Poll: Chicago schools will start to teach sex ed. in Kindergarten
- Thread starter MajorTomServo
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Uuhh, "sex" doesn't just mean "Sexual intercourse". "sex" can means the same thing as the term "gender" is often used.
Sex education could simply explain to kindergarten kids that there are some fundamental physical differences between males and females.
Sex education could simply explain to kindergarten kids that there are some fundamental physical differences between males and females.
It's just a fact of life. I vaguely remember my mother telling me what sex was when I was a kid too short to see the book she put on the counter. It was just a medical detail that didn't apply to me, but as I grew up I understood what it was. It didn't scar me, didn't screw me up, and just... wasn't an issue.
And if I tell anyone I know that I was basically told how pregnancy occurred before I hit puberty, their reaction would be, "meh."
On the other hand. This is taking place in America. I think the social implications should be taken under consideration, given that, you know. America.
But I most certainly don't have a problem with kids 1) knowing how pregnancy occurs, 2) having the groundwork for how to have sex without pregnancy (or STDs), and 3) less of a "that's evil and forbidden" view towards sex.
Treating sex as a thing that kids must be kept away from will increase the allure as soon as they hit puberty. Treating it as a dry, boring, medical subject will probably make them less desirous to start trying to work it out themselves before they're old enough to grasp the consequences.
But still. America. It could go very badly. We will see.
And if I tell anyone I know that I was basically told how pregnancy occurred before I hit puberty, their reaction would be, "meh."
On the other hand. This is taking place in America. I think the social implications should be taken under consideration, given that, you know. America.
But I most certainly don't have a problem with kids 1) knowing how pregnancy occurs, 2) having the groundwork for how to have sex without pregnancy (or STDs), and 3) less of a "that's evil and forbidden" view towards sex.
Treating sex as a thing that kids must be kept away from will increase the allure as soon as they hit puberty. Treating it as a dry, boring, medical subject will probably make them less desirous to start trying to work it out themselves before they're old enough to grasp the consequences.
But still. America. It could go very badly. We will see.
Personally, I like the idea of individual communities trying out stuff like this. Is it a good idea? Is it a bad idea? I don't know. Nobody knows until they've had the chance to try it. I'm sick of people denouncing stuff like this based on blind speculation, which is all we really have to go off of.
Sadly, it's probably going to be protested into oblivion before we have the chance to find out.
Sadly, it's probably going to be protested into oblivion before we have the chance to find out.
I was told that people were made on a kinda factory line type thing, and at the end God would poke you in the belly and say 'you're done', and that's why people had belly buttons. I never thought to ask why some people had outies...CpT_x_Killsteal said:
OT: yeah this sounds like an alright idea to me. It's not like they're going to be getting into the grizzly details, and even if they did I suspect kids that age just wouldn't understand.
In Ireland we received the basics about anatomy, reproduction and puberty in our single sexual education class that we had when we were twelve. It told us the basics about the sexual organs in a scientific and sterile way and talked about the changes that we would be going through with our bodies in puberty but went no further than that.
That was the only form of sexual education i ever received from our education system. It talked about puberty and that was it. We never had supplementary classes about sex, or safe sex, or sexual diseases. Our entire sexual education was a single one hour video.
Thus it was down to TV, my own early sexual adventures and pornography to fill the gaps in my education. (i was too timid and shy to talk to my parents or listen to them about the subject) I am really not surprised that i'm twenty years old with major issues with being comfortable with sex.
What i take from this is that i'd rather school give us too much sexual education, than too little, or none at all.
That was the only form of sexual education i ever received from our education system. It talked about puberty and that was it. We never had supplementary classes about sex, or safe sex, or sexual diseases. Our entire sexual education was a single one hour video.
Thus it was down to TV, my own early sexual adventures and pornography to fill the gaps in my education. (i was too timid and shy to talk to my parents or listen to them about the subject) I am really not surprised that i'm twenty years old with major issues with being comfortable with sex.
What i take from this is that i'd rather school give us too much sexual education, than too little, or none at all.
It was a bit different over here. At the age of 12 we had a couple of sex ed classes and it was also about puberty and such but it did also emphasize on contraception and safe sex. And than in secondary school we got an extra, very disturbing, course solely dedicated to STD's with very disturbing pictures. And than later on we even had an AIDS prevention day where a guy who had aids would basically talk about his life and such in an attempt to make us realize the seriousness of aids. So yeah, we had a lot of emphasis on STD's. (which i think is actually a good thing)Pandalisk said:
I remember the one time I watched that dumb southpark show, it was about how ridiculous Sex Ed was getting. They started teaching it in Kindergarten in the show. Maybe it's not as far fetched as I once thought.
Based on what the article says they'll be teaching the kindergartners, I'm cool with it. They're not teaching them how sex works or anything, just that boys and girls are different and we shouldn't grab each other in the genitalia. Seems like a solid lesson plan to me.
I'm gonna say they're to young. Not for any moral reason mind you, but because at that age I doubt they will be able to understand and retain the information, so it's a waste of resources.
-_- Seriously?Katatori-kun said:
You do realise Kansas is "average" as far as our Teen Pregnacy rate is concerned right? We are on par with New York and California, IN SPITE of having abstaince-emphasis education[footnote]Contrary to what some may think, we dont do Abstaince-Only, but Abstaince is the one that recieves to most mention, with other things being "yeah, that exist."[/footnote]. Which tells me that it is something else that is causing those numbers that we see in the south, like, oh I dont know, extreme poverty. Massive degeneration of the family structure. Things like that. I have always felt that it should be the parents job to teach what thier children need to know about these sort of things, and then schools just handle teaching STD's, etc.
Oh jesus, this is like when they tried to teach my kindergarten class about AIDS, an STD. We didn't know about sex so they had to talk around the parts about sex. So in the end I had no idea how you got AIDS. They replaced the word sex with, "risky behavior" and mentioned situations for risky behavior like skateboarding without a helmet.
So I went back home and my parents thought the whole program was stupid but they signed me up so I wouldn't be the one kid that wasn't there. I remember asking my dad, "So Dad, do you know how you get AIDS?" My dad raised his eyebrows and lied, "No Frank, how do you get AIDS."
Me: "Risky Behavior."
Dad:*Higher raised eyebrows and looking awkwardly at my mom* "What kind of risky behavior?"
Me: Oh you know, skateboarding without a helmet."
My parents have never forgotten that incident. I remember my mom saying years later, "Well if you were having anal sex WHILE skateboarding without a helmet I guess that would be true." Worst case scenario this will either do nothing and kids will be confused or the kids will be grossed out and won't learn a thing anyway. Seriously, why the hell do kindergartners need to know this anyway? Can't we just leave this crap to the parents?
So I went back home and my parents thought the whole program was stupid but they signed me up so I wouldn't be the one kid that wasn't there. I remember asking my dad, "So Dad, do you know how you get AIDS?" My dad raised his eyebrows and lied, "No Frank, how do you get AIDS."
Me: "Risky Behavior."
Dad:*Higher raised eyebrows and looking awkwardly at my mom* "What kind of risky behavior?"
Me: Oh you know, skateboarding without a helmet."
My parents have never forgotten that incident. I remember my mom saying years later, "Well if you were having anal sex WHILE skateboarding without a helmet I guess that would be true." Worst case scenario this will either do nothing and kids will be confused or the kids will be grossed out and won't learn a thing anyway. Seriously, why the hell do kindergartners need to know this anyway? Can't we just leave this crap to the parents?
they tried to pass a similar bill in Ontario, Canada but it was quickly pulled after MASSIVE outcry from the catholic community. if it doesn't fly in Canada, I can't wait to fireworks south of the border.
Well, you can see why I though the former considering the topic at hand in this thread.Katatori-kun said:
Just as an aside, The whole "Kansas does anti-evolution science" thing is overhyped, considering that everytime it has happen, it last for a year or less before they get rid of it again. And some dont even change. For instance, the last time they tried in 2005 to say "You must teach ID, or you loss your funding." my school district basically stuck both of its middle fingers up to the state and screamed "SCREW YOU!!!!" at the top of its lungs and continued to teach evolution with alternate funding being used.
I think this is good, while I do admit I have a gut reaction opposing this, on thinking about it; even if the kids have no use for this information now, the sooner it is introduced to them, the sooner they become familiar and normalize sexuality, the more maturely they will be able to handle it when they grow older. When they are already or just about to experience puberty is a poor time to start piling on the information, it's like waiting till an engineer's about to start working to start teaching him/her about basic math.
