What should schools teach kids about ***?

[simon12]

I just found out mainly as there revising/abolishing it that kids in Canada since 2015 are taught about
"The Wynne *** ed introduced homosexuality and gender identity in Grade 3, masturbation in Grade 6, and oral and anal *** in Grade 7, advised 12-year-olds to carry condoms, Grade 8 children to come up with a sexual plan, and taught there are six genders."
Does anyone wish there teachers had taught them to **********? Wouldn't this be considered child abuse teaching them this 20 years ago? How can being taught there are 6 genders even be in Education when it changes all the time and has no basis in fact or science. Even more worrying is the number of news articles saying how bad it will be if they stop this.

 

[ElvisIsBeer]

Trying to decipher this.

What do you think *** ed should cover, and from what ages should it be taught?

 

[simon12]

My opinion is it should be the responsibility of parents, it was before but this confirms it for me.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Some of us olds cannot get our heads round LBGT (especially the T bit) and dismiss it as the latest fad if this makes the future generation more tolerent then surely educating them at an early age is the way to go.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

My opinion is it should be the responsibility of parents, it was before but this confirms it for me.

I agree.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Simon You don't say what ages the grades are so it's difficult to comment.

.

 

[ElvisIsBeer]

It can be a tricky world at the best of times, and a dangerous world at worst. Given that context, perhaps educating people in order to help them keep themselves safe is a good thing. Perhaps educating them so they understand the world and the people around them might, as Chippy suggests, encourage tolerance.

The OP's suggestion is to ban *** ed, and leave it to parents. Does that not introduce numerous risks to vast numbers of children?

How would you go about explaining to your 13 yr old daughter about what is OK and not OK when, inevitably, they first start experimenting with ***? If school doesn't educate children, the first line educator would not be parents. It would be the internet and online ****.

That tutor will tell your daughter that she should accept and like many things that would be damaging to her. That tutor will tell a young lad exactly what he should be doing. Both are likely to be damaged.

Of course, online **** and social media are already a major influence on young people. Removing *** ed from schools would be dangerous. Do you think you, as parent, will have all the bases covered? Many won't. Many won't try.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I agree Elvis.

Another point how Balanced would the *** education be if both parents were the same ***?

.

 

[Gunge]

Some of us olds cannot get our heads round LBGT (especially the T bit) and dismiss it as the latest fad if this makes the future generation more tolerent then surely educating them at an early age is the way to go.

Stuff tolerance - this would just encourage them. No, they should be taught the basics of *** between a man and a woman... they can explore the er, finer points themselves. Any lgbgtgbt nonsense and they'll be punished by divine retribution. That's what I think, sorry if it offends but that's how I see it. Sometimes I'm glad to be getting old.

 

[MickDundee]

My opinion is it should be the responsibility of parents, it was before but this confirms it for me.

 

[Linalmeemow]

My opinion is it should be the responsibility of parents, it was before but this confirms it for me.

Teen pregnancy rates have fallen dramatically since the 1990s, so unless parents have really got their act together with what they tell their kids *** education in school is becoming more effective.

 

[marshbrewer]

It should be down to the parents / guardians of a child as to whether they want their kids to receive state sexual / morality education, unless the kids are already in the care of the state or otherwise being supervised as the parents have been judged inadequate (as long as this judgement was a rigorous process, which by and large it is).

I have no problems with the state version being made available in schools, as long as people are free to opt out.

Our eldest was ready and had already been informed by us, so went into hseigbtlmipq classes, or whatever they are called now, suitability clued up to make her own mind up.

I would be opposed to not having the option to withdraw them if I didn't think they were ready, but overall I'm fairly relaxed about it.

 

[Clint]

Just the basics...the thing is as in op...where do you stop? Bondage,rough stuff,orgies,animals....or even worse...

 

[Dutto]

My opinion is it should be the responsibility of parents, it was before but this confirms it for me.

I agree, but ....

1. An American gentleman who I was working with back in the 1970's threatened to burn down the local school because they taught his daughter about *** when she was fourteen. Surely, all kids need to know about where kids come from well before they reach fourteen years of age?
2. Not part of my Job Description but in 1975 I had to teach my Senior Operator what happened when a woman had a menstrual cycle. Why? The oldest of his three daughters was coming up eleven years old and he thought he ought to know so that he could explain things to her. Apparently he had tried to get information off his wife and she didn't know either!
3. When I was eleven years old, my own parents gave me a small booklet that was provided by the local church. The booklet explained the mechanics of how things happened and went on to explain the dangers of self-abuse (untrue, as I proved to myself) and the virtues of celibacy. That booklet was the only formal *** education that I received. Luckily for me, a slightly older girl who lived a few doors away had received a similar booklet for girls, so we got together and worked out what the booklets were talking about.

So, what happened with my own children?

Very early on, their mother and I agreed that whenever the subject came up we would sit the children down and explain the situation to them. The explanation would be true, lucid and complete. Right!

The problem was that the subject came up at breakfast, after I had been on night-shift. Our daughter, aged nine, asked:

"Is it true that if a boy stamps on a girl's foot she will have a baby?" The answer of "No." resulted in ...

... "Well then, if a boy kisses a girl in the dark will she have a baby?"

Again the answer "No." was not enough because the next question was "Well, how does a girl get pregnant then?"

Our son (who was eleven years old at the time) looked at the ceiling, my wife and I looked at each other and I said "Now's the time then." smiled at her, carried on with "I'm off to bed." and left her to it.

There was fall-out from the ensuing explanation about a week later. This was when, again during breakfast, my rather inquisitive daughter came up with a full explanation of the *** act and followed her explanation with the question "So, after the man and woman have done all that, do they just lie there?"

I know I should have kept my mouth shut because after I muttered "Your mother does!" I didn't get anywhere near the lady for about a month!

Happy Days! :thumb:

 

[simon12]

I think the grades are 4-5 year higher than the grade no. My main (not only) problem with this stuff with the state in charge in this case is the totally non scientific non factual ever changing gender part of it, how are teachers even supposed to understand something that never existed. I have no problem with kids being taught tolerance but there being indoctrinated into something even many LGBT groups are now against, it makes there identities invalid as is there are 6 genders and its a fluid thing L & G don't make much sense bi would be hex and T doesn't really work either. Also all scientific evidence suggests that being confused over your sexual identity makes you less happy and prone to suicide. Does anyone really think there life would have been better if they had more choice on there sexual identity?
Also on a side note a doctor was recently fired from the NHS for holding to the belief there are only 2 genders.

 

[Fil]

kids will always ask the questions that make the adults present most uncomfortable cos they are KIDS!!

Its always gonna be best to answer such questions with honesty and openness even if mildly uncomfortable, Teachers will be professionally trained to deal with such circumstances.

The alternative is the schoolyard grapevine and Daves big sister, who imho is of questionable character hanging around with kids younger than herself..

Of course its much better for your daughters to learn about anal *** when their b/f's fumble and pot the brown when aiming for the pink.

Also Acknowledging masturbation happens IS NOT TEACHING HOW TO DO IT!! much the same as teaching about WW2 and the holocaust is not teaching intolerance, but ABOUT it!!

Schools need to teach these things as Parents are often too effed up to do it themselves, and the more concerned about the subject the more effed up they are likely to be.

If your kids come home with information and questions you cant handle THATS YOUR FAULT!!

 

[Linalmeemow]

Also on a side note a doctor was recently fired from the NHS for holding to the belief there are only 2 genders.

If you're talking about the Mackereth case it appears he was fired for refusing to comply with the Equality Act by refusing to use the chosen personal pronoun of his patients. He could believe what he liked, he just had to treat people with a bit of respect.

 

[simon12]

If your kids come home with information and questions you cant handle THATS YOUR FAULT!!

So if they come home from school saying they are a nonbinary pansexual demi-****** swamp person will you know what to do?

 

[simon12]

If you're talking about the Mackereth case it appears he was fired for refusing to comply with the Equality Act by refusing to use the chosen personal pronoun of his patients. He could believe what he liked, he just had to treat people with a bit of respect.

Just had a proper read of it and he was offered to do a course on gender but refused
"The doctor replied that “in good conscience” he could not conform to those demands, and so the contract was terminated between them.

He said: “Firstly, we are not allowed to say what we believe. Secondly, as my case shows, we are not allowed to think what we believe. Finally, we are not allowed to defend what we believe.

“By stating what has been believed by mankind for centuries - namely that gender and *** are determined at birth - you can come under ferocious attack.""
And the contract was teminated so it actually looks like he didn't get the sack either, apologies for the error here.

 

[Linalmeemow]

Just had a proper read of it and he was offered to do a course on gender but refused
"The doctor replied that “in good conscience” he could not conform to those demands, and so the contract was terminated between them.

He said: “Firstly, we are not allowed to say what we believe. Secondly, as my case shows, we are not allowed to think what we believe. Finally, we are not allowed to defend what we believe.

“By stating what has been believed by mankind for centuries - namely that gender and *** are determined at birth - you can come under ferocious attack.""
And the contract was teminated so it actually looks like he didn't get the sack either, apologies for the error here.

Surprisingly I do have a degree of sympathy for religious types in this position. However, they aren't being forced to change their beliefs, just to treat people equally.