Current Events > Controversial LGBTQ Sex Ed classes to be taught to Kindergarteners in California

(+) Yeah! (+)

Illuminoius posted...

lgbtq+ awareness is very good to learn about at this age
sex ed though? i don't think that's at all age-appropriate

Thats pretty much all sex ed is at that point. That and teaching consent.
---

Conflict posted...

I've never noticed this Ghetto_Turtle person before today and he's having a hissy fit in two different topics involving LGBT people

Lol ce detectives assemble! Not that big of a mystery though. Im glad your obsessing over me

Blade-wolf posted...

Gotta get them started on the propaganda early

California is becoming a miniaturized version of Australia

California used to be my dream place to live like over a decade ago. Now it's the last state I'd live in
---

Girls are generally taught a form of sex Ed usually in 4th grade, even though they develop maturity faster than boys usually it should start around then for both sexes
---

This is probably fine, assuming nothing super graphic is going on. Like obviously they don't need to know about blowjobs or anything, but there's nothing wrong with "Some people like the same sex, and that's perfectly fine."

People who are saying "Wait until puberty!" baffle me because I know I was a horny little bugger before I was a teenager, it would have been nice to figure out why.

...Not that Sex Ed was very helpful back then. Mostly just pictures of diseases and "Wait until marriage". Didn't even get taught how to use a condom.

...But more to the point, there are plenty of kids who "like like" other people long before puberty official hits. Being taught to address such feelings in a healthy way is good.
---

Blade-wolf posted...

Gotta get them started on the propaganda early

California is becoming a miniaturized version of Australia

Telling kids that lgbtq people exist is not propaganda. It's worrying that you think it is
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

In general, its better to teach people things before they need to know it so that theyre prepared by the time they need to know it rather than having to guess the first time around.

This is absolutely right.

Think about the concept of sex like swimming.

Abstinence only "education" is like you going to a swimming class and being told the best way to not drown is to not get in the water.

Waiting until puberty can be like jumping in the water, flailing around, and then having the instructor tell you what stretches you want to perform before getting into the water.

And yes, children will absolutely try to figure things out. With or without their parents help. How many of us discovered a dirty magazine or a dirty movie somewhere in our parent house? Children are sneaky.

It's better to have them know about the things they need to know before it becomes relevant. There is a fine line between "later" and "too late". Especially for those early bloomers.
---

Conflict posted...

Ghetto_Turtle posted...

Conflict posted...

I've never noticed this Ghetto_Turtle person before today and he's having a hissy fit in two different topics involving LGBT people

Lol ce detectives assemble! Not that big of a mystery though. Im glad your obsessing over me

Lol, you think reading a post you submit is "obsessing over you". Should probably get over yourself

At least two

Though the framework differentiates lessons for transitional kindergarten through third grade, fourth through sixth grade, seventh and eighth grade, and ninth through 12th grade,

What exactly is taught from K though third grade? Honestly it depends on what is being taught when.
---

Umbreon posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

In general, its better to teach people things before they need to know it so that theyre prepared by the time they need to know it rather than having to guess the first time around.

This is absolutely right.

Think about the concept of sex like swimming.

Abstinence only "education" is like you going to a swimming class and being told the best way to not drown is to not get in the water.

Waiting until puberty can be like jumping in the water, flailing around, and then having the instructor tell you what stretches you want to perform before getting into the water.

And yes, children will absolutely try to figure things out. With or without their parents help. How many of us discovered a dirty magazine or a dirty movie somewhere in our parent house? Children are sneaky.

It's better to have them know about the things they need to know before it becomes relevant. There is a fine line between "later" and "too late". Especially for those early bloomers.

I love that comparison
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLxALhHTFvI" data-time="
---

burritosatan posted...

Blade-wolf posted...

Gotta get them started on the propaganda early

California is becoming a miniaturized version of Australia

California used to be my dream place to live like over a decade ago. Now it's the last state I'd live in

---

Umbreon posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

In general, its better to teach people things before they need to know it so that theyre prepared by the time they need to know it rather than having to guess the first time around.

This is absolutely right.

Think about the concept of sex like swimming.

Abstinence only "education" is like you going to a swimming class and being told the best way to not drown is to not get in the water.

Waiting until puberty can be like jumping in the water, flailing around, and then having the instructor tell you what stretches you want to perform before getting into the water.

And yes, children will absolutely try to figure things out. With or without their parents help. How many of us discovered a dirty magazine or a dirty movie somewhere in our parent house? Children are sneaky.

It's better to have them know about the things they need to know before it becomes relevant. There is a fine line between "later" and "too late". Especially for those early bloomers.

Sure it's better to know ahead of time but the age of 4 is not necessary at all
---

Sex classes shouldn't be taught to kindergarteners weather LGBTQ or Straight. They should sell be learning their ABCs and 123s and shapes and patterns and building blocks. Innocent stuff

new account conservatroll post bs clickbait topic title, what a surprise

s0nicfan posted...

For example (from the article, but edited out of the TC's quote for some reason):

S.E.X.: The All-You-Need-to-Know Sexuality Guide to Get You Through Your Teens and Twenties, which includes descriptions of anal sex and bondage;

I see nothing wrong with this being included once you hit high school. You want people practicing safe sex. Anal sex, tell them to take it slow and use plenty of lube. For bondage, show them hollywood movies like 50 shades or anything else that depicts bdsm. Then drill home how what they saw should not be attempted because hollywood's version is going to seriously get people injured.
---

creativerealms posted...

Though the framework differentiates lessons for transitional kindergarten through third grade, fourth through sixth grade, seventh and eighth grade, and ninth through 12th grade,

What exactly is taught from K though third grade? Honestly it depends on what is being taught when.

In the past K through third wasn't so much anything 'sexual' as it was about families. Like, kids would literally watch an animal documentary about mothers raising children, or siblings fighting or whatnot. Fourth through sixth was puberty, taught generally before people's genitals starting doing new things. At that point the boys and girls were separated; though of course the children would trade any materials received afterward. That would leave seventh and beyond to officially teach materials without separating the kids, with high school going into what people popularly think of when they hear the term 'sex ed'.
---

DuneMan posted...

creativerealms posted...

Though the framework differentiates lessons for transitional kindergarten through third grade, fourth through sixth grade, seventh and eighth grade, and ninth through 12th grade,

What exactly is taught from K though third grade? Honestly it depends on what is being taught when.

In the past K through third wasn't so much anything 'sexual' as it was about families. Like, kids would literally watch an animal documentary about mothers raising children, or siblings fighting or whatnot. Fourth through sixth was puberty, taught generally before people's genitals starting doing new things. At that point the boys and girls were separated; though of course the children would trade any materials received afterward. That would leave seventh and beyond to officially teach materials without separating the kids, with high school going into what people popularly think of when they hear the term 'sex ed'.

in some school they teach them about abuse too seems they tell them " if they hurt you they dont love you"
is a way to encourage childrens to talk about one of the parent beating up the other or their kids
---

Y i k e s
---

This is shit news, but it's in Cali, so.. I'm Gucci.
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

No one ever gets mad that we want teachers to teach kids math.

BS a lot of parents were pissed when they introduced new math.
---

Bossdog421 posted...

BS a lot of parents were pissed when they introduced new math.

When was this?
---

good, they NEED to know
---

living in clown world
---

KamenRiderBlade posted...

Bossdog421 posted...

BS a lot of parents were pissed when they introduced new math.

When was this?

Common Core.
---

Confusing children at young ages. Murrica'!
---

PleaseClap posted...

Telling kids that lgbtq people exist is not propaganda. It's worrying that you think it is

Whats the reason that they need to know as kindergartners
---

Blade-wolf posted...

PleaseClap posted...

Telling kids that lgbtq people exist is not propaganda. It's worrying that you think it is

Whats the reason that they need to know as kindergartners

Because some of those kindergartners will be part of the lgbtq community or know people that are, and need to know that that's normal and ok
---

What is this that people talk about and why is it too early for elementary school kids to learn about it?

No one should know LGBTQ people exist until high school? I thought we were against sheltering people from the real world? Why do people always act like kindergarteners are going to be taught how to fuck when these "controversial" classes are brought up?
---

Blade-wolf posted...

PleaseClap posted...

Telling kids that lgbtq people exist is not propaganda. It's worrying that you think it is

Whats the reason that they need to know as kindergartners

I agree. We need to stop pushing straightness on them to. It's disgusting to teach small children things like "sometimes a man and a woman love each other". It's enough of a shame that they'll see their parents being straight in front of their eyes. Borderline child abuse.
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

Good, LGBTQ people exist and everyone needs sex ed

Five year olds?
---

hockeybub89 posted...

What is this that people talk about and why is it too early for elementary school kids to learn about it?

No one should know LGBTQ people exist until high school? I thought we were against sheltering people from the real world? Why do people always act like kindergarteners are going to be taught how to fuck when these "controversial" classes are brought up?

Presumably, and I'm just playing devil's advocate here because "some people have two mommies/daddies" isn't actually a problem, the concern is teaching kids that young in conjunction with a push to open up hormone therapy to younger and younger kids. Existing research (below) shows that a full 60-90% of kids that express a trans viewpoint grow up to be a regular gay person, so the concern would be a growing number of "accidental" transitions brought about by the two together.

http://www.sexologytoday.org/2016/01/do-trans-kids-stay-trans-when-they-grow_99.html
---

PleaseClap posted...

Because some of those kindergartners will be part of the lgbtq community or know people that are, and need to know that that's normal and ok

Kids don't know what they are. Save it for later, if it at all. Getting them that early is just more Soviet style indoctrination, social engineering if you want to be blas about it. You're acting like America as a whole were unaware gay people existed unless they learned about it in classrooms. To you, the classroom is a social lab perfect for pushing your particularly favored ideologies. To me, its a place where kids should be learning about academic subjects that will make them successful in today's economy.
---

Blade-wolf posted...

To you, the classroom is a social lab perfect for pushing your particularly favored ideologies.

The fact that gay people exist is not an ideology
---

s0nicfan posted...

Presumably, and I'm just playing devil's advocate here because "some people have two mommies/daddies" isn't actually a problem, the concern is teaching kids that young in conjunction with a push to open up hormone therapy to younger and younger kids. Existing research (below) shows that a full 60-90% of kids that express a trans viewpoint grow up to be a regular gay person, so the concern would be a growing number of "accidental" transitions brought about by the two together.

No one has suggested we tell 5 year olds to take hormone therapy.
---

The fact that gay people exist is not an ideology

Its an irrelevant fact of life that they'll learn on their own later. You are in favor of wasting classroom time for something they'll pick up later on just living life. Why is that I wonder?
---

Blade-wolf posted...

To me, its a place where kids should be learning about academic subjects that will make them successful in today's economy.

What the fuck are you teaching a 4 year old that will make them successful for today's economy? What does today's economy even matter to people 2 decades from landing good jobs?

Kindergarteners don't know what an economy is. Stop indoctrinating them so young, if ever. They'll figure out what it is on their own and make their own decisions.

Why are we pretending that school is not the best place children will learn about society before adulthood. School isn't separate from society. It is society.
---

@PleaseClap
And how you phrased it sure as hell is ideology.
"Here is social subject X".
"Here is how we want you to think about it".
"This is the right way to think about it".

Thats naked ideology and social engineering.
---

Blade-wolf posted...

The fact that gay people exist is not an ideology

Its an irrelevant fact of life that they'll learn on their own later. You are in favor of wasting classroom time for something they'll pick up later on just living life. Why is that I wonder?

How are facts of life irrelevant? And since when do we just sit back and let children figure themselves and life out on their own?
---

Usual suspects clapping for this nonsense.

As many others have already stated, Kindergarden's way too fucking early. But atleast it's not mandate. And thankfully, it's only in California.
---

Ah yes, "the lgbtq community exists and deserves basic human respect," truly the most radical of ideologies.

Are you going to start whining about cultural marxism next?
---

Blade-wolf posted...

@PleaseClap
And how you phrased it sure as hell is ideology.
"Here is social subject X".
"Here is how we want you to think about it".
"This is the right way to think about it".

Thats naked ideology and social engineering.

We also shouldn't tell children to respect each other. If they want to grow up to be racists, then that is their choice based on their experiences. Telling children what is good and bad is wrong no matter what. It's indoctrination, plain and simple. Give them information, but don't suggest how they should process.

This will surely create well-adjusted human beings that are not immediately smacked with reality when they grow up.
---

PleaseClap posted...

Ah yes, "the lgbtq community exists and deserves basic human respect," truly the most radical of ideologies.

If its so basic and non-radical it doesn't need to have classroom time. It'll be picked up by them later on in due time.

You probably think that if sex education weren't taught in schools kid wouldn't know what sex is.

The fact that you're so intent on pushing for this is what worries me. You don't respect young children and the fact that they grow in stages.
---

TheDrivingForce posted...

Kindergarden's way too fucking early.

Too early for what though?

What if a child is raised by a gay couple? Should they conversely not be taught about straight couples or have it explained why their parents are different? Are gay parents indoctrination simply by existing?
---

Blade-wolf posted...

PleaseClap posted...

Ah yes, "the lgbtq community exists and deserves basic human respect," truly the most radical of ideologies.

If its so basic and non-radical it doesn't need to have classroom time. It'll be picked up by them later on in due time.

You probably think that if sex education weren't taught in schools kid wouldn't know what sex is.

The fact that you're so intent on pushing for this is what worries me. You don't respect young children and the fact that they grow in stages.

"Growing in stages" is a weird argument when sex ed in general and this very curriculum is taught in stages.

But what should we expect from people who also think we should ignore the mental health of children until they "choose to address it on their own as adults"?
---

@PleaseClap

You haven't made a good case for including social projects like these over real education in the sciences, mathematics or technology. Hell you haven't even made a case for this over letting kids have an extended nap-time. What I've gotten so far is you feel this is so important, to get kids while they're so young they don't know whats going on and what you're even talking about.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

TheDrivingForce posted...

Kindergarden's way too fucking early.

Too early for what though?

What if a child is raised by a gay couple? Should they conversely not be taught about straight couples or have it explained why their parents are different? Are gay parents indoctrination simply by existing?

Telling them 2 people of the same sex can love each other is one thing. Teaching 5 year olds how sex works is another.
---

PleaseClap posted...

Ah yes, "the lgbtq community exists and deserves basic human respect," truly the most radical of ideologies.

little kids don't think otherwise, and don't need ideas drilled into their heads that they don't understand

child innocence is a virtue, and one that should be prolonged, not ousted more quickly