Monday, July 16, 2018

In Favour of the PC Sex Education Curriculum Move

I actually don't mind the PCs reverting the sex education back to 1998. This is because:

 1. It fits in with what the majority of the voters want. Initially when brought in 2015, only 50% of the voters had a favourable view of it, and equal number was opposed. The opposition has only grown.

As per Globe and Mail, 50% of Ontario opposed the new curriculum. Given that Raymond Cho won a bielection in Scarborough with PC party promising to change it, and then Ford won the main election promising to change it, you can assume that more and more people are opposed to the new curriculum. We cannot just say ALL of Ontario are fools who are misinformed. People in general do not like the new curriculum and think it is too far out left.

2. I don't mind them teaching about consent and being aware of consent. No one should abuse anyone, especially a minor. Kids need to be taught these boundaries and to report any untoward behaviour. This needs to be kept in any new curriculum.

3. I don't think kids need to learn about gender fluidity at grade 4. At grade 4 you are pretty sure you are a boy or a girl. You don't even question it. Gender fluidity is more of a modern concept - a bit of social engineering from Wynn. Kids should go to school and learn math and science, and not come home thinking am I a boy or a girl.

4. Ditto about masturbation. Why does a grade 5 need to know about this? Maybe at grade 8 or 9. And even then, our society teaches us masturbation is healthy, and there is no warning given in the sex ed curriculum about the dangers of pornography. Grade 6 students being taught that “exploring one’s body by touching or masturbating is something that many people do and find pleasurable” is absolutely horrendous to teach at that age. Let parents be the judge of when the kid is ready and teach accordingly. And any curriculum that does not preach about the evils of pornography is catering to only one side of the issue.

5. Our sex ed curriculum comes from the view that any sex is good - here is how to do it safely. Whereas the moral point of view that sex should be with your married spouse whom you love is not taught because that is "too religious" and better left to parents. Why? If one view can be taught, why not other? i.e. Abstinence? That is after all being COMPLETELY safe.

6. The previous government says parents were consulted. When? Where? I don't remember any school notices or circulars given out widely when McGuilty first introduced (and then backtracked) and then when Wynn imposed her social engineering views on us.

The government has to be more transparent. When the majority of the province's parents oppose it - that means the parents they chose can NOT be the proper sample.

7. In Grade 1 (that's 6 year old kids) they wanted to teach body parts openly in the class. What is the need for that? This is better for later grades.

I agree there was SOME good in the 2015 curriculum. Sexting, gender based violence, consent, homosexuality was addressed. Those need to be re included in any new changes. But the 1998 one isn't so bad as people are making it out to be. We are a conservative society. Let us not try to use government to do sexual social engineering at a grand level.

No comments: