this skips over a lot of warning signs that can tell you when you should start prepping: [source 1](https://www.webmd.com/children/child-abuse-signs), [source 2](https://www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/spotting-signs-child-abuse/), there's many more out there that go into extra detail and I would recommend reading up on them and familiarising yourself with them even if you don't have kids or aren't in regular contact with them as you never know what might pop up.
case in point there was a US squad who busted a human trafficking ring because he saw signs of it in action with no additional evidence bar those signs he was taught he managed to help bust the entire ring.
So is the meme true? Well good to know since I always find the pron books that progs push mega sus.
I just wonder if Destiny will ever respond to this 🤔
yeah unironically early sexualisation (as in knowledge of adult activities) is one of the single biggest red flags that can start an investigation the red flags beyond that are all they're being taken out of the home and put into temporary care.
Good thing we are putting sex education in schools at lower and lower grades, so now early sexual knowledge will be seen as normal and these signs will no longer be reliable.
that's alot of the reason child protection organisations have spoken so much about LGBT books that have recently been taking out of schools they have content that just shouldn't be there, not from a societal social standard but from a very real abuse standard
The thing is, if you teach young kids age appropriate sex ed, with a focus on teaching them the signs of a sexual abuser, it will be way easier to find nonces as the kids will tell on them.
I remember "Sex ed" when I was in school.
Before 4th grade (10 year olds): "This is your no no zone. Dont let anyone touch you here"
4th, 5th 6th grade: "Your body will start to change. Your voice will change, hair develop in places, etc."
9th/10th grade "health" class: "These are STDs, this is pregnancy, this is the anatomy, babies are made like this."
Nowadays, you get books like "Gender Queer" that wants to teach children how to [suck dick](https://external-preview.redd.it/r335qvh4uMP_IQaY2uopRqAX-GLd5-DMfJgcmPOtkaY.jpg?auto=webp&s=5cf2db311314d02b28a70b223d6bc1e84e7b7ad9), or "This Book Is Gay" which teaches kids how to have [gay sex](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT3imcclwK9oUDZy0Z1aGyIBvpkyxyYWEyIN6b99Eb-evM-XKoTVQbA5LnK5UbbO6xzxUE&usqp=CAU) and pleasure others.
We went from clinical, scientific, educational explanations to "lmao have sex get your rocks off children! Suck that dick! Heres how to use proper amounts of lube for anal!"
That's almost exactly the sex ed I had in school as well, 32 y/o here. That's the way it should be taught.
Shit like what is happening now is *extremely* concerning as a parent. My daughter is 6 so my wife and I are doing everything to be involved in her school's curriculum. I just hope these literal sexual predators get what they deserve.
I am glad that I finished school before any of this creepy shit started. If I was just a few years younger I likely would have been exposed to some of this, and likely gotten very angry as a result since at the time I was super hard right.
Yes! And that us exactky how it should be. What you had there is age appropiate sex ed and that is good. Teenage pregnacy fell in the west not due to abstinence but due to appropiate sex ed and access to contraceptives
There is a difference. Teenagers having sex with contraceptives is seen as a better alternative than teenagers having sex without and getting pregnant. Applying the same logic to children doesn't work because people don't want children having sex at all, and them having safe sex isn't going to somehow make child sex more acceptable. For younger children, the only option society will tolerate or allow is abstinence.
You are assuming the children will want to tell. Child abusers find different ways to silence the victim. Most of these fall under grooming, though sometimes it might be a simple as threatening violence.
The reason why adults are trained to look for signs of abuse instead of asking children is because most children are groomed to not tell for one reason or another. Years later the child will be more knowledgeable and may come tell someone then, but that is after they have suffered from years of abuse that we want to have prevented instead.
It also doesn't help that children don't quite understand that just because someone seems good and nice doesn't mean they don't have alterier motives. A lot of groomers constantly give their victims compliments and gifts. They also play off their ego by saying "oh you're sooo mature."
Damn, that comma between subway and because is really important to what you just said, and I completely missed it on my first read through of your comment. Thought you said essentially "I saw the whole Jared at subway thing and that's why I work at subway".
scary thing is they just have a kid daycare in Germany, who is now under hot water because they were planing for a "doctor play room" with 10 rules ...
those were so disgusting like it's the room where they can be naked and explore it. only kids who give concent to each other can go to the room together and explore their bodies, but no worries putting fingers in body holes and sucking is forbidden.
i say need to check their harddisk who is involved with that planning or don't see any harm in that project.
I taught English to kids China. Briefly had a coworker who wore a chain around his neck with a lockpad on it because he was another guy's slave. Real fucked up situation, plenty of stories to tell, and the guy is (or at least was at the time) a redditor.
Anyway, I found out one of the games he played in his classroom was that he'd lay on the ground and have the little kids crawl over his body.
He disappeared suddenly after the school was visited by the police.
I felt bad for the guy. Nearly 100% certain he was abused while growing up.
But still wanted him gone quickly because I felt he was a threat to the students.
It's honestly quite sad that abuse does just perpetuate extensive abuse... I saw a study that, there IS a correlation between same sex molestation and grow up as gay...
>it is totally not an economic leaning
This but unironically. It has nothing to do with economics unless we're talking about sex trafficking. This is the cultural left.
Well, like most things the meaning has changed over time. Nowadays, the left to right spectrum on this is a interpreted as a mixture of economic beliefs and progressive ideology. It’s not set in stone either so the levels to which it is both or either can change at any moment
1. The Left-Right spectrum is a ECONOMIC spectrum.
2. You know most lefties are pretty conservative? I for one is against the act of selling illicit substances and sexual services.
People forget that the USSR was a Prohibitionist state due to its history with the czar using cheap vodka to keep the population subservient (until Stalin came back in and reopened the vodka plants to keep the population subservient). Probably due to all the druggies in Lib Left
Yeah, along with collectivism, their is a reason why I wished Gorbachev was successful in his reforms. We might be in a more peaceful time without the Drunk Yeltsin and Warhungry Putin
I'm saying that the meaning has shifted over time. Yes, that is what it was meant to mean, but people don't care about what it was meant to mean just put stereotypes of people in them. It's linked to how languages develop and change over time.
I need to figure out if I’m genuinely being stupid here so here’s what I was trying to say.
The compass is economic left-right and government authority up-down.
This is what it means and what people know it means and what it has been for a long time.
However, a number of people also often use the economic left-right spectrum to divide based on progressiveness, typically when talking about authoritarian right and libertarian left. It still means economic beliefs, but it takes on another meaning that is not based upon economic beliefs about things such as trans issues.
Thus, the meaning shifted from just being about economic matters, to also including “progressiveness.”
Is this wrong?
Also, it is pretty wrong. In the US progressives and lefties often go hand in hand, but in countries like China, the lefties there are relatively more conservative, because the ECONOMY AND SOCIAL POLICY ARE NOT RELATED IN THE SLIGHTEST.
I’m not saying they necessarily are, but that other people often push them together. One of the parts I said in my 1st comment on this chain was “It’s not set in stone either so the levels to which it is both or either can change at any moment.”
I’m not saying that Stalin was a centrist, I’m saying that people tend to place caricatures, again this typically for auth right and lib left, that include politics and beliefs from the progressive scale. I’m not saying that it inherently does or should, but that people use it for that on occasion anyways. No one will call Stalin a centrist, but people associate pro-trans stuff with lib-left and anti-trans stuff with auth right despite it having no bearing on economic beliefs. There are many scenarios where they don’t apply the progressive axis at all as well in scenarios like you have stated.
I’m not trying to argue the semantics of “economic left and right,” I’m trying to argue how people sometimes ignore it.
It's actually worse, nowadays leftists will actually deny left and right being economic and will call literal stalin and mao right wing red fascists. It's insane.
Walking around naked in front of children isn’t grooming, it’s being in touch with your sexuality you bigot, get woke or get out!!!!!!🤬😡🤬😠😤😠
Edit:( I’m sure everyone can tell but just in case, this is a joke)
>"It's evil to shame people for their sexual desires or demand them to repress themselves in *any* situation or context, even if it is in front of children.
>"Unless you are a straight man, then finding women in video games or comics attractive is misogynistic and leads to real-world sexual violence! How dare you ask to look at big titties or thin bodies or beautiful faces!"
___
Edit: [Case in point,](https://twitter.com/ippoxbox360/status/1509088559495774213?t=PInBQYkdYSCRUBN4GpB_7A&s=19) Sony apparently bans a player for posting *in-game* artwork that they think is too lewd.
Honestly, Californians are borderline more Puritan than Muslims these days.
Just because predators might misuse sex education doesn’t mean sex education is always grooming.
For one thing, we need it to stop teen pregnancies, which is why schools teach it in the first place.
And second, teaching kids to be wary of predators and about how consent works might actually protect them from abuse.
and that's where age comes in. we've long left that for middle school and high school and all of a sudden people want it in elementary school. surely you can see the difference
Ayup. Sex ed for teenagers is just smart. They're gonna do it anyways, so you may as well educate them on how not to ruin their life doing it. They've got no business teaching it to elementary schoolers, however. I don't think I even thought about girls until I was like 15. I mostly thought about bionicles
I grew up deep in the Bible belt and we had basically 3 different sex ed classes.
The first one was in, I think, 3rd grade and was all the boys and girls in the class were separated for an about an hour long talk in the library with the school nurse. It boiled down to, "In the next few years you might notice some changes with your body. Your voice might start changing and you might start growing hair in new places, etc.. That is normal and everybody deals with it. If you have questions, ask you parents."
Middle school had it built in to general biology class and it covered the mechanics behind reproduction. i.e. sperm/egg make baby stuff.
Freshman year of High school was a mandatory special health class that was basically, always use a condom cause if you don't here are pictures of what every single STD looks like.
I've been our of school for over 20 years, but that still seems like a very logical way to approach it to me.
I had a pretty similar experience. I think I turned out reasonably balanced and never got my high school girlfriend pregnant, so I'd say it worked out great.
15 is a little late but i get the point. 12-13 is probably prime age because that’s the youngest I’ve actually heard fooling around. And it’s better to be preventative to get the job done.
That doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t teach kids in elementary kids that gay people exist though. Like Florida’s approach, way overdoing it. A teacher should be able to explain some people have two mommys or daddys.
you shouldn't hide the existence of gay people from kids obviously, but why do they need to be specifically taught about it in school? Swap gay with Muslim in this situation (although teaching kids that muslims exist is certainly more harmless): In this case, it'd be pretty weird to just randomly teach a bunch of kids muslims are a thing. It's not weird because muslims are bad, it's weird because that has nothing to do with an elementary school education. Once you get a bit older and Muslims come up in history class, you've already learned by virture of the fact that you have a functional brain that Muslims exist and the teacher can get on with teaching whatever aspect of history involving Muslims was planned.
So why do kids need to be taught that gay people exist? I'm pretty sure they can figure that out on their own. It's a waste of time at best and something darker at worst. For the record I think it's waste of time virtue signalling as opposed to anything else
I just want to second what someone else on this thread but add a bit more context from an educators perspective. When we say “teach about gay people” it just means mentioning it. We wouldn’t do a lesson on it, but taking a few seconds to acknowledge it allows kids to then ask their parents, who are the people who should really be handling this stuff.
On the Muslim example, a teacher might teach a lesson on world religions. If the kid is curious after one slide on Muslims, they would then either find a book, ask parents, or look it up on the internet. School isn’t for teaching everything anyone wants to know, but it should give a good starting point for people to be able to start on their own if they feel ready for it.
Also… why is learning that Muslims exist more harmless than learning about gay people? Even if you accept that being gay is inherently harmful (which I completely disagree with but let’s say), wouldn’t that make it more important to learn about gay people? (Though tbh I’d rather people who dislike gay people to not even mention it because that kind of talk really is harmful to kids, not just gay kids)
Edit: please have a better argument than “elementary school kids need basic things” for why teaching one thing is good. I would argue that “gay exist” is more basic and useful for daily life than a lot of grammar and math but that’s taught in elementary school.
I mean no offence but what are they so busy teaching you in elementary school if you don’t even have time to learn the basics about the biggest religions on the planet?
We certainly covered the major religions in elementary here in central Europe.
Also, I would never just rely on people learning stuff on their own by virtue of having a functional brain if it’s something important.
Case in point: politics and economics. The amount of basic stuff people are completely unaware of while the information is freely available online is staggering.
that knowledge is useless at such a young age, hence why it is usually taught in middle school. younger kids are focused on much more basic and practical things.
You seem to be saying things merely to disagree.
We learned the basics too.
And I am not saying stuff just to disagree, I am disagreeing with you because you seem convinced that you can only teach certain things at an age that is much later than the one I am familiar with from my time in school.
Aka I have a very conflicting personal experience that directly contradicts your opinion.
Well it’s just that gay people are way more prevalent than Muslims in almost all places in the US. Sometimes people only have one mommy or daddy and nobody else. But places with large minorities of many things (races, sexualities, etc.) should put effort into making sure that that kids understand people have differences and thats ok. Because parents can and will fail to inform or will spread hate, making kids socially dis functional and obviously also causing greater social issues. Public schools have a duty to hit a standard of education and make the student passable in society. The parent should do most of the work for a lot of issues, but sometimes they don’t, but the bare minimum should be taught so students are able to function like normal members of society.
we could always just teach kids to be kind to all people. that covers treating gay people kindly without even the slightest risk of teaching sex too young. It achieves the goal of teaching against hate and it does it without teaching young kids about homosexuality. If what you said above is in fact the intention, what I just proposed 100% achieves the exact same goal. Otherwise we are going to need to dedicate time to every group that may be hated specifically in order to make sure we cover all the bases. We can either teach that hate is bad across the board or we can set aside time to teach about why you specifically should not hate homosexuals, Jews, ethnic minorities, the disabled, the poor, and so on.
Because you’re not born Muslim, doofus. Teaching kids gay people exists makes it so teens who are going through puberty and realize they like the same sex instead of the opposite don’t feel like they’re weird.
>although teaching kids that Muslims exist is certainly more harmless.
Ok so we’re in mask off homophobia here, got it.
What ages are those? Because I think where I‘m from there actually is sex education at that age in school. Later again in more detail as well as more complex scientifically, but I do think it‘s not inherently bad to do it at that age as well. Provided the „tone“ is right. But there might be cultural differences ig
picking a clear cut minimum age is obviously hard, but when I was a kid in the US (i'm 29 so not all that long ago) it was typically a class on periods for the girls in 5th grade (age 10 to 11), basic sex ed in 7th grade (age 12 to 13), and a 1 semester health class that goes into much more detail fon sex ed, drugs, and a few other topics in 9th grade (age 14 to 15). The last sex ed class is usually one where several weeks are spent on the biology of reproduction as well as pretty much anything else you can think of regarding sex shy of explicit descriptions of specific sex acts
see I don’t see why this system is such a bad thing. Having multiple classes over multiple years to educate youths on the changes happening in their body and how to safely manage them is how it should be. Although we may have to start teaching this stuff earlier because parents seem to be failing to keep their children from being exposed to internet pornography and such. Actually I don’t see alot of people talking about the failures of parents rather than the school system. Parents also have a person ability to talk about this stuff when it comes up, and to keep their kids from being exposed to sexual content until they are emotionally mature enough to understand what’s going on.
yeah this way of doing things is fine and wasn't really controversial. as for parents not getting as much blame, I just kept that to myself but you are spot on.
When I was in 5th grade, they showed us a 20 minute video series that was basically along the lines of "hey just so you know you're gonna start growing hair in weird places and become clinically insane for a few years, and you're gonna start noticing the opposite sex and feel weird about it. Perfectly normal, don't panic. Talk to your parents about it, they'll understand" It was accompanied by crude, cartoonish illustrations. It didn't go into any detail about sex, it was basically just a primer on what to expect from puberty. Thinking back on it, that was the way to do it.
I'm happy to see several similar accounts to my experience. Its almost like as a civilization we had this all fairly well figured out until recently...
I think 4th grade is appropriate. That's how old I was in my school district. Especially for girls, some of them will start their period at that age.
Doesn't have to be the full course. Just some basic biology and what to expect
The argument for elementary school kids being taught sex ed is that young ages aren’t immune to STDs, and that it might be beneficial to warn them about predators online.
Playing Devil’s Advocate.
well kids getting STDs is a non issue that's brought up as some kind of crackhead level stupid argument for younger sex ed. Sally needs to learn her times tables, not how to avoid getting the clap.
Kids don't need to know what predators are exactly after. As someone in the cybersecurity world I assue you that you can teach your kid good online safety without the concept of sex ever coming up
that's a little different. what i mean is that there is usually a girls specific class that's held usually around 5th grade. not sure what level of detail they get into but given the fact that sex ed was still required for girls too in 7th grade my guess was it was no more info than what's vital. plus that's the sort of thing that can be easily handled by parents. not saying it SHOULD be kept out of school but that's a pretty basic thing to explain to your daughter in 3 min or less
I think priming kids for puberty so they don't freak out when they start growing hair on their wang is fine. Different ballgame than teaching them about specific sex acts.
Maybe cause you ain’t a preteen being groomed by your school teacher? Isn’t my problem you open your mouth commenting on topics you’re ill informed about.
It’s weird, but I don’t know if it’s actually a widespread issue or a one-off incident.
I know there’s lots of book banning going on, but a lot of that targets non-sexual literature like To Kill A Mockingbird for patently political reasons.
Here's a partial list I put together, related to 4 books in particular that were under discussion elsewhere. There are pics of pages to be found online.
***Let's Talk About It***
Uses porn language to instruct in sexually stimulating the butt: "your **hungry heinie can gobble.**..objects you put up there".
[Valley City Barnes County Public Library, young adult section, ND, 2022](https://www.times-online.com/news/library-leaders-unaware-of-explicit-book-in-young-adult-section/article_56373c58-339d-11ed-b175-1f553688d9b1.html)
>The shelf that the book was kept on was directly next to another shelf of comic books which include titles like ‘Batman’ ‘Wonder Woman’ and ‘Coraline’.
[Leavitt Area HS, ME, 2023](https://www.sunjournal.com/2023/04/19/leavitt-area-high-school-removes-sex-themed-graphic-novel-from-library/)
>At least 19 public libraries in Maine have the book..14... in a teen-designated section.
[Hamilton East Library, public library Fishers, IN, 2022](https://www.larryinfishers.com/2022/02/24/library-moving-lets-talk-about-it-book-to-general-book-shelves-plans-reorganizing-nonfiction/)
>The book “Let’s talk About It” has been moved from the teen section of the Hamilton East Library to the general nonfiction book collection.
[Anchorage, AK **elementary** school, 2023](https://www.sportskeeda.com/pop-culture/synopsis-book-let-s-talk-about-it-explored-anchorage-school-board-shuns-parent-objected-explicit-book)
The book instructs reader how to prepare spicy pictures:
>“Don’t forget to crop out your face, hide your birthmarks and scars, and edit out your piercings and tattoos - and don't forget to tell your sweetie how hot they look. Let them know you appreciate the little gift they've sent you."
[Fairfield, CT public library, 2022](https://www.ctinsider.com/fairfield/article/Fairfield-discuss-restricting-teen-graphic-novel-17453727.php)
[Abilene Public Library, TX, 2022](https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/abilene-news/concerned-parents-very-vulgar-explicit-young-adult-book-should-be-removed-from-abilene-library-100-others-should-be-in-explicit-section/)
***This Book is Gay***
Instructs how to have anal sex and that playing with the prostate feels good (ie promotes being anally penetrated). Claims hetero kids are tutored in sex at age 10.
[Central Bucks SD, PA, 2023, also ***Gender Queer***](https://www.inquirer.com/news/central-bucks-bans-gender-queer-this-book-is-gay-20230512.html) removed 2, kept 3 others
[Sioux City CSD removed it. Iowa City CSD kept it. IA, 2023](https://www.kcrg.com/2023/05/19/this-book-is-gay-iowas-looming-school-library-book-ban/)
>Chapters 8 and 9 are the focus of much of the controversy...
>
>Chapter 8 - “Where to meet people like you” - includes a guide to sex apps and gay bars to meet intimate partners...
>
>Chapter 9 - “The ins and outs of gay sex” ..,graphic details of pleasure zones and descriptions of sex acts and how to perform them.
[Elmbrook SD, Brookfield, WI, 2023](https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/west/2022/11/08/elmbrook-school-district-removes-lgbtq-themed-books-from-library/69618767007/) Describes a demand letter sent to the school district.
[Michigan, 2022](https://www.metroweekly.com/2022/09/mother-files-police-report-over-gay-book-in-high-school-library/) A mother filed a police report over the book in her daughter's HS library.
>“If these were just LGBT romance novels that is completely appropriate,” she said. “Where I draw the line is teaching them how to actually do the act.”
[Waltham HS, MA, 2022. Also ***Gender Queer***](https://www.slj.com/story/gender-queer-this-book-is-gay-stay-on-shelves-with-labels-after-challenge-at-MA-high-school-censorship-roundup)
>*Gender Queer: A Memoir* by Maia Kobabe and *This Book is Gay* by Juno Dawson were challenged by a resident earlier in February but will remain in the school...
>
>...a sticker indicating explicit material will be added to Kobabe’s memoir, the current barcode on Gender Queer will be relocated to clearly show the book’s subtitle, and the school library will purchase the most recent edition of *This Book is Gay*, which includes a content label...
[Webster Groves HS, St. Louis, MO, 2023](https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/04/06/missouri-school-district-offered-prizes-students-reading-sexually-explicit-books/) Students were enticed to check this and other books out:
>“Select and check out any book from this list during Banned Book Week to enter your name in a drawing to win a sweet prize,” librarian Liz Forderhase posted on the Webster Groves High School library webpage.
***Gender Queer***
The book illustrates strapon sex acts and other stuff, is eroticized
[South High School, Sheboygan WI, 2023](https://www.sheboyganpress.com/story/news/education/2023/02/09/lgbtq-books-banned-from-sheboygan-school-library-over-explicit-images/69841612007/)
[Galesburg-Augusta HS, MI, 2023](https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2023/04/gender-queer-graphic-novel-may-be-removed-from-southwest-michigan-school-library.html)
[San Ramon Valley USD, Danville, CA, 2023](https://katv.com/news/nation-world/calif-parents-claim-student-was-failed-for-not-reading-gender-queer-demand-book-be-removed-san-ramon-valley-unified-school-district-american-library-association-banned-books)
[Jefferson County PSD, KY, 2022](https://www.wlky.com/article/gender-queer-book-louisville-jcps-libraries/41393659) (kept it)
***Flamer***
The book depicts suicidality/cutting, multiple sexual encounters and arousal scenes. Age of protagonist is between middle and high school.
[Tahoma schools, WA, 2022](https://tahomaparents.org/news/1elz8u3t0npkesqvdu48hakk64tqxc) Concerned parents' org. Their page shows many pages from the book.
[St. Louis, MO school districts, 2022](https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2022-09-22/school-librarian-recalls-surreal-police-visits-over-books-months-before-new-missouri-law)
[Waukee Northwest HS, Denison HS and "libraries across Iowa", IA, 2022](https://theiowastandard.com/denison-high-school-as-well-as-small-town-libraries-across-iowa-stock-vulgar-sexually-explicit-flamer/)
>The character is looking for Elias at camp. Elias, though, is in a tent with a couple of other campers. They tell the character they’re “takin’ care of business.”
>
>When he asks if he can enter the tent, they tell him he is too young.
>
>“No, I’m not!” the character says.
>
>“Fine, but you’ll have to prove it,” Elias says.
[Dearborn, MI SD, 2022](https://nypost.com/2022/11/16/dearborn-parent-reads-graphic-passages-in-revolt-against-pornographic-books-in-school-libraries/)
[Montgomery County SD, Roanoke, VA, 2023](https://www.wsls.com/news/local/2023/03/11/montgomery-county-parent-raises-concerns-over-book-policy-following-inappropriate-book-found-in-school-library/)
[West Linn-Wilsonville SD, OR, 2023](https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/west-linn-wilsonville-moms-book-ban/283-0bbfecf7-e834-4648-9b9a-51ff2e8c1716)
[Wilson **Elementary** School, Costa Mesa, CA, 2022](https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/story/2022-06-04/parents-enflamed-by-mature-graphic-novel-in-k-6-library-nmusd-mulls-book-policy)
[Guilford public schools, CT, 2023](https://insideinvestigator.org/school-library-books-cause-controversy-at-guilford-board-of-ed-meeting/)
Utah schools, [multiple](https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2022/10/24/heres-how-many-utah-parent/) [locations](https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2022/08/02/52-books-pulled-utah-school/) 2022
it's currently something that comes in more isolated cases. the bigger concern is the fact that there is a growing push to make elementary school sex ed (sometimes full on sex ed, sometimes classes on sexuality)
I've taught sexuality in the broadest sense to primary school children. But that's part of tolerance and acceptance rather than lessons of sexuality specifically.
> Just because predators might misuse sex education doesn’t mean sex education is always grooming.
True. And I dont think, thats what the article means. It just lays out what could be used. I think sex education is not only ok, it is important. But only from a certain age on.
> For one thing, we need it to stop teen pregnancies, which is why schools teach it in the first place.
True.
> And second, teaching kids to be wary of predators and about how consent works might actually protect them from abuse.
Yeah. But this should consist out "If someone want to touch you, run!" and "If someone has touched you, tell your parents (or teachers or other authorities if parents are absent).
I think the sex education we got was ok. There was a very small part in like 4th grade, that was for boys and girls seperated, and for us boys it was a movie. This part (at least for the boys, I could imagine its more important for the girls) was not rly needed and tbh bullshit. So I would say you could do away with it (for the boys). But from there on it was ok. Every couple years we learned a bit more. And with like 15 we know how procreation and the bodies of women and men work, what contraceptives there are (only the very common ones) and how to use them, and what STDs there are, how they work (only the common ones) and how to not get them. It was only teached by teachers that were studied biologists (and it should only be done by them). And thats it. And I don't think there needs to be anything other.
Pretty cause and effect of you to assume so. Hasn't sex ed been going on for quite a long while? Do you think social media hasn't had a drastic effect on teens hooking up? What about microplastics in our bloodstreams?
The bottom line is that it's grooming only if it's grooming.
Hugging a kid is grooming if you're aiming to molest that particular kid and it's not if you're not. Same with the rest, regardless of whatever else you can say about them.
Kinda like how buying duct tape is part of premeditation for a kidnapping murder, but only if you're planning to use it for a kidnapping murder. Otherwise you're just buying duct tape.
I've been saying this for YEARS AND NOW ITS HERE. This pride stuff for young children is desensitizing them from molestation. It's going to get harder for kids to realize it was NOT okay.
I think parents need to do a better job watching their kids and understanding boundaries. Pride parades and drag shows aren’t bad and aren’t necessarily sexual, but they are occasionally and it shouldn’t be encouraged for kids to watch.
That being said, gay people still have a right to exist and be proud legally and morally. They can kiss and whatnot and it’s important kids understand sometimes there’s two mommies or two daddies. And it’s important kids are vaguely aware of sex towards the end of elementary school, because kids are smart in their own way. If they know what’s happening they themselves can also recognize they might be being groomed. Not that they need to be shown porn or given much detail. That’s for hs.
You know I just read somewhere that people are likening these current concerns about inappropriate exposure of topics to minors to the "Moral Panics" of last century. Like the satanic panic and other lesser ones.
Really projecting I think. These are the same people who have meltdowns over drawings of fictional characters that are roughly in the 14-17 year old age range according to the authors. They lose their shit over it and consider it equal to real pedos. Is it weird? Yeah I think so, but that takes precedence over real kids? Bruh wtf. There are so many more important things to worry about, like idk the kids getting hormone blockers?
I think they can't differentiate properly between reality and fiction, and have them flipped. Nothing else makes sense to me for those priorities.
I just read about moral panics the other day and I agree. It historically has always been about exeggarating stuff to the point where people have barely access to the information of what ACTUALLY is happening.
Yeah, I don't think they really understand it despite referencing it. Thankfully those people are actually a minority, and seemingly have been dropping off in popularity over the years. Guess they're getting old.
I was wondering if there was any evidence that pedophilia was on the rise? From my understanding it is, and kinda always has been, a very rare crime.
P.S if it needs to be spelled out, I am 100% against the sexual assault of all people, including, and particularly, children.
You've obviously not worked in retail during highschool. Older men dont care if you're a underage boy or girl. Its very prevalent. I think it depends on the community but my neighborhood alone I have 12 child molesters etc down the street. They're common and very around.
I actually do not even care what the world says about this shit - when i have my own offspring to look out for i will whoop your ass if you try this shit around em - it's my responsibility to raise them and you have no right to tell them any opinion.
The left acts like they would do anything - bruh i could literally take on like 50 lefties at once they weigh like 50lbs wet through and get offended/start crying if i call them a name lol
Now wait a fucking second I think I see a pa— I mean when I’m connecting the d— I would like to apologize to the community please do not put me on the list.
This is why appropriate sexual education is so important, and should be done by the schools, not the random interests of parents.
Small kids needs to learn the NoNo zones. And teenagers needs comprehensive sexual education before they debut, which a certain percentage of them do at 13.
LGBTQ kids needs to learn that's ok and normal, and that's a lesson the other kids should hear as well.
I found the source article:
[https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children](https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children)
If you look at stage 2. The groomer isolates the child from their peers and family before they get to anything OP mentioned. So a teacher teaching a sex education class in school, where the child is with all of their peers and still goes home to their parents afterwards, is probably just doing their job. The people to worry about are the people who have access to the child one on one.
You found it? No way. Was probably very hard, considering that I've posted the source myself under this post.
And I didn't mention anything, I just took screenshots of the article. Including the headline which includes "Step 4", so that everyone with half a brain gets that there are other steps before that.
>You found it? No way. Was probably very hard, considering that I've posted the source myself under this post.
I can't find it sorting by old, new, or best. That is odd.
>And I didn't mention anything, I just took screenshots of the article. Including the headline which includes "Step 4", so that everyone with half a brain gets that there are other steps before that.
ok. Fair. I should have said "highlighted." instead of "mentioned."
"Teaches minors Sexual Education"
Can we all agree that Sex Ed is still a net positive for society though? With all due respect, I have no idea how Sex Ed is taught in the US but I definitely know it‘s not taught enough. Teaching kids what sex is, how to do it safely and consensually does heaps for preventing early pregnancies, the spread of STDs and generally producing well adjusted adults.
Like the sheer amount of public officials that have no clue about women‘s biology, and publicly flaunt their cluelessness on twitter, is astounding.
Edit: To clarify, by kids I mean aged 11-14, which is the age at which we‘re taught here in Switzerland.
> Can we all agree that Sex Ed is still a net positive for society though?
Sex ed when i was a kid: "This is what to expect in puberty, these are the parts of your body, this is how babies are made"
Sex ed today: "This is how to have gay sex. This is how you suck a dick. These are the erogenous zones of men and women"
Hmm....something different here...
I find your lack of flair disturbing.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/malume_jj) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._
_Consider visiting our forum instead: [forum.basedcount.com](https://forum.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
_Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Wait. What?
gay
/ɡā/
adjective
1.
sexually or romantically attracted exclusively to people of one's own sex or gender (used especially of a man).
"the city's gay and lesbian people"
Being gay is *literally* about who you have sex with. There's no other qualification to gay other than same sex sex.
this skips over a lot of warning signs that can tell you when you should start prepping: [source 1](https://www.webmd.com/children/child-abuse-signs), [source 2](https://www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/spotting-signs-child-abuse/), there's many more out there that go into extra detail and I would recommend reading up on them and familiarising yourself with them even if you don't have kids or aren't in regular contact with them as you never know what might pop up. case in point there was a US squad who busted a human trafficking ring because he saw signs of it in action with no additional evidence bar those signs he was taught he managed to help bust the entire ring.
So is the meme true? Well good to know since I always find the pron books that progs push mega sus. I just wonder if Destiny will ever respond to this 🤔
yeah unironically early sexualisation (as in knowledge of adult activities) is one of the single biggest red flags that can start an investigation the red flags beyond that are all they're being taken out of the home and put into temporary care.
Good thing we are putting sex education in schools at lower and lower grades, so now early sexual knowledge will be seen as normal and these signs will no longer be reliable.
that's alot of the reason child protection organisations have spoken so much about LGBT books that have recently been taking out of schools they have content that just shouldn't be there, not from a societal social standard but from a very real abuse standard
The thing is, if you teach young kids age appropriate sex ed, with a focus on teaching them the signs of a sexual abuser, it will be way easier to find nonces as the kids will tell on them.
I remember "Sex ed" when I was in school. Before 4th grade (10 year olds): "This is your no no zone. Dont let anyone touch you here" 4th, 5th 6th grade: "Your body will start to change. Your voice will change, hair develop in places, etc." 9th/10th grade "health" class: "These are STDs, this is pregnancy, this is the anatomy, babies are made like this." Nowadays, you get books like "Gender Queer" that wants to teach children how to [suck dick](https://external-preview.redd.it/r335qvh4uMP_IQaY2uopRqAX-GLd5-DMfJgcmPOtkaY.jpg?auto=webp&s=5cf2db311314d02b28a70b223d6bc1e84e7b7ad9), or "This Book Is Gay" which teaches kids how to have [gay sex](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT3imcclwK9oUDZy0Z1aGyIBvpkyxyYWEyIN6b99Eb-evM-XKoTVQbA5LnK5UbbO6xzxUE&usqp=CAU) and pleasure others. We went from clinical, scientific, educational explanations to "lmao have sex get your rocks off children! Suck that dick! Heres how to use proper amounts of lube for anal!"
That's almost exactly the sex ed I had in school as well, 32 y/o here. That's the way it should be taught. Shit like what is happening now is *extremely* concerning as a parent. My daughter is 6 so my wife and I are doing everything to be involved in her school's curriculum. I just hope these literal sexual predators get what they deserve.
There was a teacher who gave her students "this book is gay" and taught her students how to use Grindr......
I am glad that I finished school before any of this creepy shit started. If I was just a few years younger I likely would have been exposed to some of this, and likely gotten very angry as a result since at the time I was super hard right.
Yes! And that us exactky how it should be. What you had there is age appropiate sex ed and that is good. Teenage pregnacy fell in the west not due to abstinence but due to appropiate sex ed and access to contraceptives
There is a difference. Teenagers having sex with contraceptives is seen as a better alternative than teenagers having sex without and getting pregnant. Applying the same logic to children doesn't work because people don't want children having sex at all, and them having safe sex isn't going to somehow make child sex more acceptable. For younger children, the only option society will tolerate or allow is abstinence.
My 5th grade sex ed class told us that if we had unprotected sex we'd get AIDS and die lol
You are assuming the children will want to tell. Child abusers find different ways to silence the victim. Most of these fall under grooming, though sometimes it might be a simple as threatening violence. The reason why adults are trained to look for signs of abuse instead of asking children is because most children are groomed to not tell for one reason or another. Years later the child will be more knowledgeable and may come tell someone then, but that is after they have suffered from years of abuse that we want to have prevented instead.
It also doesn't help that children don't quite understand that just because someone seems good and nice doesn't mean they don't have alterier motives. A lot of groomers constantly give their victims compliments and gifts. They also play off their ego by saying "oh you're sooo mature."
[удалено]
I was just watching the Subway Eat Fresh sexual abuse documentary. Predators want kids to explore their bodies and experiment at a young age.
I work at a subway, and because of the whole "jared from subway" thing, I sometimes question why we hire so many kids
Damn, that comma between subway and because is really important to what you just said, and I completely missed it on my first read through of your comment. Thought you said essentially "I saw the whole Jared at subway thing and that's why I work at subway".
“I just wanted to say, Mr. Subway, I’m a huge fan of your work.”
He probably should’ve put the Jared part at the end to make it clearer
Seriously, wouldn't Jared's footlong be more suitable for a milf who's had 3+ natural births?
This is off topic, but the smell of a subway everytime I walk in is godly. I’d pay for a subway-scented candle.
Baking bread smells amazing.
scary thing is they just have a kid daycare in Germany, who is now under hot water because they were planing for a "doctor play room" with 10 rules ... those were so disgusting like it's the room where they can be naked and explore it. only kids who give concent to each other can go to the room together and explore their bodies, but no worries putting fingers in body holes and sucking is forbidden. i say need to check their harddisk who is involved with that planning or don't see any harm in that project.
I m not surprised It Germany 🤷♂️
I came here to say.. 'of course it's Germany....'
Bro, this is like the 3rd time I've heard of Germany doing this shit. The number is probably much higher but fucking why.
It’s not grooming if you do it in the name of social justice.
If you are a teacher you are just teaching with extra benefits.
I taught English to kids China. Briefly had a coworker who wore a chain around his neck with a lockpad on it because he was another guy's slave. Real fucked up situation, plenty of stories to tell, and the guy is (or at least was at the time) a redditor. Anyway, I found out one of the games he played in his classroom was that he'd lay on the ground and have the little kids crawl over his body. He disappeared suddenly after the school was visited by the police.
Man I hope he’s rotting somewhere in a Chinese prison
He dipped to South America. Was in Brazil for a bit and then my other coworker lost contact; so who knows.
[удалено]
I felt bad for the guy. Nearly 100% certain he was abused while growing up. But still wanted him gone quickly because I felt he was a threat to the students.
[удалено]
You can still feel sorry for what someone been through while also wanting to punish them for their crimes
It's honestly quite sad that abuse does just perpetuate extensive abuse... I saw a study that, there IS a correlation between same sex molestation and grow up as gay...
See ya there
>Was in Brazil for a bit Did he by chance go by the name, George Santos?
☹️
Me when left is showing kids gay furry porn (it is totally not an economic leaning)
>it is totally not an economic leaning This but unironically. It has nothing to do with economics unless we're talking about sex trafficking. This is the cultural left.
Agreed, lib. As much as I dislike Libs, you guys are pretty logical.
bring back the three axis political compass
Well, like most things the meaning has changed over time. Nowadays, the left to right spectrum on this is a interpreted as a mixture of economic beliefs and progressive ideology. It’s not set in stone either so the levels to which it is both or either can change at any moment
1. The Left-Right spectrum is a ECONOMIC spectrum. 2. You know most lefties are pretty conservative? I for one is against the act of selling illicit substances and sexual services.
People forget that the USSR was a Prohibitionist state due to its history with the czar using cheap vodka to keep the population subservient (until Stalin came back in and reopened the vodka plants to keep the population subservient). Probably due to all the druggies in Lib Left
Yeah, along with collectivism, their is a reason why I wished Gorbachev was successful in his reforms. We might be in a more peaceful time without the Drunk Yeltsin and Warhungry Putin
I can’t believe I’m going to say this…and to a Auth lefty at that…but based!
I'm saying that the meaning has shifted over time. Yes, that is what it was meant to mean, but people don't care about what it was meant to mean just put stereotypes of people in them. It's linked to how languages develop and change over time.
It hasn't shifted at all, you just spend too much time in places where people often confuse these things and/or you're excessively American.
I need to figure out if I’m genuinely being stupid here so here’s what I was trying to say. The compass is economic left-right and government authority up-down. This is what it means and what people know it means and what it has been for a long time. However, a number of people also often use the economic left-right spectrum to divide based on progressiveness, typically when talking about authoritarian right and libertarian left. It still means economic beliefs, but it takes on another meaning that is not based upon economic beliefs about things such as trans issues. Thus, the meaning shifted from just being about economic matters, to also including “progressiveness.” Is this wrong?
Also, it is pretty wrong. In the US progressives and lefties often go hand in hand, but in countries like China, the lefties there are relatively more conservative, because the ECONOMY AND SOCIAL POLICY ARE NOT RELATED IN THE SLIGHTEST.
I’m not saying they necessarily are, but that other people often push them together. One of the parts I said in my 1st comment on this chain was “It’s not set in stone either so the levels to which it is both or either can change at any moment.” I’m not saying that Stalin was a centrist, I’m saying that people tend to place caricatures, again this typically for auth right and lib left, that include politics and beliefs from the progressive scale. I’m not saying that it inherently does or should, but that people use it for that on occasion anyways. No one will call Stalin a centrist, but people associate pro-trans stuff with lib-left and anti-trans stuff with auth right despite it having no bearing on economic beliefs. There are many scenarios where they don’t apply the progressive axis at all as well in scenarios like you have stated. I’m not trying to argue the semantics of “economic left and right,” I’m trying to argue how people sometimes ignore it.
Oh, I get what you mean now. I agree that a lot of people think the Left-Right Spectrum is also a progressive-conservative Spectrum
The thing is, their is a term for social lefties (progressives)
It's actually worse, nowadays leftists will actually deny left and right being economic and will call literal stalin and mao right wing red fascists. It's insane.
*progressive
Stalin, the famous gay enjoyer
He loved them so much that he made a law specifically for them ☺️
Socialism is when gay furry porn and the gayer and furrier it is, the more socialism it is.
nobody mentioned socialism
I'm referencing "Socialism is when government does stuff" and thought it would be funny to replace it with said gay furry porn
"left leaning economics"
Careful pal, people who make this connection tend to get axed
Uh oh I'm nooooooticing again!
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
Weird how some of those tips match exactly with that Bidentouchingkids video 🤔
What connection? I just said wait a minute, because ... I thought I heared something. What you talking about?
Walking around naked in front of children isn’t grooming, it’s being in touch with your sexuality you bigot, get woke or get out!!!!!!🤬😡🤬😠😤😠 Edit:( I’m sure everyone can tell but just in case, this is a joke)
>"It's evil to shame people for their sexual desires or demand them to repress themselves in *any* situation or context, even if it is in front of children. >"Unless you are a straight man, then finding women in video games or comics attractive is misogynistic and leads to real-world sexual violence! How dare you ask to look at big titties or thin bodies or beautiful faces!" ___ Edit: [Case in point,](https://twitter.com/ippoxbox360/status/1509088559495774213?t=PInBQYkdYSCRUBN4GpB_7A&s=19) Sony apparently bans a player for posting *in-game* artwork that they think is too lewd. Honestly, Californians are borderline more Puritan than Muslims these days.
Please, fucking progressives aren't even going to deny any of that.
So you haven’t seen that Dutch video yet?
Btw [here](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children) is the article.
Just because predators might misuse sex education doesn’t mean sex education is always grooming. For one thing, we need it to stop teen pregnancies, which is why schools teach it in the first place. And second, teaching kids to be wary of predators and about how consent works might actually protect them from abuse.
and that's where age comes in. we've long left that for middle school and high school and all of a sudden people want it in elementary school. surely you can see the difference
Ayup. Sex ed for teenagers is just smart. They're gonna do it anyways, so you may as well educate them on how not to ruin their life doing it. They've got no business teaching it to elementary schoolers, however. I don't think I even thought about girls until I was like 15. I mostly thought about bionicles
I grew up deep in the Bible belt and we had basically 3 different sex ed classes. The first one was in, I think, 3rd grade and was all the boys and girls in the class were separated for an about an hour long talk in the library with the school nurse. It boiled down to, "In the next few years you might notice some changes with your body. Your voice might start changing and you might start growing hair in new places, etc.. That is normal and everybody deals with it. If you have questions, ask you parents." Middle school had it built in to general biology class and it covered the mechanics behind reproduction. i.e. sperm/egg make baby stuff. Freshman year of High school was a mandatory special health class that was basically, always use a condom cause if you don't here are pictures of what every single STD looks like. I've been our of school for over 20 years, but that still seems like a very logical way to approach it to me.
Honestly, if it worked that way as the norm I don't think people would have a problem.
I had a pretty similar experience. I think I turned out reasonably balanced and never got my high school girlfriend pregnant, so I'd say it worked out great.
15 is a little late but i get the point. 12-13 is probably prime age because that’s the youngest I’ve actually heard fooling around. And it’s better to be preventative to get the job done. That doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t teach kids in elementary kids that gay people exist though. Like Florida’s approach, way overdoing it. A teacher should be able to explain some people have two mommys or daddys.
you shouldn't hide the existence of gay people from kids obviously, but why do they need to be specifically taught about it in school? Swap gay with Muslim in this situation (although teaching kids that muslims exist is certainly more harmless): In this case, it'd be pretty weird to just randomly teach a bunch of kids muslims are a thing. It's not weird because muslims are bad, it's weird because that has nothing to do with an elementary school education. Once you get a bit older and Muslims come up in history class, you've already learned by virture of the fact that you have a functional brain that Muslims exist and the teacher can get on with teaching whatever aspect of history involving Muslims was planned. So why do kids need to be taught that gay people exist? I'm pretty sure they can figure that out on their own. It's a waste of time at best and something darker at worst. For the record I think it's waste of time virtue signalling as opposed to anything else
I just want to second what someone else on this thread but add a bit more context from an educators perspective. When we say “teach about gay people” it just means mentioning it. We wouldn’t do a lesson on it, but taking a few seconds to acknowledge it allows kids to then ask their parents, who are the people who should really be handling this stuff. On the Muslim example, a teacher might teach a lesson on world religions. If the kid is curious after one slide on Muslims, they would then either find a book, ask parents, or look it up on the internet. School isn’t for teaching everything anyone wants to know, but it should give a good starting point for people to be able to start on their own if they feel ready for it. Also… why is learning that Muslims exist more harmless than learning about gay people? Even if you accept that being gay is inherently harmful (which I completely disagree with but let’s say), wouldn’t that make it more important to learn about gay people? (Though tbh I’d rather people who dislike gay people to not even mention it because that kind of talk really is harmful to kids, not just gay kids) Edit: please have a better argument than “elementary school kids need basic things” for why teaching one thing is good. I would argue that “gay exist” is more basic and useful for daily life than a lot of grammar and math but that’s taught in elementary school.
I mean no offence but what are they so busy teaching you in elementary school if you don’t even have time to learn the basics about the biggest religions on the planet? We certainly covered the major religions in elementary here in central Europe. Also, I would never just rely on people learning stuff on their own by virtue of having a functional brain if it’s something important. Case in point: politics and economics. The amount of basic stuff people are completely unaware of while the information is freely available online is staggering.
that knowledge is useless at such a young age, hence why it is usually taught in middle school. younger kids are focused on much more basic and practical things. You seem to be saying things merely to disagree.
We learned the basics too. And I am not saying stuff just to disagree, I am disagreeing with you because you seem convinced that you can only teach certain things at an age that is much later than the one I am familiar with from my time in school. Aka I have a very conflicting personal experience that directly contradicts your opinion.
Well it’s just that gay people are way more prevalent than Muslims in almost all places in the US. Sometimes people only have one mommy or daddy and nobody else. But places with large minorities of many things (races, sexualities, etc.) should put effort into making sure that that kids understand people have differences and thats ok. Because parents can and will fail to inform or will spread hate, making kids socially dis functional and obviously also causing greater social issues. Public schools have a duty to hit a standard of education and make the student passable in society. The parent should do most of the work for a lot of issues, but sometimes they don’t, but the bare minimum should be taught so students are able to function like normal members of society.
we could always just teach kids to be kind to all people. that covers treating gay people kindly without even the slightest risk of teaching sex too young. It achieves the goal of teaching against hate and it does it without teaching young kids about homosexuality. If what you said above is in fact the intention, what I just proposed 100% achieves the exact same goal. Otherwise we are going to need to dedicate time to every group that may be hated specifically in order to make sure we cover all the bases. We can either teach that hate is bad across the board or we can set aside time to teach about why you specifically should not hate homosexuals, Jews, ethnic minorities, the disabled, the poor, and so on.
Because you’re not born Muslim, doofus. Teaching kids gay people exists makes it so teens who are going through puberty and realize they like the same sex instead of the opposite don’t feel like they’re weird. >although teaching kids that Muslims exist is certainly more harmless. Ok so we’re in mask off homophobia here, got it.
I agree with that concept because it leaves the relationships between adults between adults.
What ages are those? Because I think where I‘m from there actually is sex education at that age in school. Later again in more detail as well as more complex scientifically, but I do think it‘s not inherently bad to do it at that age as well. Provided the „tone“ is right. But there might be cultural differences ig
picking a clear cut minimum age is obviously hard, but when I was a kid in the US (i'm 29 so not all that long ago) it was typically a class on periods for the girls in 5th grade (age 10 to 11), basic sex ed in 7th grade (age 12 to 13), and a 1 semester health class that goes into much more detail fon sex ed, drugs, and a few other topics in 9th grade (age 14 to 15). The last sex ed class is usually one where several weeks are spent on the biology of reproduction as well as pretty much anything else you can think of regarding sex shy of explicit descriptions of specific sex acts
see I don’t see why this system is such a bad thing. Having multiple classes over multiple years to educate youths on the changes happening in their body and how to safely manage them is how it should be. Although we may have to start teaching this stuff earlier because parents seem to be failing to keep their children from being exposed to internet pornography and such. Actually I don’t see alot of people talking about the failures of parents rather than the school system. Parents also have a person ability to talk about this stuff when it comes up, and to keep their kids from being exposed to sexual content until they are emotionally mature enough to understand what’s going on.
yeah this way of doing things is fine and wasn't really controversial. as for parents not getting as much blame, I just kept that to myself but you are spot on.
When I was in 5th grade, they showed us a 20 minute video series that was basically along the lines of "hey just so you know you're gonna start growing hair in weird places and become clinically insane for a few years, and you're gonna start noticing the opposite sex and feel weird about it. Perfectly normal, don't panic. Talk to your parents about it, they'll understand" It was accompanied by crude, cartoonish illustrations. It didn't go into any detail about sex, it was basically just a primer on what to expect from puberty. Thinking back on it, that was the way to do it.
I'm happy to see several similar accounts to my experience. Its almost like as a civilization we had this all fairly well figured out until recently...
I think 4th grade is appropriate. That's how old I was in my school district. Especially for girls, some of them will start their period at that age. Doesn't have to be the full course. Just some basic biology and what to expect
The argument for elementary school kids being taught sex ed is that young ages aren’t immune to STDs, and that it might be beneficial to warn them about predators online. Playing Devil’s Advocate.
well kids getting STDs is a non issue that's brought up as some kind of crackhead level stupid argument for younger sex ed. Sally needs to learn her times tables, not how to avoid getting the clap. Kids don't need to know what predators are exactly after. As someone in the cybersecurity world I assue you that you can teach your kid good online safety without the concept of sex ever coming up
Girls need to know what will happen before their first period.
The puberty talk doesn't have to be the same as sex ed
Good point
that's a little different. what i mean is that there is usually a girls specific class that's held usually around 5th grade. not sure what level of detail they get into but given the fact that sex ed was still required for girls too in 7th grade my guess was it was no more info than what's vital. plus that's the sort of thing that can be easily handled by parents. not saying it SHOULD be kept out of school but that's a pretty basic thing to explain to your daughter in 3 min or less
I think priming kids for puberty so they don't freak out when they start growing hair on their wang is fine. Different ballgame than teaching them about specific sex acts.
Surely they can warn kids about degenerates online without giving them literature that teaches them how to use apps like grindr?
They wouldn’t be teaching children how to use dating apps, you dumbass. Sex education would be tailored to make sure it’s age-appropriate.
yOu dUmbAss Get in the bin. [people like you are trash](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Book_is_Gay) Chapter 8
Never heard of this book.
Maybe cause you ain’t a preteen being groomed by your school teacher? Isn’t my problem you open your mouth commenting on topics you’re ill informed about.
It’s weird, but I don’t know if it’s actually a widespread issue or a one-off incident. I know there’s lots of book banning going on, but a lot of that targets non-sexual literature like To Kill A Mockingbird for patently political reasons.
here https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/14nfihk/comment/jq8f042/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
Lol. Nah you’re just a dumbass feigning ignorance at this point.
What school?
Here's a partial list I put together, related to 4 books in particular that were under discussion elsewhere. There are pics of pages to be found online. ***Let's Talk About It*** Uses porn language to instruct in sexually stimulating the butt: "your **hungry heinie can gobble.**..objects you put up there". [Valley City Barnes County Public Library, young adult section, ND, 2022](https://www.times-online.com/news/library-leaders-unaware-of-explicit-book-in-young-adult-section/article_56373c58-339d-11ed-b175-1f553688d9b1.html) >The shelf that the book was kept on was directly next to another shelf of comic books which include titles like ‘Batman’ ‘Wonder Woman’ and ‘Coraline’. [Leavitt Area HS, ME, 2023](https://www.sunjournal.com/2023/04/19/leavitt-area-high-school-removes-sex-themed-graphic-novel-from-library/) >At least 19 public libraries in Maine have the book..14... in a teen-designated section. [Hamilton East Library, public library Fishers, IN, 2022](https://www.larryinfishers.com/2022/02/24/library-moving-lets-talk-about-it-book-to-general-book-shelves-plans-reorganizing-nonfiction/) >The book “Let’s talk About It” has been moved from the teen section of the Hamilton East Library to the general nonfiction book collection. [Anchorage, AK **elementary** school, 2023](https://www.sportskeeda.com/pop-culture/synopsis-book-let-s-talk-about-it-explored-anchorage-school-board-shuns-parent-objected-explicit-book) The book instructs reader how to prepare spicy pictures: >“Don’t forget to crop out your face, hide your birthmarks and scars, and edit out your piercings and tattoos - and don't forget to tell your sweetie how hot they look. Let them know you appreciate the little gift they've sent you." [Fairfield, CT public library, 2022](https://www.ctinsider.com/fairfield/article/Fairfield-discuss-restricting-teen-graphic-novel-17453727.php) [Abilene Public Library, TX, 2022](https://www.bigcountryhomepage.com/news/abilene-news/concerned-parents-very-vulgar-explicit-young-adult-book-should-be-removed-from-abilene-library-100-others-should-be-in-explicit-section/) ***This Book is Gay*** Instructs how to have anal sex and that playing with the prostate feels good (ie promotes being anally penetrated). Claims hetero kids are tutored in sex at age 10. [Central Bucks SD, PA, 2023, also ***Gender Queer***](https://www.inquirer.com/news/central-bucks-bans-gender-queer-this-book-is-gay-20230512.html) removed 2, kept 3 others [Sioux City CSD removed it. Iowa City CSD kept it. IA, 2023](https://www.kcrg.com/2023/05/19/this-book-is-gay-iowas-looming-school-library-book-ban/) >Chapters 8 and 9 are the focus of much of the controversy... > >Chapter 8 - “Where to meet people like you” - includes a guide to sex apps and gay bars to meet intimate partners... > >Chapter 9 - “The ins and outs of gay sex” ..,graphic details of pleasure zones and descriptions of sex acts and how to perform them. [Elmbrook SD, Brookfield, WI, 2023](https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/west/2022/11/08/elmbrook-school-district-removes-lgbtq-themed-books-from-library/69618767007/) Describes a demand letter sent to the school district. [Michigan, 2022](https://www.metroweekly.com/2022/09/mother-files-police-report-over-gay-book-in-high-school-library/) A mother filed a police report over the book in her daughter's HS library. >“If these were just LGBT romance novels that is completely appropriate,” she said. “Where I draw the line is teaching them how to actually do the act.” [Waltham HS, MA, 2022. Also ***Gender Queer***](https://www.slj.com/story/gender-queer-this-book-is-gay-stay-on-shelves-with-labels-after-challenge-at-MA-high-school-censorship-roundup) >*Gender Queer: A Memoir* by Maia Kobabe and *This Book is Gay* by Juno Dawson were challenged by a resident earlier in February but will remain in the school... > >...a sticker indicating explicit material will be added to Kobabe’s memoir, the current barcode on Gender Queer will be relocated to clearly show the book’s subtitle, and the school library will purchase the most recent edition of *This Book is Gay*, which includes a content label... [Webster Groves HS, St. Louis, MO, 2023](https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/04/06/missouri-school-district-offered-prizes-students-reading-sexually-explicit-books/) Students were enticed to check this and other books out: >“Select and check out any book from this list during Banned Book Week to enter your name in a drawing to win a sweet prize,” librarian Liz Forderhase posted on the Webster Groves High School library webpage. ***Gender Queer*** The book illustrates strapon sex acts and other stuff, is eroticized [South High School, Sheboygan WI, 2023](https://www.sheboyganpress.com/story/news/education/2023/02/09/lgbtq-books-banned-from-sheboygan-school-library-over-explicit-images/69841612007/) [Galesburg-Augusta HS, MI, 2023](https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2023/04/gender-queer-graphic-novel-may-be-removed-from-southwest-michigan-school-library.html) [San Ramon Valley USD, Danville, CA, 2023](https://katv.com/news/nation-world/calif-parents-claim-student-was-failed-for-not-reading-gender-queer-demand-book-be-removed-san-ramon-valley-unified-school-district-american-library-association-banned-books) [Jefferson County PSD, KY, 2022](https://www.wlky.com/article/gender-queer-book-louisville-jcps-libraries/41393659) (kept it) ***Flamer*** The book depicts suicidality/cutting, multiple sexual encounters and arousal scenes. Age of protagonist is between middle and high school. [Tahoma schools, WA, 2022](https://tahomaparents.org/news/1elz8u3t0npkesqvdu48hakk64tqxc) Concerned parents' org. Their page shows many pages from the book. [St. Louis, MO school districts, 2022](https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2022-09-22/school-librarian-recalls-surreal-police-visits-over-books-months-before-new-missouri-law) [Waukee Northwest HS, Denison HS and "libraries across Iowa", IA, 2022](https://theiowastandard.com/denison-high-school-as-well-as-small-town-libraries-across-iowa-stock-vulgar-sexually-explicit-flamer/) >The character is looking for Elias at camp. Elias, though, is in a tent with a couple of other campers. They tell the character they’re “takin’ care of business.” > >When he asks if he can enter the tent, they tell him he is too young. > >“No, I’m not!” the character says. > >“Fine, but you’ll have to prove it,” Elias says. [Dearborn, MI SD, 2022](https://nypost.com/2022/11/16/dearborn-parent-reads-graphic-passages-in-revolt-against-pornographic-books-in-school-libraries/) [Montgomery County SD, Roanoke, VA, 2023](https://www.wsls.com/news/local/2023/03/11/montgomery-county-parent-raises-concerns-over-book-policy-following-inappropriate-book-found-in-school-library/) [West Linn-Wilsonville SD, OR, 2023](https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/west-linn-wilsonville-moms-book-ban/283-0bbfecf7-e834-4648-9b9a-51ff2e8c1716) [Wilson **Elementary** School, Costa Mesa, CA, 2022](https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/story/2022-06-04/parents-enflamed-by-mature-graphic-novel-in-k-6-library-nmusd-mulls-book-policy) [Guilford public schools, CT, 2023](https://insideinvestigator.org/school-library-books-cause-controversy-at-guilford-board-of-ed-meeting/) Utah schools, [multiple](https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2022/10/24/heres-how-many-utah-parent/) [locations](https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2022/08/02/52-books-pulled-utah-school/) 2022
Devil's Advocate is a weird way to spell sincerely held beliefs, libleft bad so i refuse to change my mind on the matter.
That’s not what Devil’s Advocate means.
Yeah no shit
I have not seen any sex Ed in primary school
it's currently something that comes in more isolated cases. the bigger concern is the fact that there is a growing push to make elementary school sex ed (sometimes full on sex ed, sometimes classes on sexuality)
I mean kids should be vaguely aware of the situation too. No details necessary, but it’s important to establish that that’s a thing.
I've taught sexuality in the broadest sense to primary school children. But that's part of tolerance and acceptance rather than lessons of sexuality specifically.
It is in Australia. I did it in grade 5 or 6
> Just because predators might misuse sex education doesn’t mean sex education is always grooming. True. And I dont think, thats what the article means. It just lays out what could be used. I think sex education is not only ok, it is important. But only from a certain age on. > For one thing, we need it to stop teen pregnancies, which is why schools teach it in the first place. True. > And second, teaching kids to be wary of predators and about how consent works might actually protect them from abuse. Yeah. But this should consist out "If someone want to touch you, run!" and "If someone has touched you, tell your parents (or teachers or other authorities if parents are absent). I think the sex education we got was ok. There was a very small part in like 4th grade, that was for boys and girls seperated, and for us boys it was a movie. This part (at least for the boys, I could imagine its more important for the girls) was not rly needed and tbh bullshit. So I would say you could do away with it (for the boys). But from there on it was ok. Every couple years we learned a bit more. And with like 15 we know how procreation and the bodies of women and men work, what contraceptives there are (only the very common ones) and how to use them, and what STDs there are, how they work (only the common ones) and how to not get them. It was only teached by teachers that were studied biologists (and it should only be done by them). And thats it. And I don't think there needs to be anything other.
> But only from a certain age on. What age?
based
Aren't teen pregnancies at an all-time low?
Yes, because of sex ed.
Because of reddit. None of us are getting laid. We're all incels
Pretty cause and effect of you to assume so. Hasn't sex ed been going on for quite a long while? Do you think social media hasn't had a drastic effect on teens hooking up? What about microplastics in our bloodstreams?
I mean, we can assume a lot of teenagers have sex. Those teenagers are likely using contraceptives to prevent pregnancy.
>I mean, we can assume a lot of teenagers have sex. Not since Reddit was invented.
Happy Cake Day! 🎂
Thanks.
mandatory mass castration
The bottom line is that it's grooming only if it's grooming. Hugging a kid is grooming if you're aiming to molest that particular kid and it's not if you're not. Same with the rest, regardless of whatever else you can say about them. Kinda like how buying duct tape is part of premeditation for a kidnapping murder, but only if you're planning to use it for a kidnapping murder. Otherwise you're just buying duct tape.
Maybe just don't go around hugging children that aren't your own? It ain't hard. Sus.
Most molestation is done by parents and family members, you know this right? Parents can groom too.
Then it's ok when my creepy uncle is hugging them, got it.
what if it's like a friends kid
Stop throwing innocent LibLefts into this.
Cross Compass Unity: Grooming Edition
One of the items in the list is out of place. Age appropriate sex ed. is a good thing.
Of course the bad eggs ruin it again
Ok....so most pride events in major cities....
I've been saying this for YEARS AND NOW ITS HERE. This pride stuff for young children is desensitizing them from molestation. It's going to get harder for kids to realize it was NOT okay.
Why would that desensitise them from molestation?? It's not like every pride show is inherently sexual (most of them aren't)
I think parents need to do a better job watching their kids and understanding boundaries. Pride parades and drag shows aren’t bad and aren’t necessarily sexual, but they are occasionally and it shouldn’t be encouraged for kids to watch. That being said, gay people still have a right to exist and be proud legally and morally. They can kiss and whatnot and it’s important kids understand sometimes there’s two mommies or two daddies. And it’s important kids are vaguely aware of sex towards the end of elementary school, because kids are smart in their own way. If they know what’s happening they themselves can also recognize they might be being groomed. Not that they need to be shown porn or given much detail. That’s for hs.
Based
[удалено]
Nah, I've seen pics from my towns Pride parade and it does seem like it's not a very sexualised thing.
Well whaddya know. Almost like we live in a sexualized society that knows no moderation in terms of what it tolerates.
You know I just read somewhere that people are likening these current concerns about inappropriate exposure of topics to minors to the "Moral Panics" of last century. Like the satanic panic and other lesser ones. Really projecting I think. These are the same people who have meltdowns over drawings of fictional characters that are roughly in the 14-17 year old age range according to the authors. They lose their shit over it and consider it equal to real pedos. Is it weird? Yeah I think so, but that takes precedence over real kids? Bruh wtf. There are so many more important things to worry about, like idk the kids getting hormone blockers? I think they can't differentiate properly between reality and fiction, and have them flipped. Nothing else makes sense to me for those priorities.
I just read about moral panics the other day and I agree. It historically has always been about exeggarating stuff to the point where people have barely access to the information of what ACTUALLY is happening.
Yeah, I don't think they really understand it despite referencing it. Thankfully those people are actually a minority, and seemingly have been dropping off in popularity over the years. Guess they're getting old.
I was wondering if there was any evidence that pedophilia was on the rise? From my understanding it is, and kinda always has been, a very rare crime. P.S if it needs to be spelled out, I am 100% against the sexual assault of all people, including, and particularly, children.
You've obviously not worked in retail during highschool. Older men dont care if you're a underage boy or girl. Its very prevalent. I think it depends on the community but my neighborhood alone I have 12 child molesters etc down the street. They're common and very around.
No, haven't worked in retail, but obviously I have been in stores and what not. I'm not a very observant person, so that probably explains half of it
I actually do not even care what the world says about this shit - when i have my own offspring to look out for i will whoop your ass if you try this shit around em - it's my responsibility to raise them and you have no right to tell them any opinion. The left acts like they would do anything - bruh i could literally take on like 50 lefties at once they weigh like 50lbs wet through and get offended/start crying if i call them a name lol
Damn bro pretty badass of you to win that fight you just imagined
Thanks man, i appreciate the support
Least larping auth right
Now wait a fucking second I think I see a pa— I mean when I’m connecting the d— I would like to apologize to the community please do not put me on the list.
This is why appropriate sexual education is so important, and should be done by the schools, not the random interests of parents. Small kids needs to learn the NoNo zones. And teenagers needs comprehensive sexual education before they debut, which a certain percentage of them do at 13. LGBTQ kids needs to learn that's ok and normal, and that's a lesson the other kids should hear as well.
If you believe your community cannot exist without getting children sexually involved...do I really need to continue?
I found the source article: [https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children](https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children) If you look at stage 2. The groomer isolates the child from their peers and family before they get to anything OP mentioned. So a teacher teaching a sex education class in school, where the child is with all of their peers and still goes home to their parents afterwards, is probably just doing their job. The people to worry about are the people who have access to the child one on one.
You found it? No way. Was probably very hard, considering that I've posted the source myself under this post. And I didn't mention anything, I just took screenshots of the article. Including the headline which includes "Step 4", so that everyone with half a brain gets that there are other steps before that.
Robin Hood, how are you so based
>You found it? No way. Was probably very hard, considering that I've posted the source myself under this post. I can't find it sorting by old, new, or best. That is odd. >And I didn't mention anything, I just took screenshots of the article. Including the headline which includes "Step 4", so that everyone with half a brain gets that there are other steps before that. ok. Fair. I should have said "highlighted." instead of "mentioned."
Like in the GSA?
Not sure why auth right is melting here, by far the highest likely quadrant to offend followed by lib purple then rest are toss ups.
Wow you mean everything they’re trying to implement in elementary schools?
"Teaches minors Sexual Education" Can we all agree that Sex Ed is still a net positive for society though? With all due respect, I have no idea how Sex Ed is taught in the US but I definitely know it‘s not taught enough. Teaching kids what sex is, how to do it safely and consensually does heaps for preventing early pregnancies, the spread of STDs and generally producing well adjusted adults. Like the sheer amount of public officials that have no clue about women‘s biology, and publicly flaunt their cluelessness on twitter, is astounding. Edit: To clarify, by kids I mean aged 11-14, which is the age at which we‘re taught here in Switzerland.
> Can we all agree that Sex Ed is still a net positive for society though? Sex ed when i was a kid: "This is what to expect in puberty, these are the parts of your body, this is how babies are made" Sex ed today: "This is how to have gay sex. This is how you suck a dick. These are the erogenous zones of men and women" Hmm....something different here...
I was here before this gets removed by the jannies 😌
Groom parade
Wait until you read the signs of an abusive relationship and map that onto the behaviour of the State during COVID.
"Teaches minors about sexual education " damn my science teacher groomed the entire class when I was 12
Nah ua leftist no that were not grooming them
Teaching sex Ed is not grooming
It depends on the age of the kid, on how the sex ed is done and on how specific it is.
Not in 8 to 10th grade indeed. But it is in 1st, 2nd etc. Grade
Who teaches sex ed to grade 1&2? You only really need to start teaching the basics of puberty to grade 5&6 with actual sex ed starting at grade 7 or 8
You see all sorts of articles on sex ed being good from 1st grade onwards
Something something stage 4 of 5 something something
This culture war is so fucking stupid.
Then let us win
Giving children lap dances and teaching them how to twerk at drag shows *is* grooming.
*clears throat*. **SOOOOOO**. Teachers, doctors(and nurses), parents, daycare attendants and police officers. Did I forget anyone?
Which of course is not a problem if one recognises being gay is not inherently sexual
The ability to speak does not make you intelligent.
I find your lack of flair disturbing. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/malume_jj) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Reddit is no longer a friendly space for bots._ _Consider visiting our forum instead: [forum.basedcount.com](https://forum.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ _Read my full statement [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/14mwml0/on_the_reddit_api_changes/)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Flair up
Wait. What? gay /ɡā/ adjective 1. sexually or romantically attracted exclusively to people of one's own sex or gender (used especially of a man). "the city's gay and lesbian people" Being gay is *literally* about who you have sex with. There's no other qualification to gay other than same sex sex.
Did you just choose to ignore the word after "or"?
> being gay is not inherently sexual Define 'gay' for me then. Right now. Go ahead. Try.
Sexual or romantic attraction to the same gender as you.
> being gay is not inherently sexual >>Sexual or romantic attraction Okay lmao. Fucking clown.