General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsScience or Sex: Which Does the Right Hate More?
http://www.alternet.org/story/155999/science_or_sex%3A_which_does_the_right_hate_more/_640x426_310x220
A principal in Onalaska, Wash., was accused of raping her fifth-grade students. Not actually this isnt a case of, you know, rape-rape but rather rape as an inappropriate metaphor: rape by sex ed. James Gilliland, the parent of an 11-year-old girl who took C.J. Grays class on the birds and the bees, told Seattles KING 5 News: Its basically the same as raping a kids mind and taking their innocence.
What got this father and other parents so fired up? In a recent lesson on HIV, Gray answered a students question about what oral sex and anal sex are. Onalaska superintendent Scott Fenter told KING 5, She only gave factual information, no demonstrations. Gray herself told Centralia, Wash.s Chronicle, It was very factual and it was dropped. I did not demonstrate it. Yes, despite at least two parents likening her answering of kids questions to child molestation and others inundating her with angry phone calls and letters she did not actually demonstrate the act; there were no photos or videos, either. It was just a matter-of-fact explanation of the basic mechanics.
This small-town story has garnered national attention and, of course, lit up conservative sites like Glenn Becks the Blaze and anti-choice outlets like LifeNews.com because the backlash isnt just about these kids or their hyperbolic parents; its really about a larger culture war, as well as fundamental, bipartisan fears about kids and sex. Its a case study on the parental terror, ignorance and sometimes willful blindness that often accompanies the fight against comprehensive sex education.
The curriculum Gray was using, the Family Life and Sexual Health (FLASH) program, was developed in the state despite conservatives claims that it was the result of Planned Parenthoods puppet-mastery. The lesson plan for the HIV portion of the fifth- and sixth-grade classes explains, We use the term sexual intercourse as an umbrella expression to represent all three risky sexual behaviors: oral, anal and vaginal intercourse, it says. These will be spelled out in later grades. But heres the important part: Thats not to say that you cant define them simply if students ask about them. Thats exactly what Gray did: A student asked about oral and anal sex, and she responded with a straightforward description.
JHB
(37,161 posts)... stays in their designated pigeon hole.
Their fear of science isn't nearly as consistent as their their fear of anyone getting out of line sexually.
Lionessa
(3,894 posts)at an Atheist Meetup. Now I learned about sex in school, rudimentary, but the basic birds and bees, both educationally and through gossip-y arenas. This was mid-70s and in Texas. In a related conversation, as I was trying to get a point across, someone recognized my disconnect.
She says, "Oh I see, you think girls know how babies are made. They don't. In the small-ish, conservative town I grew up in, girls didn't understand how they're made until after they get pregnant the first time. Contraception isn't allowed to be discussed by school, and heavily discouraged of parents through the churches."
I am flabbergasted. How in the hell was it that my generation is more educated in the 70s than the current generation? This would be akin, in my mind, to having long division as the highest level of math available. Isn't education and glory of the written word supposed to be the ADVANCEMENT of education, not the regression of it?
I'm am once again dumbfounded by how un-exceptional we've become... well except apparently in our ability to market ourselves as benign superpower, that is still exceptional.
surrealAmerican
(11,362 posts)Sex education in the 70's was very controversial. You were just lucky enough to live in a school district that did the right thing. It still a matter of where a child lives, and what their school board will approve.