sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

[Monk]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

175
HEALTHY LIVING
GRADE 6
Student:
“Is how I am feeling normal? Why is my body different from everybody else’s?
How do you tell someone you like them? Who can answer my questions about…?”
• • • • •
Teacher prompt:
“Things like wet dreams or vaginal lubrication are normal and happen
as a result of physical changes with puberty. Exploring one’s body by touching or mastur

bating is something that many people do and find pleasurable. It is common and is not
harmful and is one way of learning about your body.”

GLOSSARY
231

based on a social construct of gender, which is
either stereotypically male or female. However,
some individuals who do not see themselves
as being either male or female but as some
combination of the two genders, or as without
gender, choose to express their identity in terms
of a multiple model of gender, mixing both male
and female expressions.
gender identity.
A person’s sense of self, with
respect to being male or female. Gender identity
is different from sexual orientation, and may be
different from birth-assigned sex. (Refer to the
Ontario Human Rights Commission’s
Policy on
Discrimination and Harassment because of Gender
Identity
, at

Seriously ??

Good enough for you southie ??

health1to8.pdf

[hareem01]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Pisiform

No it won't work. People are even boning in pakistan where there is no sex education. Better to do it safely and some information.

This model is working just fine. Teen pregnancies have gone way down. It just doesn't work for you because entire notion of sex just makes your head explode. You are living in a western society. If you don't teach YOURSELF the moral and values of Islam, sooner or later your kids will do it. Anyone kids will. Common sense. Islamic school is there for anyone to send kids just like there are catholic schools and jewish schools that promote their ideology. Simple.

It's the right of the parents to protest that can lead to the change of policies of a school system. What is your problem with that? Why do you want them to shut up and submit to the government's policies?

And no, not everyone can afford to send kids to religious schools....in fact, now sex ed has been made compulsory even for religious schools.

It's sad on your part for having a poor opinion about non-muslims and non-white in West and thinking they're not bothered by the school policies. And no, the pregnancy and std rate hasn't gone down hugely. Teenage pregnancy rate has gone down a bit this year in UK compare to 1969 and onwards years but it has less to do with sex ed and more to do with other factors like stigma attached to single motherhood and more girls concentrating on career and education.

[Pisiform]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@hareem01

It’s the right of the parents to protest that can lead to the change of policies of a school system. What is your problem with that? Why do you want them to shut up and submit to the government’s policies?

And no, not everyone can afford to send kids to religious schools…in fact, now sex ed has been made compulsory even for religious schools.

It’s sad on your part that all non-muslims and non-white in West are not bothered by the school policies. And no, the pregnancy and std rate hasn’t gone down hugely. Teenage pregnancy rate has gone down a bit this year in UK compare to 1969 and onwards years but it has less to do with sex ed and more to do with other factors like stigma attached to single motherhood and more girls concentrating on career and education.

I don’t have a problem with peaceful protest. When did I say don’t protest? Have at it. You are free to protest whatever you think is not just.

Don’t know about UK but here its falling. See the facts. And there is no stigma with single moms. There are way more single parents home than before. Get out of the house once in a while or read papers or something.

---

Restored attachments:

[hareem01]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Pisiform

I don’t have a problem with peaceful protest. When did I say don’t protest? Have at it. You are free to protest whatever you think is not just.

Don’t know about UK but here its falling. See the facts. And there is no stigma with single moms. There are way more single parents home than before. Get out of the house once in a while or read papers or something.

My findings are based on newspaers mainly The Guardian…so no I’m not making up things. You can carry on saying “no” to everything it won’t make a difference to me.

[Pisiform]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@hareem01

My findings are based on newspaers mainly The Guardian...so no I'm not making up things. You can carry on saying "no" to everything it won't make a difference to me.

I know it won't make any difference. I tried though. I can only lead horse to water but I can't make it drink

[hareem01]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Pisiform

I know it won't make any difference. I tried though. I can only lead horse to water but I can't make it drink

Responding with "no, no, no" is not the way to lead. :)

[Pisiform]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@hareem01

Responding with "no, no, no" is not the way to lead. :)

you are just blabbering now. Please stop embarrassing yourself. Come back when you have something useful to say

[hareem01]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Pisiform

you are just blabbering now. Please stop embarrassing yourself. Come back when you have something useful to say

acha baji ji...

[Southie]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@hareem01

Are you crazy or what? Seriously....you ignored my quote I posted and then clicked on God knows what and then told me I was lying. Childish.

If you were honest you could have searched my quote in google anyway. And on top, you come here telling me DONT EVEN GET OUT OF THIS. Well...how about YOU DONT GET OUT OF THIS???

Actually I stated he could have said tbis. And that I will read it in the guardian later.

The point of contention was NOT whether he said it. The point of contention was whether he said it in the original link u posted. Because at the time I challenged u , you had NOT posted the 2nd link!

Of course I could have searched myself if I wanted to smdisprove he said it. But that was NOT my position.

For the nth time, my position was that your claim that he said it was NOT supported by ur original link.

And in spite if it u said something wrong with my nazar.

AFTER I posted the whole link content, you posted the second link.

This is an example of how you debate.

[jeans]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

can I laugh.. I just wanna laugh..
For one..bcz there actually is a thing called “Hareem’s logic”…(I remember lashing a man bcz that was law of the land)
And another thing called “Southie never gives up”…
Yet..another thing that we all need a "Moral education " class…

Excuse the Pun…

[jeans]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Southie

How do you know they won't teach the dangers of unprotected sex with multiple partners - straight or gay - in sex ed class. Did u just pull that out of "Hareem ' s basket of imaginary facts to support her weak hypothesis"?

The link claims gays are more prone to mental illness that straights. If you dig deeper by clicking read more under mental illness here is what u get

"th

Mental Health

Psychiatric Illness

Multiple studies have identified high rates of psychiatric illness, including depression, drug abuse and suicide attempts, among self-professed gays and lesbians.1*Some proponents of GLB rights have used these findings to conclude that mental illness is induced by other people’s unwillingness to accept same-sex attraction and behavior as normal. They point to homophobia, effectively defined as any opposition to or critique of gay sex, as the cause for the higher rates of psychiatric illness, especially among gay youth.2*Although homophobia must be considered as a potential cause for the increase in mental health problems, the medical literature suggests other conclusions.

An extensive study in the Netherlands undermines the assumption that homophobia is the cause of increased psychiatric illness among gays and lesbians. The Dutch have been considerably more accepting of same-sex relationships than other Western countries — as evidenced by the fact that they have recognized a legal right to same-sex marriage since December of 2000.3*Consequently, a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with homosexual behavior in the Netherlands cannot be attributed to social rejection and homophobia alone.4

The Dutch study, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry, did indeed find a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with same-sex behavior.4*Compared to controls who had no homosexual experience in the 12 months prior to the interview, males who had any homosexual contact within that time period were much more likely to experience major depression, bipolar disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia and obsessive compulsive disorder. Females with any homosexual contact within the previous 12 months were more often diagnosed with major depression, social phobia or alcohol dependence. In fact, those with a history of homosexual contact had higher rates of nearly all psychiatric pathologies measured in the study.5*The researchers found “that homosexuality is not only associated with mental health problems during adolescence and early adulthood, as has been suggested, but also in later life.”6*Researchers actually fear that methodological features of “the study might underestimate the differences between homosexual and heterosexual people.”7

The Dutch researchers concluded, “this study offers evidence that homosexuality is associated with a higher prevalence of psychiatric disorders. The outcomes are in line with findings from earlier studies in which less rigorous designs have been employed.”8*The researchers offered no opinion as to whether homosexual behavior causes psychiatric disorders, or whether it is the result of psychiatric disorders."

Read the last sentence. Schools cannot teach stuff that researchers are not sure about.

Cheers!

Here is some food for thought - these conservatives appear to be concerned abt STDs. But OPPOSE distribution of condomns. That makes perfect sense.

That's not food for thought Southie..... They are concerned about STD's and they see abstaining as a way of controlling that... Not condomising...

[jeans]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

Read everything..... Above.....
(Not links)

Still I believe Sex education as a subject should be introduced to around 10 to 12 yr olds...
Before that not as a separate subject.... Identification of body parts should come under normal science...
Transgender gay lesbians under social or moral education or family structure type books.... With general....points making children familiar with the topics and as for making gay parent child feel normal...and connected....

Totally agree with a child being able to differentiate between abuse and judge from facial exp. But that's a quality that can't be taught to first graders...but sensing abuse should definitely be on charts...

One link I followed... Posted by southie... 2 nd graders were taught no means no....Ithink that's too early..and again physical violence abuse should be taught in personality /morals class...
Third class too.....I mean not basically into having a whole subject....divide it covering all important topics..leaving a out explicit details....and...distribute it in other subjects..thereby not making big deal of sex... Bcz when they don't start a whole book on food or religion and they have bad effects too...so I don't think giving it hype by making it a whole different subject is good...when its just a normal activity....
Around fifth class when nature itself triggers their changes....they can totally be given knowledge about consent... Violence...what is just and stuff.... With gradual increase...and then to finding sexualities and their type... With acceptability as a general form...then to StD's and contraceptives....with abstaining also taken into account and teaching them about it...

I don't come from a very liberal place.. But I will not want my Bachuu to think there is something different with his lady friend....children don't differentiate ...they shouldn't be made to differentiate... I will not like to kill Bachuu's Bachpana...

Explicit content....I am totally against.... And about justifying cravings too much... A certain level is good enough but I don't think if their is a way parents want to raise their kid then that should be taken into account...

If I had been in west....I would have not been against it... Cause that's the need over there...

Here too....but issues are different here..

[Southie]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

Good half picture jeans. The full picture is - in reality some students do engage in sex. So it is good to provide them condoms IN CASE they do decide to have sex.

Doesn't mean the school preaches THOU SHALL HAVE SEX. Simply that if the students do have sex - and statistically is is more than likely some will - at list they have the tools to PREVENT STDs.

It's not an either or. It is about recognizing reality on the ground and preparing for it.

@jeans

That's not food for thought Southie..... They are concerned about STD's and they see abstaining as a way of controlling that... Not condomising...

[Southie]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@jeans

Read everything..... Above..... (Not links)

Still I believe Sex education as a subject should be introduced to around 10 to 12 yr olds... Before that not as a separate subject.... Identification of body parts should come under normal science... Transgender gay lesbians under social or moral education or family structure type books.... With general....points making children familiar with the topics and as for making gay parent child feel normal...and connected....

Totally agree with a child being able to differentiate between abuse and judge from facial exp. But that's a quality that can't be taught to first graders...but sensing abuse should definitely be on charts...

One link I followed... Posted by southie... 2 nd graders were taught no means no....Ithink that's too early..and again physical violence abuse should be taught in personality /morals class... Third class too.....I mean not basically into having a whole subject....divide it covering all important topics..leaving a out explicit details....and...distribute it in other subjects..thereby not making big deal of sex... Bcz when they don't start a whole book on food or religion and they have bad effects too...so I don't think giving it hype by making it a whole different subject is good...when its just a normal activity.... Around fifth class when nature itself triggers their changes....they can totally be given knowledge about consent... Violence...what is just and stuff.... With gradual increase...and then to finding sexualities and their type... With acceptability as a general form...then to StD's and contraceptives....with abstaining also taken into account and teaching them about it...

I don't come from a very liberal place.. But I will not want my Bachuu to think there is something different with his lady friend....children don't differentiate ...they shouldn't be made to differentiate... I will not like to kill Bachuu's Bachpana...

Explicit content....I am totally against.... And about justifying cravings too much... A certain level is good enough but I don't think if their is a way parents want to raise their kid then that should be taken into account...

If I had been in west....I would have not been against it... Cause that's the need over there...

Here too....but issues are different here..

I could be wrong. To best of my recollection 2nd graders are NOT taught no means no etc.

AS for explicit content that is taught later on. One exception - 1st graders are told what their body parts are called. I can see both sides of the issue on this. That it is too early of an age is conservative side. That kids should be able to say where something hurts. Or God forbid if someone touched them, they should be able to state without doubt.

Anyway look forward to where it's stated 2nd gardens r taught no means no.

Bottom line - sexually explicit material is reserved for later years. But conservative link - the one both Muzna and Monk posted - muddy the waters. Deliberately. And sheep fall for it.

[Southie]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@hareem01

Benedict Garrett believes the UK needs to adopt a more liberal attitude to sex. In 2011 Garrett was dismissed from his role as head of PSHE at an Essex school after authorities discovered he was also a stripper and students alerted them to a pornographic film trailer he was featured in.
After an investigation, he was allowed to continue teaching (although he has since chosen not to) and insisted that his involvement in the porn industry was not harmful or incompatible with his role in education. Garrett now warns against demonising pornography and using scare mongering to teach children about the dangers of watching it, which he claims is counter-productive.
He advocates playing teenage students a short segment of a pornographic film and then encouraging the class to talk critically about issues such as how it depicts sex and gender representations.

Great!

@Southie

Per the link you posted, here is what he said

“He said students should not have seen his pornography work, as it was intended for over-18s, but added: “It’s perfectly natural. Get over it.””

So he clearly state his work was intended for over 18 crowd. And you claim he “encouraged” CHILDREN to watch pornography.

Thus sbowing, if u take the lies away, it is akin to what Warren Buffet says about those cauggt swimming naked when the tide recedes.

Lage raho, deviji. Don’t ever let fact get in the way of prejudice.

@hareem01

It says he advocates playing porno clips in classroom. And he’s a teacher (ex stripper). He believes porn shouldn’t be demonised.
Nazar check karwain apni.

@Southie

Cutting and past g the entire link. Where has he said he ADVOCATES PLAYING PORN IN CLASS. IN FACT HE SAID KIDS LESS THAN 18 YEARS SHOULD NOT SEE PORN.

"und guilty of unacceptable professional conduct but left free to continue teaching.

A disciplinary hearing was told pupils at Beal High School in Ilford had seen him in a trailer for a porn film.

Mr Garrett said: “What is wrong about it? I can’t see anything.”

He added: "I don’t think I’ve done anything that goes against my values and I worked incredibly hard as a teacher.

‘Slightly embarrassing’

“What a teacher chooses to do in their life outside that work is up to them.”

Mr Garrett was head of personal, social and health education at the school between 1 January 2008 and 16 July 2010.

On Wednesday the General Teaching Council found him guilty of unacceptable professional conduct but said he could resume his career.

The stripper, whose alias is Johnny Anglais, said he had no plans to return to teaching.

It’s perfectly naturalBenedict Garrett

He admitted it “might be slightly embarrassing” if students had seen his porn films, but “no more than me starring as a monkey in the school musical”.

He said students should not have seen his pornography work, as it was intended for over-18s, but added: “It’s perfectly natural. Get over it.”

He added he did not see himself as a role model, asking: “If teachers are role models, why do we tolerate teachers who smoke, when smoking is linked to thousands of deaths?”

“Do we look at teachers who are fat and say you shouldn’t be teaching? Obesity is linked to thousands of deaths,” he adde"

Upto tbis stage the Guardin Link was not posted. While you kept claiming he proposed students be encouraged to watch porn in class and talk about it.

[Southie]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@hareem01

Benedict Garrett believes the UK needs to adopt a more liberal attitude to sex. In 2011 Garrett was dismissed from his role as head of PSHE at an Essex school after authorities discovered he was also a stripper and students alerted them to a pornographic film trailer he was featured in.
After an investigation, he was allowed to continue teaching (although he has since chosen not to) and insisted that his involvement in the porn industry was not harmful or incompatible with his role in education. Garrett now warns against demonising pornography and using scare mongering to teach children about the dangers of watching it, which he claims is counter-productive.
He advocates playing teenage students a short segment of a pornographic film and then encouraging the class to talk critically about issues such as how it depicts sex and gender representations.

Great!

@Southie

Per the link you posted, here is what he said

“He said students should not have seen his pornography work, as it was intended for over-18s, but added: “It’s perfectly natural. Get over it.””

So he clearly state his work was intended for over 18 crowd. And you claim he “encouraged” CHILDREN to watch pornography.

Thus sbowing, if u take the lies away, it is akin to what Warren Buffet says about those cauggt swimming naked when the tide recedes.

Lage raho, deviji. Don’t ever let fact get in the way of prejudice.

@hareem01

It says he advocates playing porno clips in classroom. And he’s a teacher (ex stripper). He believes porn shouldn’t be demonised.
Nazar check karwain apni.

@hareem01

Different link…same news.

If schools are teaching about porn, should they show it too? | Teacher Network | The Guardian

@hareem01

You think I’m lying…seriously, open your eyes.

Heres a quote from the guardian article I posted the link above

“Garrett now warns against demonising pornography and using scare mongering to teach children about the dangers of watching it, which he claims is counter-productive.
He advocates playing teenage students a short segment of a pornographic film and then encouraging the class to talk critically about issues such as how it depicts sex and gender representations.”

T
he limits some people woukd go to make themselves stand correct. Why should it be so shocking to you anyway…they’re thinking of allowing to discuss and show porn in classrooms for a long time now.

Here is the full sequence. It is clear you posted the Guardian link much later. AFTER I challenged ur claim for ur first link.

Anyway, let us put this aside. Just wanted to document sequence of events.

Will look at Guardian article and see if he said anything inappropriate.

Enjoy the Ashes.

[S_and_S]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

In response to Hareem, for some reason couldn't quote from my phone but I'm not sure what strip clubs and prostituion have to do with this conversation but I think your missing the point. Schools are not encouraging multiple partners by talking about using protection but you can't expect your Islamic beliefs about premarital sex to be the same as those that are not Muslim. People engage in multiple relationships all the time, which is what the whole concept of dating is in western culture. Monogamy is not a law or rule here, and no schools don't have a right to teach kids that it's even wrong but it's almost like preventative maintenance for a lifestyle that is very accepted and a part of normal culture here. Not everyone even believes in monogamy so nobody has a right to tell someone they can't be with multiple people. So no it's not the schools jobs, that's ours as parents to instill those values. Heck, even Islam allows four marriages, most don't agree/like it but you couldn't stop/discourage a person from doing it based on your personal belief. So unprotected sex with different people does happen and your kids will be exposed to it so yes it makes sense that schools are talking about, not to promote it to educate on it.

[Muzna]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

Haven't read all the posts since I was last here.....will do when I have the time to spare but for the most part let me say that I agree with those parents that are suggesting knowledge is important and ignorance serves nobody.

My objection lies only at the age appropriateness. If the age is appropriate then, of course, any subject matter can be discussed with my child.

Per my opinion the new curriculum brings too much to the table, too soon.

[Deeba1234]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Southie

Good half picture jeans. The full picture is - in reality some students do engage in sex. So it is good to provide them condoms IN CASE they do decide to have sex.

Doesn’t mean the school preaches THOU SHALL HAVE SEX. Simply that if the students do have sex - and statistically is is more than likely some will - at list they have the tools to PREVENT STDs.

It’s not an either or. It is about recognizing reality on the ground and preparing for it.

Agree and here’s the reality in the US:

STD Heat Map

Which State Has the Most STDs? Check These Maps - Mic

HIV Infection Is Most Concentrated In The South, Where Students Don’t Learn About It In School | ThinkProgress

[Reha]

Re: sex ed comes to Canada. Very worried

@Monk

Ontario's Radical Sex Ed Curriculum
@Southie and @Reha

I really want to know what is your take on grade 6, grade 7 and sex change operation suggestion to every one.

Monk…do you know the source of these articles? Or did you just google, copy and paste?

1. You guys have the option of protesting.

2. Make your kid sit out of it if you can…I sat out of sex ed at my school because my parents were not comfortable…they even made me sit out of the reproductive chapter in biology.

3. For people who believe that sex ed leads to whorehouses, prostitution and godknowswhat…these things are NOT a Western concept. They are pretty common in Muslim countries too or did we turn a blind eye there? People who believe this wholeheartedly need to get a job and actually connect with the world rather than sit in their kitchen and peek out of their window once in a while.

WHY is ignorance okay in this day and age? WHY is it acceptable to be uneducated and keep your kids uneducated? How is it NOT bad parenting to keep your kids in a bubble and then unleash them on the world? Because its everyone else’s job? Are we raising insaan or delicate phools that might wither in the sun?