Changes in Ontario's sex education curriculum cause causes some britches to bunch

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
Maysie Maysie's picture
Changes in Ontario's sex education curriculum cause causes some britches to bunch

Are props due to McGuinty? I hate to do it, but this does sounds like a very positive move forward.

Premier Dalton McGuinty is defending the province's new sex education curriculum against accusations from "family values" groups that it exposes young children to inappropriate material.

Dr. Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College, said Ontario's revamped sex education curriculum will teach 11-year-olds about oral and anal sex and eight-year-olds about sexual orientation and identity.

"Little eight-year-olds, they're going to be taught they look one way on the outside but they may be the opposite on the inside," McVety said. "This is so confusing to an eight-year-old ... these are children in the strongest sense of the word -- they're innocent, they're clean, they're beautiful -- and to corrupt them by imparting a question of gender identity is beyond the pale."


Children in Grade 1 will be taught to identify male and female genitalia, where the previous curriculum referred only generally to body parts.

In Grade 3, students will learn about differences -- visible and invisible -- between people, such as learning abilities, gender identity and sexual orientation.


This curriculum introduces possible "teacher prompts" that, although not mandatory, suggest how instructors can address issues such as same-sex parents and masturbation. The ministry said the inclusion of same-sex families reflects a commitment to equity and inclusive education.


Link to article here.

Issues Pages: 
RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

No props due, McGuinty caved.



Denying he was bowing to pressure from religious groups, McGuinty said "it's become pretty obvious to us that we should give this a serious re-think."

Parents will get time to have more input into the new sex ed curriculum, which will replace the existing 12-year-old guidelines.

With a provincial election looming next year, he did not set out a time frame.

"We spent a good 24 to 48 hours listening to parents," McGuinty said at a London school.

"We listened carefully."


Spineless wimps.




Hmm.  Selective hearing loss, it seems.

Skinny Dipper

The new Health curriculum with up-to-date sex-ed curriculum expectations would have been appropriate for students in the elementary grades.  It is appropriate for students in grade-one to learn the proper terms for their bodies.  It is appropriate for grade-three students to learn that people have different sexual orientations.  I would add that I think kindergarten students can learn that families come in different shapes, sizes, and colours including families with two moms or two dads.  I do think intermediate students should be aware of different types of sexual activity and their health risks.  They should also be aware of their legal responsibility before engaging in sexual activity.  For example, "No means no."

I'll leave the morality of sexual education with the parents and religious leaders.  As a teacher, my job is to teach the students to make decisions about their lives based on health and legal facts.  The reason is that the older students are not going to be with me or their parents 24 hours per day.  They need to make choices about their sexual activities including abstinence based on facts.  Their lives depend on their choices.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Never had any sex education in either  1950s primary or 1960s secondary skule. I can't get my head around that youngsters are learning and know so much more than I did when I was their age. I guess it's a good thing. Geez, I feel old.Frown

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

By the way, I believe it should be against the law for religious folk to be able to lobby the government in matters such as education curriculum design, and I speak as someone who was active in church life. My thinking is that we have extremes of religious thought, from the far right fundamentalists to the ultra liberal. If we permit religious lobbying to governments, where the heck does it stop???