February 23, 2015

'Your gender is all about how you feel': What the rest of the media isn't telling parents about the new sex-ed curriculum

Brian LilleyRebel Co-Founder
 

When it comes to what's in the new Ontario sex-ed curriculum, the media is emphasizing its lessons about puberty, anatomy and "sexting."

But they're neglecting to mention the most radical aspect of it all.

As I told you last week, this curriculum starts teaching children about “gender identity” and “gender fluidity," beginning in Grade 3.

This means children will be taught that their gender has nothing to do with their anatomy -- that it all depends on whether they "feel" they are a girl or a boy.

And why was this new curriculum leaked early, by the way? Maybe as a distraction from Premier Wynne's other problems...?

Brian Lilley's book CBC Exposed has been called “the political book of the year." It's available in paperback and on Kindle from Amazon.ca

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-03-02 23:37:03 -0500
Kevin Price, just one more thing. You reference a “Career and Personal Planning” course. I’m assuming you mean something akin to the “Career and Life Management” course offered in most provincial high school curricula. Where I went to high school (Ontario and then Alberta), this was an optional course offered only at the “Basic” level and geared toward students who weren’t likely to even graduate, let alone attend post-secondary school (i.e. for the dumb kids).
Did you take it? I didn’t take this course, as it seemed a waste of time. I was too busy taking AP Physics, Chemistry and Calculus 30 when I was in grade 11, and I could already make out a budget and a grocery list when I was 9. But kudos to you.
commented 2015-03-02 23:28:05 -0500
Kevin Price, you also confuse “melting pot” with “multiculturalism”. These are very distinct concepts and yet you lump them together interchangeably.
Also, no. I am not “Rachel”. I am predominately a conservative libertarian, as I suspect you to be. However I would rather be confused with Rachel than lumped in with the likes of you. While I disagree with almost all her comments, her opinion on Canada’s poor record of assimilating immigrants is unfortunately correct and very astute.
Your response, on the other hand, makes absolutely no sense. You clearly have no understanding of what an “oncogene” is, and obviously are not aware of the recent rise of such incidents involving the confluence of sexual assault and murder with religious/gender politics among immigrants in Canada.
commented 2015-03-02 23:15:08 -0500
To Kevin Price:
You discredit your views by resort to ad hominem arguments and attacks. I agree that schools should stick to teaching and parents should be responsible for parenting. But I’m also a realist. I, too, disagree with our public education system being hijacked to cater to a small minority of our population. However, I also acknowledge that parents ARE NOT doing their jobs (whether their lapse is the result or the cause of the expansion of public school sex education is highly debatable.) A lot of parents also ascribe to certain religious doctrines such that their children have no opportunity to receive an honest, scientific, objective sexual education at home. I don’t agree with it, but that’s my right to do so, and it’s just as important as the right to freedom of religion and expression. Public school sex education is important for that reason alone, provided there is always an “opt-out”.
commented 2015-03-02 23:04:58 -0500
To David McDougall:
“Baloney!! I do not believe that there are any kids at all who can spell and read, and who therefore are capable of texting, before they are potty trained….
Such blatantly false statements completely undermine your credibility.”
Sorry, but your disbelief doesn’t make reality go away. I submit that your blinders and naivety severely cripple your own credibility. I do agree with you on one point — kids who can spell and read are becoming a minority. Why? Because it’s not emphasized in education anymore (in favour of promoting progressive sex education in elementary school), and kids are inarguably growing more accustomed to a form of text message shorthand, i.e. “LOL”, “ttfn”, etc. Apparently, as a result, the education system feels kids no longer need to learn how to read and write.
I may have exaggerated about “most” kids, but the increasingly young age kids get cellphones and communicate via text message is indisputable.
commented 2015-02-27 17:06:54 -0500
It has been said, “the further a society strays from the truth, the more they will hate all those who speak it”. The obvious use of various anatomical parts can not be disputed with any degree of sanity. In recent times when others insisted on un natural variations in San Francisco, they couldn’t produce the coffins fast enough, as many perished leaving others broken-hearted. Just because science has now managed to delay the diseases produced by the activity, doesn’t mean everything is a “go.” We are born with sensitivities that
cause shame to wash over us when we venture outside the “natural” use of
our birth anatomy, but it can be silenced by continuous alternate decisions. There is no “anal” sex because the anus is not a sexual organ, but a healthy eliminator of waste… and continuing to use it otherwise has, and will continue to produce, predictable results…. Teaching children that these fleeting and sometimes attractions are their permanent life identity is both erroneous and tragic. Someone please stop the insanity….
commented 2015-02-26 21:28:05 -0500
this is a long term game plan by Liberals, both provincially and federally to rewrite " Age Of Consent Laws." where Harper strengthened pedophile sentencing. The Liberals will undermine it by redefining Consent. Provincially speaking, there jurisdiction is education. So the provincial Liberals will desensatize youth over many years as to the physical interactions of sexuality. Naw, not about Boys and Girls parts being different. Nope, you can see this Sex Ed program is about physical contact and supporting a future " Age of Consent " change that will allow very young Pre-Teens to be sexually active. As you can see from the way the Wynne government pushed it through. Parents will be bypassed because Who are these parents to deny two consenting people the opportunity to sexually explore each others interests.
do you realize what this means. Mom or Dad will NOT have to be informed son or daughter are sexually active. Same argument used by Birth Control promoters not to inform Mom or Dad about birth control. None of your business. Its my Right! But there are other implications too. Old World tribalism arranged marriages. And maybe the worst of the worst. By grossly reducing Age of Consent, a lot of pedophile crimes will go under the radar. Gord Stuckless, Graham James exploited 11-14 year olds for their warped gratification using pressure tactics. If Age of Consent is lowered to let’s say 11 or 12 years of age. Do you realize how many age sex crimes will go unnoticed? Teacher -Student Sex crimes will go unchallenged, because hey, we are consenting people of legal age.
commented 2015-02-26 19:40:20 -0500
Recently, there is a enormous debate for new Ontario sex education. I have reviewed the curriculum, too. Before we start to discuss this curriculum, let’s put religious and moral standards aside, just use scientific and object views to check it.

All of us know that with good nutrition, 5% of children enter puberty as early as 10 years old. And 85% teenagers are in puberty when they are 15 years old. So, in order to prevent unnecessary bullies toward children who enter puberty early, compulsory education should teach children that puberty is not a dirty thing at about 10 years old.

To protect children for sex predators, children should be taught “NO is NO” and “Don’t touch my torso (except shoulder) without my permission except parents taking care of or educating me, teachers in the classroom, doctors in the hospital, police for duty”. And this part should be taught as early as first grade or earlier.

For biological sex education (including the concept of having sex), it should be started at about 11 years old when they start entering preteen, and finished no later than 16 years old (more than 75% of teenagers are in puberty). At this time, they have enough capabilities to read, write and digest complex knowledge. And student should know preventing pregnancy, STD and chromosome related syndromes clearly before they get 17 years old.

For social and psychological sex education, it should be started from 13 years old and through the whole compulsory education. Topics like gays, lesbians, gender change, same-sex marriage and sex toys (no matter you like it or not, it’s there) should be taught after 16 years old and before the graduate from high school.

Now, let’s take a look at the coming new curriculum:

From Toronto Star:
http://www.thestar.com/…/ontarios-new-sex-education-curricu…

Teach children in Grades 1 to 3 the name of body parts and about different family structures, such as families with two mums, two dads or one parent.

-> It is too early to teach children about this. They are even not ready to think about these topics. All they have to know is don’t bully other children based on different family backgrounds.

Children in Grades 4 to 6 – when girls and boys are entering puberty – will learn about physical changes their bodies will undergo, emotional and interpersonal changes and stresses that come with puberty, understanding reproduction and learning about healthy relationships.

-> Body parts teaching should start from here. A little bit early about biological part, not that horrible. Healthy relationship? it is early when only less than 30% girls and 10% of boys enter puberty. It should be 2 years later.

It will also teach them about not touching someone without permission. And that sharing private sexual photos or posting sexual comments online is not only unacceptable, it’s illegal.

-> This should be taught at GRADE 1! Why wait for another 4 to 6 years? Leave chance for sex predators?

In Grades 7 to 12 students will learn about romantic relationships, personal safety, “sexting,” decision-making, delaying sexual activity, oral sex, preventing sexually transmitted diseases and how to prevent pregnancy.

-> About preventing STD and pregnancy, it is reasonable to be taught here. However, all other materials are related to advanced social and psychological sex education. These advanced materials should be taught from grade 10 until they graduate from high school. And different family structure should be taught here.

Where are the topics about chromosome related syndromes and acquired gender-related diseases? They are as important as gay and lesbian issues. Some people say “parent can decide when to let their children get sex education”, it is incorrect. sex itself is a part of biology and psychology. There is no reason for parents to decide. All students must get enough knowledge about sex before they finish their compulsory education – to give birth, to prevent them from being bullied and bullying others.
commented 2015-02-26 15:59:16 -0500
With all this trash and filth they are teaching kids, I wish they would lift restraints on the use of “dirty words” so I could really express my true feelings.
commented 2015-02-26 13:43:15 -0500
Its sad. I’m just getting out of high school and looking into law enforcement as a career… I do NOT want my younger sister and cousins to be taught about this and many other sexual things I’ve herd from Brian’s podcast and here!
commented 2015-02-25 17:42:42 -0500
Typical-kids being educated on how to put a condom on a cucumber before being taught how to read, add and write properly.
commented 2015-02-25 12:15:09 -0500
Give them credit for their political duplicity.
commented 2015-02-25 09:17:53 -0500
Parents, you had better pull your children from public schools NOW, before they screw your children up more than they already have. . Organize and teach your children at home- based schools collectively, amongst your selves. Demand tax dollars back from the government to accomplish that. The nanny state has really stepped way over the line this time. Computer- based or paper -based correspondence learning is actually very effective and doable. Public schooling has been a facade now for over 30 years.
commented 2015-02-25 00:52:14 -0500
Erin Berney commented…“Most kids are texting before they’re potty trained…”

Baloney!! I do not believe that there are any kids at all who can spell and read, and who therefore are capable of texting, before they are potty trained….

Such blatantly false statements completely undermine your credibility.
commented 2015-02-24 23:33:18 -0500
Doris Smith, THANK YOU for the thoughtful and intelligent post. Finally!

As for this bullshit program, I swear the day my daughter comes home telling me she is now a boy because she feels like she likes boy things, that’s the day she gets pulled out of school and that’s the day I take the school board to court and sue. Total bullshit that this is even on the radar in this country – who the hell are we anymore? Why are we letting less than 1 percent of the population dictate to us what we, as parents, must allow our children to be taught? That’s called a dictatorship, not a democracy. Except the dictator isn’t a leader, it’s a tiny minority. It’s almost like Saudi Arabia where one family runs the country. Except in this case, it’s not a family, it’s just a group of sexual deviants.
commented 2015-02-24 22:52:44 -0500
This paradigm shift to include sex education as a subject forming part of the school curriculum has to be resisted. What is being proposed as the sexual content of this subject is and always has been a parental responsibility, as parents are best suited to nurture and teach their children about such matters, while the old proverbial three “Rs” are best taught by the schools. A minority of parents may abdicate that responsibility, but that is hardly a reason to skew the school curriculum to accommodate that minority. It facilitates a shift towards confusion and potential sexual deviance, and is a slippery slope that should be avoided. In reference to Brian Lilley’s monologue, old fashioned anatomy should prevail rather than feeling as a basis for sexual understanding and behaviour, and the majority of parents should be more vocal in asserting future direction in the education of their children.
commented 2015-02-24 20:35:04 -0500
Rachel you’re clearly as dumb as the day is long. Let me address why.

First, what does one oncogene of a single kid raping another kid have to do with sex education? The funny thing is, those parents did a better job than your liberal friends who want the schools to raise their kids. At least they backed up the twisted values the school taught at home. But regardless, you think because of one oncogene halfway across the world we should have an entire program dedicated to taking the responsibility away from children? That’s inane. How about parents tech their kids just as they did forty years ago? Hmmm what a novel idea. Teaching kids how to avoid predators is easily taught inside the home too, but if your nanny state ways feel they must intrude on my rights to parent my own damn child then that’s the limit. You don’t need an entire sex education class for it.

Do you not realize that it is because of these programs that parents do not bother? It’s not a chicken and egg scenario, it’s a bill and shit scenario. The schools teaching kids being the bull, and the shit being the way parents don’t care. The bull came first.

We need to rid our schools of any programs that try to raise children, and let teachers go back to, ermm… Teaching. Not parenting.

As for this immigrant garbage, are you joking me? You think the government WANTS to integrate immigrants? They are more than happy to continue down this awful path of bring a melting pot. There is no desire to make anyone Canadian, they want to make Canada a multicultural hell hole with no identity.

And as for the flinging shit thing, you’ve got no argument. Why would we want, or stand for, a class that teaches kids that they are whatever gender they feel like when they wake up? Talk about confusion. The “trans” community makes up less than one percent of our population…. Way less. Why would we teach our kids about that and encourage it when it is almost non-existent? The only reason we know about it is because of a) you and your liberal cronies who push the bogus lgbt agenda and b) because they are so damn vocal. There’s no logic to teaching our children that filth, let alone encouraging it.

Further to that, transsexual behavior is contradictory to society’s moral well being. This is exactly why the liberal agenda pushes it so hard. The liberals want to see ALL morals wiped out so that they can push ahead with other parts of their agenda like designer babies and other genealogical “treatments” and procedures. Once the morals are gone there is nothing standing in the way of all sorts of activities.

Use your damn head…. Don’t know why I’m suggesting this though, you’re clearly a liberal who’s job it is to join conservative and libertarian forums and chats and pollute them with your bullshit. Amazing why you try, we aren’t that stupid. You’re probably the same person as Erin down there.
commented 2015-02-24 20:00:17 -0500
I think sex education in Canadian schools is very important, considering a boy in England raped a girl at 13 because his Islamic school taught that women are worthless and therefore he did not understand he was raping a person. Kids right now are very confused, especially with the rising tensions between new immigrants not being properly assimilated and the UN’s pressure to allow refugees into the country… The government has to take steps to ensure new Canadians are properly integrated into the culture… And I’m sorry that you are all offended that the schools have to teach this to our children… This is really indicative of our failure as Canadians and parents. Blame yourself and stop flinging shit at people. You all act like fuckin chimpanzees. Change starts from within yourself; you must be the change you want to see… Otherwise you must admit defeat and hand over the job to someone more competent. I’m sorry the government has to raise your children… Seems like premier wynne is listening to what the country needs and is taking steps in the right direction. You could learn a thing or two from this woman. Stop complaining. Shut up and listen to what intelligent and experienced people are teaching you. Use that learning to make a difference. Was that so hard?
commented 2015-02-24 16:54:59 -0500
Erin Berney, you’re a damn fool. First off, teaching our children about sex in schools is NOT RIGHT at all. It’s a parent’s responsibility. If the parent isn’t doing it, the state should not be taking over. Schools are for learning, not raising our children. That’s one of the major problems these days. Deuschbag parents who don’t care enough about their own children to raise them themselves would rather just hand them off to the school to pump out “good little liberals”, so the parents can go about their business, making money and making themselves happy. Enough with the sex ed already! (My own father was a sex ed teacher, by the way, so I’ve got a good perspective to look at this from – this was before they instituted telling kids much about homosexuality and certainly before trans “issues” came into play).

As far as the actual content (if we assume that somehow the class is needed at all), I don’t have a real issue with teaching kids about sexting, the issue I have is the fact that the class will most certainly not condemn the practice, it will simply say “be careful” and “don’t send pictures if you don’t know the person” and other bullshit like that. Educating them on sexual predators, both on and offline, is certainly a valuable lesson, however it doesn’t need to be part of a sex ed course (again, assuming we need it at all). This is something that can be taught in something similar to a Career and Personal Planning course. But again, that’s the parents’ jobs, not the job of the schools.

As far as trans-gender “issues” NO that is not something to teach kids. Are you insane? Why would it make sense to confuse children more than they already are? Trans-gender “issues” are a bogus load of crap 99 times out of 100. They are the result of a purposely confused young person who has little in the way of an identity and likely has parents who were uninvolved in most ways. In almost every case, it is a simple matter of telling the child “you are a boy, you were born with boy parts, you have boy genes, you are simply a boy. it’s ok if you want to play with your sister and play house, or have stuffed animals, but you’re a boy”. Telling a child that, because they like their sisters’ toys or they feel feminine, they should consider themselves female, is just a way to further confuse them. This is just a ploy by the liberal agenda to confuse and obfuscate the truth for the next generation. A confused and helpless generation is far easier to control and dominate.

The truth is, you are born with a penis, you have a Y chromosome, you are a boy. End of story. Vagina and no Y chromosome? You’re a girl. End of story. Why do these idiots want to confuse children more (rhetorical question, see above paragraph).

You, Erin Berney, have clearly bought into the brainwashing and stupidity.

Why is it that we, a DEMOCRACY, are allowing less than 1% of the population to completely change our society? Why are we allowing such a tiny minority to change what our children are taught? That’s the power of the liberal agenda… they appeal to the stupid, the weak, the entitled, and then they move and move fast.

We must move faster, and appeal to people’s logic (or what’s left of it – thinking and logic have been “taught” out of people for over 20 years, and it’s getting worse).
commented 2015-02-24 16:33:11 -0500
Valerie Clark – nice to see you posting here!! So rude, what happened to SNN.
commented 2015-02-24 16:01:06 -0500
Simple math is being changed so kids are confused and feel helpless. Confusing them about their gender will make them even more helpless. It’s all part of a plan. Home school your kids or put them in private schools that you can closely monitor.
commented 2015-02-24 15:38:57 -0500
Reply to Ros Feldman: I have no pity for the teachers who “have” to teach this crap. They had/have the opportunity to oppose it…crickets all round. Mute acceptance is just their part of the quid pro quo for Wynnedigo rescinding all those nasty contract things that Dildo McDinky brought in. They have no pride or guts – I have no pity.
commented 2015-02-24 15:29:37 -0500
Parents must want it – because I sure as hell don’t see any protest against it.
commented 2015-02-24 14:30:30 -0500
I have read all the comments to date. But, One question, “What does this Premier”s husband think about the new criculam?" ,, “Oh Damn, I keep forgetting she does not have a husband to ask.” I wonder if she did would it make any difference".
commented 2015-02-24 13:39:33 -0500
No. Your gender is about the genitalia with which you were born. If you feel more masculine or feminine than those parts allow, get counselling or just live your life as a more masculine girl or a more feminine guy. Nobody really cares. Just don’t make me pay for sex change operations. Pay for them yourselves. This should never be part of the school curriculum. That it is, is insane.
commented 2015-02-24 12:13:21 -0500
Is this going to be the next issues the teachers in Alberta will be dealing with?
commented 2015-02-24 12:05:03 -0500
I too pity the teachers who have to teach this. Yes, the curriculum needed updating, but I’m sorry, gender fluidity? Kids in the early grades are just learning about their bodies, this is just going to confuse the hell out of them.
commented 2015-02-24 10:29:21 -0500
I do not think that I would like to be a teacher in Ontario in the coming school year. These are the men and women on the “front line” whose job it will be to implement this program, irregardless of their personal feelings and beliefs. This will be a tough job! I agree with you, Brian, about the timing! Anything to deflect attention from the criminal proceedings. About the curriculum itself – there are many aspects of it with which I agree, but, on the flip side (no sexism intended), there are many aspects with which I disagree. The wise leader would LISTEN to the parental voice and attempt to steer this through on the middle road. But, then, there are WISE leaders, and there are the not-so wise. P.S. Are the days of “SHOW AND TELL” still a part of primary school education?
commented 2015-02-24 08:48:35 -0500
As a grandparent, I want my grandchildren taught sex education properly. Leaving this curriculum as open as it is, is problematic. We now know that a pedophile was in the highest position within the Ministry. This opens the question as to how many other pedophiles are in the Ministry. Are our teachers vetted properly with a clearance certificate and have they been screened properly? Have they submitted their hard drive(s) for inspection. In short, we don’t know. We don’t know how this curriculum can be used to subvert its stated intent. This makes it dangerous.
commented 2015-02-24 08:00:12 -0500
The only way such a grossly abstractive pre pubescent sexual indoctrinating system could ever be lawfully enforced is if parents have the legal option to not let their child take part in such blatantly fallible social experimentation. The state has no business in the nation’s bedrooms or our in biasing our children’s sexual awakenings.

Our children are NOT lab rats for smug politicos to run social experiments upon. If there is no option for parents but to expose pre-pubescent children to this grotesque overstep of state pedagogy, this government should face a massive class action suit.
commented 2015-02-24 06:19:10 -0500
Let’s not confuse Wynne’s other problems and political scandals with this one. I’m all for holding her accountable for a variety of other things, but I don’t think bringing the sex ed curriculum a little more up to date deserves some of these responses. Isn’t educating our children about online sexual exploitation of children and sexting a good idea these days? Most kids are texting before they’re potty trained so this would seem to be an area worth instructing at a young age, just as important as what they’ve already been teaching for years about knowing the difference between good touches and bad touches, and why taking candy from a strange man who stops you on the street driving a non-descript van is the absolute worst. Today, the pedophile in the van is more often stalking and grooming your kids online, disguised as one of their peers.
Telling the truth to kids about gender identity issues is equally necessary to their individual, social, sexual and gender development. At the very least, it would likely benefit the small percentage of kids that go through these identity struggles. Whatever your religious/non-religious views are on sexuality, gender roles and identity, the historic diversity of the human race is an undeniable constant. By contrast, public perception and social/political/economic treatment of anything physically, sexually or socially “different” is like fashion, constantly shifting and changing.
Some may disagree, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with telling kids that it’s ok to feel and be different, and that they can feel secure enough to talk to people and express their feelings of difference. It’s certainly acceptable to teach kids that individuality and uniqueness are something to be celebrated.
However, I do have a problem with presenting such important messages in a manner that over-represents how many people in the general population actually identify as being primarily homosexual, lesbian, transexual, transgender, or gender dysmorphic, as opposed to being primarily heterosexual or even bisexual. The new Ontario curriculum presents people who have full-on gender dysmorphia as being superficially trendy and cool, reducing expressions of gender identity to a mere fashion statement. What effect this might have on the field of plastic surgery, I can only speculate, but the other day I actually came across an online news story about a woman who had surgery to give herself a third breast. It’s every Total Recall fan’s wet dream. She says she did it to reduce her physical appeal to men because she was tired of attracting unwanted sexual attention.
Teaching sexual identity issues in this way diminishes the struggles and experiences of the few individuals who know from birth that they were born in the wrong body who probably deserve to have taxpayer-funded sex-reassignment surgery.
Public school sex education should, if nothing less, attempt to present basic facts with as little opinion or judgment as possible. Grades 3-6 are for learning about the parts of your body, male and female physical differences, protecting yourself from sexual abuse and exploitation (online and in person), puberty, pregnancy and some simple biology (like why are my eyes blue?), eventually introducing contraception and STI prevention. Junior high and high school are more appropriate for explaining more complex gender identity issues, societal discrimination, etc., perhaps including some world history of human sexuality, culture, law and politics, to help kids understand our constantly shifting views.
To prepare kids for the real world, we need to teach them that change is constant and individual differences are neither good or bad but inherently judgment-neutral, and that in any case, they will each undergo several million changes throughout their lives, as no one is truly the same person from any one second to the next. From an anthropological perspective, deviations from the statistical mean can often be informative when examining small discrete eras in human history such as individual lifetimes, but over longer time periods are statitistically de minimis. Since we can’t fathom that kind of timescale, our perception is limited to primarily life experience of personal and societal perceptions and views on different expressions of human sexuality.
Our perceptions change, and our laws change accordingly, so while we may now enjoy the basic freedom to form and express our own opinions, whether on human sexuality or any other issue, we need to be able to critically analyze our opinions and constantly question and test our most fundamental personal beliefs, and always be prepared to rationally explain and and occasionally justify them. Those who can do so effectively and respectfully tend to earn respect from others, whether they agree or not.
The new Ontario sexual education curriculum is simply yet another sign of the devolution of public education, such that it increasingly resembles nothing more than a failed experiment in social engineering stubbornly motivated by an irrational, pandemic obsession with political correctness. This kind of insanity needs to stop.