Sex education in schools

Remove all ads!

Hmmm......sex ed on slates.......that must have been tough Blackthorne!!

Ours was rubbish, we watched a 10 minute video that seemed to be more about sychronised swimming and then watched a teacher put a condom on a cucumber. Like you ever need to learn how to put one on something that big!

 

Speak for yourself...

 

I don't have one sweetie!

 

Heh. I'll put it another way, then. Not every man needs to buy rubber bands with his magnums. (I would certainly need to, but that's entirely beside the point.)

 

That reminds me ... did you know there is a lot number at the based of each condom?

... never unrolled it that far did you ...

 

You know, there's a lot of things that the schools can teach your kids that you might not agree with. While I fully agree that parents have a right and even a responsibility to fight for a curriculum that reflects their particular ideology, the fact is that in that fight some parents are gonna lose. Therefore, it behooves the parents to be deeply involved in their kids lives and do some bloody teaching at home! Tell your kids what you believe and why. Practice what you preach -- LIVE your religion or other philosophical system and set an example for your kids. Talk to them about things, don't just expect the school to do it and then turn around and complain they didn't do it the way you would like.

As was said, though, the sad fact is that some parents give their kids no guidance at all. My Grandma left a pamphlet on my Mom's bed, and that was as close as they ever came to a discussion about human sexuality. Mom was utterly clueless as to where her mother stood on issues and to be honest on what the issues even were! Not cool. So the schools have had to step in to counteract the inaction of SOME modern parents. It's unfortunate but if things are going badly in a society, SOMEBODY has to do SOMETHING, right?

That said, even in a family where the parents do every possible thing to teach their kids properly and fully, some kids will make big honking mistakes. I knew a family like that -- 2 totally awesome kids, good in school, well adjusted, socially skilled, great kids -- the kind you want your own kids to date when they are teens. The 3rd kid in that family, well, he was "none of the above" -- I've never met a bigger dirtbag. His parents did everything they could for him, but he was just hell bent for self destruction. You can't tell me it was the parent's fault -- or the school's for that matter. He made his choices, and now he's paying the price.

 

True, but the church grapevine is wicked accurate. If it had happened, the congregation would have found out, somehow. Goodness knows everything else went around.

 

Ah yes, the faithful people who don't think their sins are interesting so they have to talk about other people's sins...

 

LKD, letting parents 'correct' schooling works in many aspects, such as homosexuality, evolution, etc. but in sexuality, mere exposure may be the issue. I don't think for a second that this is the right way to raise a child, but it is the issue for many people. Also, one way or another, your children won't be seeing you live your life on the pre-marital sex issue.

Ultimately, I think the best tactic is to present all the facts, emphasize consequences and responsability, and expect the kids to behave like adults, since they're at that age anyway. We do too much to coddle kids and protect them from consequences these days and, while I don't think sexuality is the issue to start it with, we need to teach them in a practical sense that they're responsible for their actions. We stopped doing that in many areas and I'm not surprised that it spread.

Then again, when I was in middle school, we needed to sign a waiver to be included in sex-ed. They cut that when they watered it down to 'Family Health Class' with no mention of sex whatsoever. I think we could bring back the waiver and it'd be ok for those parents that want to teach it themselves.

 

As I think you said it yourself, the problem is that some parents will not do it - or do such a pish-poor job at it that it will not benefit the kids in the least. And that actually assumes the parents are there and actually care for the kid, which need not be the case. Now, the kids will most likely learn a bit anyway before making their own ripples in the gene pool of humanity, but it would probably be from the media, their peers, and other less dependable sources. School education can help them have a relatively informed and responsible (relatively being a keyword here - school can only teach you something, not do it for you) view on the matter. A least school knowledge has a reputation for reliability; the average student may imo think that literature classes are a waste of time, but when they are told Shakespeare is a writer they will most likely believe it. Sexuality is a field where there are a fair bit of rumors and misconceptions, and sex ed classes are in most cases taken as a fairly reliable source of information - more so than parents, in some cases.

I really think it is important, to be honest, to have mandatory classes on that. School curriculum is basically a mandatory set of knowledge that young people are supposed to need to be productive members of society (PMoS, for short), as well as help them continue their education if need be. I'd say some information on sexuality, as well as on their rights and responsibilities in this matter, is one of the more important parts of being a PMoS, as it is an area that everyone will have to make decisions in, as even abstaining from sex is a choice that you have to make. The problem is how much should be presented, and how. As was said earlier, a 10-year old should know enough not to get in trouble with molesters; a 14-year old should have a more advanced perspective on issues such as STDs, birth control (including contraceptives) and pregnancy, and possibly a few others. A student at the end of high school should imo have an idea of some of the social ramifications as well - they will need them, some sooner than others. Heck, last month there was a case here where a girl of 15 gave birth. You know what the really bad part is? She didn't know she was pregnant; her mother took the pains for a stomach problem.

 

Shaman, those parents that are going to take the time to exempt their child are usually going to take the time to teach their child (pay special attention to that 'usually'). This is especially true if we make inclusion the default status, not exemption. On top of that, the fear that leads to parents exempting their children is as often what else will be taught in sex-ed class (will they teach that homosexuality is good and acceptable? will the teacher teach that protection is better than abstinance? will they teach about masturbation?). Social agendas have a nasty way of sneaking into mandatory education in every area except math and the hardest of sciences (and yes, those social agendas can go either way).

 

Do you honestly think that sex-ed classes teach that protection is better than abstinence, or are you implying that other people do? I've never seen it. Sex-ed classes teach that protection is better than nothing, not better than abstinence. I've never seen a sex-ed class teach that homosexuality is good, either, or that abstinence wasn't the best choice for avoiding VD and unwanted pregnancies. What I have seen these classes teach - without judgment one way or the other - is that you should be sure to wear protection if you engage in anal sex, which is slightly riskier than vaginal intercourse. Rush Limbaugh once talked on his radio show about a teacher in California who taught her sex-ed students -in vivid detail and with visual examples -all about masturbation, but it turned out that he made the whole thing up (it must have been a slow news day).

 

I think that what I would look for is accountability, common sense and a willingness to stick to the facts. Just as others don't want a Christian morality to enter into the discussion, I don't want to see someone promoting sexual behaviours in the classroom.

On the topic of Homosexuality, stick to the scientific facts, and only go as far as to state that society has decided that it is not criminal, and that it is wrong to harrass or abuse them. I don't want it promoted...

 

Do you find that sex ed classes can be a little one sided? We were given a talk on abortion that was totally one sided, we were told that anyone who did it was sick and wrong. No thought given to the fact that people can be raped (plus, should rape be covered in sex ed?) and fall pregnant, or that people can sometimes just panic when they fall prenant.

Also, with regards to homosexuality, I have a lot of gay friends who had to pretty much guess what they were doing because people seemed to think that telling them about a gay relationship would be promoting it. The first time I had a same sex relationship I was so scared I was going to catch something that my girlfriend had to sit me down and tell me all the stuff that I really should have been taught at an earlier age!

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you Silvery, in all my experience sex education has been depressingly hetronormative.
How can it be called sex education if it completely ignores the existence of non heterosexuals. That'd be like teaching geography and omitting South America.
As for promoting homosexuality, a teacher in religion can teach about Islam without being said to promote it, so why is it that a sex ed teacher would be suspected of promoting homosexuality just for educating about the practice and existence of it?

 

Well, a lot of the stuff talked about here since I last posted covers single experiences, but these is exactly the things that are the issue. To Drew, I have heard of a few court cases involving teaching of exactly those things, but I'll admit it is very rare. It's exactly those things that some parents fear, though. To Silvery and Godless, your experiences are seen from the other side, but again are exactly the issue. Do you teach safe practice a minority and controversial section (and thus, yes, prmoting it to an extent) and risk angering and even being sued by conservative parents, or do you neglect it and thus neglect the students in applies to (and maybe being sued by their parents). The only thing I can say to that is: The best solution is a personalized, tailored education to that particular student (i.e. it's best left up to caring, loving parents. Oh, if only they were more common!).

 

A hot topic. First we must answer this. Why do we do this? For the kids who need it as much as water, food and air? Or do we give it to prove that we did it so that we are not to blame.

I, not limited by spiritual leaders telling me what to think, will say it out loud. We cannot afford not to. The whole truth and nothing but the whole truth about it. No holding back. Kids can take it, they can take a lot.

It is far more harder to unlearn something when the kid has grown up.

 

@ NOG: the problem is that there is no guarantee that, if the parents do teach their children at all, the information will be better or as good as what a school can. Just because they are the parents does not mean that they will be better at it, and the more complete and objective the information, the better.

As for abortion, homosexuality, masturbation etc I have not heard of any sex ed promoting any of those, and indeed they are usually glossed over to put it mildly. The general tone afaik is "ok, sex carries risk and you should act responsibly; if you want to have it here is what you should do to minimize the risk:..." In general, the misconceptions it aims to dispel are the ones kids may learn on the street or TV, not anything the parents say - if they do say it.

Now, I don't know if that contributes to the amount of kids that have sex, but given the fair percentage that still don't use precautions, I'd say there is not enough sex ed, not too much

 

Yes, Rape should be covered. One of the most important things to consider with sex is consent. The kids need to know that they don't have to have sex if they don't want to. I don't know how to approach Abortion without moralizing, but I believe that situations like rape, incest and severe risk to the mother (above and beyond normal probability) would grant some clemency. Under those circumstances, the general public should stay out of it...

That's why the facts should be taught. Sure heterosexuals are the majority, and many segments of the population will not accept homosexual behaviour. I don't know how much a heterosexual can teach about the practice...

When I took it 20+ years ago, they acknowledged homosexuals, but the focus was heterosexual. I don't know that a heterosexual can adequately explain homosexuality.

It is because homosexuality is a polarizing topic. There are those that think that not including it as morally wrong is promoting it.

Merlanni: I think part of the problem is that there is not a consensus on what is the truth. There are some that don't agree with what is being taught about certain subjects...

Isn't that what it's supposed to do? It is about presenting facts and dispelling myths. How far can you go without crossing into pornography or moralizing?

 

Indeed. My point is, school-taught sex education is not necessarily antithetical to home-taught notions of sexuality, and generally takes no moral standpoint.