Green Room

The Progressive Case for “Age-Appropriate” Sex Ed

posted at 8:45 am on July 12, 2010 by

Last November, two enterprising teachers were unjustly fired after maintenance staff saw them clearly “rehearsing” their sex ed presentation.  Linda Waite, the New York High School Superintendent, stated that Cindy Mauro and Alini Brito were found in a classroom at 8:50 p.m. “naked,” with one “on her knees” and one “lying on the floor,” reports United Press International and NBC New York.

This sort of puritanical misunderstanding is outrageous.  These two progressive educators should be commended for their innovative approach to sexual health by endeavoring to engage their students through performance art.  This is high school.  Statistics show that modern teens are indeed sexually active (ask them about those colored Jelly bracelets) and could benefit from a creative explanation of their sexual “options.”  Relax, parents.  No teacher would recommend this type of mature demonstration to, say, elementary school children.

Not that educators shouldn’t instruct their kindergarten classes in proper anatomical terminology, or first graders about sexual orientation and gay slurs, or fifth graders about various types of…penetration.   In fact, the recent hullabaloo over Helena, Montana’s new sex ed program for grades K-5 is absurd.  Anyone accusing these administrators of nefarious intent is pathologically prudish. Helena brought the best minds of the community to the table to revamp the curriculum.  I mean, they had a “committee,” and conducted an “intense review,” utilizing the…

…best practices and research-based information from state and national health organizations, Burson said, and the draft incorporates the district’s philosophy of teaching to the whole child. (Emphasis mine.)

I really don’t think you people want a bunch of six year old “half” children walking around saying words like “wee wee” and “pee pee,” do you?  Cultural nightmare!

Indeed, these officials are working tirelessly to educate the whole American child from cradle to college coed.  Sure they have some kinks to work out, like “accidentally” authorizing condom distribution to first graders in Provincetown, Mass.  Whoops!  Just a procedural error. School superintendent Beth Singer (author of the district “condom policy”) assures us that no more condoms will be available to younger children, and that the policy will be “age-appropriate”— they’ll wait until, like, fifth grade.

State officials’ acknowledgment of “age-appropriateness” should certainly assuage any remaining parental fears, even the President himself recognizes the need for “age-appropriate” curriculum.  After all, he personally selected Kevin Jennings as Safe-Schools Czar with this very issue in mind.  Jennings understands the delicate balance between respect for childhood innocence and fomenting adolescent lust which is precisely why he waited until children were 14 to tell them how to properly “fist”  someone. That level of moral discernment should dispel any residual concern about educational intent.   Likewise, no parent should doubt whether children need this instruction.  Of course they do.

After all, children will have sex.  It’s an inevitability.  We should give these little sexual beings all the tools necessary to make informed decisions, the younger the better!   To deny their sexuality almost seems, I don’t know, a hostile act against their personhood—a bourgeois power play, even.  Perhaps a history lesson (content warning) from Germany would be instructive:

Sexual liberation was at the top of the agenda of the young revolutionaries who, in 1967, began turning society upside down. The control of sexual desire was seen as an instrument of domination, which bourgeois society used to uphold its power. Everything that the innovators perceived as wrong and harmful has its origins in this concept: man’s aggression, greed and desire to own things, as well as his willingness to submit to authority. The student radicals believed that only those who liberated themselves from sexual repression could be truly free.

To them, it seemed obvious that liberation should begin at an early age. Once sexual inhibitions had taken root, they reasoned, everything that followed was merely the treatment of symptoms. They were convinced that it was much better to prevent those inhibitions from developing in the first place. Hardly any leftist texts of the day did not address the subject of sexuality.

For instance, “Revolution der Erziehung” (“The Revolution in Education”), a work published by Rowohlt in 1971, which quickly became a bestseller, addresses sexuality as follows: “The de-eroticization of family life, from the prohibition of sexual activity among children to the taboo of incest, serves as preparation for total assimilation — as preparation for the hostile treatment of sexual pleasure in school and voluntary subjugation to a dehumanizing labor system.

Well, maybe that’s a tad extreme.  Admittedly, European leftists really went that extra mile.  No worries, though.  American culture and educational philosophy is quite impervious to European influence.  No similarities at all, moms and dads!

You can sleep soundly knowing the State will tenaciously, relentlessly seek out pioneering new ways to do more age-appropriate things to more children, earlier…with or without your consent.

Trust them.

__

h/t to Halestorm and RickSheridan for the odd UPI news story at the top of the article.

Cross posted at Newsreal Blog.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Hot.

MadisonConservative on July 12, 2010 at 9:30 AM

Lest we forget…

“Have sex, do drugs” speaker tells students
“Men with men, women and women, whatever combination you would like”
Posted: May 21, 2007
10:26 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh

A guest speaker at an assembly at Boulder High School in Colorado has told students as young as 14 to go have sex and use drugs, prompting school officials to say they will investigate.

The instructions came from Joel Becker, an associate clinical professor of psychology at the University of California at Los Angeles.

“I am going to encourage you to have sex and encourage you to use drugs appropriately,” Becker said during his appearance at the school as part of a recent panel sponsored by the University of Colorado’s Conference on World Affairs.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=41704

Roy Rogers on July 12, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Trouble with the Nanny State is that the Nanny will never be Mary Poppins!

IKIDYOUNOT on July 12, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Looks like the progressives are bound and determined to return us to the Dark Ages.

chemman on July 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM

The Progressives have a long and dark history of attempting to teach sex ed to children.

Conservative Samizdat on July 12, 2010 at 3:58 PM

Unbridled sex will make abortion become the climax.

ericdijon on July 12, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Hot.

MadisonConservative on July 12, 2010 at 9:30 AM

My article? ;) Awww. You’re too sweet! haha.

The Progressives have a long and dark history of attempting to teach sex ed to children.

Conservative Samizdat on July 12, 2010 at 3:58 PM

My last block quote was from the Spiegel piece.

The line between inappropriate gov. overreach and intentional sexualization of children is mighty blurry indeed. Disturbing stuff.

Bee on July 13, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Diane, your snark gives me joy :-)

Good Lt on July 13, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Wow, my comment never got through. Is it because I said p*nis?

I wrote a lot more, but the negative consequences of teaching sex-ed at such a young age should be readily apparent. Young boys should be taught respect, class, and how to treat a lady, not what to do when she finally drops her pants. That’s when you’re on your own.

Safe sex is all well and good, but we should be teaching proper behavior and respect for each other. All this sex-ed stuff would be much better spent on teaching kids how to be adults, and not in the between-the-sheets way.

jimmy the notable on July 13, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Good Lt on July 13, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Thank you!

Wow, my comment never got through. Is it because I said p*nis?

jimmy the notable on July 13, 2010 at 6:25 PM

It’s p-nus. ha.

Good point about respect.

Bee on July 13, 2010 at 8:46 PM