Sexual education compared across Canada
By Leslie Young National Online Journalist Global News
Ontario’s newly-revised sexual education curriculum introduces kids to the proper names for genitalia by Grade 1, the physical changes of puberty in Grade 4, and how to prevent sexually-transmitted infections in Grade 7.
RELATED
We went through the curriculum for each province and examined when certain key concepts are first introduced to children. You’ll find our results below. Note that many curricula suggest strategies for introducing concepts at an age-appropriate level, for example: a discussion of sexual abuse in a kindergarten class would likely be about what inappropriate touching is and the importance of reporting it. And in many classrooms, concepts could be introduced earlier than required by the curriculum.
For more information on how a province describes a concept, you should look directly at the curriculum document.
And as an aside, while all provinces spend a lot of time talking about sex, only one guideline document specifically mentions love: Quebec’s.
The grade at which children are expected to know the names of all body parts:
Ontario’s newly-revised sexual education curriculum introduces kids to the proper names for genitalia by Grade 1, the physical changes of puberty in Grade 4, and how to prevent sexually-transmitted infections in Grade 7.
RELATED
- Consent curriculum: What do you think of Ontario’s new sex ed?
- What Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum teaches in Grades 1 through 12
- Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum will teach consent in Grade 2
We went through the curriculum for each province and examined when certain key concepts are first introduced to children. You’ll find our results below. Note that many curricula suggest strategies for introducing concepts at an age-appropriate level, for example: a discussion of sexual abuse in a kindergarten class would likely be about what inappropriate touching is and the importance of reporting it. And in many classrooms, concepts could be introduced earlier than required by the curriculum.
For more information on how a province describes a concept, you should look directly at the curriculum document.
And as an aside, while all provinces spend a lot of time talking about sex, only one guideline document specifically mentions love: Quebec’s.
The grade at which children are expected to know the names of all body parts:
- Ontario: Grade 1
- B.C.: Kindergarten
- Alberta: Kindergarten
- Saskatchewan: Grade 5 (possibly earlier)
- Manitoba: Kindergarten
- Quebec: By 5 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 6
- PEI: Grade 6
- Nova Scotia: Grade 3
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Grade 4
- Ontario: Grade 3
- B.C.: Grade 6
- Alberta: Unclear
- Saskatchewan: Grade 3
- Manitoba: Unclear
- Quebec: By 5 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 8
- PEI: Grade 8
- Nova Scotia: Grade 3
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Grade 9 (may be mentioned earlier)
- Ontario: Grade 3
- B.C.: Grade 6
- Alberta: Unclear
- Saskatchewan: Grade 1
- Manitoba: Grade 5
- Quebec: Between 8 and 11 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 6
- PEI: Unclear
- Nova Scotia: Grade 4
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Unclear
- Ontario: Grade 7
- B.C.: Grade 6
- Alberta: Grade 6
- Saskatchewan: Grade 6
- Manitoba: Grade 7
- Quebec: Between 12-17 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 9 and 10
- PEI: Grade 8 (expected to understand abstinence in Grade 7)
- Nova Scotia: Between Grades 5 and 7: HIV/AIDS mentioned in Grade 5, consequences of sex in Grade 6, contraceptive methods in Grade 7
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Grade 7 (HIV/AIDS mentioned in Grade 5)
- Ontario: Grade 4
- B.C.: Grade 4
- Alberta: Unclear
- Saskatchewan: Grade 4
- Manitoba: Unclear
- Quebec: Unclear, but strong focus on safety/exploitation starting in kindergarten
- New Brunswick: Unclear
- PEI: Unclear
- Nova Scotia: Grade 8
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Unclear
- Ontario: Grade 7
- B.C.: Grade 6 (unclear)
- Alberta: Grade 8
- Saskatchewan: Grade 9
- Manitoba: Grade 7
- Quebec: Between 12 and 17 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 9 and 10
- PEI: Grade 8 (expected to understand abstinence in Grade 7)
- Nova Scotia: Grade 7
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Grade 8
- Ontario: Grade 7 (some mention in Grade 2)
- B.C.: Grade 8
- Alberta: Grade 8
- Saskatchewan: Grade 9
- Manitoba: Grade 5
- Quebec: Between 10-11 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 7, emphasized in Grade 9 and 10
- PEI: Grade 9
- Nova Scotia: Grade 7
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Grade 8
- Ontario: Grade 4
- B.C.: Kindergarten
- Alberta: Grade 8
- Saskatchewan: Grade 3
- Manitoba: Unclear
- Quebec: By 5 years old
- New Brunswick: Grade 8
- PEI: Grade 8
- Nova Scotia: Grade 5
- Newfoundland and Labrador: Grade 2
'Girls & Sex' And The Importance Of Talking To Young Women About Pleasure
Author Peggy Orenstein says that when it comes to sexuality, girls today are receiving mixed messages. Girls hear that "they're supposed to be sexy, they're supposed to perform sexually for boys," Orenstein tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross, "but that their sexual pleasure is unspoken."
While researching her new book, Girls & Sex, Orenstein spoke with more than 70 young women between the ages of 15 and 20 about their attitudes and early experiences with the full range of physical intimacy.
She says that pop culture and pornography sexualize young women by creating undue pressure to look and act sexy. These pressures affect both the sexual expectations that girls put on themselves and the expectations boys project onto them.
Peggy Orenstein has been chronicling the lives of girls for over 25 years. Her book Cinderella Ate My Daughterdescribed the impact of "princess culture" on young girls.
Michael Todd/HarperOrenstein adds that girls she spoke to were often navigating between being considered "slutty" or a "prude," and that their own desires were often lost in the shuffle. Girls, Orenstein says, are being taught to please their partners without regard to their own desires.
"When I would talk to girls, for instance, about oral sex, that was something that they were doing from a pretty young age, and it tended to go one way [and not be reciprocated]," Orenstein explains.
She recommends that parents examine the messages they send regarding girls and sexuality. "One of the things that I really took away from this research, is the absolute importance of not just talking about [girls] as victims, or not just talking about them as these new aggressors, but really surfacing these ideas of talking clearly and honestly to girls about their own desires and their own pleasures," she says.
On the silence surrounding girls' genitals
Parents don't tend to name their infant baby's genitals if they're girls. For boys, they'll say, "Here's your nose, here's your shoulders, here's your waist, here's your pee pee," whatever. But with girls, there's this sort of blank space — it's right from navel to knees, and not naming something makes it quite literally unspeakable.
Then they go into puberty education class, and girls have periods and unwanted pregnancy, and you see only the inside anatomy — that thing that looks like a steer head, with the ovaries and everything — and then it grays out between the legs, so we never talk about the vulva, we never talk about the clitoris. Very few girls explore, there's no self-knowledge, and then they go into their sexual experiences and we expect them to be able to have some sense of entitlement, some sense of knowledge, to be able to assert themselves, to have some sense of equality, and it's just not realistic that that's going to happen.
On whether kids are having more sex at a younger age, and the prevalence of oral sex
Kids are not having intercourse at a younger age, and they're not having more intercourse than they used to. They are engaging in other forms of sexual behavior, younger and more often. And one of the things that I became really clear on was that we have to broaden our definition of sex, because by ignoring and denying these other forms of sexual behavior that kids are engaging in, we are opening the door to a lot of risky behavior, and we are opening the door to a lot of disrespect. ...
[Oral sex] is considered to be less intimate than intercourse, and something that girls say repeatedly to me would be, "It's no big deal." There's an argument that some of the girls have in the book about exactly what it is. Is it sex? Is it not sex? Is it no big deal? ... It was something that they felt that they could do that boys expected — that they could do to not have to do something else. It was a way that they could cultivate popularity, it was a way that they felt — interestingly, they would talk about feeling more in control than if it was reciprocal.
They felt it was safer sex, which is true and not true, because the rates of STDs have actually shot up among teenagers, even though the rates of intercourse have not, because they think that oral sex is safer sex and things like gonorrhea are spreading much more quickly.
On talking to girls about their partners not reciprocating oral sex
I started saying, "Look, what if every time you were with a guy, he told you to go get him a glass of water from the kitchen and he never offered to get you a glass of water. Or if he did he'd say, "Ugh, you want me to get you a glass of water?" You would never stand for it! Girls, they would bust out laughing when I said that, and they'd say, "Oh, I never thought about it that way." I thought, well, maybe you should if you think that being asked repeatedly to give someone a glass of water without reciprocation is less insulting than being asked to perform a sexual act over and over.
On what "hooking up" means
It can mean anything. It can mean kissing, it can mean intercourse, it can mean any other form of sexual interplay. It really is a nonphrase. But what the hookup culture means, I mean, kids did not invent casual sex, right? But what has changed is the idea that casual sex is the pathway to a relationship, that sex is a precursor rather than a function of intimacy and affection.
[In college] pretty much if you didn't want to stay home with microwave popcorn calling your parents, especially for freshmen and sophomores, that was kind of what they did. They went out, they got drunk, they hooked up.
On drinking and hookup culture
More On Teen Girls And Culture
ALL TECH CONSIDEREDTeen Girls And Social Media: A Story Of 'Secret Lives' And MisogynyHookup culture, particularly, it's not just lubricated by alcohol anymore — it's completely dependent on it. One sociologist told me that alcohol was what created this compulsory carelessness, so that it was a way to signal that the sex that they were having was meaningless. Alcohol, it was almost like it had replaced mutual attraction as kind of reason in and of itself to have sex, so it was a way to not care. It was a way to say, "We're just doing this for one night."
What was tricky was that both the thing that is held out — for college students in particular but high school students, too — as "fun," which is getting drunk and hooking up, also facilitated assault, because alcohol is really the No. 1 date drug. ... We talk a lot about girls drinking and reducing girls drinking, and I think it's very important to talk to girls about the particular effects of alcohol on their bodies, because drink for drink, we get drunker faster than boys do.
We can't forget to talk about the impact of alcohol on boys, because we know that alcohol at best loosens inhibitions, it reduces a person's ability to read social cues, it gives young men who might not otherwise have it — courage is probably the wrong word, but the courage, I guess, to commit an assault, or to ignore "no," and tend to be more aggressive when they do. Alcohol also makes boys less likely to step in as bystanders when they see something occurring, than they would be if they were sober. So we really have to address both sides of this equation if we want to reduce assault.
On the notion of multiple "virginities"
One girl said to me, "Usually the opposite of a negative is a positive, but when you're talking about girls and sex, the opposite of slut is prude, both of which are negative. So what are you supposed to do?" So they're always trying to walk this line where they're not considered slutty, but they're not considered too [much of a] prude. It's an ever-shifting kind of dynamic, so part of that was getting rid of virginity, which often was something they did drunk, not necessarily with someone they cared that much about, and you really have to ask, is that really experience? Is the person who rushes toward intercourse wasted getting more experience than the person who spends three hours making out with a partner sober and exploring ideas about sexual tension and pleasure and what feels good? We have this weird idea, and I think that our emphasis on virginity right now is not doing girls any favors, and of course it also completely disregards gay girls.
One of the things that was really great was in talking to a gay girl, I asked her, "When did you think that you had lost your virginity?" And she said, "Well, you know, I really have thought a lot about that, and I'm not really sure." She gave a few different answers and then she said, "You know what I think? I think a girl loses her virginity when she has her first orgasm with a partner." And it completely knocked me out. I thought, "Wow." I know we're not going to dismantle the idea of virginity, but what if we could broaden it to think that there's multiple virginities, and what if that was one of them? That would totally shift our ideas of how we thought about girls and boys and sex.
While researching her new book, Girls & Sex, Orenstein spoke with more than 70 young women between the ages of 15 and 20 about their attitudes and early experiences with the full range of physical intimacy.
She says that pop culture and pornography sexualize young women by creating undue pressure to look and act sexy. These pressures affect both the sexual expectations that girls put on themselves and the expectations boys project onto them.
Peggy Orenstein has been chronicling the lives of girls for over 25 years. Her book Cinderella Ate My Daughterdescribed the impact of "princess culture" on young girls.
Michael Todd/HarperOrenstein adds that girls she spoke to were often navigating between being considered "slutty" or a "prude," and that their own desires were often lost in the shuffle. Girls, Orenstein says, are being taught to please their partners without regard to their own desires.
"When I would talk to girls, for instance, about oral sex, that was something that they were doing from a pretty young age, and it tended to go one way [and not be reciprocated]," Orenstein explains.
She recommends that parents examine the messages they send regarding girls and sexuality. "One of the things that I really took away from this research, is the absolute importance of not just talking about [girls] as victims, or not just talking about them as these new aggressors, but really surfacing these ideas of talking clearly and honestly to girls about their own desires and their own pleasures," she says.
On the silence surrounding girls' genitals
Parents don't tend to name their infant baby's genitals if they're girls. For boys, they'll say, "Here's your nose, here's your shoulders, here's your waist, here's your pee pee," whatever. But with girls, there's this sort of blank space — it's right from navel to knees, and not naming something makes it quite literally unspeakable.
Then they go into puberty education class, and girls have periods and unwanted pregnancy, and you see only the inside anatomy — that thing that looks like a steer head, with the ovaries and everything — and then it grays out between the legs, so we never talk about the vulva, we never talk about the clitoris. Very few girls explore, there's no self-knowledge, and then they go into their sexual experiences and we expect them to be able to have some sense of entitlement, some sense of knowledge, to be able to assert themselves, to have some sense of equality, and it's just not realistic that that's going to happen.
On whether kids are having more sex at a younger age, and the prevalence of oral sex
Kids are not having intercourse at a younger age, and they're not having more intercourse than they used to. They are engaging in other forms of sexual behavior, younger and more often. And one of the things that I became really clear on was that we have to broaden our definition of sex, because by ignoring and denying these other forms of sexual behavior that kids are engaging in, we are opening the door to a lot of risky behavior, and we are opening the door to a lot of disrespect. ...
[Oral sex] is considered to be less intimate than intercourse, and something that girls say repeatedly to me would be, "It's no big deal." There's an argument that some of the girls have in the book about exactly what it is. Is it sex? Is it not sex? Is it no big deal? ... It was something that they felt that they could do that boys expected — that they could do to not have to do something else. It was a way that they could cultivate popularity, it was a way that they felt — interestingly, they would talk about feeling more in control than if it was reciprocal.
They felt it was safer sex, which is true and not true, because the rates of STDs have actually shot up among teenagers, even though the rates of intercourse have not, because they think that oral sex is safer sex and things like gonorrhea are spreading much more quickly.
On talking to girls about their partners not reciprocating oral sex
I started saying, "Look, what if every time you were with a guy, he told you to go get him a glass of water from the kitchen and he never offered to get you a glass of water. Or if he did he'd say, "Ugh, you want me to get you a glass of water?" You would never stand for it! Girls, they would bust out laughing when I said that, and they'd say, "Oh, I never thought about it that way." I thought, well, maybe you should if you think that being asked repeatedly to give someone a glass of water without reciprocation is less insulting than being asked to perform a sexual act over and over.
On what "hooking up" means
It can mean anything. It can mean kissing, it can mean intercourse, it can mean any other form of sexual interplay. It really is a nonphrase. But what the hookup culture means, I mean, kids did not invent casual sex, right? But what has changed is the idea that casual sex is the pathway to a relationship, that sex is a precursor rather than a function of intimacy and affection.
[In college] pretty much if you didn't want to stay home with microwave popcorn calling your parents, especially for freshmen and sophomores, that was kind of what they did. They went out, they got drunk, they hooked up.
On drinking and hookup culture
More On Teen Girls And Culture
ALL TECH CONSIDEREDTeen Girls And Social Media: A Story Of 'Secret Lives' And MisogynyHookup culture, particularly, it's not just lubricated by alcohol anymore — it's completely dependent on it. One sociologist told me that alcohol was what created this compulsory carelessness, so that it was a way to signal that the sex that they were having was meaningless. Alcohol, it was almost like it had replaced mutual attraction as kind of reason in and of itself to have sex, so it was a way to not care. It was a way to say, "We're just doing this for one night."
What was tricky was that both the thing that is held out — for college students in particular but high school students, too — as "fun," which is getting drunk and hooking up, also facilitated assault, because alcohol is really the No. 1 date drug. ... We talk a lot about girls drinking and reducing girls drinking, and I think it's very important to talk to girls about the particular effects of alcohol on their bodies, because drink for drink, we get drunker faster than boys do.
We can't forget to talk about the impact of alcohol on boys, because we know that alcohol at best loosens inhibitions, it reduces a person's ability to read social cues, it gives young men who might not otherwise have it — courage is probably the wrong word, but the courage, I guess, to commit an assault, or to ignore "no," and tend to be more aggressive when they do. Alcohol also makes boys less likely to step in as bystanders when they see something occurring, than they would be if they were sober. So we really have to address both sides of this equation if we want to reduce assault.
On the notion of multiple "virginities"
One girl said to me, "Usually the opposite of a negative is a positive, but when you're talking about girls and sex, the opposite of slut is prude, both of which are negative. So what are you supposed to do?" So they're always trying to walk this line where they're not considered slutty, but they're not considered too [much of a] prude. It's an ever-shifting kind of dynamic, so part of that was getting rid of virginity, which often was something they did drunk, not necessarily with someone they cared that much about, and you really have to ask, is that really experience? Is the person who rushes toward intercourse wasted getting more experience than the person who spends three hours making out with a partner sober and exploring ideas about sexual tension and pleasure and what feels good? We have this weird idea, and I think that our emphasis on virginity right now is not doing girls any favors, and of course it also completely disregards gay girls.
One of the things that was really great was in talking to a gay girl, I asked her, "When did you think that you had lost your virginity?" And she said, "Well, you know, I really have thought a lot about that, and I'm not really sure." She gave a few different answers and then she said, "You know what I think? I think a girl loses her virginity when she has her first orgasm with a partner." And it completely knocked me out. I thought, "Wow." I know we're not going to dismantle the idea of virginity, but what if we could broaden it to think that there's multiple virginities, and what if that was one of them? That would totally shift our ideas of how we thought about girls and boys and sex.
Five Ways To Support Sexual Violence Survivors During the Jian Ghomeshi Trial
By: Farrah Khan, Ryerson University
Today one of Canada’s most high profile sexual assault trials begins, here are some ways allies can support the survivors in their lives:
Sending love, light and compassion to fellow survivors today. We deserve to be seen, heard and believed.
Farrah
Today one of Canada’s most high profile sexual assault trials begins, here are some ways allies can support the survivors in their lives:
- Survivors are listening. When you talk/post/tweet about the#JianGhomeshi trial and shame or blame the survivors, we are listening. We are judging if we can trust you with what we were subjected to. Think about what you say before you post.
- Be prepared. Throughout this trial and afterwards, people you care about might disclose that they are survivors of sexual assault. Listen, believe, remind them it’s not their fault, that they have the right to be safe and they are not alone. You can share resources like the Toronto Rape Crisis Centre/Multicultural Women Against Rape (TRCC/MWAR) and Assaulted Women’s Helpline.
- People may not want to have to talk about it. Survivors may not want to engage with the trial hearing at all. It’s not our job to educate you on sexual assault myths or share information about what we were subjected to. Some great resources to check out is www.usetherightwords.ca and the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres. Do your own work.
- Practice community care. Check in with people around you, follow their lead and ask what they need. Maybe it’s a Beyonce dance party, maybe it’s dropping off a meal, maybe it sending pictures of animals. Don’t make assumptions, listen.
- Honour the ways we survive and seek justice. There is no “right” way to survive sexual assault. A survivor can tell no one, tell themselves, call the police, tell a friend, heal on their own, with community, utilize transformative justice. We can feel okay some days, some months and other times we can feel different minute to minute. “Why didn’t you report?” is a loaded question that is commonly posed to survivors. It suggests that somehow if we don’t report what we are subjected to wasn’t serious or legitimate enough to do so. Reporting to the police is only one option, and for many survivors from marginalized, criminalized and policed communities is it not a real possibility. There are so many intersecting barriers of why in Canada only 1 in 10 sexual assaults are reported to the police.
Sending love, light and compassion to fellow survivors today. We deserve to be seen, heard and believed.
Farrah
Ontario Sex Ed: Why Parents Need To Calm Down and Embrace The Change
If we look back throughout history, there has always been a time of revolt and upheaval to pave the way to progress and positive change: abolition of segregation, women’s suffrage and the Black Lives Matter movement to name a few.
So the fact that Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum is freaking out parents is completely understandable to me. In a democracy, those who oppose the curriculum have the right to protest, rally, petition, appeal and/or switch school systems. That is why I embrace and promote the democratic process.
In fact, the democratic process was used to develop the curriculum. The Wynne government wisely included the opinion of one parent representative from each school to weigh in.
While the majority of Ontario parents are on board, there seems to be only a few contentious issues among the minority who are opposed.
Let’s look at each individually:
Sex-ed: Okay, let’s face it, people are triggered by the name alone. Sex is simply a dirty word to many and when they hear it, they shut down their ability to think rationally or listen openly. British Columbia refers to their equivalent curriculum as“Body Science.” Maybe we should adopt that language, too?
Same-sex relationships: Same-sex marriages are legal in Canada. As a country, we embrace the equality and normalcy of homosexuality. Public education should reflect public laws that govern society.
Masturbation: Ask any mental health professional and we will all answer unequivocally: masturbation is normal and healthy. People are tormented by guilt over this most human of behaviours. Explaining these sexual sensations are a part of our physiology; it’s like teaching the science of nerve conduction and friction.
Gender expression: Like same sex-marriages, gender non-conforming children are healthy, normal and have rights in our country. Schools are a subsection of our country. School rights should reflect greater societal rights. Schools are already adopting gender-neutral bathrooms as Obama has in the White House.
Prevnet.ca, a world leader in bullying research and school programming, shares stats that including LGBQT committees in schools is an important factor in reducing bullying.
Contraception: My grandmother campaigned to get sex education into the school curriculum in Delaware in the 60s. Those who opposed argued that if schools taught youth about contraception they would be condoning, or worse, inviting youth to engage in sexual intercourse. Research shows the opposite is true. Education always wins out. We have reduced unwanted pregnancy, STDs and the average age of being sexually active is getting older each year.
The truth of the matter is, our kids are being exposed to all sorts of conversations, social media and YouTube videos where they are being forced to make their own assumptions when it comes to “Body Science.” Some parents feel uncomfortable with the curriculum because they aren’t sure they're ready to answer the follow-up questions that might come up at the dinner table. For the majority of us, our own parents never had these conversations with us as children and we turned out just fine. Right?
But think of where you learned the facts, how much of it was incorrect and if that is the same avenue you want for your kids. Trust me, you will survive this!
One last thing to note -- you absolutely have the right to opt-out of the class, but that will only invite further curiosity and playground discussions. Would you rather them hear it from a trained professional or second-hand from the eight year old who was allowed to attend the class and is giving a Coles notes version of what was discussed?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/15/ontario-sex-ed_n_8141140.html?ir=Canada&ncid=tweetlnkcahpmg00000002
So the fact that Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum is freaking out parents is completely understandable to me. In a democracy, those who oppose the curriculum have the right to protest, rally, petition, appeal and/or switch school systems. That is why I embrace and promote the democratic process.
In fact, the democratic process was used to develop the curriculum. The Wynne government wisely included the opinion of one parent representative from each school to weigh in.
While the majority of Ontario parents are on board, there seems to be only a few contentious issues among the minority who are opposed.
Let’s look at each individually:
Sex-ed: Okay, let’s face it, people are triggered by the name alone. Sex is simply a dirty word to many and when they hear it, they shut down their ability to think rationally or listen openly. British Columbia refers to their equivalent curriculum as“Body Science.” Maybe we should adopt that language, too?
Same-sex relationships: Same-sex marriages are legal in Canada. As a country, we embrace the equality and normalcy of homosexuality. Public education should reflect public laws that govern society.
Masturbation: Ask any mental health professional and we will all answer unequivocally: masturbation is normal and healthy. People are tormented by guilt over this most human of behaviours. Explaining these sexual sensations are a part of our physiology; it’s like teaching the science of nerve conduction and friction.
Gender expression: Like same sex-marriages, gender non-conforming children are healthy, normal and have rights in our country. Schools are a subsection of our country. School rights should reflect greater societal rights. Schools are already adopting gender-neutral bathrooms as Obama has in the White House.
Prevnet.ca, a world leader in bullying research and school programming, shares stats that including LGBQT committees in schools is an important factor in reducing bullying.
Contraception: My grandmother campaigned to get sex education into the school curriculum in Delaware in the 60s. Those who opposed argued that if schools taught youth about contraception they would be condoning, or worse, inviting youth to engage in sexual intercourse. Research shows the opposite is true. Education always wins out. We have reduced unwanted pregnancy, STDs and the average age of being sexually active is getting older each year.
The truth of the matter is, our kids are being exposed to all sorts of conversations, social media and YouTube videos where they are being forced to make their own assumptions when it comes to “Body Science.” Some parents feel uncomfortable with the curriculum because they aren’t sure they're ready to answer the follow-up questions that might come up at the dinner table. For the majority of us, our own parents never had these conversations with us as children and we turned out just fine. Right?
But think of where you learned the facts, how much of it was incorrect and if that is the same avenue you want for your kids. Trust me, you will survive this!
One last thing to note -- you absolutely have the right to opt-out of the class, but that will only invite further curiosity and playground discussions. Would you rather them hear it from a trained professional or second-hand from the eight year old who was allowed to attend the class and is giving a Coles notes version of what was discussed?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/15/ontario-sex-ed_n_8141140.html?ir=Canada&ncid=tweetlnkcahpmg00000002
Ontario’s Sex Ed Curriculum: Modern Document for a Modern Era
To keep our children safe and healthy, we teach them to not run with scissors. We put bike helmets on them. We ensure they floss. We make them eat broccoli and try to limit the sweets. Isn’t it equally important that they are well-informed about sexual health?
This is the intent of sexual education in our schools and Ontario’s Ministry of Education has finally updated the Health and Physical Education Curriculum, largely unchanged since 1998.
The curriculum is divided into four sections for each grade, and I’ll summarize the Ministry’s words:
Or so it should be. This is all in the name of keeping our kids safe and healthy. But there has been intense public outcry amid accusation that the syllabus only serves to promote sexual promiscuity among teens. Some parents have even kept their kids home in protest. Some allegations are downright hateful in their criticism of curricular objectives that explain that some kids have two mommies. Other assertions are downright false, such as that students are taught how to have sex – utter nonsense! The curriculum teaches students facts in the context of their well-being and safety; it isn’t a how-to manual.
Sex ed is not new to the curriculum, as it has been taught for many decades. However, kids have access to information like never before. We teach them media literacy to help them navigate our digital world. They now also must be educated in a contemporary manner with accurate information about sexual health to protect them from potentially dangerous and inaccurate material found online and shared through social media. There is plenty of misinformation out there, along with stereotypes and bias that must be debunked. The curriculum is a good document, and it has been updated with the aim to do just this.
Learning about sexuality is an element of human biology, and our children have the right to know. Learning about sexual behaviour, its consequences, avoiding diseases and infections, the emotional dimension of sex, what consent means and the right to refuse, are about healthy living and our children absolutely need to know.
What exactly is in the sex ed portion of the curriculum? Here’s a quick look:
It’s one thing to debate at what age we should teach these issues, but it is another thing entirely to argue that we shouldn’t teach certain subjects at all because some parents personally disapprove. We live in a liberal society and bigotry and homophobia are unacceptable in Canada. Same-sex marriage is legal, and students have the right to know about and understand sexual orientation because it is a fact, and it is first introduced in the context of respecting differences. In schools in many communities in Ontario, it is likely that students will have encountered kids with two moms or two dads long before the issue is addressed by a teacher. I believe that teaching children tolerance and respect for diversity at a young age bodes well for our nation’s future.
In addition, acting like controversial issues don’t exist is not a good strategy for empowering our children to make the right choices. It’s an educator’s responsibility to ensure that students have the information and strategies to steer them through what can be a challenging coming-of-age in the digital world. Online porn, sexting, peer pressure, bullying through social media, and the pervasive sexual images and negative stereotypes found in the media are not going away. Accurate and current information will help youth make sound decisions and engage in healthy relationships, and that’s good for everyone.
I’ve taught puberty to my grade 5 girls (boys went with male teachers) for many years. It wasn’t at all about sexual activity, it was strictly about puberty and their changing bodies. I ensured a relaxed and safe environment, and it was apparent that they craved the attention of an adult with whom they could speak openly and honestly. They had so many thoughtful questions, and I was glad to be there to answer them. Our kids need and deserve that.
For accurate information about the new curriculum, visit the Ministry of Education’s website which breaks down the enormous document into an excellent summary.
See more at: http://hermagazine.ca/ontarios-sex-ed-curriculum-modern-document-for-a-modern-era/#sthash.26psp86B.3XtKk2KC.dpuf
This is the intent of sexual education in our schools and Ontario’s Ministry of Education has finally updated the Health and Physical Education Curriculum, largely unchanged since 1998.
The curriculum is divided into four sections for each grade, and I’ll summarize the Ministry’s words:
- Living Skills: understanding themselves, communicating and interacting with others, learning to think critically and problem solve
- Active Living: physical fitness and safety
- Movement Competence: body awareness, and learning movement skills
- Healthy Living: learning about health and making healthy choices
Or so it should be. This is all in the name of keeping our kids safe and healthy. But there has been intense public outcry amid accusation that the syllabus only serves to promote sexual promiscuity among teens. Some parents have even kept their kids home in protest. Some allegations are downright hateful in their criticism of curricular objectives that explain that some kids have two mommies. Other assertions are downright false, such as that students are taught how to have sex – utter nonsense! The curriculum teaches students facts in the context of their well-being and safety; it isn’t a how-to manual.
Sex ed is not new to the curriculum, as it has been taught for many decades. However, kids have access to information like never before. We teach them media literacy to help them navigate our digital world. They now also must be educated in a contemporary manner with accurate information about sexual health to protect them from potentially dangerous and inaccurate material found online and shared through social media. There is plenty of misinformation out there, along with stereotypes and bias that must be debunked. The curriculum is a good document, and it has been updated with the aim to do just this.
Learning about sexuality is an element of human biology, and our children have the right to know. Learning about sexual behaviour, its consequences, avoiding diseases and infections, the emotional dimension of sex, what consent means and the right to refuse, are about healthy living and our children absolutely need to know.
What exactly is in the sex ed portion of the curriculum? Here’s a quick look:
- Naming body parts accurately
- Stages of development
- Physical and emotional development
- Puberty
- Personal hygiene
- Reproductive system
- Understanding stereotypes, bias and assumptions
- Respect
- Delaying sexual activity
- STIs and pregnancy prevention
- Sexual health and decision making
- Sexual orientation
- Relationships and intimacy (including how to end relationships)
- Thinking ahead, consent and personal limits
- Mental health
- Proactive health measures
It’s one thing to debate at what age we should teach these issues, but it is another thing entirely to argue that we shouldn’t teach certain subjects at all because some parents personally disapprove. We live in a liberal society and bigotry and homophobia are unacceptable in Canada. Same-sex marriage is legal, and students have the right to know about and understand sexual orientation because it is a fact, and it is first introduced in the context of respecting differences. In schools in many communities in Ontario, it is likely that students will have encountered kids with two moms or two dads long before the issue is addressed by a teacher. I believe that teaching children tolerance and respect for diversity at a young age bodes well for our nation’s future.
In addition, acting like controversial issues don’t exist is not a good strategy for empowering our children to make the right choices. It’s an educator’s responsibility to ensure that students have the information and strategies to steer them through what can be a challenging coming-of-age in the digital world. Online porn, sexting, peer pressure, bullying through social media, and the pervasive sexual images and negative stereotypes found in the media are not going away. Accurate and current information will help youth make sound decisions and engage in healthy relationships, and that’s good for everyone.
I’ve taught puberty to my grade 5 girls (boys went with male teachers) for many years. It wasn’t at all about sexual activity, it was strictly about puberty and their changing bodies. I ensured a relaxed and safe environment, and it was apparent that they craved the attention of an adult with whom they could speak openly and honestly. They had so many thoughtful questions, and I was glad to be there to answer them. Our kids need and deserve that.
For accurate information about the new curriculum, visit the Ministry of Education’s website which breaks down the enormous document into an excellent summary.
See more at: http://hermagazine.ca/ontarios-sex-ed-curriculum-modern-document-for-a-modern-era/#sthash.26psp86B.3XtKk2KC.dpuf
Robyn Urback: Can we please put this garbage debate about sex-ed to bed?
Robyn Urback
September 2, 2015
National Post
I get cranky every time I hear about people raising a stink about Ontario’s new sex education curriculum, mostly because it forces me to defend the provincial government. And every couple of months I’m put in this objectionable position again, uncomfortably sharing a corner with Premier Kathleen Wynne and Education Minister Liz Sandals, who have long insisted — rightly — that Ontario’s old sex education curriculum is embarrassingly out of date.
This week, the Ontario government released a new television ad about the revamped curriculum, which will be implemented as of this year, showing kids in a variety of complex situations — a child being cyberbullied, a girl purportedly about to send a “sext,” a boy who is puzzled by two groom figurine on a wedding cake. The ad shows the children abruptly stop what they’re doing to raise a hand, setting up the tagline: “Our kids have questions. The sex ed and health curriculum can help.”
Along with resuscitating the usual attacks against the new curriculum, the ad solicited howls of taxpayer indignation about using provincial dollars to fund another pointless political advertisement. And normally, I’d be on board with that complaint, except in this case I square the blame entirely with the parents who have wasted everyone’s time by pulling their children out of school in protest of the curriculum. With the threat of more protests this coming school year, how could the province not respond?
Ever since it was unveiled back in February, I have heard dozens of arguments against Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum, and precisely zero good ones. Much of the problem seems to be that many detractors haven’t actually read the curriculum, instead relying on hyperbolic characterizations by people yelling at each other on Facebook. For that reason, and for that fact that this curriculum is going ahead, whether parents like it or not, it is worth taking a moment to go over (and debunk) the most frequently aired objections in order to try to put this exhausting debate to bed, finally.
Objection 1: The curriculum introduces students to inappropriate concepts such as anal sex, oral sex, etc.
Wrong. Categorically wrong. False.
Unless a child is being raised without television and the Internet — and without friends with access to television and the Internet — he or she already knows about these things, and probably much earlier than parents think. Watch one awful Nicki Minaj music video, and that becomes abundantly clear. Seriously, read the lyrics to “Freaky Girl,” and shudder with disappointment, as I do.
The curriculum aims to give students information about mitigating risk — both social and physical — not about cool new things they can try with their partners in bed. What’s more, this information is infinitely more valuable if offered when or before kids start actually experimenting sexually with each other. Not after.
Objection 2: The curriculum encourages students to engage in masturbation, premarital sex.
There is a difference between teaching students about something, and instructing them to engage in it. I learned about the Third Reich in public school, but it didn’t make me want to shave my head and carve a swastika into my arm. The curriculum is grounded on the notion that if some kids are going to engage in these activities — and some are — they might as well do it safely.
Furthermore, there is nothing less sexy than hearing your teacher talk about “intercourse.” Chances are, most students will react to these lessons by recoiling in disgust, or else, erupting in a fit of giggles.
Objection 3: The curriculum normalizes sexual activity
We live in a liberal Western democracy. Sex is already normal. Plugging our ears and pretending these things aren’t happening is of no benefit to anyone. Just ask the young parents who got pregnant after abstinence-only sexual education.
Objection 4: Schools should stick with the basics, like reading and math
The public school system is supposed to equip students with the tools needed to live as productive, successful adults. Kids need to learn reading and math, yes, but they also need to learn life skills, such as how to write cheques, or how to deal with difficult interpersonal relationships, or how to craft a household budget. If anything, schools aren’t doing enough to prepare kids for the real world.
The idea is not just to guide students to success on an individual level, but also to teach them how to live as productive members of a community. Part of that is learning how to treat others who are of, say, a different sexual orientation, and how to protect themselves and other if they choose to engage in sexual activity.
Objection 5: All this talk about trangenderism and gender fluidity will be confusing for children
This notion only holds water if you believe that being trans is a product of social influence and upbringing, not something present since birth.
But let’s say it was theoretically possible to “confuse” a child into thinking he or she was of the wrong gender, simply by acknowledging that trans people exist. What child would possibly think: So, you mean I could be rejected by my family, ostracized by my friends, stared at on the street and way more likely to commit suicide if I start dressing like the opposite gender? Oooh, that sounds good — pass the lipstick.
Objection 6: Discussion of sex should be left to the parents
Every parent thinks that he or she knows what’s going on with his or her kids. Those other parents might be out of the loop, but me and my child are the exception.
No. Wrong. Generation to generation, this doesn’t change. There’s always something parents don’t know — especially if their kids know they won’t approve.
Schools are unemotional teachers. The curriculum doesn’t get embarrassed talking about condoms. And teachers don’t opt to exclude certain lessons because they believe their children would never engage in those activities anyway. Some parents will have open, frank conversations with their kids about sex, and others won’t. The curriculum aims to see that all kids have the necessary information.
Objection 7: Parents are being silenced
There’s nothing stopping parents from sitting down with their kids after class and saying, “So, I hear you had a lesson on sex today. Let’s talk about why it’s important to our family/faith/community that you wait until marriage.”
Just because sexual education is happening at school doesn’t mean it can’t also happen at home. Schools might fill in the gaps left at home, or vice versa.
Objection 8: The province is ignoring parents’ concerns
OK, maybe this is true, but there’s a good reason for that: See #1-7. Parents also have the option to pull their children out of sex ed classes, which is fine. Ms. Minaj can surely take over from there. And the fact that parents can opt out for their children makes these ongoing demonstrations evermore bizzare — why protest what your kids won’t be learning, anyway?
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/robyn-urback-can-we-please-put-this-garbage-debate-about-sex-ed-to-bed
September 2, 2015
National Post
I get cranky every time I hear about people raising a stink about Ontario’s new sex education curriculum, mostly because it forces me to defend the provincial government. And every couple of months I’m put in this objectionable position again, uncomfortably sharing a corner with Premier Kathleen Wynne and Education Minister Liz Sandals, who have long insisted — rightly — that Ontario’s old sex education curriculum is embarrassingly out of date.
This week, the Ontario government released a new television ad about the revamped curriculum, which will be implemented as of this year, showing kids in a variety of complex situations — a child being cyberbullied, a girl purportedly about to send a “sext,” a boy who is puzzled by two groom figurine on a wedding cake. The ad shows the children abruptly stop what they’re doing to raise a hand, setting up the tagline: “Our kids have questions. The sex ed and health curriculum can help.”
Along with resuscitating the usual attacks against the new curriculum, the ad solicited howls of taxpayer indignation about using provincial dollars to fund another pointless political advertisement. And normally, I’d be on board with that complaint, except in this case I square the blame entirely with the parents who have wasted everyone’s time by pulling their children out of school in protest of the curriculum. With the threat of more protests this coming school year, how could the province not respond?
Ever since it was unveiled back in February, I have heard dozens of arguments against Ontario’s new sex ed curriculum, and precisely zero good ones. Much of the problem seems to be that many detractors haven’t actually read the curriculum, instead relying on hyperbolic characterizations by people yelling at each other on Facebook. For that reason, and for that fact that this curriculum is going ahead, whether parents like it or not, it is worth taking a moment to go over (and debunk) the most frequently aired objections in order to try to put this exhausting debate to bed, finally.
Objection 1: The curriculum introduces students to inappropriate concepts such as anal sex, oral sex, etc.
Wrong. Categorically wrong. False.
Unless a child is being raised without television and the Internet — and without friends with access to television and the Internet — he or she already knows about these things, and probably much earlier than parents think. Watch one awful Nicki Minaj music video, and that becomes abundantly clear. Seriously, read the lyrics to “Freaky Girl,” and shudder with disappointment, as I do.
The curriculum aims to give students information about mitigating risk — both social and physical — not about cool new things they can try with their partners in bed. What’s more, this information is infinitely more valuable if offered when or before kids start actually experimenting sexually with each other. Not after.
Objection 2: The curriculum encourages students to engage in masturbation, premarital sex.
There is a difference between teaching students about something, and instructing them to engage in it. I learned about the Third Reich in public school, but it didn’t make me want to shave my head and carve a swastika into my arm. The curriculum is grounded on the notion that if some kids are going to engage in these activities — and some are — they might as well do it safely.
Furthermore, there is nothing less sexy than hearing your teacher talk about “intercourse.” Chances are, most students will react to these lessons by recoiling in disgust, or else, erupting in a fit of giggles.
Objection 3: The curriculum normalizes sexual activity
We live in a liberal Western democracy. Sex is already normal. Plugging our ears and pretending these things aren’t happening is of no benefit to anyone. Just ask the young parents who got pregnant after abstinence-only sexual education.
Objection 4: Schools should stick with the basics, like reading and math
The public school system is supposed to equip students with the tools needed to live as productive, successful adults. Kids need to learn reading and math, yes, but they also need to learn life skills, such as how to write cheques, or how to deal with difficult interpersonal relationships, or how to craft a household budget. If anything, schools aren’t doing enough to prepare kids for the real world.
The idea is not just to guide students to success on an individual level, but also to teach them how to live as productive members of a community. Part of that is learning how to treat others who are of, say, a different sexual orientation, and how to protect themselves and other if they choose to engage in sexual activity.
Objection 5: All this talk about trangenderism and gender fluidity will be confusing for children
This notion only holds water if you believe that being trans is a product of social influence and upbringing, not something present since birth.
But let’s say it was theoretically possible to “confuse” a child into thinking he or she was of the wrong gender, simply by acknowledging that trans people exist. What child would possibly think: So, you mean I could be rejected by my family, ostracized by my friends, stared at on the street and way more likely to commit suicide if I start dressing like the opposite gender? Oooh, that sounds good — pass the lipstick.
Objection 6: Discussion of sex should be left to the parents
Every parent thinks that he or she knows what’s going on with his or her kids. Those other parents might be out of the loop, but me and my child are the exception.
No. Wrong. Generation to generation, this doesn’t change. There’s always something parents don’t know — especially if their kids know they won’t approve.
Schools are unemotional teachers. The curriculum doesn’t get embarrassed talking about condoms. And teachers don’t opt to exclude certain lessons because they believe their children would never engage in those activities anyway. Some parents will have open, frank conversations with their kids about sex, and others won’t. The curriculum aims to see that all kids have the necessary information.
Objection 7: Parents are being silenced
There’s nothing stopping parents from sitting down with their kids after class and saying, “So, I hear you had a lesson on sex today. Let’s talk about why it’s important to our family/faith/community that you wait until marriage.”
Just because sexual education is happening at school doesn’t mean it can’t also happen at home. Schools might fill in the gaps left at home, or vice versa.
Objection 8: The province is ignoring parents’ concerns
OK, maybe this is true, but there’s a good reason for that: See #1-7. Parents also have the option to pull their children out of sex ed classes, which is fine. Ms. Minaj can surely take over from there. And the fact that parents can opt out for their children makes these ongoing demonstrations evermore bizzare — why protest what your kids won’t be learning, anyway?
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/robyn-urback-can-we-please-put-this-garbage-debate-about-sex-ed-to-bed
Peel board won't exempt kids from learning about gay families, gender issues
The Toronto Star
Wednesday September 2 2015
Parents can remove their kids from sex-ed classes for religious reasons, but any requests for students to opt-out of learning about gay families or diverse gender identities won’t be tolerated, says the director of Ontario’s second largest school board — one that expects to be hard hit by protests over the new health curriculum.
The same day as anti-sex-ed rallies were planned outside Liberal MPP offices across the province, Tony Pontes was to tell teachers and superintendents about the Peel board’s tough stand, saying if parents have a problem with such strong support for equity and inclusion, the public system may not be right for them.
“Let’s be clear: Some in our community may not like this,” he says in a speech to be given Wednesday morning, a copy of which was provided to the Star.
After noting the 905-area board is opening its first gender-neutral washroom at a high school as well as introducing a new gender identity guideline for educators, some parents “may choose to switch school systems … if so, that is a price we must be willing to pay.
“We cannot — we will not — by action or inaction endorse discrimination,” said Pontes, who cited Ontario’s Human Rights Code as applying to people of all sexual orientation and gender identity. “Supported by legal opinion, bolstered by our core values, I would no more say yes to someone wanting a child excluded because of a discussion about LGBTQ than I would a discussion about race or gender.”
He said that while some parents do have “genuine concerns” that the board will work to address, critics of the updated sex-ed curriculum have used it to “raise fear, generate untruths and build constituencies of protest based on false information. I find that unconscionable.”
Since the new curriculum was announced, opponents, made up mainly of different faith groups, have tried to derail it, labelling it age-inappropriate, radical and even immoral — arguing parents should be the ones providing such information, and at a time when they feel their children are ready.
Thousands have taken part in several protests, and kept their children home from school for a week last May. Some even refused to allow their kids to participate in the anti-bullying “Day of Pink,” believing it promoted homosexuality.
On Wednesday, protesters were to target MPP offices around the province demanding that the curriculum be dropped. As well, a Sept. 2 letter sent by the Canadian Families Alliance to the Ministry of Education outlines several concerns and asks for a public debate on the issue, saying now is the time to “amend and enhance the curriculum before it is fully implemented across the province.”
The government, meanwhile, has stepped up its promotion of the new curriculum, withYouTube videos airing on television over the next month, as the school year starts up.
Some anonymous materials, distributed to families by groups unknown, have incorrectly said sex education offers how-to classes on masturbation and homosexuality; parents have also objected to teaching masturbation as “healthy,” or their children learning about oral or anal sex — none of which is actually a mandatory part of the curriculum, though it could be discussed.
The health curriculum had last been updated in 1998. Until now, Ontario has been teaching students with the most outdated information of any province in the country. The updated version was first introduced in 2010, but then abandoned by former premier Dalton McGuinty because of the outcry from a vocal minority.
Parents are free to keep their children home from school at any time, but because equity is woven into all subject areas and may also spontaneously arise during classroom discussion, it is near-impossible for kids to avoid it.
“So, some parents may ask, ‘Don’t you respect my values?’” Pontes also said. “Yes — but that does not mean we will de facto endorse those values by providing an in-school accommodation.”
Let’s talk about sex: Details of Ontario’s new health curriculum
· Grade 1: Students learn about body parts and genitalia, with possible examples: penis, testicles, vagina, vulva. Could be as simple as “boys have penises and girls have vaginas,” or more detailed, depending on the resources teachers use.
· Grade 2: Students will learn the basic states of human development including how their bodies change as they grow.
· Grade 3: First mention of homosexuality, within the context of being respectful of differences. Teachers may talk about families that have two moms or two dads.
· Grade 4: Kids learn about puberty and the body and emotional changes it brings, also personal hygiene. Topics also include online safety (including text messaging as well as warnings about sending sexy pictures).
· Grade 5: Students learn about reproductive systems, menstruation and sperm production, as well as emotions and stress during puberty.
· Grade 6: Healthy relationships and sexual consent are major issues covered. If a student asks about masturbation, a teacher could respond by saying: “Things like wet dreams or vaginal lubrication are normal and happen as a result of physical changes with puberty. Exploring one’s body by touching or masturbating is something that many people do and find pleasurable. It is common and is not harmful and is one way of learning about your body.”
· Grade 7: Students are warned about sexting, and learn about sexually transmitted diseases and discuss delaying sexual activity “until they are older (e.g., choosing to abstain from any genital contact; choosing to abstain from having vaginal or anal intercourse; choosing to abstain from having oral-genital contact); the reasons for not engaging in sexual activity; the concept of consent and how consent is communicated; and, in general, the need to communicate clearly with each other when making decisions about sexual activity in the relationship.” Birth control is also covered. Anal intercourse and oral sex may be discussed, but are not mandatory parts of the curriculum.
Source: Toronto Star files, Ministry of Education
What happened when in the sex-ed controversy
· 1998: Ontario introduces an updated health/sex-ed curriculum.
· January 2010: Ministry of Education releases an updated and revamped version of the 1998 health/sex ed curriculum, to be in place in classrooms by the fall, including emerging issues such as cyberbullying, sexting and mental health.
· April 2010: Concerns are raised by a small, vocal minority, as well as then-Conservative leader Tim Hudak, and within two days then-premier Dalton McGuinty sets the curriculum aside, calling for a “serious rethink” with more parental input.
· February 2013: Newly sworn-in Kathleen Wynne promises to reintroduce the sex-ed curriculum during her first press conference as premier.
· June 2013: Health and education experts urge the government to move ahead with plans to launch the curriculum, so that it can be in place by the fall.
· October 2013: Ophea, a non-profit group that advises on health and physical education, begins a crowd-funding campaign to place newspaper ads alerting the public to the fact that Ontario has the most outdated sex ed and health curriculum in the country.
· February 2015: The Ontario government reintroduces the new curriculum, to mixed reviews from parents, to be implemented in the fall.
· March/April 2015: Opponents organize a number of anti-sex-ed protests, including one where thousands of families keep their children home from school for up to five days.
· June 2014: Halton’s Catholic board calls police after a conflict over a motion seeking to delay teaching the new sex-ed curriculum failed. Toronto’s Catholic board introduces a similar motion that also fails. Protests continue.
· August 2015: Ontario government posts a video on YouTube, which will also be aired on TV in September, to promote the new curriculum, saying “Our kids have questions … the sex-ed and health curriculum can help.”
Source: http://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/education/2015/09/02/peel-board-wont-exempt-kids-from-learning-about-gay-families-gender-issues.html
Wednesday September 2 2015
Parents can remove their kids from sex-ed classes for religious reasons, but any requests for students to opt-out of learning about gay families or diverse gender identities won’t be tolerated, says the director of Ontario’s second largest school board — one that expects to be hard hit by protests over the new health curriculum.
The same day as anti-sex-ed rallies were planned outside Liberal MPP offices across the province, Tony Pontes was to tell teachers and superintendents about the Peel board’s tough stand, saying if parents have a problem with such strong support for equity and inclusion, the public system may not be right for them.
“Let’s be clear: Some in our community may not like this,” he says in a speech to be given Wednesday morning, a copy of which was provided to the Star.
After noting the 905-area board is opening its first gender-neutral washroom at a high school as well as introducing a new gender identity guideline for educators, some parents “may choose to switch school systems … if so, that is a price we must be willing to pay.
“We cannot — we will not — by action or inaction endorse discrimination,” said Pontes, who cited Ontario’s Human Rights Code as applying to people of all sexual orientation and gender identity. “Supported by legal opinion, bolstered by our core values, I would no more say yes to someone wanting a child excluded because of a discussion about LGBTQ than I would a discussion about race or gender.”
He said that while some parents do have “genuine concerns” that the board will work to address, critics of the updated sex-ed curriculum have used it to “raise fear, generate untruths and build constituencies of protest based on false information. I find that unconscionable.”
Since the new curriculum was announced, opponents, made up mainly of different faith groups, have tried to derail it, labelling it age-inappropriate, radical and even immoral — arguing parents should be the ones providing such information, and at a time when they feel their children are ready.
Thousands have taken part in several protests, and kept their children home from school for a week last May. Some even refused to allow their kids to participate in the anti-bullying “Day of Pink,” believing it promoted homosexuality.
On Wednesday, protesters were to target MPP offices around the province demanding that the curriculum be dropped. As well, a Sept. 2 letter sent by the Canadian Families Alliance to the Ministry of Education outlines several concerns and asks for a public debate on the issue, saying now is the time to “amend and enhance the curriculum before it is fully implemented across the province.”
The government, meanwhile, has stepped up its promotion of the new curriculum, withYouTube videos airing on television over the next month, as the school year starts up.
Some anonymous materials, distributed to families by groups unknown, have incorrectly said sex education offers how-to classes on masturbation and homosexuality; parents have also objected to teaching masturbation as “healthy,” or their children learning about oral or anal sex — none of which is actually a mandatory part of the curriculum, though it could be discussed.
The health curriculum had last been updated in 1998. Until now, Ontario has been teaching students with the most outdated information of any province in the country. The updated version was first introduced in 2010, but then abandoned by former premier Dalton McGuinty because of the outcry from a vocal minority.
Parents are free to keep their children home from school at any time, but because equity is woven into all subject areas and may also spontaneously arise during classroom discussion, it is near-impossible for kids to avoid it.
“So, some parents may ask, ‘Don’t you respect my values?’” Pontes also said. “Yes — but that does not mean we will de facto endorse those values by providing an in-school accommodation.”
Let’s talk about sex: Details of Ontario’s new health curriculum
· Grade 1: Students learn about body parts and genitalia, with possible examples: penis, testicles, vagina, vulva. Could be as simple as “boys have penises and girls have vaginas,” or more detailed, depending on the resources teachers use.
· Grade 2: Students will learn the basic states of human development including how their bodies change as they grow.
· Grade 3: First mention of homosexuality, within the context of being respectful of differences. Teachers may talk about families that have two moms or two dads.
· Grade 4: Kids learn about puberty and the body and emotional changes it brings, also personal hygiene. Topics also include online safety (including text messaging as well as warnings about sending sexy pictures).
· Grade 5: Students learn about reproductive systems, menstruation and sperm production, as well as emotions and stress during puberty.
· Grade 6: Healthy relationships and sexual consent are major issues covered. If a student asks about masturbation, a teacher could respond by saying: “Things like wet dreams or vaginal lubrication are normal and happen as a result of physical changes with puberty. Exploring one’s body by touching or masturbating is something that many people do and find pleasurable. It is common and is not harmful and is one way of learning about your body.”
· Grade 7: Students are warned about sexting, and learn about sexually transmitted diseases and discuss delaying sexual activity “until they are older (e.g., choosing to abstain from any genital contact; choosing to abstain from having vaginal or anal intercourse; choosing to abstain from having oral-genital contact); the reasons for not engaging in sexual activity; the concept of consent and how consent is communicated; and, in general, the need to communicate clearly with each other when making decisions about sexual activity in the relationship.” Birth control is also covered. Anal intercourse and oral sex may be discussed, but are not mandatory parts of the curriculum.
Source: Toronto Star files, Ministry of Education
What happened when in the sex-ed controversy
· 1998: Ontario introduces an updated health/sex-ed curriculum.
· January 2010: Ministry of Education releases an updated and revamped version of the 1998 health/sex ed curriculum, to be in place in classrooms by the fall, including emerging issues such as cyberbullying, sexting and mental health.
· April 2010: Concerns are raised by a small, vocal minority, as well as then-Conservative leader Tim Hudak, and within two days then-premier Dalton McGuinty sets the curriculum aside, calling for a “serious rethink” with more parental input.
· February 2013: Newly sworn-in Kathleen Wynne promises to reintroduce the sex-ed curriculum during her first press conference as premier.
· June 2013: Health and education experts urge the government to move ahead with plans to launch the curriculum, so that it can be in place by the fall.
· October 2013: Ophea, a non-profit group that advises on health and physical education, begins a crowd-funding campaign to place newspaper ads alerting the public to the fact that Ontario has the most outdated sex ed and health curriculum in the country.
· February 2015: The Ontario government reintroduces the new curriculum, to mixed reviews from parents, to be implemented in the fall.
· March/April 2015: Opponents organize a number of anti-sex-ed protests, including one where thousands of families keep their children home from school for up to five days.
· June 2014: Halton’s Catholic board calls police after a conflict over a motion seeking to delay teaching the new sex-ed curriculum failed. Toronto’s Catholic board introduces a similar motion that also fails. Protests continue.
· August 2015: Ontario government posts a video on YouTube, which will also be aired on TV in September, to promote the new curriculum, saying “Our kids have questions … the sex-ed and health curriculum can help.”
Source: http://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/education/2015/09/02/peel-board-wont-exempt-kids-from-learning-about-gay-families-gender-issues.html
Sex-ed curriculum is about more than sex, say educators; Supporters argue it's about health, physical education
Guelph Mercury
Mon Jun 22 2015
Page: A1
Section: NEWS
Byline: May Warren, Mercury staff
GUELPH — The controversial new Ontario curriculum may be making headlines, and attracting protesters because of the parts about sex, but it's about so much more than that, educators say.
"We've been hearing over and over again about the sex-education curriculum that's coming to Ontario soon, and, in fact, it's a health and physical education curriculum. It's about health and education," said Joanne Walsh, a health and physical education curriculum consultant with Ophea, a non-profit organization that advises on the topics.
"It's not just about sex."
Walsh made the remarks during a panel discussion on the new curriculum, part of the 37th annual Guelph Sexuality Conference, hosted by the University of Guelph last week.
She also stressed that much of what will be taught is very similar to what's already in the curriculum, last updated in 1998.
"It's been updated for a 21st-century world in terms of content, but it was a strong curriculum to begin with," she said.
"What happened was the learning was shifted down and we know that's happened because of the explosion of information, because of our bodies are developing earlier," she said.
"Students need that information much earlier on. All the research says we need to give the kids the knowledge and the skills before they actually need to use it."
The discussion was moderated by Heather Gardner of Ophea.
Gardner stressed "health needs to happen," in schools and not just when outside physical activities are cancelled because it's raining.
The new curriculum is about "helping students to become physically literate as well as health literate," she said.
The new sexual health curriculum was released in February 2015 after much consultation and will become mandatory in schools in September.
It includes information on topics such as sexting and cyberbullying, which didn't even exist in the late 1990s. It also discusses sexuality and gender identity.
The curriculum has been the target of severe criticism by some parents and caregivers, who argue it exposes children to sex too early.
In the Greater Toronto Area, thousands of kids were kept home from school in protest by parents this spring, and rallies at Queen's Park have drawn huge crowds.
Ken Jeffers, co-ordinator of gender-based violence prevention at the Toronto District School Board, said parents will not be able to make "blanket requests" to have their children opt their kids out of the curriculum, even if they feel it conflicts with their religious values.
"'I don't want my children to know anything about sex education, I don't want my children to know anything about transgender people, I don't want my children to hear anything about gay and lesbian people,' those are not legitimate requests," he said.
"It's the responsibility of all public education institutions to expose students to different aspects of education than they would get at home," Jeffers continued.
"It doesn't stop you from practicing your religion; it doesn't stop you from believing what you want to believe."
Mon Jun 22 2015
Page: A1
Section: NEWS
Byline: May Warren, Mercury staff
GUELPH — The controversial new Ontario curriculum may be making headlines, and attracting protesters because of the parts about sex, but it's about so much more than that, educators say.
"We've been hearing over and over again about the sex-education curriculum that's coming to Ontario soon, and, in fact, it's a health and physical education curriculum. It's about health and education," said Joanne Walsh, a health and physical education curriculum consultant with Ophea, a non-profit organization that advises on the topics.
"It's not just about sex."
Walsh made the remarks during a panel discussion on the new curriculum, part of the 37th annual Guelph Sexuality Conference, hosted by the University of Guelph last week.
She also stressed that much of what will be taught is very similar to what's already in the curriculum, last updated in 1998.
"It's been updated for a 21st-century world in terms of content, but it was a strong curriculum to begin with," she said.
"What happened was the learning was shifted down and we know that's happened because of the explosion of information, because of our bodies are developing earlier," she said.
"Students need that information much earlier on. All the research says we need to give the kids the knowledge and the skills before they actually need to use it."
The discussion was moderated by Heather Gardner of Ophea.
Gardner stressed "health needs to happen," in schools and not just when outside physical activities are cancelled because it's raining.
The new curriculum is about "helping students to become physically literate as well as health literate," she said.
The new sexual health curriculum was released in February 2015 after much consultation and will become mandatory in schools in September.
It includes information on topics such as sexting and cyberbullying, which didn't even exist in the late 1990s. It also discusses sexuality and gender identity.
The curriculum has been the target of severe criticism by some parents and caregivers, who argue it exposes children to sex too early.
In the Greater Toronto Area, thousands of kids were kept home from school in protest by parents this spring, and rallies at Queen's Park have drawn huge crowds.
Ken Jeffers, co-ordinator of gender-based violence prevention at the Toronto District School Board, said parents will not be able to make "blanket requests" to have their children opt their kids out of the curriculum, even if they feel it conflicts with their religious values.
"'I don't want my children to know anything about sex education, I don't want my children to know anything about transgender people, I don't want my children to hear anything about gay and lesbian people,' those are not legitimate requests," he said.
"It's the responsibility of all public education institutions to expose students to different aspects of education than they would get at home," Jeffers continued.
"It doesn't stop you from practicing your religion; it doesn't stop you from believing what you want to believe."
5 Myths And Facts About Ontario's Updated Sex Education Curriculum
Karyn Pickles
February 24, 2015
Huffington Post Canada
Yesterday I spent the day going over the newly released 2015 Ontario Health and Physical Education Curriculum (Elementary) with a fine-toothed comb to generate a comprehensive précis made up of every single quote that had anything to do with the "sex ed" parts.
Unfortunately, misconceptions and misinformation about this curriculum are continuing to make their way around the Internet, mostly because people seem bound and determined to willfully ignore the actual facts before forming an opinion.
So today I'm going to address the most common myths about the new curriculum.
Myth #1
Explicit sexual content, including oral and anal sex, consent, and rape will be taught to children as young as six.
Key words/phrases:
"graphic content," "young ages," "desensitizing," "innocent minds," "putting thoughts into young minds," "too young to learn about sex," "age-inappropriate content," "explicit content," "children will be taught to consent to sex," "protect our children's innocence."
Truth:
In grade one, children will be taught to identify body parts, including genitalia, using their correct terms (penis, testicles, vagina, vulva) and to recognize exploitative behaviours such as inappropriate touching. In grade two, the concept of "consent" will be introduced very broadly as the right to say "no" in threatening situations. This has been misrepresented by many critics as "teaching children the concept of consent," which is then in turn further misrepresented as "teaching children to consent to sex."
The concept of human and animal reproduction -- presented broadly as the union of the egg and sperm -- has actually been pushed back a grade, moving from grade three to grade four, and the first discussion of sexual intercourse occurs in grade five, the same as in the previous curriculum.
Masturbation is defined in grade six and characterized as normal and not harmful, but students are not "taught masturbation." A 1950s-era sex-ed video that I found in my research describes masturbation more graphically than the 2015 curriculum. Oral-genital contact and anal intercourse are discussed in grade seven. They are listed as potential sexual activities that one should consider abstaining from or delaying -- not described graphically, "taught" or offered up as alternatives to delaying vaginal intercourse. They are described as part of a comprehensive sex education curriculum, which is the only type of sex education curriculum that is proven to reduce teen pregnancy and STI infection rates and raise the age of onset of first sexual activity.
Myth #2
Children will be taught graphic information about homosexuality and gender fluidity and forced to view them as normal, accepted practice.
Key words/phrases:
"gay premier of Ontario," "homosexuality," "homosexual activities," "sick," "homosexual agenda," "Kathleen Wynne, a practicing lesbian," "family values," "personal beliefs," "neo-liberal beliefs," "lifestyle choices," "impressionable children," "gay sex acts," "gender fluidity," "gender expression," "gender is determined by your sex organs," "gender identity," "choose to change gender."
Truth:
In the 2015 curriculum, children will be taught to respect people's differences. Starting in grade three, they will be introduced to the concepts of gender identity and sexual orientation as invisible characteristics; other examples include learning abilities, allergies, and cultural values. The teacher prompt for this topic includes"Give me some examples or things that make each person unique," to which an example student response is "We all come from different families. Some students live with two parents. Some live with one parent. Some have two mothers or two fathers. Some live with grandparents or with caregivers. We may come from different cultures. We also have different talents and abilities and different things that we find difficult to do."
Yes, the fact that we must treat everyone with respect regardless of their personal characteristics is emphasized throughout the curriculum. Yes, the concept of same-sex relationships and gender identity are introduced in grade three and treated as normal. That's because, under the laws of this country in which we live, we must treat everyone with respect regardless of their personal characteristics, and same-sex relationships are normal and gender expression is protected by law (here and here). It really doesn't get any more cut and dry than that.
Entrenching the pretense that LGBTQ people simply don't exist in our public school system is discriminatory. Saying that it's not the statistical norm to be in a same-sex relationship and therefore we don't have to talk about it a curriculum that covers human relationships would be akin to saying, "Well, 80 per cent of our school's population identifies as Canadian, so what's the point in learning world geography? Consider the risk that students will be influenced by it and want to become Japanese."
If your personal values do not line up with the laws of Canada, it is your right to impart those beliefs to your children at home, but your children will be required to be versed in and abide by those laws while in the public school system.
Myth #3
This curriculum was designed by a pedophile.
Key words/phrases:
"Ben Levin," "Benjamin Levin," "child pornographer," "should want to distance themselves," "alleged child molester."
Truth:
It is very unfortunate that a man charged with multiple counts relating to child pornography had a hand in developing the failed 2010 curriculum. This does not change the fact that the current curriculum is outdated by almost two decades and in dire need of updating. It probably would have been the easier choice for the government to leave the curriculum issue alone for a few more years to let people forget about Ben Levin before quietly reintroducing it (or not bothering at all), but they chose to persevere with the new curriculum.
Many other people, including education, child development, and policy experts, as well as 4,000 heads of school parent councils across Ontario, were involved in developing the 2015 curriculum, Levin NOT included. The proposed changes are research-supported and intended to make children less vulnerable to exploitation, including over the Internet.
Pedophiles, child pornographers, and child molesters, in fact, are the ones who would benefit MOST from the older curriculum remaining in place.
Myth #4
Parents are being forced to accept a curriculum they had no say in.
Key words/phrases:
"force-fed," "police state," "not comfortable," "opt out," "not in agreement," "forced upon us," "right to our beliefs," "freedom of speech," "should have a democratic poll," "majority disagree," "catering to the minority."
Truth:
Parents can choose to remove their children from all or part of the Physical and Health Education curriculum. Children whose parents make this choice are usually kept home or supervised in the library or another part of the school while the class takes place. In fact, the public education system is not mandatory. While the United Nation Convention on the Rights of a Child recognizes a child's right to an education, the Ontario Education Act states that a child is excused from attendance at school if they are receiving satisfactory instruction at home or elsewhere. This means that you are free to withdraw your child from the public school system provided you are committed to educating them at home or within the private school system.
As to the second point, having no say, a) this curriculum is being implemented by the Ontario Ministry of Education, a Ministry of the democratically elected Government of Ontario; and b) the process of creating this curriculum included consultation with 4,000 chairs of parent councils (i.e. parents who were democratically elected to chair parent councils in each of 4,000 schools across Ontario).
Myth #5
It's up to parents to teach their children these concepts, not the schools.
Key words/phrases:
"why aren't they teaching math," "what happened to the 3 Rs," "when did this become the school's responsibility," "underfunded and understaffed school," "these kids can't read or write but they know about sex," "this is the parent's job," "my child should learn about this from me."
Truth:
Sexual education has been taught in schools FOREVER. Seriously -- here's a direct quote from this 1950s sex-ed film: "You can cause an ejaculation by yourself too, by masturbating -- rubbing the penis. Sometimes you hear that masturbation affects your mind or your manhood. It isn't true. For kids your age, it's just something normal." We're talking Wally and the Beave here. This is nothing new. Depending on how old you are, it might have been putting condoms on bananas, or a filmstrip in a dark classroom. Maybe the boys and girls were split up, maybe they stayed together? But you learned it.
Very little has actually changed from the previous curriculum in terms of what is actually being taught. There have been major, necessary updates in keeping with law and technology -- changes to marriage equality, social media and digital safety. The main difference between this and the 1998 curriculum is that the 2015 curriculum includes much more detail. Where the 1998 curriculum provided broad topics and left it to the discretion of the individual teacher to interpret them, the 2015 curriculum actually makes it EASIER for parents to see and understand exactly what their children will be learning in school. By providing the detailed concepts and teaching prompts, the curriculum makes it clear what information teachers are expected to provide and makes the curriculum less susceptible to the teacher's intentional or unintentional biases.
The curriculum (both 2015 and 1998) also indicates that students should seek guidance from trusted adults in their lives, such as parents, doctors, elders, or religious leaders, when considering sexual choices, supporting the rights of parents to influence their children's values and beliefs when it comes to making decisions. Just as ever before, the 2015 curriculum provides the basic facts, at developmentally appropriate ages, leaving moral judgments at home.
February 24, 2015
Huffington Post Canada
Yesterday I spent the day going over the newly released 2015 Ontario Health and Physical Education Curriculum (Elementary) with a fine-toothed comb to generate a comprehensive précis made up of every single quote that had anything to do with the "sex ed" parts.
Unfortunately, misconceptions and misinformation about this curriculum are continuing to make their way around the Internet, mostly because people seem bound and determined to willfully ignore the actual facts before forming an opinion.
So today I'm going to address the most common myths about the new curriculum.
Myth #1
Explicit sexual content, including oral and anal sex, consent, and rape will be taught to children as young as six.
Key words/phrases:
"graphic content," "young ages," "desensitizing," "innocent minds," "putting thoughts into young minds," "too young to learn about sex," "age-inappropriate content," "explicit content," "children will be taught to consent to sex," "protect our children's innocence."
Truth:
In grade one, children will be taught to identify body parts, including genitalia, using their correct terms (penis, testicles, vagina, vulva) and to recognize exploitative behaviours such as inappropriate touching. In grade two, the concept of "consent" will be introduced very broadly as the right to say "no" in threatening situations. This has been misrepresented by many critics as "teaching children the concept of consent," which is then in turn further misrepresented as "teaching children to consent to sex."
The concept of human and animal reproduction -- presented broadly as the union of the egg and sperm -- has actually been pushed back a grade, moving from grade three to grade four, and the first discussion of sexual intercourse occurs in grade five, the same as in the previous curriculum.
Masturbation is defined in grade six and characterized as normal and not harmful, but students are not "taught masturbation." A 1950s-era sex-ed video that I found in my research describes masturbation more graphically than the 2015 curriculum. Oral-genital contact and anal intercourse are discussed in grade seven. They are listed as potential sexual activities that one should consider abstaining from or delaying -- not described graphically, "taught" or offered up as alternatives to delaying vaginal intercourse. They are described as part of a comprehensive sex education curriculum, which is the only type of sex education curriculum that is proven to reduce teen pregnancy and STI infection rates and raise the age of onset of first sexual activity.
Myth #2
Children will be taught graphic information about homosexuality and gender fluidity and forced to view them as normal, accepted practice.
Key words/phrases:
"gay premier of Ontario," "homosexuality," "homosexual activities," "sick," "homosexual agenda," "Kathleen Wynne, a practicing lesbian," "family values," "personal beliefs," "neo-liberal beliefs," "lifestyle choices," "impressionable children," "gay sex acts," "gender fluidity," "gender expression," "gender is determined by your sex organs," "gender identity," "choose to change gender."
Truth:
In the 2015 curriculum, children will be taught to respect people's differences. Starting in grade three, they will be introduced to the concepts of gender identity and sexual orientation as invisible characteristics; other examples include learning abilities, allergies, and cultural values. The teacher prompt for this topic includes"Give me some examples or things that make each person unique," to which an example student response is "We all come from different families. Some students live with two parents. Some live with one parent. Some have two mothers or two fathers. Some live with grandparents or with caregivers. We may come from different cultures. We also have different talents and abilities and different things that we find difficult to do."
Yes, the fact that we must treat everyone with respect regardless of their personal characteristics is emphasized throughout the curriculum. Yes, the concept of same-sex relationships and gender identity are introduced in grade three and treated as normal. That's because, under the laws of this country in which we live, we must treat everyone with respect regardless of their personal characteristics, and same-sex relationships are normal and gender expression is protected by law (here and here). It really doesn't get any more cut and dry than that.
Entrenching the pretense that LGBTQ people simply don't exist in our public school system is discriminatory. Saying that it's not the statistical norm to be in a same-sex relationship and therefore we don't have to talk about it a curriculum that covers human relationships would be akin to saying, "Well, 80 per cent of our school's population identifies as Canadian, so what's the point in learning world geography? Consider the risk that students will be influenced by it and want to become Japanese."
If your personal values do not line up with the laws of Canada, it is your right to impart those beliefs to your children at home, but your children will be required to be versed in and abide by those laws while in the public school system.
Myth #3
This curriculum was designed by a pedophile.
Key words/phrases:
"Ben Levin," "Benjamin Levin," "child pornographer," "should want to distance themselves," "alleged child molester."
Truth:
It is very unfortunate that a man charged with multiple counts relating to child pornography had a hand in developing the failed 2010 curriculum. This does not change the fact that the current curriculum is outdated by almost two decades and in dire need of updating. It probably would have been the easier choice for the government to leave the curriculum issue alone for a few more years to let people forget about Ben Levin before quietly reintroducing it (or not bothering at all), but they chose to persevere with the new curriculum.
Many other people, including education, child development, and policy experts, as well as 4,000 heads of school parent councils across Ontario, were involved in developing the 2015 curriculum, Levin NOT included. The proposed changes are research-supported and intended to make children less vulnerable to exploitation, including over the Internet.
Pedophiles, child pornographers, and child molesters, in fact, are the ones who would benefit MOST from the older curriculum remaining in place.
Myth #4
Parents are being forced to accept a curriculum they had no say in.
Key words/phrases:
"force-fed," "police state," "not comfortable," "opt out," "not in agreement," "forced upon us," "right to our beliefs," "freedom of speech," "should have a democratic poll," "majority disagree," "catering to the minority."
Truth:
Parents can choose to remove their children from all or part of the Physical and Health Education curriculum. Children whose parents make this choice are usually kept home or supervised in the library or another part of the school while the class takes place. In fact, the public education system is not mandatory. While the United Nation Convention on the Rights of a Child recognizes a child's right to an education, the Ontario Education Act states that a child is excused from attendance at school if they are receiving satisfactory instruction at home or elsewhere. This means that you are free to withdraw your child from the public school system provided you are committed to educating them at home or within the private school system.
As to the second point, having no say, a) this curriculum is being implemented by the Ontario Ministry of Education, a Ministry of the democratically elected Government of Ontario; and b) the process of creating this curriculum included consultation with 4,000 chairs of parent councils (i.e. parents who were democratically elected to chair parent councils in each of 4,000 schools across Ontario).
Myth #5
It's up to parents to teach their children these concepts, not the schools.
Key words/phrases:
"why aren't they teaching math," "what happened to the 3 Rs," "when did this become the school's responsibility," "underfunded and understaffed school," "these kids can't read or write but they know about sex," "this is the parent's job," "my child should learn about this from me."
Truth:
Sexual education has been taught in schools FOREVER. Seriously -- here's a direct quote from this 1950s sex-ed film: "You can cause an ejaculation by yourself too, by masturbating -- rubbing the penis. Sometimes you hear that masturbation affects your mind or your manhood. It isn't true. For kids your age, it's just something normal." We're talking Wally and the Beave here. This is nothing new. Depending on how old you are, it might have been putting condoms on bananas, or a filmstrip in a dark classroom. Maybe the boys and girls were split up, maybe they stayed together? But you learned it.
Very little has actually changed from the previous curriculum in terms of what is actually being taught. There have been major, necessary updates in keeping with law and technology -- changes to marriage equality, social media and digital safety. The main difference between this and the 1998 curriculum is that the 2015 curriculum includes much more detail. Where the 1998 curriculum provided broad topics and left it to the discretion of the individual teacher to interpret them, the 2015 curriculum actually makes it EASIER for parents to see and understand exactly what their children will be learning in school. By providing the detailed concepts and teaching prompts, the curriculum makes it clear what information teachers are expected to provide and makes the curriculum less susceptible to the teacher's intentional or unintentional biases.
The curriculum (both 2015 and 1998) also indicates that students should seek guidance from trusted adults in their lives, such as parents, doctors, elders, or religious leaders, when considering sexual choices, supporting the rights of parents to influence their children's values and beliefs when it comes to making decisions. Just as ever before, the 2015 curriculum provides the basic facts, at developmentally appropriate ages, leaving moral judgments at home.
Beyond 'he' and 'she': The rise of non-binary pronouns
In the English language, the word "he" is used to refer to males and "she" to refer to females. But some people identify as neither gender, or both - which is why an increasing number of US universities are making it easier for people to choose to be referred to by other pronouns.
Kit Wilson's introduction when meeting other people is: "Hi, I'm Kit. I use they/them pronouns." That means that when people refer to Kit in conversation, the first-year student at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee would prefer them to use "they" rather than "she" or "he".
As a child, Wilson never felt entirely female or entirely male. They figured they were a "tomboy" until the age of 16, but later began to identify as "genderqueer".
"Neither end of the [male/female] spectrum is a suitable way of expressing the gender I am," Wilson says. "Sometimes I feel 'feminine' and 'masculine' at the same time, and other times I reject the two terms entirely."
Earlier this year, Wilson asked friends to call them "Kit," instead of the name they (Wilson) had grown up with, and to use the pronoun "they" when talking about them.
GlossaryTransgender: Applies to a person whose gender is different from their "assigned" sex at birth
Cisgender: Applies to someone whose gender matches their "assigned" sex at birth (ie someone who is not transgender)
Non-binary: Applies to a person who does not identify as "male" or "female"
Genderqueer: Similar to "non-binary" - some people regard "queer" as offensive, others embrace it
Genderfluid: Applies to a person whose gender identity changes over time
See also: A guide to transgender terms
Sharing one's pronouns and asking for others' pronouns when making introductions is a growing trend in US colleges.
For example, when new students attended orientation sessions at American University in Washington DC a few months ago, they were asked to introduce themselves with their name, hometown, and preferred gender pronoun (sometimes abbreviated to PGP).
"We ask everyone at orientation to state their pronouns," says Sara Bendoraitis, of the university's Center for Diversity and Inclusion, "so that we are learning more about each other rather than assuming."
A handful of universities go further and allow students to register their preferred pronouns in the university computer systems - and also a preferred name.
At the University of Vermont, which has led this movement, students can choose from "he," "she," "they," and "ze," as well as "name only" - meaning they don't want to be referred to by any third-person pronoun, only their name.
"It maximises the student's ability to control their identity," says Keith Williams, the university's registrar, who helped to launch the updated student information system in 2009. Most people stick to the default option, "none", which means they are not registering a pronoun - presumably because they are content to let people decide whether they are a "he" or a "she".
Image copyrightiStockOut of about 13,000 students currently enrolled, some 3,200 have entered preferred names in the system, and about half of them have specified preferred pronouns, Williams says. He adds that this doesn't necessarily mean they are transgender - they could be non-transgender students specifying "he" and "she".
At Harvard University, which followed Vermont's example at the beginning of this academic year, about half of the approximately 10,000 students registered in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences have specified preferred pronouns, and slightly more than 1% of those - about 50 out of 5,000 - chose pronouns other than "she" or "he", according to registrar Mike Burke.
At most other US universities the growing use of "non-binary" pronouns remains less formalised but is often encouraged in various ways. Signs and badges found throughout campuses display slogans such as Pronouns Matter or Ask Me About My Pronouns. Professors may be invited to training sessions at the start of each year and are sometimes urged to include their pronouns in their email signature, for example, "John Smith (he/him/his)".
A card developed by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee LGBT Resource Center in 2011 has been widely reproduced and distributed across the US.
One side of the card lists eight pronouns, from "ey" to "zie," and illustrates how they change depending on their role in a sentence. Instead of "he/she," "him/her," "his/her," "his/hers," and "himself/herself" it would be:
"The intention behind it was to ensure that the campus was fostering an inclusive environment," says Jennifer Murray, the director of the resource centre.
All the pronouns on the card were already in use, Murray says, either among students or members of Milwaukee's LGBT community. Although it might have been simpler to suggest just one non-binary pronoun, she says the staff of the resource centre didn't want to "limit folks' choices".
The alternatives to "he" and "she" are myriad. Wikipedia's gender-neutral pronouns page lists 14 "non-traditional pronouns" in English, though three are variants of "ze". Other online resources for the non-binary community, however, offer hundreds of options.
Image copyrightAlamy
Image captionThe First Grammar Book for Children (1900)Some terms come from foreign languages - such as the German-inspired "sie" - others from fiction. For example, "ze" and "per" are the pronouns of a future utopia Marge Piercy describes in her feminist sci-fi novel Woman on the Edge of Time (1976). Some are drawn from the plant or animal worlds, or refer to mythical beings with which the individual may identify.
It's is not the first time people have tried to coin new pronouns. Writers have long been frustrated by the lack of a neat way to refer to someone of unknown gender - "he or she" is clunky, and if you use it several times in quick succession, "your writing ends up looking like an explosion in a pedants' factory", as Guardian columnist Lucy Mangan once put it.
A linguist at the University of Illinois, Dennis Baron, has catalogued dozens of proposed gender-neutral pronouns, many - including "ip," "nis," and "hiser" - dating back to the 19th Century.
Most of these made little impact, though one - "thon", a contraction of "that one" - got into two American dictionaries.
Overall, though, Baron calls the gender-neutral pronoun an "epic fail" and reckons that new pronouns such as "ze" may not survive. But both he and Sally McConnell-Ginet, a Cornell University linguistics professor who researches the link between gender, sexuality, and language, think the singular "they" - as used for example by Kit Wilson - has a chance of success.
Image copyrightEmma Holman-Smith
Image captionStickers available at the University of OhioThis use of "they" annoys some grammarians. While it does feel natural for most English speakers to say something like "Someone lost their wallet," critics argue that "they" should really only be used to refer to plural nouns. And even those comfortable with "Someone lost their wallet" may have doubts when "Someone" is replaced by a person's name.
It's for this reason that when the pronoun registration system was developed at the University of Vermont in 2009, professors at first argued "ze" would be acceptable, but "they" would not. "They" was only added as an option in 2014.
But English has a precedent for a plural pronoun coming to be used in the singular - the pronoun "you". Until the 17th Century a single person was addressed with "thou" and "thee". Later "you" became perfectly acceptable in both plural and singular. Neither McConnell-Ginet nor Baron sees any reason why the same could not happen with "they".
Last week Washington Post copy editor Bill Walsh sent an email to the newsroom - probably the most popular email he will ever send, as he put it - saying the singular "they" was sometimes permissible, and "also useful in references to people who identify as neither male nor female".
Non-binary in the UKImage copyrightJessi LloydMost students have "some level of understanding about pronouns", which was not the case a few years ago, says the National Union of Students' LGBT officer, Fran Cowling. NUS name badges now include space for preferred pronouns.
Cambridge University students started a campaign called Make No Assumptions about a year ago. One of its badges (above) prompts readers to ask about the wearer's pronouns. Another has empty spaces for pronouns to be filled in.
Emrys Travis, Cambridge University Student Union's LGBT+ campaigns officer, uses "they," "them," and "their," but also "ey," "em," and "eir" with trans friends. "A lot of them mess up - repeatedly, often," Travis says. "As long as I think they're trying, it doesn't bother me."
Travis asked their director of studies to email each of their (Travis's) lecturers with a request to use "they" and "them" when referring to Travis and none objected. "Cambridge, in general, is a great place to be trans," they say.
However, learning to use new pronouns or the singular "they" is not easy.
Like Harvard, Ohio University gave students the option to register their preferred name and pronoun this year, but not all professors were ready for it. Some thought "they" was a typo on their student rosters, says LGBT centre director delfin bautista (bautista writes their name without any capital letters).
Image copyrightEmma Holman-SmithSlip-ups with preferred names are rarer than with preferred pronouns, bautista says, but can happen too. Calling someone by their rejected birth name is termed "deadnaming". More broadly, referring to a person in a way that does not reflect their gender identity is called "misgendering".
When students suspect that professors may not get the point of gender-neutral pronouns, they may play it safe and stick with "he" or "she".
Sarah Grote, an Ohio University student, uses "they/them" with close friends but hasn't entered this in the student information system to avoid inconveniencing or alienating professors. "I still need their recommendations… and this is still south-eastern Ohio," Sarah says.
In another socially conservative region, one university had to swiftly backtrack after tentatively starting a discussion about pronouns this summer. Donna Braquet, director of the Pride Center at the University of Tennessee posted an explanation of gender-neutral pronouns on the university website in August and encouraged people on campus to ask one another about their pronouns.
Image captionThe deleted page from the University of Tennessee websiteThe goal was to make the climate more trans-friendly, but it was widely mistaken for a change in university policy. Some of the press coverage imagined that "he" and "she" were being outlawed. One opinion column even used the headline "New pronouns for the traveling freak show". State and federal lawmakers complained to the university, and the post was removed the following week.
It's not just in US universities that gender-neutral language is advancing. Last year, Facebook gave users the option to customise gender beyond male and female, and pick a pronoun from "he", "she", and "they". This summer the Oxford Dictionaries website added the honorific "Mx", defining it as "a title used before a person's surname or full name by those who wish to avoid specifying their gender or by those who prefer not to identify themselves as male or female". Meanwhile, Caitlyn Jenner and the controversy over Benedict Cumberbatch playing a non-binary character in the film Zoolander 2 have kept the subject of gender identity topical.
Universities, however, remain the most fertile ground for new pronouns.
kat baus, a non-binary student who graduated from Harvard this year - and who also writes their name without capital letters - regrets that the university's computer system was not introduced earlier. "It would have been a lot easier and less awkward," baus says.
baus sent emails or visited professors during office hours to explain their gender identity and pronouns. In smaller classes they (baus) brought it up when introducing themself.
"I don't know a single trans person who likes having that conversation," baus says.
Being able to do it with the click of a mouse would have allowed them to get straight down to their work in class, baus says - and would have allowed their classmates to get straight down to theirs.
Pronoun panicImage copyrightiStockIt is sometimes difficult to determine somebody's gender by sight but what if you're blind? Mike Lambert recently experienced this problem when he attended a course on equality and diversity.
"I listen hard to Nina's voice. There's something soft and tentative about it - but the pitch is unmistakeably male... I tell myself that any concerns I have about Nina's gender are a thing of little consequence. The whole point of the day is equality and diversity, and I shouldn't get so hung-up trying to slot people into neat pigeon-holes. And then, I'm struck by a horrifying thought. How am I going to get through more than a couple of sentences without committing myself to 'he' or 'she', 'his' or 'hers'?"
Kit Wilson's introduction when meeting other people is: "Hi, I'm Kit. I use they/them pronouns." That means that when people refer to Kit in conversation, the first-year student at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee would prefer them to use "they" rather than "she" or "he".
As a child, Wilson never felt entirely female or entirely male. They figured they were a "tomboy" until the age of 16, but later began to identify as "genderqueer".
"Neither end of the [male/female] spectrum is a suitable way of expressing the gender I am," Wilson says. "Sometimes I feel 'feminine' and 'masculine' at the same time, and other times I reject the two terms entirely."
Earlier this year, Wilson asked friends to call them "Kit," instead of the name they (Wilson) had grown up with, and to use the pronoun "they" when talking about them.
GlossaryTransgender: Applies to a person whose gender is different from their "assigned" sex at birth
Cisgender: Applies to someone whose gender matches their "assigned" sex at birth (ie someone who is not transgender)
Non-binary: Applies to a person who does not identify as "male" or "female"
Genderqueer: Similar to "non-binary" - some people regard "queer" as offensive, others embrace it
Genderfluid: Applies to a person whose gender identity changes over time
See also: A guide to transgender terms
Sharing one's pronouns and asking for others' pronouns when making introductions is a growing trend in US colleges.
For example, when new students attended orientation sessions at American University in Washington DC a few months ago, they were asked to introduce themselves with their name, hometown, and preferred gender pronoun (sometimes abbreviated to PGP).
"We ask everyone at orientation to state their pronouns," says Sara Bendoraitis, of the university's Center for Diversity and Inclusion, "so that we are learning more about each other rather than assuming."
A handful of universities go further and allow students to register their preferred pronouns in the university computer systems - and also a preferred name.
At the University of Vermont, which has led this movement, students can choose from "he," "she," "they," and "ze," as well as "name only" - meaning they don't want to be referred to by any third-person pronoun, only their name.
"It maximises the student's ability to control their identity," says Keith Williams, the university's registrar, who helped to launch the updated student information system in 2009. Most people stick to the default option, "none", which means they are not registering a pronoun - presumably because they are content to let people decide whether they are a "he" or a "she".
Image copyrightiStockOut of about 13,000 students currently enrolled, some 3,200 have entered preferred names in the system, and about half of them have specified preferred pronouns, Williams says. He adds that this doesn't necessarily mean they are transgender - they could be non-transgender students specifying "he" and "she".
At Harvard University, which followed Vermont's example at the beginning of this academic year, about half of the approximately 10,000 students registered in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences have specified preferred pronouns, and slightly more than 1% of those - about 50 out of 5,000 - chose pronouns other than "she" or "he", according to registrar Mike Burke.
At most other US universities the growing use of "non-binary" pronouns remains less formalised but is often encouraged in various ways. Signs and badges found throughout campuses display slogans such as Pronouns Matter or Ask Me About My Pronouns. Professors may be invited to training sessions at the start of each year and are sometimes urged to include their pronouns in their email signature, for example, "John Smith (he/him/his)".
A card developed by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee LGBT Resource Center in 2011 has been widely reproduced and distributed across the US.
One side of the card lists eight pronouns, from "ey" to "zie," and illustrates how they change depending on their role in a sentence. Instead of "he/she," "him/her," "his/her," "his/hers," and "himself/herself" it would be:
- "ey," "em," "eir," "eirs," and "eirself", or
- "zie," "zim," "zir," "zirs," and "zirself"
"The intention behind it was to ensure that the campus was fostering an inclusive environment," says Jennifer Murray, the director of the resource centre.
All the pronouns on the card were already in use, Murray says, either among students or members of Milwaukee's LGBT community. Although it might have been simpler to suggest just one non-binary pronoun, she says the staff of the resource centre didn't want to "limit folks' choices".
The alternatives to "he" and "she" are myriad. Wikipedia's gender-neutral pronouns page lists 14 "non-traditional pronouns" in English, though three are variants of "ze". Other online resources for the non-binary community, however, offer hundreds of options.
Image copyrightAlamy
Image captionThe First Grammar Book for Children (1900)Some terms come from foreign languages - such as the German-inspired "sie" - others from fiction. For example, "ze" and "per" are the pronouns of a future utopia Marge Piercy describes in her feminist sci-fi novel Woman on the Edge of Time (1976). Some are drawn from the plant or animal worlds, or refer to mythical beings with which the individual may identify.
It's is not the first time people have tried to coin new pronouns. Writers have long been frustrated by the lack of a neat way to refer to someone of unknown gender - "he or she" is clunky, and if you use it several times in quick succession, "your writing ends up looking like an explosion in a pedants' factory", as Guardian columnist Lucy Mangan once put it.
A linguist at the University of Illinois, Dennis Baron, has catalogued dozens of proposed gender-neutral pronouns, many - including "ip," "nis," and "hiser" - dating back to the 19th Century.
Most of these made little impact, though one - "thon", a contraction of "that one" - got into two American dictionaries.
Overall, though, Baron calls the gender-neutral pronoun an "epic fail" and reckons that new pronouns such as "ze" may not survive. But both he and Sally McConnell-Ginet, a Cornell University linguistics professor who researches the link between gender, sexuality, and language, think the singular "they" - as used for example by Kit Wilson - has a chance of success.
Image copyrightEmma Holman-Smith
Image captionStickers available at the University of OhioThis use of "they" annoys some grammarians. While it does feel natural for most English speakers to say something like "Someone lost their wallet," critics argue that "they" should really only be used to refer to plural nouns. And even those comfortable with "Someone lost their wallet" may have doubts when "Someone" is replaced by a person's name.
It's for this reason that when the pronoun registration system was developed at the University of Vermont in 2009, professors at first argued "ze" would be acceptable, but "they" would not. "They" was only added as an option in 2014.
But English has a precedent for a plural pronoun coming to be used in the singular - the pronoun "you". Until the 17th Century a single person was addressed with "thou" and "thee". Later "you" became perfectly acceptable in both plural and singular. Neither McConnell-Ginet nor Baron sees any reason why the same could not happen with "they".
Last week Washington Post copy editor Bill Walsh sent an email to the newsroom - probably the most popular email he will ever send, as he put it - saying the singular "they" was sometimes permissible, and "also useful in references to people who identify as neither male nor female".
Non-binary in the UKImage copyrightJessi LloydMost students have "some level of understanding about pronouns", which was not the case a few years ago, says the National Union of Students' LGBT officer, Fran Cowling. NUS name badges now include space for preferred pronouns.
Cambridge University students started a campaign called Make No Assumptions about a year ago. One of its badges (above) prompts readers to ask about the wearer's pronouns. Another has empty spaces for pronouns to be filled in.
Emrys Travis, Cambridge University Student Union's LGBT+ campaigns officer, uses "they," "them," and "their," but also "ey," "em," and "eir" with trans friends. "A lot of them mess up - repeatedly, often," Travis says. "As long as I think they're trying, it doesn't bother me."
Travis asked their director of studies to email each of their (Travis's) lecturers with a request to use "they" and "them" when referring to Travis and none objected. "Cambridge, in general, is a great place to be trans," they say.
However, learning to use new pronouns or the singular "they" is not easy.
Like Harvard, Ohio University gave students the option to register their preferred name and pronoun this year, but not all professors were ready for it. Some thought "they" was a typo on their student rosters, says LGBT centre director delfin bautista (bautista writes their name without any capital letters).
Image copyrightEmma Holman-SmithSlip-ups with preferred names are rarer than with preferred pronouns, bautista says, but can happen too. Calling someone by their rejected birth name is termed "deadnaming". More broadly, referring to a person in a way that does not reflect their gender identity is called "misgendering".
When students suspect that professors may not get the point of gender-neutral pronouns, they may play it safe and stick with "he" or "she".
Sarah Grote, an Ohio University student, uses "they/them" with close friends but hasn't entered this in the student information system to avoid inconveniencing or alienating professors. "I still need their recommendations… and this is still south-eastern Ohio," Sarah says.
In another socially conservative region, one university had to swiftly backtrack after tentatively starting a discussion about pronouns this summer. Donna Braquet, director of the Pride Center at the University of Tennessee posted an explanation of gender-neutral pronouns on the university website in August and encouraged people on campus to ask one another about their pronouns.
Image captionThe deleted page from the University of Tennessee websiteThe goal was to make the climate more trans-friendly, but it was widely mistaken for a change in university policy. Some of the press coverage imagined that "he" and "she" were being outlawed. One opinion column even used the headline "New pronouns for the traveling freak show". State and federal lawmakers complained to the university, and the post was removed the following week.
It's not just in US universities that gender-neutral language is advancing. Last year, Facebook gave users the option to customise gender beyond male and female, and pick a pronoun from "he", "she", and "they". This summer the Oxford Dictionaries website added the honorific "Mx", defining it as "a title used before a person's surname or full name by those who wish to avoid specifying their gender or by those who prefer not to identify themselves as male or female". Meanwhile, Caitlyn Jenner and the controversy over Benedict Cumberbatch playing a non-binary character in the film Zoolander 2 have kept the subject of gender identity topical.
Universities, however, remain the most fertile ground for new pronouns.
kat baus, a non-binary student who graduated from Harvard this year - and who also writes their name without capital letters - regrets that the university's computer system was not introduced earlier. "It would have been a lot easier and less awkward," baus says.
baus sent emails or visited professors during office hours to explain their gender identity and pronouns. In smaller classes they (baus) brought it up when introducing themself.
"I don't know a single trans person who likes having that conversation," baus says.
Being able to do it with the click of a mouse would have allowed them to get straight down to their work in class, baus says - and would have allowed their classmates to get straight down to theirs.
Pronoun panicImage copyrightiStockIt is sometimes difficult to determine somebody's gender by sight but what if you're blind? Mike Lambert recently experienced this problem when he attended a course on equality and diversity.
"I listen hard to Nina's voice. There's something soft and tentative about it - but the pitch is unmistakeably male... I tell myself that any concerns I have about Nina's gender are a thing of little consequence. The whole point of the day is equality and diversity, and I shouldn't get so hung-up trying to slot people into neat pigeon-holes. And then, I'm struck by a horrifying thought. How am I going to get through more than a couple of sentences without committing myself to 'he' or 'she', 'his' or 'hers'?"
Free contraception means big savings for health care system
How this indigenous youth is making sex education sexy
ANGELA STERRITT
Published Thursday, Mar. 10, 2016 10:40AM EST
This is one of four stories exploring culturally relevant First Nations sex education. Read the other stories:
-A nature-based program provides a powerful First Nations metaphor for lessons on consent
-Indigenous languages recognize gender states not even named in English
-How the traditional indigenous practice of beading can lead to frank talk about sex
Growing up, Alexa Lesperance saw low youth attendance at sexual health education events in her Naotkamegwanning First Nation in northwestern Ontario. High rates of sexually transmitted diseases and infections, suicides and teen pregnancy characterize some Indigenous communities but, Lesperance discovered, there’s often little to no engaging education to address the problem.
So at just 17 years old, she hatched a plan and, with the Native Youth Sexual Health Network behind her, she made sex education sexy. And so far, it’s been the most popular project the Network has seen.
Lesperance’s Sexy Health Carnival has been to over 30 Indigenous communities and draws anywhere from 80 to 1,200 people.
At a carnival in Naotkamegwanning First Nation, a young Anishinaabe mom pushes a stroller through a gymnasium packed with tables cloaked in bright cloths and giant colorful displays behind them. Teens around her giggle as they compete for prizes. She’s smiling as she makes her way to a booth that offers games and space for little ones while the parents walk freely around. Then she heads over to a red display and a sign posing the question, “How can you protect yourself?” Underneath that is another sign reading, “Our culture is strong; break the silence, talk about HIV.”
“Learning should be pleasurable. It’s not just Sexual Health 101, like ‘This is how you put on a condom,’” Lesperance says from Ottawa, where she attends Carlton University with the goal of attending medical school to become a health practitioner providing culturally safe care for her nation.
For young people who have gone through standard sex ed in high school, where putting a condom on a banana is boilerplate, the Sexy Health Carnival is a game changer. It may look like just a lively trade expo of sorts to adults looking in, but its engaging questions and disarming activities make it magnetic to youth.
An Indigenous teen throws a dart at a wall of balloons and when a red one pops, a card inside is revealed with a question he must answer – “True or false, is oral sex risk free?” Another balloon bursts, revealing another question – “Can you get HIV from a toilet seat?” For Alexa, it is all part of making awkward and uncomfortable subjects more approachable, and fun.
“I wanted to create a space where young people could teach each other and talk about the real hard stuff but also celebrate our strengths and learn in fun, non-shaming, interactive ways.”
At another table, a girl spins a small prize wheel with numbered sections. The clicker lands on the number four, corresponding to an activity she must do. The person behind the table reads out the instruction: “Name one thing you are proud of in your culture.”
For Lesperance, learning about culture goes hand in hand with knowledge about sexual health and health in general. In other activities, youth are asked to say “sex” or name body parts in their Indigenous language.
“If they can reclaim language, then they can also reclaim spaces, their homes, and their bodies,” Lesperance said. “These little things can actually lead to decreases of shame in culture and the body. They can also lead to important conversations about consent.”
Lesperance wrangled her entire family – her siblings and her mom – and then her community to create the Sexy Health Carnival. She wanted to make it inclusive not just to youth, but all members of the community. So at every SHC, there are activities for all ages – for grandparents, kids, babies, moms and dads, and all ages attend. “Healthy relationships were broken down and taken away for centuries, I think trying to navigate and provide safe space is really a big step,” she says.
Reflecting back, Lesperance says she learned that at the heart of what she was doing was providing young people with the knowledge they needed to make informed decisions, something she says her ancestors taught her community to do well.
“I’ve seen the real impact of what happens when we shame those in our community, and the difference it makes when we support them, so I guess another part of why I was inspired to make the Carnival was to create this as a tool for all Native youth, so that we could spread the love and the care a little further.”
Published Thursday, Mar. 10, 2016 10:40AM EST
This is one of four stories exploring culturally relevant First Nations sex education. Read the other stories:
-A nature-based program provides a powerful First Nations metaphor for lessons on consent
-Indigenous languages recognize gender states not even named in English
-How the traditional indigenous practice of beading can lead to frank talk about sex
Growing up, Alexa Lesperance saw low youth attendance at sexual health education events in her Naotkamegwanning First Nation in northwestern Ontario. High rates of sexually transmitted diseases and infections, suicides and teen pregnancy characterize some Indigenous communities but, Lesperance discovered, there’s often little to no engaging education to address the problem.
So at just 17 years old, she hatched a plan and, with the Native Youth Sexual Health Network behind her, she made sex education sexy. And so far, it’s been the most popular project the Network has seen.
Lesperance’s Sexy Health Carnival has been to over 30 Indigenous communities and draws anywhere from 80 to 1,200 people.
At a carnival in Naotkamegwanning First Nation, a young Anishinaabe mom pushes a stroller through a gymnasium packed with tables cloaked in bright cloths and giant colorful displays behind them. Teens around her giggle as they compete for prizes. She’s smiling as she makes her way to a booth that offers games and space for little ones while the parents walk freely around. Then she heads over to a red display and a sign posing the question, “How can you protect yourself?” Underneath that is another sign reading, “Our culture is strong; break the silence, talk about HIV.”
“Learning should be pleasurable. It’s not just Sexual Health 101, like ‘This is how you put on a condom,’” Lesperance says from Ottawa, where she attends Carlton University with the goal of attending medical school to become a health practitioner providing culturally safe care for her nation.
For young people who have gone through standard sex ed in high school, where putting a condom on a banana is boilerplate, the Sexy Health Carnival is a game changer. It may look like just a lively trade expo of sorts to adults looking in, but its engaging questions and disarming activities make it magnetic to youth.
An Indigenous teen throws a dart at a wall of balloons and when a red one pops, a card inside is revealed with a question he must answer – “True or false, is oral sex risk free?” Another balloon bursts, revealing another question – “Can you get HIV from a toilet seat?” For Alexa, it is all part of making awkward and uncomfortable subjects more approachable, and fun.
“I wanted to create a space where young people could teach each other and talk about the real hard stuff but also celebrate our strengths and learn in fun, non-shaming, interactive ways.”
At another table, a girl spins a small prize wheel with numbered sections. The clicker lands on the number four, corresponding to an activity she must do. The person behind the table reads out the instruction: “Name one thing you are proud of in your culture.”
For Lesperance, learning about culture goes hand in hand with knowledge about sexual health and health in general. In other activities, youth are asked to say “sex” or name body parts in their Indigenous language.
“If they can reclaim language, then they can also reclaim spaces, their homes, and their bodies,” Lesperance said. “These little things can actually lead to decreases of shame in culture and the body. They can also lead to important conversations about consent.”
Lesperance wrangled her entire family – her siblings and her mom – and then her community to create the Sexy Health Carnival. She wanted to make it inclusive not just to youth, but all members of the community. So at every SHC, there are activities for all ages – for grandparents, kids, babies, moms and dads, and all ages attend. “Healthy relationships were broken down and taken away for centuries, I think trying to navigate and provide safe space is really a big step,” she says.
Reflecting back, Lesperance says she learned that at the heart of what she was doing was providing young people with the knowledge they needed to make informed decisions, something she says her ancestors taught her community to do well.
“I’ve seen the real impact of what happens when we shame those in our community, and the difference it makes when we support them, so I guess another part of why I was inspired to make the Carnival was to create this as a tool for all Native youth, so that we could spread the love and the care a little further.”
Gender-neutral washrooms at the Royal Ontario Museum reflect changing times
A new Royal Ontario Museum exhibit exploring gender diversity in ancient Japan has inspired a new set of gender-neutral washrooms at the Toronto museum.
A Third Gender explores gender and sexual diversity during the Edo period in Japan. It focuses on wakashu: male youths who were considered objects of desire for men and women, and who also looked different from both women and adult men.
Prior to the exhibit's opening in early May, curators held workshops with the LGBT community in Toronto.
How did the ROM make washrooms gender neutral?
"The exhibition sharpened our thinking around gender and sexual diversity at the museum and expedited our efforts," ROM managing director Sascha Priewe told CBC News.
Art galleries and museums do not fall under federal regulation, so the decision about what types of washrooms are available on the premises rests with the individual institution and its stakeholders.
Gender-specific public washrooms don't go back as far as some might think: the first instance of separate public toilet facilities for men and women is believed to date to Paris in the 1700s.
'Something to celebrate and value'Both the revamped washrooms and the exhibit impressed Sheila Cavanagh, a professor of gender and sexuality studies at York University and author of Queering Bathrooms: Gender, Sexuality and the Hygienic Imagination.
"This development enables those who are gender variant and trans to more easily access the museum. I hope other cultural institutions follow suit," she said.
The ROM's Priewe agreed.
"I do hope that the goal of creating inclusive institutions for staff and audiences is at the forefront of the thinking of cultural institutions," he said.
A Third Gender: Beautiful Youths in Japanese Prints continues at the ROM through November 27.
A Third Gender explores gender and sexual diversity during the Edo period in Japan. It focuses on wakashu: male youths who were considered objects of desire for men and women, and who also looked different from both women and adult men.
Prior to the exhibit's opening in early May, curators held workshops with the LGBT community in Toronto.
How did the ROM make washrooms gender neutral?
- In a previous women's room, signage on the door was changed to an "All Gender" sign.
- In a previous men's room, the urinals were covered with professional plastic covers, existing toilet cubicles remain intact and signage was changed to an "All Gender" sign.
- Wayfinding signs directing visitors to washrooms were altered to denote gender-neutral washrooms.
"The exhibition sharpened our thinking around gender and sexual diversity at the museum and expedited our efforts," ROM managing director Sascha Priewe told CBC News.
Art galleries and museums do not fall under federal regulation, so the decision about what types of washrooms are available on the premises rests with the individual institution and its stakeholders.
Gender-specific public washrooms don't go back as far as some might think: the first instance of separate public toilet facilities for men and women is believed to date to Paris in the 1700s.
'Something to celebrate and value'Both the revamped washrooms and the exhibit impressed Sheila Cavanagh, a professor of gender and sexuality studies at York University and author of Queering Bathrooms: Gender, Sexuality and the Hygienic Imagination.
"This development enables those who are gender variant and trans to more easily access the museum. I hope other cultural institutions follow suit," she said.
- Transgender Canadians should 'fell free and safe' to be themselves under new Liberal bill
- Transgender bathroom debate has students wondering 'what the big deal is'
The ROM's Priewe agreed.
"I do hope that the goal of creating inclusive institutions for staff and audiences is at the forefront of the thinking of cultural institutions," he said.
A Third Gender: Beautiful Youths in Japanese Prints continues at the ROM through November 27.
Addressing Rape Culture in Post-Secondary Schools, Carleton University
Rape Culture. It gives me chills just saying the words, but it is a reality we live in. Rape Culture is something that must be discussed with students, as difficult as it is, but equally - if not more so - important. It is deeply embedded within our language, our media, and our day-to-day lives.
Having open and honest conversations about Rape Culture are the beginning steps required to undermine and erase its pervasiveness.
"Rape culture is when you tell your daughter that the boys on the playground are only teasing her because “they have a crush on you.” Rape culture is when you tell her that “boys will be boys.” Rape culture is when fathers sexualize their daughters, whether they’re Donald Trump or Joe Sixpack. Rape culture is when you ask, “Are you sure it was rape? Because you were pretty drunk.”"
Full article here: http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/ashby-carleton-must-acknowledge-rape-culture
Having open and honest conversations about Rape Culture are the beginning steps required to undermine and erase its pervasiveness.
"Rape culture is when you tell your daughter that the boys on the playground are only teasing her because “they have a crush on you.” Rape culture is when you tell her that “boys will be boys.” Rape culture is when fathers sexualize their daughters, whether they’re Donald Trump or Joe Sixpack. Rape culture is when you ask, “Are you sure it was rape? Because you were pretty drunk.”"
Full article here: http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/ashby-carleton-must-acknowledge-rape-culture
Holistic Student Approach to Wellness
A great read for all teachers out there - whether in the K-12 system, post-secondary, or beyond.
"PERMA–V is a powerful model of human well-being originally articulated by Dr. Martin Seligman that posits six essential building-blocks as follows:
Positive Emotion
Engagement
Relationships
Meaning
Accomplishment
Vitality"
Read more on PERMA-V (and a new initiative by Ryerson University to help students thrive, which could be applied to any school) here:http://ryersonstudentaffairs.com/a-framework-of-beams/
"PERMA–V is a powerful model of human well-being originally articulated by Dr. Martin Seligman that posits six essential building-blocks as follows:
Positive Emotion
Engagement
Relationships
Meaning
Accomplishment
Vitality"
Read more on PERMA-V (and a new initiative by Ryerson University to help students thrive, which could be applied to any school) here:http://ryersonstudentaffairs.com/a-framework-of-beams/
Raising (and Teaching) Caring Children
Being a caring, loving, empathic person begins with parents. This article outlines good parenting strategies to help role model what healthy relationships look like: http://www.upworthy.com/harvard-psychologists-have-been-studying-what-it-takes-to-raise-good-kids-here-are-6-tips?c=ufb6
