Same Sex Education in Schools

[Lisnpuppy]

 

Teaching about gender identities or sexual dispositions is an entirely different matter, and is more related to social studies than a health class since the vast majority of issues connected with it are infact social issues, just like sexism, racism, nationalism and other forms of bigotry.

 

 

I agree this is a "social" matter of study if you say "social studies" in the school system in the U.S. they start talking about History, Geography and Civics?

[HeyYou]

 

 

Teaching about gender identities or sexual dispositions is an entirely different matter, and is more related to social studies than a health class since the vast majority of issues connected with it are infact social issues, just like sexism, racism, nationalism and other forms of bigotry.

 

 

I agree this is a "social" matter of study if you say "social studies" in the school system in the U.S. they start talking about History, Geography and Civics?

 

Pretty much. Personally, I don't think teaching anything related to gender identity/sexual preference, has any place in public schools.

[Vagrant0]

 

 

 

Teaching about gender identities or sexual dispositions is an entirely different matter, and is more related to social studies than a health class since the vast majority of issues connected with it are infact social issues, just like sexism, racism, nationalism and other forms of bigotry.

 

 

I agree this is a "social" matter of study if you say "social studies" in the school system in the U.S. they start talking about History, Geography and Civics?

 

Pretty much. Personally, I don't think teaching anything related to gender identity/sexual preference, has any place in public schools.

 

The problem is that if not in school, then where? How exactly do you go from a society where the existence of something so common has gone from being intentionally disregarded or sanctioned, to a state of awareness and tolerance? The more forbidden you try to make knowledge, the more growing minds will actively try to seek it. When concepts such as gay, lesbian, transgender, inter-sexed, ect are front and center within the active culture, you cannot ignore the necessity of clarifying that sort of information. Failure to inform in an unbiased manner only leads to people forming prejudices based on the biases they are already exposed to by nature of existing within that culture.

 

The same problem existed with racism and sexism in the past. Before the histories, cultures, and contributions of darker skinned cultures was integrated into Social Studies, it was much easier to maintain a belief towards White Superiority or that these people were less than human. Before the accomplishments of Women were being recognized in the classroom, the narrative being taught to girls was that the only future they had was in domestic duties to their husband, being cloistered as a nun, or if they were not fit for marrying they were to live as a subordinate to whatever man allowed them to have money or property. Today we recognize those beliefs as dated, incorrect, and even vulgar. Notions of "normal" gender are just as dated, incorrect and vulgar, people just aren't conscious of this yet.

 

Sociologists have acknowledged that gender equality will be one of the next major hurdles that human society will have to deal with. This can either happen after those with political agendas have exhausted all power related with this concept as a means of rallying supporters, causing further generations of ignorance and prejudice; or this can happen in an honest and unbiased manner which seeks to dispel that ignorance and prejudice. If left to lawmakers, individuals, or government officials to decide what should be taught, then it will be a politicized decision that threatens to put parents against the school system (see evolution vs intelligent design) while neglecting the responsibility of educating students and providing them with the knowledge they need to succeed in this world and navigate all the complications involved with being a contributing part of society.

 

 

Obviously, touchy subjects like this would still need to be very limited until atleast highschool, the point at which they start being relevant to students. But some manner of impartial discussion should still exist as part of the broader subject of social sciences, rather than being a component of sexual education (or health education).

[HeyYou]

 

 

 

 

Teaching about gender identities or sexual dispositions is an entirely different matter, and is more related to social studies than a health class since the vast majority of issues connected with it are infact social issues, just like sexism, racism, nationalism and other forms of bigotry.

 

 

I agree this is a "social" matter of study if you say "social studies" in the school system in the U.S. they start talking about History, Geography and Civics?

 

Pretty much. Personally, I don't think teaching anything related to gender identity/sexual preference, has any place in public schools.

 

The problem is that if not in school, then where? How exactly do you go from a society where the existence of something so common has gone from being intentionally disregarded or sanctioned, to a state of awareness and tolerance? The more forbidden you try to make knowledge, the more growing minds will actively try to seek it. When concepts such as gay, lesbian, transgender, inter-sexed, ect are front and center within the active culture, you cannot ignore the necessity of clarifying that sort of information. Failure to inform in an unbiased manner only leads to people forming prejudices based on the biases they are already exposed to by nature of existing within that culture.

 

The same problem existed with racism and sexism in the past. Before the histories, cultures, and contributions of darker skinned cultures was integrated into Social Studies, it was much easier to maintain a belief towards White Superiority or that these people were less than human. Before the accomplishments of Women were being recognized in the classroom, the narrative being taught to girls was that the only future they had was in domestic duties to their husband, being cloistered as a nun, or if they were not fit for marrying they were to live as a subordinate to whatever man allowed them to have money or property. Today we recognize those beliefs as dated, incorrect, and even vulgar. Notions of "normal" gender are just as dated, incorrect and vulgar, people just aren't conscious of this yet.

 

Sociologists have acknowledged that gender equality will be one of the next major hurdles that human society will have to deal with. This can either happen after those with political agendas have exhausted all power related with this concept as a means of rallying supporters, causing further generations of ignorance and prejudice; or this can happen in an honest and unbiased manner which seeks to dispel that ignorance and prejudice. If left to lawmakers, individuals, or government officials to decide what should be taught, then it will be a politicized decision that threatens to put parents against the school system (see evolution vs intelligent design) while neglecting the responsibility of educating students and providing them with the knowledge they need to succeed in this world and navigate all the complications involved with being a contributing part of society.

 

 

Obviously, touchy subjects like this would still need to be very limited until atleast highschool, the point at which they start being relevant to students. But some manner of impartial discussion should still exist as part of the broader subject of social sciences, rather than being a component of sexual education (or health education).

 

And that right there is the problem. "An Unbiased Manner." Won't happen in a public school.

 

People already form their biases and opinions based on their environment, and what they are exposed to. Be it their parents, their friends, their church, whathaveyou. If you entertain, for even a single second, that some educator, that is simply assigned the task, is going to present the information without coloring it with their own biases, I think you serioulsy overestimate them. Not even a psychologist, counselor, whatever, is going to present just the facts. As if we actually knew what the facts were.....

 

People will form their opinions, make their own decisions, the same way they always have. With the information they have at hand. In this day and age, claiming "I don't have enough information." is simply a person burying their head in the sand, and screaming LA LA LA LA LA, with their hands frimly pressed to their ears, and their eyes tightly shut. There is so much information available at the press of a few keys, anyone that wants more information, can easily get it. There are support groups and all manner of resources online, and that's only the beginning. There are people at the school they can speak with privately, confidentially, to bring clarity to their questions. Or, at least, help them be a bit less confused. Now, will they seek it out? Or will they still hide in the closet? That's up to the individual.

 

No, I do not thing a school setting (short of university level) is the place for this. Certainly not something I would entrust to the typical teacher.......

 

My father was a professor at a local college for better than 30 years, I wouldn't even trust HIM to cover this topic without his biases showing. (which I know for a fact, they would......) And he was a fantastic teacher. (not just my opinion, his students all said the same.)

[WursWaldo]

The reality remains that any initiative to 'educate' people on the scientific facts of sexual identity would be polluted by those who have an agenda. Education boards would filter and censor like they do everything else taught in schools and universities. The resulting information available to students would not be the whole story. Even if it was, some individual teachers and professors would not follow the curriculum and they would disseminate what they saw fit. Facts and the truth would be replaced with ideology.

There was a movement in LGBT circles to stop the medical and scientific community from “labeling them” as having mental disorders; going as far as to try and censor the NIH report from 2013 that verified LGBT Americans have disproportionately higher instances of alcoholism, depression, smoking, cancer, suicide, and perpetrated acts of violence. There was an earlier attempt to censor a more detailed NIH 2010 report that showed LGBT Americans make up 5% of the population, but have instances of 6.8% alcoholism, 2.7% depression, 7.7% cancer, 1.4 % suicide, 6.3% perpetrated acts of violence and a huge 81.5% instance of sexually transmitted diseases. They are only 5% of the population and look at the numbers, and some in the LGBT community did not want people to know about the results.

How does anyone expect for students to be taught the truth in a politically correct society where the truth has no place? Anything taught would be slanted to fit an agenda. If students would be told the truth and given facts then maybe teaching about sexual identity could be a good thing, but we all know what would be taught would be far from the truth or factual.

A listing of NIH annual reports is available here: http://www.fnih.org/about/foundation/annual-reports

Edited for spelling:

Edited July 22, 2015 by WursWaldo

[stroytika]

Public Schools need to teach about only one thing with regards to sex: How to not get STD's. Everything else a human can learn on their own but an STD doesn't have an Undo button. In cases like this we need to institutionalize the education. A good parallel example would be how dangerous a Car can be and how we ensure that people have to maintain a drivers' license and a good driving record to continue to drive. This needs to be mandatory because its a public health issue more than a social issue. Let's be clear, though. I arrive at this from a financial perspective: its cheaper to explain to a young man or woman why they should use a condom on the whole than for the country to bear the financial burden of treating people with these sometimes lifelong diseases. As for the question of whether or not same sex education belongs in schools? I would say no. If people want to bash on LGBT and commit crimes/hate crimes, that needs to be stamped out via the criminal justice system just like any other crime. Trying to educate in school will just make some kids think: "i have to do this stupid course because person X in my class is LGBT" and this will cause social pressure on this person we already know is statistically disadvantaged. Basically, Less carrot, more stick.

 

With Regards to WursWaldo's point about the stats on Alcoholism, etc. inside the lgbt community, the cart is before the horse in your perspective. The Stats represent a result of Systemwide Discrimination, however they can be misused to represent LGBT as raging drug addict alcoholics. The reason why 'the truth has no place' is because it can be misconstrued, and abused. We as a society have to consider this class of person as a Discriminated minority, and assist them in Mitigating issues like alcoholism, depression, suicide. Being fair though, I do think that Sex education is a significant factor in the STD statistics.

[Vagrant0]

 

And that right there is the problem. "An Unbiased Manner." Won't happen in a public school.

 

People already form their biases and opinions based on their environment, and what they are exposed to. Be it their parents, their friends, their church, whathaveyou. If you entertain, for even a single second, that some educator, that is simply assigned the task, is going to present the information without coloring it with their own biases, I think you serioulsy overestimate them. Not even a psychologist, counselor, whatever, is going to present just the facts. As if we actually knew what the facts were.....

 

People will form their opinions, make their own decisions, the same way they always have. With the information they have at hand. In this day and age, claiming "I don't have enough information." is simply a person burying their head in the sand, and screaming LA LA LA LA LA, with their hands frimly pressed to their ears, and their eyes tightly shut. There is so much information available at the press of a few keys, anyone that wants more information, can easily get it. There are support groups and all manner of resources online, and that's only the beginning. There are people at the school they can speak with privately, confidentially, to bring clarity to their questions. Or, at least, help them be a bit less confused. Now, will they seek it out? Or will they still hide in the closet? That's up to the individual.

 

No, I do not thing a school setting (short of university level) is the place for this. Certainly not something I would entrust to the typical teacher.......

 

My father was a professor at a local college for better than 30 years, I wouldn't even trust HIM to cover this topic without his biases showing. (which I know for a fact, they would......) And he was a fantastic teacher. (not just my opinion, his students all said the same.)

 

Biases are natural, and they will always occur. But part of the point of establishing a standardized curriculum and having a topic being covered multiple times is to help reduce the effects of those biases. While the starting point for this is likely to be the most prone to biases, over time those biases will naturally be evened out as alternate perspectives are allowed to present themselves in the same light. We are not talking about a quick fix here. This is a problem that will likely remain beyond the generation which is being born now. But a rational starting point needs to be established for any real progress to be made. This won't come from individuals electing to find this information for themselves.

 

The danger of relying on support groups and the like is that many of them have political or social agendas beyond simply offering information. More to the point, information presented in something like a transgender support group usually asserts that the people reading that information either identifies as transgender or is questioning their sexuality rather than just looking for information. These sources also have a tendency to ignore information which is not beneficial to whatever frame they're supporting. While these places can still be a good place for people to go for support in whatever lifestyle is being advertised, there is no real oversight... To the point that opposition groups have even gone about setting up support groups intended to misinform, spread doubt, or to fabricate a cause for outcry. To try and consider any of these sources as being less biased than standardized education is laughable.

[Lisnpuppy]

Let me tell you all a little story. About two years ago some local business people paid for this woman to come give a "sexual education" seminar in some local schools. They told it as sex education and this is what the kids and the very, very few parents that knew about it before hand thought it would be (and that included abstinence.)

 

These are two of the many, many stories about the woman that came and one of the students who spoke out against her:

 

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/17/1883121/west-virginia-abstinence-assembly/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/12/pam-stenzel-abstinence-sex-ed-george-washington-high-school_n_3070605.html

 

Now the issue is this woman has no education or medical background. She gives incorrect information but makes young woman feel ashamed of anything regarding sex. I was pretty angry about the message itself but complete medical inaccuracy of it was appalling.

 

The school made excuses that they didn't pay for it...and they didn't. However one of the biggest donors to the 6K fee this woman got for speeches was the HUSBAND of one of the Kanawha County Education board members. They explained they had separate bank accounts. *cough*

 

So if you think that board approved or disapproved messages about sex education will or will not get to a child without you knowing or having a voice in it...think again. And go ahead and google this lovely speech giver, Pam Stenzel. I think you will find her you tube stuff so interesting....*sarcasm*

 

I'm glad she never made it to my daughter's high school. I don't look good in jail orange and the school would not have enjoyed the conversation I had with them until the cops got there. *ha ha*

[WursWaldo]

With Regards to WursWaldo's point about the stats on Alcoholism, etc. inside the lgbt community, the cart is before the horse in your perspective. The Stats represent a result of Systemwide Discrimination, however they can be misused to represent LGBT as raging drug addict alcoholics. The reason why 'the truth has no place' is because it can be misconstrued, and abused. We as a society have to consider this class of person as a Discriminated minority, and assist them in Mitigating issues like alcoholism, depression, suicide. Being fair though, I do think that Sex education is a significant factor in the STD statistics.

 

I disagree. Not that there isn't bigotry; we all know there is. The root cause of the problems the LGBT community faces can't be placed anywhere but at the feet of that community. In 1973 Homosexuality was de-classified as being a mental illness. The declassification wasn't because the scientific and medical communities had it wrong, but because of political activism by the gay community. Sexual and gender dysphoria are real psychological conditions. A quick search on any medical wiki will show that I'm asserting is the truth. The science was changed to fit an agenda.

(I am not saying gay people are insane. I am pointing to the fact there are fundamental differences in brain chemistry and function that may cause problems if not addressed. I realize that is not the politically correct thing to say, but it is a scientific fact.)

No matter the case, discrimination is not justification to be an addict, or be sexually irresponsible. That same argument is used by African American activists. Instead of addressing the issues in the community, blame society.

This isn't off topic since it rolls back to how people perceive same sex relationships. Lisnpuppy pointed out an instance of someone with agenda 'educating' people with bogus information. Attempts by some circles in the LGBT community to censor NIH scientific findings and rewrite medicine is not different. How can anyone be trusted to tell children the truth if the people involve have agendas that fly in the face of facts and the truth? Education isn't about social justice just so one group of people can feel good about themselves while they indoctrinate children.

Even if sexual identity 'classes' were taught in schools the mission would be sabotaged. One group of educators would want present the facts about same sex relationships; the good and the bad. Another group would be against that because they would be afraid of what people might think, and other group would want to vilify them.

This goes back to the NIH reports. Instead of addressing the root causes and finding solutions, some circles in the LBGT community want to hide the truth. That is just as ignorant as the woman Lisnpuppy talked about.

I have voiced my opinion. Once I quote someone I feel as if I'm internet arguing, and that is something I do not do. I have enjoyed reading the posts and the mental exercise. Thank you, Lisnpuppy for the links. That woman is a real piece of work.

WursWaldo? He's not here anymore. :blush:

[Vagrant0]

 

 

The problem with drawing any conclusion just on statistics is that people are free to interpret it however they wish. The same conclusions you are alluding to here are the same conclusions that people can make about men as a whole. Men statistically have much higher rates of suicide, much higher rates of alcoholism and drug abuse, much higher rates of being the cause of physical abuse compared to women. Based on these statistics and you're perspective on the matter, one can make the same conclusion that men as a whole should be blamed for the faults of the few. That men cause these problems themselves, that environment plays no role in the likelihood of these issues, and that they should strive to be more "normal".

 

Surely, rates of depression, alcoholism, sexual infidelity are things that are not unique to any singular group or affiliation. These are also issues that predate any of these organized groups which may have an agenda. The reality is that when a person, of any walk of life, is faced with the threat of death, disfigurement, or being excluded from your family just because they are different; they have to deal with that threat, stress, or void somehow. Because humans are frail, flawed, small minded things that will often reach for the first branch of hope offered to them and cling to it, be it a bottle, be it self-delusion, be it destructive thoughts, or just throwing themselves into sexual companionship with anyone who will accept them. Just because there are those who would seek to take advantage of this for their own political agenda does not mean that large portions of society are not to blame for creating this situation for others to take advantage of. To try and suggest otherwise indicates that you really have not seen or felt what real prejudice is or the lasting damage it can cause.