Should Your Public School Be Teaching Sexual Intimacy?

Diane Schneider fired the money-shot heard 'round the world' when she asked how we can teach sex education (in public schools) without terms such as orgasm, oral sex and masturbation.   That quote got plenty of ink, if for no other reason than that copy writers and editors are always looking for ways to sneak the words "oral sex" and 'orgasm' into their copy.  (Like I just did there--twice)  But no sneaking was required.  This GLSEN area co-chair, representing ACEI and the NEA, all committed to teaching your kids about all the cool ways they should rub their genitals on each other, (clealry a states interest) brought her A-game to the 55th UN Conference of the Status of Women which is dedicated to gender equality and advancement of women.

We can only assume they take that as seriously as everything else they do, like say...a human rights council run by tyrants and dictators.

So Diane made quite a stir with her remarks. (Transcript on the jump). But what I failed to find in the press, and I admit that I may have missed it, is why she thinks we must discuss orgasm, oral sex and masturbation in public school.  (Other than to advance gender politics, left wing dogma, the destruction of the family, and the socialist goals for the collapse of American civilization). Diane Schneider believes that public-school sex-education classes cannot limit themselves to human biology or biology as it relates to reproduction; that sex education needs to explore sexual intimacy if it is to prevent the exclusion of students who do not consider themselves to be heterosexual.

Many schools throughout the world cover sex education in the realm of reproduction as part of a biology class which provides a subtle message to LGBT youth that their intimacy does not count.

I wonder if we can translate that kind of thinking into mathematics?  The intimacy of math?  Everyone knows math sends a subtle message about math.  But maybe the plus sign is really a minus sign, and the multiplier would work just as well for division?

It would certainly add a new dimension to English Class.  Mrs. Johnson, Johnny is using hyperbole on his dangling  participle and I'm not sure how I should feel about that?

Here's a suggestion Diane wont like.  Save tax dollars.  Cut sex ed in public school altogether. That'd fix your genderless wagon.

Because at what point did the role of public school teacher go from point and click anatomy to Dr. Ruth meets The Dark Bothers?  The last thing I want is a government bureaucrat using their judgment to explore sexual intimacy issues with my kids in a public school.  And in a high school? Are you providing private beds at discounted rates?  That's like pouring gasoline on a fire.  Anatomy at least serves a public education purpose.

Diane is also a proud member of the NEA and committed to their goals for the genderless classroom.   She believes that parents should not be able to opt out of the "Love the one your with regardless of genitals" public school intimacy training she supports, and she blames our American religious heritage for keeping it out of the classroom.

So I guess if you don't want some public sector, UN loving, union hack to teach your kid about free love you are some stuck up religious bigot.  (I've been called worse.)

What you actually are is a parent who feels a moral and fiscal (and very likley religious) obligation to educate your own children with your values.  Values that may not include the notion that sex is like the all you can eat salad bar.  You also understand that the village known as government run public education does not share those values with you.

That was why until recently we expected them to stick to math and science and grammar.  But unions and UN's need to control things like children to build the next perfect failed state, so now they want to teach intimacy so that a small fraction of the community won't feel left out when they discuss what the pluses and minuses are in anatomy.

And isn't that what you pay tax-dollars for?  Transgenders-Psycho-sexual-intimacy-therapists.  It's the class right after Environmental worship, and before "English is the language of tyrants."

Diane's speech follows.  We had an issue with the audio of her speech ,so that will be added later.

[Audio link of Diane Schneider's Speech at the UN; audio embedded here]

Transcript of Diane Schneider's UN CSW speech begins here.

...Education international represents 30 million teachers and education workers.  There are approximately 402 member organizations in 173 countries and territories, ranging from pre-school to university level. It is the world’s largest global (unintelligible) federation and the only one representing education workers in every corner of the globe.  They protect the rights of every teacher, education worker and student they educate.  They combat racism and discrimination in education and society fostering relations between education workers in all countries.

The other group I am honored to represent tonight is the National Education Association, which is a union for all educators in the United States.  It has 3.2 million members, who are all public education employees from across the United States.  It is the largest union n the country.   NEA is also a member of Education International.  NEA's commitment is to quality public education for all and including a safe environment for employees and their students.

There are 3 separate factions within the National Education Association that work specifically with LGBT issues.

The LGBT Cadre…and you have a flier if you haven't taken one, on your way out there are plenty there.  I am so proud to be a member of the NEA and of the work they do in this cadre.  We offer training to staff members throughout the world. Cadre members have been trained to deliver 4 modules that deal with safe schools.  I have provided a flier as I said; I hope you all take one.

SOGI, S-O-G-I, is NEA's standing committee on sexual orientation and gender identification. It serves as an advisory role on policy development and program direction. The committee develops recommendations for government in response to specific charges. Presently, the committee continues to work on charges related to rights, benefits and protections for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans-gender members,(unintelligible) factors that GLBT schools truancy and dropout rates and testimonies from the committee hearings.

Finally the GLBT caucus, the National Education Associations Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgendered caucus was founded in the 1980s by a handful of NEA members thinking to provide a means of professional support for gays and lesbians colleagues. The NEA GLBT caucus works to provide GLBT teachers, education support professionals and students with safe schools free of anti GLBT bias and intolerance, and to provide sound education programs for all students.

The NEA GLBT caucus, in order to eliminate institutional discrimination and homophobia, monitors and participates in the development of NEA policies and activities, provides resources and forces better communication among educators, students and communities.

And now, I am going to talk with my sex educator’s hat on… since the topic is sexuality.

The term sex education in my opinion is a somewhat of an oxymoron. Education connotes a need to deliver comprehensive information and (tools) to our students and to stay abreast of the latest information and trends. I do not know of any other subject that is so maltreated when it comes to freedom of topic, style and format. 

Many schools throughout the world cover sex education in the realm of reproduction as part of a biology class which provides a subtle message to LGBT youth that their intimacy does not count. There are schools that are vehement about offering abstinence only based sex education classes. Many schools offer parents the opportunity to have their child opt out of sex education and still receive full health credit for their class.

The United States was founded by a very religious faction who stronghold is still felt by those sex education programs that are founded on the guidelines of sex for the sake of reproducing.

How can we teach sex education without including terms such as orgasm, oral sex and masturbation?   We are here today because the chasm that exists when it comes to addressing issues of sexual orientation and gender identity within the educational forum.

I have asked many health educators when topics such as sexual orientation arise. They have said that homosexuality is only mentioned during their lesson on HIV AIDS.

With this in mind, how can we expect to obliterate homophobia in this country? The question comes to mind; how we as educators conserve to eradicate homo and trans-phobia through education? This is an awesome task.

The key to the answer lies in the realization that both gender identity expression as well as sexual orientation is a spectrum and not a box that houses our demons. We must teach our children at a very young age that the male, female and intersex comes with the presence of genitalia and no further expectation. That one needs to grow up and be their authentic self, free of society’s gender expectations...that one needs to grow up and be their authentic self, free of societies--I just said that--gender expectations, sorry.

The same could be true of our sexual orientation.  Homophobia exists when those stocked in the binary box of strictly hetero, find themselves slipping out of that role that religion and family promote.

When we as a society, encourage (unintelligible) that it is normal to be attracted to a variety of people and situations, we will then begin to conquer homophobia.

Once again, to be true and authentic about romantic relations without fear or sin of wrongdoing could mark the beginning of the end of homophobia.

As a co-chair of GLSEN , the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network, it is important to know that there are support groups in schools called gay straight alliances which serve to keep the education concerning sexual orientation, gender-identity expression alive. 

Being an openly gay teacher in my school for me, it was safe and created an even safer environment for my students. As educators, we must create the need for LGTB history inclusion.

When I ask my students to raise their hand if they have ever heard of Martin Luther King Junior, every single child in that classroom raise their hand. I would ask them to keep their hand up and ask if they have ever heard of Bayard Rustin, not a hand remained in the air.  Bayard Rustin as some of you know was material in organizing the 1963 march on Washington, where Martin Luther King Junior gave his famous speech. (Unintelligible) uh, there were no hands up so…when all students realized that there are gay heroes in history, the homophobia will lessen.

Another important education piece that would tend to lessen the phobias we are addressing is taking the time to dedicate lessons that deal with discrimination, prejudice and stereotypes. Hate and violence are preceded first by ignorance, ignorance, which result in fear and then a sense of anger.  Education is the only way to combat the so called phobias that bring us here today.

The question that needs to be addressed through education is how to combat heterosexism and gender conformity in our societies. Once we put all our concerted efforts into more comprehensive  education and make topics such as ”isms”, gender identity and sexual orientation,  a part of every middle school and high school student agendas, will we then begin to see a shift from misunderstanding to a peaceful understanding and acceptance of differences.

And finally, quality public education means that educators are well trained with the appropriate material in support to effectively teach all children in a safe, nurturing environment. 

This includes our service to students who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or perceived gay.

Thank you very much for your time. 

Transcript Ends

Related Links

C-FAM

Hot Air (Green Room)

ACEI.org

UN Women

Cross Posted

HB 1411

When the NEA and NEA-NH push hard for a bill, I get suspicious.  HB 1411 is just such a bill.  It came up on my radar when an NEA email appeared in my wife's in box with all those "hey we really need to you to read this email" attention getters.  "VOTE ON TUESDAY," is the subject line and I'm thinking, vote on Tuesday?  What vote is on Tuesday?

HB1411 is described by the NEA like this...

It requires school districts to notify their ESP employees on or before the last day of school, each year, whether or not that employee will or will not have a job the next school year. That is all the bill does.

They go on to point out that some districts do this already under collective bargaining agreements.  That means the union makes them do it.  So the union would like to make sure anyone not under an agreement, or anyone who does not have this agreement gets it.  But why is that a potential problem?

For the answer we consult the NH House Republican Pink sheet which says

This bill would limit the flexibility of school districts by guaranteeing employment of support personnel prior to the school districts workload analysis of the coming school year. These are tax dollars and should not be earmarked to guarantee public employment in advance of the determination that public service is needed.

So the union is asking teachers to email and call State Senators to vote for HB 1411 to lock in taxpayer money in the name of 'fairness' for the 'lowest paid employees,' which sounds warm and fuzzy, but coming from the NEA makes my blood run cold. 

During these hard times people should know as soon as possible whether they have a job.

Just like you or I, who could get fired tomorrow without notice?  No. Like you or I who can't take a job over the summer to supplement our income?  No, these are educational staff.  They help teach our children!  They are special.  They have to know.

No, actually , they don't. 

But I'm picturing future contracts with unions getting their hand on these folks and etching the provisions in stone across the state in places that cannot possibly afford to promise money to people they may not be able to afford come September.

Maybe I can make it clearer.  Think lawsuits.  Think taxpayer funded lawsuits as your town defends itself for having to fire low wage school employees, it in good faith either do not need or cannot afford but that by law had to promise a job before they really knew if they needed it.  So do they keep people at your expense they can't afford, or fire them just in case?  And what happens when they need them back and hire someone else?

And while the proponents are promising that this bill is harmless, this just complicates the problem already created by the lamprey/vampire like relationship between taxpayers and their municipalities and public sector unions.  Why in the name of all that makes sense do we have public sector unions?

I'd like to see a few bills next session that break up public sector union power and make it easier for towns to dump their unions.  An outright repeal would make me happy.  No offense to the people employed with them, all good folks for the most part, but the pension problems and protected wage growth--which always exceeds private sector averages--is unsustainable and operates outside price and cost pressures.  There are hundreds of reasons why public sector unions are a bad idea, but here's just one more.  Unemployment.  When there is no money, as in NO MONEY, the union will cut you loose to protect their contracts and power.  They don't care about workers, just the union. And when you go to collect a pension there is no money for, what do you do, file a lawsuit that will cost more money they already don't have?

So on Tuesday I suspect the liberal meat puppets in the State Senate will pass this 'seemingly harmless' bill, taking more choices and power away from towns and cities and giving it to unions and lawyers.  And we should not be surprised if they do.  It has been the hallmark of the past few years of democrat rule in New Hampshire, a tenure that cannot come to an end soon enough.

Propoganda Art

The Obama White House has been linked to a plan to utelize the National Endowment for the Arts, (NEA) to encourage artists funded by NEA to advance the Presidents Agenda.   A confrence call involving White House, NEA funded partners, and invited artists has surfaced over at Andrew Breitbarts Big Hollywood.

The importance of this cannot go understated.  A taxpayer funded federal program and its recipients are being courted as a propaganda tool for advancing the governments social agenda with taxpayer money.

Big Hollywood reports that the NEA is now in duck and cover (perhaps) because of the potential legal issues, but with no significant main stream coverage this will likely be just another oversight the White House will have to walk back, hoping it simply goes away or, that other opportunities present themselves.

Change indeed. 

I wonder if that plan included building sized portraits of our Dear Leader; posing with school children; next to smiling health care workers; with people enjoying their new green jobs; maybe just with Michelle in a nice sleeveless number?  No.  I'm just trying to be helpful.