Ontario kids to learn all about anal intercourse and vaginal lubrication

[Josephus]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario-to-introduce-more-explicit-sex-education-in-schools/article1540642/


The days of euphemisms and innuendo in Ontario's classrooms are numbered, with the province set to roll out a new sex education curriculum next fall built on clear and explicit language that has raised objections from conservative parent groups.

The revision, outlined in 208 pages that were quietly posted on the Ministry of Education's website in January, will for the first time teach Grade 3 pupils about such topics as sexual identity and orientation, and introduce terms like "anal intercourse" and "vaginal lubrication" to children in Grades 6 and 7. The new curriculum begins in Grade 1 with lessons about the proper names of body parts.

The changes came to light Tuesday, when members of a religious, "family-focused" coalition threatened to pull their children out of school on May 10 unless Premier Dalton McGuinty abandons the changes.

The Premier stood by the curriculum, saying he has confidence in the judgment of school principals and teachers to present the information in a thoughtful and responsible manner. If sex education is not taught in the classroom, he added, students could get information from potentially uninformed sources, such as their friends.--especially ones named Marti.

"If we can provide it in a format and in a venue over which we have some control ... why wouldn't we recognize that we live in an information age and why wouldn't we try to present this information in a thoughtful and responsible and open way," Mr. McGuinty said.

Critics said topics such as homosexuality are best left to parents to discuss with their children.

"I think it's a sort of infringement on parents, because you're talking about a very personal and sensitive area and dealing with kids so young I believe what it will end up infringing on their thought processes and their desires and ability to make correct choices," said Reverend Ekron Malcolm, director of the Institute for Canadian Values, who is involved in the coalition.

Some of the most controversial changes are in the Grade 3 curriculum. In a discussion on human development and showing respect for people's differences, for example, teachers are invited to discuss "invisible differences," including gender identity and sexual orientation, in an effort to reflect the fact that more and more students have same-sex parents.

Christian right leader Charles McVety, who is also part of the coalition, said it is unconscionable to teach children as young as eight years old gender identity and sexual orientation. He accused the Premier of listening to "special interest groups with an agenda," including former education minister Kathleen Wynne, who is openly gay.

The curriculum hadn't been reviewed since 1998, and the changes reflect Ontario's diverse society and have nothing to do with Ms. Wynne, who is now Transportation Minister, said Michelle Despault, a spokeswoman for Education Minister Lorna Dombrowsky.

"As a government, we have a commitment to provide a curriculum that is both equitable and inclusive," she said.

A spokesman for Ms. Wynne said the minister will make no comment on the issue.

In another key change, the topic of puberty will be introduced in Grade 4, a year earlier than in the old curriculum, in recognition of the fact that many children reach puberty at younger ages. The description of physical changes is also more explicit in the new version, including the development of breasts and body hair.

All the changes are developmentally appropriate, and sex education doesn't lead to sex, said Alex McKay, research co-ordinator for the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada.

"If anything, young people who are very well educated about sexuality and sexual health tend to actually delay having sex, because they fully understand everything that's involved, biologically and psychologically," he said.

There has always been a sting to the topic of birds and bees in the classroom. Sex education was first seriously considered in Ontario in the 1940s, fuelled in part by the spread of sexually transmitted infections during the Second World War. It wasn't until 1966 that education officials drafted a Grade 9 course that introduced students to human reproduction.

Almost every change or revision since has drawn some objections.

In 2004, a parents group in Nova Scotia grew incensed after the province offered youth 12 years old and over a brightly coloured, spiral-bound notebook titled Sex? A Healthy Sexuality Resource.

When New Brunswick reviewed its sex education curriculum in 2005, parents called the course too explicit, pointing to references to homosexuality, orgasm and masturbation. The curriculum was adjusted slightly to place more emphasis on abstinence.

The new Ontario curriculum took two years to develop and involved input from principals and teachers in both the Roman Catholic and public school boards as well as parent groups and public health units in the province.

With research from Rick Cash

[Berkut]

"I think it's a sort of infringement on parents, because you're  talking about a very personal and sensitive area and dealing with kids  so young I believe what it will end up infringing on their thought  processes and their desires and ability to make correct choices," said  Reverend Ekron Malcolm, director of the Institute for Canadian Values,  who is involved in the coalition.

I can see why religious  leaders would get upset at the idea of someone else "infringing on kids  thought processes".

Christian right leader Charles McVety, who is also part of the  coalition, said it is unconscionable to teach children as young as eight  years old gender identity and sexual orientation.

Of course, teaching kids even younger than eight years old that their  friends who do not share their religious beliefs are going to burn in  hell for all eternity (or insert some other morally reprehensible  religious viewpoint here) is perfectly reasonable.

No religious "leader" has any right to talk about what is appropriate  and not appropriate to teach children. Their entire power structure is  based on the brainwashing of children specifically prior to their  ability to form independent and objective viewpoints on "faith".

[Grey Fox]

Death to Political Correctness!

[Ed Anger]

If sex education is not taught in the classroom, he added, students could get information from potentially uninformed sources, such as their friends.--especially ones named Marti.

Ha.

[JonasSalk]

Is that some sort of Canadian joke?  Ones named Marti?

[Grey Fox]

It's a Languish joke. Eventually, you'll understand.

[Eddie Teach]

Some kind of reference to Cuban poet Jose Marti I'm guessing. 

[Martinus]

What's your objection to this, Josephus? That school pupils should not learn about sex or that they should not learn about anal sex?

[Martinus]

Death to Political Correctness!

How is this political correctness? Or are you saying that those opposing these subjects being taught at schools are acting out of political correctness?

I fail to see how actually giving any information to students can be seen as "political correctness"? Isn't political correctness about censoring or restricting some information or expressions because they are politically incorrect?

[Martinus]

"I think it's a sort of infringement on parents, because you're talking about a very personal and sensitive area and dealing with kids so young I believe what it will end up infringing on their thought processes and their desires and ability to make correct choices," said Reverend Ekron Malcolm, director of the Institute for Canadian Values, who is involved in the coalition.

I wish someone had "infringed on his parents" and taught him how to form proper sentences.

[Josephus]

What's your objection to this, Josephus? That school pupils should not learn about sex or that they should not learn about anal sex?

I only posted it as an FYI...I'm not necessarily pro or con. But now that you got me started on it, I don't think 8 year olds need to know about anal sex no. If they get the urges they'll  eventually figure it out.

When you consider that Canadian students are consistently doing poor in such skills as grammar,math and science, I just believe that maybe schools should put more effort into teaching kids how to read and write first, before teaching them how to bugger each other.

Don't forget I am one of the representatives of the loonie leftists on this board...I'm all for gay rights...I just don't think it's a huge priority to get into so much detail in Grade 3 or whatever. I'm a strong believer in childhood, and it seems more and more that childhood, the intrinsic innocence of it, is ending.

[Grey Fox]

Death to Political Correctness!

How is this political correctness? Or are you saying that those opposing these subjects being taught at schools are acting out of political correctness?

I fail to see how actually giving any information to students can be seen as "political correctness"? Isn't political correctness about censoring or restricting some information or expressions because they are politically incorrect?

Not using the real words is political correctness.

[Faeelin]

Hrm, I'm not sure how I feel about this. It might be a bit too young to be learning about gay sex, but I do think it's a serious problem that gay teens never really get sexual education in school...

[Josquius]

Fair enough to a extent. They may try it anyway and end up hurting themselves.
But grades 6 and 7? Way too early.

[Berkut]

What's your objection to this, Josephus? That school pupils should not learn about sex or that they should not learn about anal sex?

I only posted it as an FYI...I'm not necessarily pro or con. But now that you got me started on it, I don't think 8 year olds need to know about anal sex no. If they get the urges they'll  eventually figure it out.

When you consider that Canadian students are consistently doing poor in such skills as grammar,math and science, I just believe that maybe schools should put more effort into teaching kids how to read and write first, before teaching them how to bugger each other.

Don't forget I am one of the representatives of the loonie leftists on this board...I'm all for gay rights...I just don't think it's a huge priority to get into so much detail in Grade 3 or whatever. I'm a strong believer in childhood, and it seems more and more that childhood, the intrinsic innocence of it, is ending.

But they aren't teaching anyone about anal sex in Grade 3.

They are teaching kids in Grade 3 about sexual identity and orientation. Which, IMO, is perfectly appropriate, since by that age they are going to be exposed to the concepts in general society anyway.

I know this is not intentional, but you are mimicking the standard fundy "response" to this kind of stuff - take the totality of what is taught at any age, lump it all together, then decry that the stuff being taught in high school is being taught in kindergarten or whatever.