That’s an amazing statement. That’s exactly what parents are objecting to; that educators feel they know best and that they will shape the mores and ethics of the children. It’s something I’d expect to see in the Soviet Union or communist China…teachers telling students to ignore what the parents say. The fact that you don’t have a problem with this and even think it’s an effective “smackdown” is incredible.
Participation in sports and learning “civics”…how exactly is that attacking the spiritual or religious basis of the parents? How is that even close to a decent analogy?
The type of sex education described is really a belief system and a “religion” of its own. Casual sex, “all kids do it”, it’s no big deal…overcoming modesty (having females put condoms on cucumbers in front of males)…this is akin to brainwashing.
If it were just factual material…this is how the body works, this is what STDs are, this is what hormones do, etc, I think there would be very few complaints. Instead they border into preaching their own liberal view of sex, free love, instant gratification, etc. Why? Why not just stick to the basics? Why the need to “convert” people to their point of view?
There was a case in Mass. where kids were shown pornographic movies of gay sex and homosexuals were brought in to describe the joys of “fisting”. Kids who didn’t have opposite sex “girlfriends” or “boyfriends” were told that they were probably “questioning their sexuality” and it was OK to experiment. This goes far beyond “education” and into sexual prothelytyzing.
In my case, in 6th grade we had a day or two of movies and such. It wasn’t much. I could definitely see the case for more “education”. But it should be “education”, like physics or math, values nuetral, not an indoctrination into the “free sex - your parents are fuddy duddies so don’t listen to anything they say” religion.
So the parents are right to feel outraged that somebody knows more about biology than they do?
Like I said, I took four years of this and never heard anything of the sort.
In what way is this comparable to a religion?
I’ve seen surveys that indicate some 75% of high school kids have had sex - and I never saw this cited in a health class. Nor did I see sex encouraged or any females having to put condoms on cucumbers. What would the point of that be? Men have to know how to put condoms on too.
Bull. That’s exactly what I had, and there are people who have a problem with it.
Please don’t let gross overgeneralizations stop you now.
This really shouldn’t be the battle people make it into.
It really isn’t that hard to say “Masturbation cannot cause you physical harm. Different religions have different opinions on whether or not it is appropriate. If you don’t know what your religion’s views on the topic are, please check with your parents or clergy.”
On that note, sometimes it seems like the faculty at the school where I teach end up giving more guidance to our students than their parents do. I know of high school girls who claim they can’t use a condom during sex, because they’re Catholic - and contraception is against the Church teachings - but they were pretty darn shocked when a teacher replied that while contraception might not be acceptable, neither was premarital sex. How on earth did they miss out on that? How on earth can a parent NOT tell they’re child “don’t have sex until you’re married,” if that’s their actual belief.
kennybath, if that did actually happen (and I’d like to see a cite), then it’s not sexual prosletyzing, it’s out and out indecency with a child - a bunch of them, in fact - and the teacher concerned should be fired, have their credential revoked, and face jail time.
In the end, I’m convinced that the vast majority of parents and teachers want the same thing - for students to be safe and healthy. It’s just that parents are often short-sighted about what their kids are already up to, already have opinions about, and already think is doable. Conversely, teachers sometimes see too much of the parents who don’t give a crap, kids who are sexually active far too early, and we overcompensate by throwing everything in the deep blue, lubricated sea at them
I get Abstinence-only education, and what it aims to teach BUT I have a concern that the young people are being done a disservice.
Most of the emphasis on contraception in the US seems to be on it’s unreliability, I have a feeling that some of the 18 year old newlyweds in the bible-belt may need someone to tell them that unless they really want a large family, they should start trusting it a bit more.
I assume that most parents, even if they want their daughter to be a virgin on her wedding night, don’t want her popping out a baby every year for the next 15 years.
Where EXACTLY is the problem with teaching the different forms of birth control and contraception, if it is done within the context of a married couple choosing their family size?
My school (this is in Northern Ireland) taught sex education in the religious education classes. We did the whole “sex within marriage” thing and didn’t even mention homosexuality or masturbation. However, we had two 1 hour sessions on contraception and abortion. One was on how various things worked, who they were suitable for, failure rates and how to make them most effective (we certainly covered oil-based lubricants with condoms and antibiotics with the pill).
The second hour was spent discussing the views of various religions towards contraception and abortion.
eg The rythm method is the only type of contraception sanctioned by the Catholic church however condoms and the rythm method would not be acceptable to orthodox jews, while the pill would be.
Thus everyone was left in no doubt as to what their particular religion’s views on the subject were, and was still informed of all their options.
Great job of extrapolating from what was not said. Try and look up the difference between explaining and advocating some time, please.
You will notice I did say that I would leave up to those who care about what may or may not be left to the the difference to explain it. In this case, you ostensibly feel that (a) sexual mores are a “spiritual and religious” issue and (b) “spiritual and religious” issues are a supremely privileged category that is absolutely non-negotiable.
And your reaction is exactly what I was describing in my post. Describing, again. You haven’t tried to lay a smackdown on me, but have gone ballistic up to and including comparisons to the soviets or Red China.
And this is exactly what various posters have mentioned is the great far: a caricature of “sex education” based on people’s worst, darkest fears about the corruption of their young.
IRL, I’m in most agreement with phouka’s latest post insofar as sex-ed’s place in the curriculum and how it should deal with moral implications. The problem as I see it, kennybath, is that for too many parents even THAT would be considered unacceptable.
…and I just realized you probably got the meaning wrong. I said a way to earn a self inflicted smackdown was to go up to a parent and say you knew better. Meaning the non parent would bring upon himself a smackdown FROM the parent, for being so presumptuous. OK?
Talk about a strawman. We already know that they’ll all engage in some masturbation, but that doesn’t give the teachers justification for saying, “Hey, if you need some sexual release, you can always just pleasure yourself.” In other words, they don’t need encouragement to engage in some of this act, but that doesn’t mean that teachers should feel free to give this their stamp of approval.
Ahh yes. The famous “fisting” propoganda.What isn’t told about the situation is as follows…
These kids were actually teenagers.
They were attending a conference for GLSEN ( the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network). It was not in a high school classroom, but rather hosted at the Tufts University campus. In other words it was entirely voluntary and organized completely by a private organization.
GLSEN did not, in fact, sponsor the dialogue that occured in this workshop. It was specifically two Planned Parenthood associates who were doing a safer sex workshop. It has also been suggested, though hard to prove, that the questioners who started this dialogue were actually plants given the fact that they were also “conveniently” recording that specific piece.
I’m not sure whether I believe the last sentence or not, but I can say that I’ve been to Teaching Respect for All (GLSEN’s conference) in the past and have never seen people with recording devices.
The workshop itself only got into fisting. All that other stuff (especially pornographic video allegations)? Crap, as far as I can tell, that you’ll not find a coherent cite for outside the wild ramblings of the severely right-wing. Actually, I’m hard-pressed to find any third-party cites at all on the subject.
The clean-up.
But, seriously, the concern is that the kids could conclude that if some things mother told them are matters of opinion on which there can be different acceptable POVs, other things mother told them may not be Universal Absolutes either.
They also learn about contreception in science in year 9 (aged 14), whcih parents also have a right to make their child opt out of, especially since the girl who had an abortion at 14’s mother blamed the school.