

We have three choices given today's reality of all the avenues of self expression and the propensity of media. One, we can bury our collective heads in the sand and appeal to social conservatism's usual fall back to "abstinence" which is basically social ignorance. Two, we can adopt the Ontario model which takes things a bit too far a bit too early in child development. Three, we can rationally find a common ground so that kids over their time in public school understand human sexuality, understand the concept of consequence, and understand today's social climate.

Kids are going to be exposed to various terms and concepts no matter how well adapt the helicopter parent is at trying to keep their child in a social bubble.

 

[KevinKohler]

I have a super simple solution.


Make these sex ed classes optional.

 

[LadyMoonlight]

If you have an agenda, and you want to change society to think and act the way you want it to, then you must indoctrinate children. There is no point in trying to get older people to think about changing society (well, it works with some I know, people who do not value tradition and see themselves as ....shudder....progressive), because people my age have learnt to sit back, watch and wait and then see the results that they predicted, if only to themselves, unfold.

This tactic is well known and works. Religious people do it, indoctrinating their offspring in the hope that their children, and the world around them, follows their beliefs, the left does it and so does the right, and have always done so. Forget the adults, work slowly and indoctrinate the children to grow up and think and believe and act the way you want them to and society will be moulded to the system you want. I think that lefties/progressives are just better at it and have had an agenda planned since the 60s.

When it is my time to go, I think I will not be too upset. I will be ready to go because I don't like, or want to live in, the society I foresee in the future. Many people will be glad to see people like me leave, taking all the traditions and values with us to the grave so that they can forge ahead with their brave new world. This video is just one aspect of it.

 

[countryboy]

Anyone wanna give me a brief synopsis? I don't have 30 minutes to watch the vid. I watched the first 3 minutes, and am slightly alarmed that apparently they think sex ed needs to start at kindergarten.

So far for my daughter, they have simply gone over what they call "bad touching", which is not really sex ed, per say, as it is more...education to prevent molestation. And they way they teach it and present it, I am perfectly fine with it.

It's difficult to give a brief synopsis. But basically, they want to teach children as young as 5 about masturbation and sexual pleasure. And kids as young as 12 about vaginal and anal fluid and their role in transmitting disease. They also want to teach kids that it is perfectly normal to identify as any gender or sexual orientation that you wish, and that that cannot be changed. Furthermore, they want to give organizations that push religious humanist beliefs access to your kids inside, AND, outside of the school.

This is going to happen in Canada this fall, it is already the official curriculum. But rest assured, we will not be far behind.

 

[KevinKohler]

I mean, look. 3rd -6th grade sounds a little young to me to be starting to have ADULTS who AREN'T the parent, talking to kids about stuff like masturbation, and what not.

However, I also MUST admit that it's been a LOOOONG time since I was in the 3rd-6th grade, so I can't rightly recall the things I and my pears were dealing with/doing. I wanna say that around that time, girls were still CLEARLY the "enemy". I honestly don't believe I became interested in girls at ALL until...well, maybe it WAS 7th grade. It was DEFF in middle school.

Anyway, to continue my point, in addition to being a little fuzzy on my own history, I also don't have any friends in that age range, nor to I hang out with kids in that range.


Basically, what I am saying is, I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIDS THAT AGE ARE NOW GETTING UP TO. I mean, I hear the stories. I'd like to think a lot of those are outliers. Never the less, I can't DENY that things are different today than they were 20 years ago. I mean, my daughter just turned 6, and one of her uncles got her an RCA brand TABLET. Mostly for streaming netflix, he claims...but it can also play games, and access the internet. Now, I'm gonna be honest. I appreciate the generosity that gift represents. But I'm not exactly happy about it. Then again, I'm old fashioned, despite my age. So maybe I DO have my head in the sand.

All I know is, as long as my kid's school continues to be honest and forthright about what they are teaching in class, and I get to see it BEFORE they go over it, and as long as I retain a CHOICE on allowing my daughter to attend certain things, I'm happy as a clam.

 

[AGENT J]

Basically, the Ontario government’s new sex-ed curriculum has freaked everyone out to the point that about a month ago a bunch of parents kept their kids home from school in protest. The basic platform for the program is at 3rd Grade student learn about same-sex relationships, at 6th Grade kids hear the terms masturbation and gender expression, and at 7th Grade kids are warned about the dangers of sexting and the dangerous ease of availability of pornography on the internet.

The reality is Ontario's program may be taking things a bit to far but that does not mean they are entirely offtrack here.

We have three choices given today's reality of all the avenues of self expression and the propensity of media. One, we can bury our collective heads in the sand and appeal to social conservatism's usual fall back to "abstinence" which is basically social ignorance. Two, we can adopt the Ontario model which takes things a bit too far a bit too early in child development. Three, we can rationally find a common ground so that kids over their time in public school understand human sexuality, understand the concept of consequence, and understand today's social climate.

Kids are going to be exposed to various terms and concepts no matter how well adapt the helicopter parent is at trying to keep their child in a social bubble.

Well my question would simply be what is mandatory and what is volunteer and when. Like do they already learn about opposite sex relationships in 3rd grade? then its only logical to learn about them all.

anyway for example, my own school starts what they "call" sex ed at kindergarten but it only involves "stranger danger" stuff, improper touching and overall body cleanliness.
Nothing to do with real sex ed.

In 4th grade they learn about families and the different make ups . . . again nothing to really do with sex ed

In 5th grade girls have a health class just for them about thier bodies, body changes, periods etc . . .no real sex ed but very basic.

in 6th grade real reality based sex ed taught BUT its optional, parents get to choose if thier kids take it

in 9th grade (high school) sex ed is mandatory part of health class

I have zero problems with this system (I dont know anybody that does, does anybody here think that is unreasonable or illogical) but I dont know how it compares to what the OP is talking about since i can't currently watch the video and can only go by your cliff notes

 

[cpwill]

Basically, the Ontario government’s new sex-ed curriculum has freaked everyone out to the point that about a month ago a bunch of parents kept their kids home from school in protest. The basic platform for the program is at 3rd Grade student learn about same-sex relationships, at 6th Grade kids hear the terms masturbation and gender expression, and at 7th Grade kids are warned about the dangers of sexting and the dangerous ease of availability of pornography on the internet.

The reality is Ontario's program may be taking things a bit to far but that does not mean they are entirely offtrack here.

We have three choices given today's reality of all the avenues of self expression and the propensity of media. One, we can bury our collective heads in the sand and appeal to social conservatism's usual fall back to "abstinence" which is basically social ignorance. Two, we can adopt the Ontario model which takes things a bit too far a bit too early in child development. Three, we can rationally find a common ground so that kids over their time in public school understand human sexuality, understand the concept of consequence, and understand today's social climate.

Kids are going to be exposed to various terms and concepts no matter how well adapt the helicopter parent is at trying to keep their child in a social bubble.

The interesting assumption here being that if children do not learn about sex from the public education system, they won't learn about it at home from parents.


How about parents not treat the public education system as a get-out-of-jail card on having a series of possibly awkward conversations with their kids? Even James Dobson says you need to talk to your kids about sex at a younger age, you just need to make sure that it's you doing it, not the public education system.

 

[countryboy]

I would like to ask the same question to you

Oh that's right, I forgot. You just throw **** out there without giving it any thought. Never mind.

 

[countryboy]

Basically, the Ontario government’s new sex-ed curriculum has freaked everyone out to the point that about a month ago a bunch of parents kept their kids home from school in protest. The basic platform for the program is at 3rd Grade student learn about same-sex relationships, at 6th Grade kids hear the terms masturbation and gender expression, and at 7th Grade kids are warned about the dangers of sexting and the dangerous ease of availability of pornography on the internet.

The reality is Ontario's program may be taking things a bit to far but that does not mean they are entirely offtrack here.

We have three choices given today's reality of all the avenues of self expression and the propensity of media. One, we can bury our collective heads in the sand and appeal to social conservatism's usual fall back to "abstinence" which is basically social ignorance. Two, we can adopt the Ontario model which takes things a bit too far a bit too early in child development. Three, we can rationally find a common ground so that kids over their time in public school understand human sexuality, understand the concept of consequence, and understand today's social climate.

Kids are going to be exposed to various terms and concepts no matter how well adapt the helicopter parent is at trying to keep their child in a social bubble.

Actually, it's much, MUCH deeper than that. This is far from knee jerk. Watch the video.

 

[KevinKohler]

It's difficult to give a brief synopsis. But basically, they want to teach children as young as 5 about masturbation and sexual pleasure.

I'm not OK with this. My daughter is 6, and all she needs to know about her vagina is that that's where the urine comes from.

And kids as young as 12 about vaginal and anal fluid and their role in transmitting disease.

This I'm not so sure about. I know that 12 seems young, but I honestly don't hang out with any, don't know their culture, and have heard more than enough stories about the things even kids THIS young get up to. Teaching them about STDs around the time they are likely to become sexually active is not bad policy, IMO.

They also want to teach kids that it is perfectly normal to identify as any gender or sexual orientation that you wish, and that that cannot be changed.

Teaching kids acceptance for people that are different from them is fine, IMO. I get the religious angle, but that's why I think the simple solution is to allow parents to opt their kid out.

Furthermore, they want to give organizations that push religious humanist beliefs access to your kids inside, AND, outside of the school.

Intolerable. I mean, OUTSIDE of school seems fair game, but on school grounds, on school time? Nah.

This is going to happen in Canada this fall, it is already the official curriculum. But rest assured, we will not be far behind.

I'm more optimistic. I don't think having our 5 year olds learn about waxing their carrot is going to fly in this country. Ever.

 

[countryboy]

I mean, look. 3rd -6th grade sounds a little young to me to be starting to have ADULTS who AREN'T the parent, talking to kids about stuff like masturbation, and what not.

However, I also MUST admit that it's been a LOOOONG time since I was in the 3rd-6th grade, so I can't rightly recall the things I and my pears were dealing with/doing. I wanna say that around that time, girls were still CLEARLY the "enemy". I honestly don't believe I became interested in girls at ALL until...well, maybe it WAS 7th grade. It was DEFF in middle school.

Anyway, to continue my point, in addition to being a little fuzzy on my own history, I also don't have any friends in that age range, nor to I hang out with kids in that range.


Basically, what I am saying is, I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIDS THAT AGE ARE NOW GETTING UP TO. I mean, I hear the stories. I'd like to think a lot of those are outliers. Never the less, I can't DENY that things are different today than they were 20 years ago. I mean, my daughter just turned 6, and one of her uncles got her an RCA brand TABLET. Mostly for streaming netflix, he claims...but it can also play games, and access the internet. Now, I'm gonna be honest. I appreciate the generosity that gift represents. But I'm not exactly happy about it. Then again, I'm old fashioned, despite my age. So maybe I DO have my head in the sand.

All I know is, as long as my kid's school continues to be honest and forthright about what they are teaching in class, and I get to see it BEFORE they go over it, and as long as I retain a CHOICE on allowing my daughter to attend certain things, I'm happy as a clam.

The part that concerns me the most is giving outside organizations access to the children outside of school.

The curriculum also states, "the most effective way to stem the spread of HIV is to stop the stigma associated with the disease" (paraphrased). Aren't libs always lecturing us about the importance of science? Does that sound scientific to you?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Basically, the Ontario government’s new sex-ed curriculum has freaked everyone out to the point that about a month ago a bunch of parents kept their kids home from school in protest. The basic platform for the program is at 3rd Grade student learn about same-sex relationships, at 6th Grade kids hear the terms masturbation and gender expression, and at 7th Grade kids are warned about the dangers of sexting and the dangerous ease of availability of pornography on the internet.

The reality is Ontario's program may be taking things a bit to far but that does not mean they are entirely offtrack here.

We have three choices given today's reality of all the avenues of self expression and the propensity of media. One, we can bury our collective heads in the sand and appeal to social conservatism's usual fall back to "abstinence" which is basically social ignorance. Two, we can adopt the Ontario model which takes things a bit too far a bit too early in child development. Three, we can rationally find a common ground so that kids over their time in public school understand human sexuality, understand the concept of consequence, and understand today's social climate.

Kids are going to be exposed to various terms and concepts no matter how well adapt the helicopter parent is at trying to keep their child in a social bubble.

I don't know if they are taking it too far. If anything, they are teaching these things several years later than most kids are living them.

Children sometimes start masturbating in infancy, or even in the womb. Understanding that some people are gay might start being important as early preschool, if they have a peer whose parents are same-sex (and what's so bad about a kid knowing what a gay couple is in the same way they know what a straight couple is, e.g. "people who love each other a lot"?). Gender expression starts becoming clear by kindergarten, and certainly in early elementary school. 5th and 6th graders are definitely starting to flirt, and most have cell phones these days, so they will be trying to navigate these things already.

Basically, it seems like people's opposition is that they simply don't want to acknowledge the reality that kids don't just go to sleep one night at 17 as totally asexual "innocents" and then wake up on their 18th birthday as fully sexual adults. Sexuality is a process that starts before birth and continues until death.

No matter how much prudish parents may want to stick their heads in the sand, that is not going to stop their children from developing and living in the real world. And to just pretend that isn't happening is not going to set them up for learning healthy expression and boundaries.

 

[countryboy]

I'm not OK with this. My daughter is 6, and all she needs to know about her vagina is that that's where the urine comes from.
This I'm not so sure about. I know that 12 seems young, but I honestly don't hang out with any, don't know their culture, and have heard more than enough stories about the things even kids THIS young get up to. Teaching them about STDs around the time they are likely to become sexually active is not bad policy, IMO.
Teaching kids acceptance for people that are different from them is fine, IMO. I get the religious angle, but that's why I think the simple solution is to allow parents to opt their kid out.

Intolerable. I mean, OUTSIDE of school seems fair game, but on school grounds, on school time? Nah.

I'm more optimistic. I don't think having our 5 year olds learn about waxing their carrot is going to fly in this country. Ever.

Don't have time for a point by point response but, the activities outside of the school are to be officially encouraged, partnered, and coordinated with the schools. Some of these organizations are associated with the church of "unitarian universalism". It's pretty obvious what's going on here. I suggest you make time to watch the video.

 

[KevinKohler]

OK, where to draw the line on what is optional, and what isn't.

To me, this also can be simplified, by breaking these things up into courses. So, in other words, the masturbation sex ed. The STD portion. ETC.

I would say to make it ALL optional. Up to 9th grade. By 9th grade, some form of education on sexual reproduction and the consequences of it, STDs, etc, should be mandatory at public schools. Sad to say, there are a LOT of parents who aren't parents out there, and with public schools, they HAVE to do blanket style approaches to things that we, as a society, NEED to ensure that our kids know about.

But prior to that, break all these little bits up, like a sexual orientation class, family dynamic, etc, and let the parents get a sylabus, and make their own decisions on their child's sexual education. What I expect would happen is, the kids that don't have decent parents will STILL end up in those classes, because their parents aren't likely to pay attention to stuff like that anyway.

 

[KevinKohler]

The part that concerns me the most is giving outside organizations access to the children outside of school.

The curriculum also states, "the most effective way to stem the spread of HIV is to stop the stigma associated with the disease" (paraphrased). Aren't libs always lecturing us about the importance of science? Does that sound scientific to you?

The number one reason why HIV spreads is because people don't know they or their partner has it.

I'd say making HIV more socially acceptable to talk about would help that fact out considerably, wouldn't you?

But I agree that a school finding ways to grant access to kids outside of it by whatever organizations is bull****.

But then again...they already do. ROTC, anyone?

 

[OrphanSlug]

Well my question would simply be what is mandatory and what is volunteer and when. Like do they already learn about opposite sex relationships in 3rd grade? then its only logical to learn about them all.

anyway for example, my own school starts what they "call" sex ed at kindergarten but it only involves "stranger danger" stuff, improper touching and overall body cleanliness.
Nothing to do with real sex ed.

In 4th grade they learn about families and the different make ups . . . again nothing to really do with sex ed

In 5th grade girls have a health class just for them about thier bodies, body changes, periods etc . . .no real sex ed but very basic.

in 6th grade real reality based sex ed taught BUT its optional, parents get to choose if thier kids take it

in 9th grade (high school) sex ed is mandatory part of health class

I have zero problems with this system (I dont know anybody that does, does anybody here think that is unreasonable or illogical) but I dont know how it compares to what the OP is talking about since i can't currently watch the video and can only go by your cliff notes

I'll do this for you and everyone else. Doing a little research this appears to be the "revised" 2015 document in question...

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health1to8.pdf

Read for yourself what the program does and does not include. Now this is a huge document which covers more than just sex education. I have not read all of it either, but just quickly going through some key terms the video mentions I did not find explicit instructions for *anything.* Telling me the video is being just as reactionary as the OP and several comments in this thread.

Of course, concepts and terms are mentioned as well as types of relationships. Not a big deal in my opinion, as kids are going to hear these terms anyway and see these relationships throughout the various media sources. But again, there is no explicit instruction for or encouragement of anything. This is not about promoting homosexuality, or anal sex, or whatever else people get all freaked out about hearing. More often than not scanning through the document I see plenty of mention of these being adult decisions, plenty of mention of going to the parent to have these discussions as kids go through various stages of human development (which they are going to do,) and plenty of mention about "modelling healthy choices" concerning all aspects of physical health, including "relationships."

I do not see enough in the document to get that upset about, but I will say we can be rational about making potential changes.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Actually, it's much, MUCH deeper than that. This is far from knee jerk. Watch the video.

Read the actual source document, the video is a knee jerk reaction.

 

[Andalublue]

Basically, the Ontario government’s new sex-ed curriculum has freaked everyone out to the point that about a month ago a bunch of parents kept their kids home from school in protest. The basic platform for the program is at 3rd Grade student learn about same-sex relationships, at 6th Grade kids hear the terms masturbation and gender expression, and at 7th Grade kids are warned about the dangers of sexting and the dangerous ease of availability of pornography on the internet.

The reality is Ontario's program may be taking things a bit to far but that does not mean they are entirely offtrack here.

We have three choices given today's reality of all the avenues of self expression and the propensity of media. One, we can bury our collective heads in the sand and appeal to social conservatism's usual fall back to "abstinence" which is basically social ignorance. Two, we can adopt the Ontario model which takes things a bit too far a bit too early in child development. Three, we can rationally find a common ground so that kids over their time in public school understand human sexuality, understand the concept of consequence, and understand today's social climate.

Kids are going to be exposed to various terms and concepts no matter how well adapt the helicopter parent is at trying to keep their child in a social bubble.

Seems good to me. The curriculum seems to be taking sex education step-by-step at appropriate ages. Given that I think something like 70% of 12-year-old have seen internet porn, I think it's best that they know what sex is really about. The guy on the vid doesn't appear to want 6-year-olds to know the correct word for penis or vagina. He's like my sex education teacher back in the 70s - either don't talk about it, or use florid euphemisms for body parts.

 

[AGENT J]

I'll do this for you and everyone else. Doing a little research this appears to be the "revised" 2015 document in question...

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health1to8.pdf

Read for yourself what the program does and does not include. Now this is a huge document which covers more than just sex education. I have not read all of it either, but just quickly going through some key terms the video mentions I did not find explicit instructions for *anything.* Telling me the video is being just as reactionary as the OP and several comments in this thread.

Of course, concepts and terms are mentioned as well as types of relationships. Not a big deal in my opinion, as kids are going to hear these terms anyway and see these relationships throughout the various media sources. But again, there is no explicit instruction for or encouragement of anything. This is not about promoting homosexuality, or anal sex, or whatever else people get all freaked out about hearing. More often than not scanning through the document I see plenty of mention of these being adult decisions, plenty of mention of going to the parent to have these discussions as kids go through various stages of human development (which they are going to do,) and plenty of mention about "modelling healthy choices" concerning all aspects of physical health, including "relationships."

I do not see enough in the document to get that upset about, but I will say we can be rational about making potential changes.

Thanks when I have time ill look at the vid and the doc you provided . . currently I can't make a judgment or get all up in arms about it because I havent seen the vids, doc or heard from an objective and honest poster on whats really going on.