Schools add LGBTQ to sex ed: Inclusive or overstep?
This little essay popped up on my web browser. I think the intent is to foster thinking and discussion of the subject.
Here is the text of the piece, my comments, as if they are of any importance, follow:
What's happening: California school teachers who conduct sexual education classes are now encouraged to address gender identity and to offer advice for LGBTQ teenagers under new guidelines issued by the state's board of education.
The guidelines offer tips on discussing gender identity with children as young as kindergarten. It also includes advice for integrating "gender-neutral and LGBTQ-inclusive language," dicussing masturbation and promoting safe sex practices for both straight and LGBTQ students. The new format is not mandatory, but rather intended as a blueprint for schools that choose to use them.
Why there's debate: Advocates for LGBTQ issues have applauded the reforms for providing information to a population of students that is often overlooked in sex ed coursework.
Some parents have complained that the guidelines violate their rights to decide what their children learn about sexuality and when they learn it. Conservative groups have also argued that frank discussions about sex and gender have no place in the classroom.
What's next: California's new guidelines are part of a larger movement taking place in a number of states as policymakers reconsider the standards for teaching sex ed. Colorado's legislature recently passed a bill to mandate "comprehensive" sex ed and bar schools from teaching abstinience-only programs, which are the only type of sex ed programs allowed in several states.
Arizona and Utah recently repealed their so-called no promo homo laws, which banned schools from discussing LGBTQ issues during health courses. Similar laws remain on the books in six other states. Changes to sex ed are taking place in other countries as well. Courses in British schools will include LGBTQ material under new guidelines passed in February.
Perspectives
Excluding LGBTQ issues from sex ed is detrimental to student health
“Removing sexual orientation, biological sex and gender identity language from any framework or curriculum does not erase LGBTQ+ youth from existence. Instead it exacerbates their risk for negative health outcomes and other inequities.” — Kelli Bourne, EdSource
Parents are being left out of deciding what is taught to their kids
“The opinions of parents matter. Sex education is personal and sensitive, evoking diverse medical, moral and religious issues. Everyone has a different opinion about what should be taught to whom and when, and those opinions should be considered when school districts implement a sex education policy.” — Lori Kuykendall, Dallas News
“Parents — not school systems — should hold authority over what their children learn about sexuality and gender and when.” — Maria Keffler, Washington Post
Exclusion from sex ed can be dangerous for the mental health of LGBTQ students
“I knew I didn’t belong when the remainder of my sex education failed to mention LGBTQ people at all. I graduated high school feeling like a statistic — the kid who gets bullied for her sexual orientation, the one who feels suicidal thanks to everyday hatred.” — Erica Lenti, Globe and Mail
Sex ed has no place in schools
“The lessons stomp on childhood innocence, parental authority and teacher rights.” — Rebecca Friedrichs, Orange County Register
Inclusion in sex ed curricula helps LGBTQ students feel accepted
“If I had been given information about the kind of relationships I would later come to be in and given the space to think critically about my gender it would have made my road to self-acceptance a less bumpy one.” — Kennedy Walker, Guardian
A limited view of sexuality leaves kids unprepared
“Sex is like a Cheesecake Factory menu: There are endless options, some you might be interested in trying, some you’re not into and some you might try later. Framing sex as a single activity ― penis-in-vagina intercourse between two consenting heterosexual adults ― isn’t going to cut it anymore.” — Brittany Wong, HuffPost
Leaving sex ed to parents results in kids who are uniformed and unprepared
“Conservatives often frame sex ed as government overreach, arguing that lessons in sexuality and relationships are best provided by parents. But most parents can’t or don’t provide such guidance.” — Andrea Barrica, New York Times
My perspective: I think your attitude about this subject depends on how you view sexuality. Here is my take on sexuality:
1) Our species has only two sexes - male and female; each person is supposed to be assigned one set of reproductive organs. Just like birth defects, occasionally their are mishaps in development and someone may have two sets of reproductive organs or may develop traits in appearance and physique that are more aligned with the opposite sex as their equipment.
Not to be dismissive or trite, but this comes under the heading of 'shit happens.' Folks with such problems should be accepted just as we accept those with any other developmental problem - cerebral palsy, etc. I'm not talking about labeling them as disabled, I'm talking about how we should treat/relate to them.
2) In terms of sexual orientation, it is supposed to be hardwired to your equipment. As noted above, sometimes things happen. Let's call folks like this 'wired gays.' My perspective is there is another type of gay - l call them 'psychological gays.' I think that these are folks who are lead to gayness by chemical imbalance, depression, or choice. Some folks think it is cool to be queer.
I have a gay sibling, you wouldn't know it to meet her. I know several other gay folks, some are friends, some are acquaintances, again, unless you really get into their lives, you wouldn't know just by meeting them, largely because they are NOT proclaiming their orientation to everyone they meet. To me this typifies the 'wired gay.' I believe most folks in the 'I'm queer and I'm here' crowd are 'psychological gays.'
As far as I'm concerned, bi-sexuality is a form of hedonistic, deviant behavior. I don't believe it should be accepted. Trans-gendered falls under the heading of either hardwired or psychological.
The bottom line is, being homosexual/transgender is okay, just as having cerebral palsy is okay. But it is not normal. It is an aberration.
Reportedly 4.5% of the population identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. I'm not inclined to look deeply into the dats, so I'm not sure what percentages are L, G, B, T. Willing to bet that T is a small percentage.
Taking that into consideration, how much accommodation should we make? Are there enough transgenders running around to warrant separate transgendered bathrooms? Are there enough transgendered folks who actually want to pee in the restroom used by the sex they want to be that it is actually an issue worth attention? I don't think so. Side note - I didn't let my kids go alone into a multi-stall public restroom until they were 9 or 10ish.
So, do these numbers warrant the inclusion of LGBT sex habits in sex education? Nope. As far as I'm concerned sex education should end at how mommy and daddy made you, covered in a biology class.
The only conflict I have is that I had a couple friends in high school who were not aware of the little squirt before ejaculation and ended up getting married when their girlfriend turned up pregnant. That is some information that youngsters need to have at some point, and it is unlikely that mom or dad is going to pass that on.
Sex-Ed needs to be an opt-in class - the default is that your kid doesn't get it unless you want them to attend.
LGBT info does not need to be included.
Last edited by 26 Inf; 05-14-19 at 17:46.
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President... - Theodore Roosevelt, Lincoln and Free Speech, Metropolitan Magazine, Volume 47, Number 6, May 1918.
Every Communist must grasp the truth. Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party Mao Zedong, 6 November, 1938 - speech to the Communist Patry of China's sixth Central Committee
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by TomMcC
Bookmarks