My opionions and whatever other insane idea I think of
Published on August 22, 2005 By msladydeath In Politics
What is the difference between teaching nutrition and sex ed in schools? Sex has to do with the body's health also, abstinence is always best because there is no risk of pregnancy or STD's, but kids that don't learn that STD's can be transmitted by non sexual activities, or how to prevent STD's and pregnancy if they choose sex are more likely to be fooled by "more mature" persons that just want sex and don't care about the youth in question. Like jumping up and down will keep you from getting pregnant, or don't worry, I don't have AIDS, do I look sick?



Now I don't think that Abortion/Adoption should be taught of even touched on in a school setting, but these children's LIVES depend on them knowing something about sex, and even responsible parents will get flustered or embarrassed to talk to their own kids about sex. There is also a HIGH possibility that our youth will learn about sex from their friends (whom of course are smarter than their parents *cough*), Harlequin Romance, TV, and the "more mature" youth that only want to take advantage of them.



It should be an opt out class at the parents discretion, but it NEEDS to be offered! I don't care if it's after school, I don't care if it's taught by qualified volunteers, and it has NOTHING to do with religious beliefs! We teach children that exercise is healthy, good nutrition is necessary, to respect others and themselves. Heck, some schools teach teens how to rent an apartment, deal with landlords, how to create a resume and interview, and home repair (none of those are required classes though).

Link
The Caliber of Sex-Ed Instruction in Public Schools

The Delivery of the Message

The public controversy centered around sex education in public schools has shifted. Where the question was once whether or not sexual education should be taught in public schools, the fray now questions the methodology of what is being taught. The division exist between advocates of an "abstinence only" approach (supported by the "No Child Left Behind Act") versus the more traditional sexuality programs that include the correct usage and protective qualities of contraceptives. Many parents however, find themselves more concerned about the environment their children find themselves exposed to when sex-education classes are being taught.

In many schools across the country, these classes are gender exclusive, however teachers can quickly find themselves out of control when facing a room full of adolescent students. With classes full of immature children titillated by the subject matter, giggles, whoops and hollers echo into the halls as middle school children are exposed to the deadly serious aspect of approaching their sexual development responsibly. Their teachers constantly struggling to keep the children focused on the gravity of what is being discussed. Consequently, because of the loose and casual atmosphere of sex ed classrooms, thousands of parents question the validity and the effectiveness of sex-education being delivered in public education. If the message can't be delivered responsibly then should it be delivered at all?

The sexual education of adolescent children is presented to parents as a necessary and legitimate course of study. Shouldn't the demeanor of the class and the accountability regarding the subject material be just as serious and in depth as any other class centered around health and science? Why is such a serious subject encapsulated within a few days? Many parents feel that sex education programs in public schools today amount to no more than a 3 day sex talk complete with giggles, immature commentary, and very little real instruction taking place rather than being approached in a true academic manner.

Taught properly, sexual education and development could easily become part of any other scientific course of study like Human Biology, Human Behavior, Human Anatomy or Health. More importantly, perhaps if administrators present a more dignified and academic approach to the delivery of sexual education, complete with test and grades, it may just impress upon our children that they should view sex a serious part of their human development rather than a recreational activity.


Comments (Page 1)
on Aug 22, 2005

It should be an opt out class at the parents discretion, but it NEEDS to be offered!

Exactly.  And that is how it should be.

on Aug 22, 2005
That's funny.

Last time I checked, Sex Ed was offered in public schools, and parents had the option of taking their kids out of that class.

The Sex Ed scenario msladydeath describes is exactly the scenario in effect in public schools today.

I think the real problem is that while we have the basics of nutrition and exercise pretty well figured out and agreed-upon, there's a lot of stuff in the Sex Ed curriculum today that a lot of people find very controversial and debatable.

One person's "healthy facts" are another person's "inappropriate alternative moral agenda". I think there's a lot of stuff the Adults really need to sort out amongst themselves, before we begin to teach it to the Children.
on Aug 22, 2005
Last time I checked, Sex Ed was offered in public schools, and parents had the option of taking their kids out of that class.


Have you gone to it? Not meaning this to be degrading or anything, but seriously, have you seen it in action? I told my experience with Sex Ed on TW thread Link

"I remember "sex ed" in 5th grade. Nothing about sex in it, actually, and I have no idea why they called it that, but still. The boys and girls were separated into groups and the boys went to a different classroom. The girls learned about menstruation (took an hour) and the boys watched a film on football and horsed around. Of course we had to have parental consent to take the class."

I haven't been out of school that long have I? *pout*
on Aug 22, 2005
I've been to Sex Ed-like classes three times: once in grade school (6th grade), once in high school, and once in 7th grade at a private school in Brazil.

Boys and girls were segregated, but us boys did get taught stuff about sex. In the high school version, we also got taught about STDs and such.

So yes, I have been to sex ed classes (the Brazilian one followed the same basic model as the American ones). Why do you ask?
on Aug 22, 2005
Because the one I was stuck in was super bad, just as I illistrated.

I'm going to add a bit to this, in the artical itself..
on Aug 22, 2005
Agreed Msladydeath, and Great Article!!

I think the place for sex education in schoos IS in health and biology classes. However, a degree in Health Sciences has taught me that one thing Sex Ed and Health Ed have in common is both seem to be more about propaganda than education.
on Aug 22, 2005
Very insightful article.

Here's some food for thought...

During his senior year, my brother signed up for health class to fulfill and elective requirement. I clearly remember him talking about a std film he had watched. His teacher also made everyone bring home one of those "baby cries a lot" dolls that is supposed to simulate the routine of a real baby. Even though he payed attention in class and recieved an A, he still ended up knocking a girl up by the end of the year.

he's a great father, and now I have a beautiful niece.

I think sex ed in the schools is wonderul, but I think kids are going to do whatever they want, reguardless of the thinking about the consiquenses.

on Aug 22, 2005
I think sex ed in the schools is wonderul, but I think kids are going to do whatever they want, reguardless of the thinking about the consiquenses.


and no greater truth has been spoken.... ever.
on Aug 22, 2005
"I remember "sex ed" in 5th grade. Nothing about sex in it, actually, and I have no idea why they called it that, but still. The boys and girls were separated into groups and the boys went to a different classroom. The girls learned about menstruation (took an hour) and the boys watched a film on football and horsed around. Of course we had to have parental consent to take the class."


Sorry but just what did you expect them to teach 11 year olds? Because that's what age most of you were. Since most start school at 6 years of age. I would think 11 is a little "to" young for actual sex education.
on Aug 22, 2005
Sorry but just what did you expect them to teach 11 year olds? Because that's what age most of you were. Since most start school at 6 years of age. I would think 11 is a little "to" young for actual sex education.


Oh, I understand that, but the point is, that one class is all we ever got in school. No mention of it later on whatsoever. Another thing, while I do think that 11 may be a little young, there were 12 year olds in a town not far from mine that were getting pregnant (1 or 2, not many) and admitedly, they probably would have gotten pregnant regardless. I do think the class should be taught to 13 - 14 year olds. Also, my ex (who had the WORST parents possible) got a girl pregnant when he was 11 or 12, she was his 16 year old babysitter. So is life I guess.
on Aug 22, 2005
I'm an Aussie so I can't comment on what your schools do, but I had 4 clumps of sex ed through school: 1 week each in Year 4, Year 6, Year 8 and Year 9. All treated very clinically and very biased towards procreative sex, as though our bodies are nothing but machines with elementary functions to perform. All done through a transimission approach, with no real chance for us to clarify any misconceptions we had or things we wanted to know. What, were they expecting I'd go home and ask my parents about any of the finer details I didn't understand? "Dad, I still didn't quite get the whole pinching the end of the condom thing, can you explain that to me?" "Sure son, get your dick out and let's practise".

Kids will also eat whatever they want, but I think it does help several of them to learn about nutrition. Otherwise, why teach them anything at all?

I don't understand why these issues shouldn't be taught the same way teachers are supposed to teach any co9ntroversial issue: cover the controversial sides, get students to research and then justify their own positions on the matter. For example, I recently did some work with my Year 4s about whether Australia was colonised/invaded and who arrived when. There are very differing views on this in the community. There were still very differing views at the end of the course, but my kids could justify why they took the position they did. Some of the clarified misconceptions, others changed their minds, others changed their minds after they heard other children's researched opinions. And none of them felt pressured to take on my loony leftist position (which btw I did not impart). Why not do the same with sex ed? Kids are going to come up with their own opinions around this age anyway, let's at least get them informed!!!!
on Aug 22, 2005
Oh and btw, why the hell shouldn't adoption be covered? Surely our society has enough stigma attached to something that could prevent a lot of abortions already without making it taboo. What: you think if we cover our eyes and pretend abortion and adoption don't exist, the kids won't notice they exist and they won't discuss them in the playground? Oh yeah, I remember how in high school playgrounds, we really steered away from anything controversial. Sure.
on Aug 22, 2005
Oh and BTW, why the hell shouldn't adoption be covered? Surely our society has enough stigma attached to something that could prevent a lot of abortions already without making it taboo.


Because that, honestly, to me, is not something that should be covered, I do think that is an Extremely private matter that should be worked out by the child and the parents/counselors. At the risk of sounding hypocritical, I don't think it should be taught. "but if you do get pregnant, you can always...." It should be STRESSED (and I should have said it before) by the instructors, that the student NEEDS to discuss the matters learned in class with their parents.

This is also something different about the community I live in. There are places that you can go to get a confidential pregnancy test for free, 3 of them actually, and all church supported, so adoption is the first discussion they have with women that don't want the baby. To get an abortion requires parental consent and a 4 hour minimum drive.
on Aug 23, 2005

Sorry but just what did you expect them to teach 11 year olds? Because that's what age most of you were. Since most start school at 6 years of age. I would think 11 is a little "to" young for actual sex education.

Now when some of them get active at that age.  And I have heard of it.  Seems back in 74, there was a little girl in a Palo Alto school that was servicing several guys!  Their ages?  11 and 12.

on Aug 23, 2005

All treated very clinically and very biased towards procreative sex, as though our bodies are nothing but machines with elementary functions to perform.

They aren't?

Meta
Views
» 5011
Comments
» 24
Category
Sponsored Links