Parents Object to Santa Barbara School Program
[Guest post by DRJ]
A Santa Barbara CA school administrator, principal and teacher have apologized to parents after a middle school class was provided controversial sexual content without following school district screening protocols:
“The controversial workshop was presented by “Just Communities Central Coast” in three, 45-minute sessions over three days. It included handouts defining homosexual terminology, including queer and transgender, and listed “heterosexism” as “oppression that ‘pushes down’ people who are LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender and questioning) and ‘pushes up’ people who are straight.”
The program was treated as a health curriculum for which no screening was required, rather than a sex ed class that requires pre-screening. The article suggests a teacher unilaterally scheduled the program and sent out a vague notice to parents, and the principal and administration were unaware of the content. There were also political overtones:
“[A parent] said it was ironic that an organization that was billed as teaching tolerance uses what she described as “intimidation” in the workshop, including criticizing parents who voted for Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that passed in California in November 2008 that read: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
“One kid asked this authority figure from Just Communities, what about Proposition 8?” Cleary said. “And apparently it was asked, well, whose parents voted for yes or no? And those who voted yes, [they are] prejudiced and discriminatory.”
As a parent, I know how hard it is to stay on top of everything our children are taught in school. There isn’t time to hear everything that happens during the day, and not all children are comfortable sharing stories about topics like this. Parents have a role to play but so do teachers and school administrators. Based on this article, the school — and possibly just the teacher — was the problem here.
— DRJ
sounds like grounds for a lawsuit….
/white smoke
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:25 pm“It included handouts defining homosexual terminology, including queer and transgender, and listed “heterosexism” as “oppression that ‘pushes down’ people who are LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender and questioning) and ‘pushes up’ people who are straight.””
Is this what you mean by “sexual content” ? Defining these words?
imdw (c06324) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:31 pmNo, imdw. There’s more at the link. Apparently there was a section (or possibly a handout) on genitalia.
DRJ (dee47d) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:34 pmCan you ever be something other than intentionally obtuse and disingenuous?
JD (4a5c67) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:34 pmI had an argument with my older son who is a trial lawyer and very pro-gay marriage. He has married a couple of gay couples and gets angry when the subject comes up (God knows, I don’t bring up politics around him). My position is that I am agnostic on gay marriage with one exception. I worry that, if it is ever given the force of law, the advocates will go after traditional churches, like the Catholic Church. Andrew Sullivan, for example, makes a big deal about how he is Catholic. I can’t see them, given their sense of entitlement, letting churches make the decision to not officiate at such weddings.
He, of course, dismisses my concern as typical homophobia. His siblings have, semi-seriously, suggested that I should switch to supporting gay marriage since his position on most issues seems to be selected based on mine. If I’m for it, he’s against it.
This story is another example of the intolerance of the left.
Mike K (2cf494) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:35 pmAnd then they claim that they’re not after kids.
nk (df76d4) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:41 pmBut most of the material in the handouts given to students deals with what Just Communities believes is discrimination against people because they are homosexual and social and parental influence on “gender identity.”
The utter hypocrisy of it all: their unabashed discrimination toward those student’s parents who voted for Prop 8 is perfectly acceptable and even, righteous.
And that is precisely why this is a bald face lie,
“We’re not promoting anything beyond respect and safety for all students,” Schwartz told CNSNews.com.
Bull. They are not promoting safety and respect for the students – what they are promoting and what is clearly their mission is the overt indoctrination of young, fertile minds.
Liars.
Dana (e9ba20) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:44 pmSchools waste time and resources in attempts like this to propagandize their students; meanwhile, they fail to actually teach core subjects.
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:50 pmHOMOPHOBES! Denounced and condemned. All of you.
JD (4a5c67) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:51 pmAnd then they claim you can always opt out.
Patricia (b05e7f) — 12/3/2009 @ 7:57 pmI know Mr. Neal. Not well, but we have friends in common and I know Ms. Cleary indirectly as well.
They are good people, active in their kids lives, active for the community.
Goleta Valley Jr Hi is across the freeway from UCSB in an area that used to be lemon orchards. It still is one of the more conservative areas on the south coast but with Carpinteria probably taking the title.
SteveG (97b6b9) — 12/3/2009 @ 8:05 pmWe have really screwed the pooch with our voting habits though and have one of the worst US Reps…. Lois Capps (not to mention our Senators Boxer and Feinstein)
We have elected leftist fools from school board up through city council and beyond. Leftist is OK, but fools… not so good.
I really doubt that Mr. Schwartz can fathom that someone would think his materials promote anything beyond “respect and safety”… those words have been tortured into such different meanings by the left now…
I’ll bet homeschooling looks a lot better to people every day.
“No, imdw. There’s more at the link. Apparently there was a section (or possibly a handout) on genitalia.”
Clearly controversial sexual content then. Unless you mean this cartoon:
“One page featuring cartoon-like figures and entitled “Gender & Sexuality Definitions: A Visual Map,” depicts a person’s body with the heart area labeled as “sexual orientation” and the genital area labeled as “sex.” ”
That’s what you mean?
imdw (00bfab) — 12/3/2009 @ 8:06 pmPatricia – Given what was told about this in advance, it seems as though there would have been not nearly enough information that would allow someone to choose to opt out, and that seems quite intentional.
JD (4a5c67) — 12/3/2009 @ 8:08 pmimdw,
I focused on the parent’s description (‘Clearly, and I showed her the picture, this is sex education. There is a circle around the genitals’)and the fact the principal and the administrator conceded it was sexual content that should have been pre-screened.
DRJ (dee47d) — 12/3/2009 @ 8:10 pmimdw
pages 8,9,10 of a 15 page handout directly involve sexuality
math is not my strong point, but that is about 20% of the course.
I very much object to combining race based discrimination content with sexuality.
SteveG (97b6b9) — 12/3/2009 @ 8:34 pm.. after all, I don’t want to get *bleeped* in the *bleep* but if I say no, does it mean I hate Mexicans?… Maybe I could go to that white noise place in my head that blocks most of it out and just tell myself that at least I’m not a racist
This stuff is ALWAYS mandatory whenever Gay Marriage or EVEN Domestic Registered Partnerships are involved. It is driven by the State level recognizing Gay Marriage or DRPs as part of the State Ed Code, is my understanding.
This has been the case in other states recognizing either DRP or Gay Marriage. I don’t think either the teacher or district or school is at fault. It is my understanding that in many states parents CANNOT OPT OUT.
Bottom line: you can choose for “acceptance” for Gays which means inevitably your kids being taught the stuff above, or a “don’t ask don’t tell” policy state-wide. That’s it.
whiskey (f36a0a) — 12/3/2009 @ 9:02 pmWhen I read imdw’s latest, I was reminded of what Dr. K. said about his son above.
Reflexive contrarianism isn’t about any kind of organized set of precepts. It’s purely reactive.
There is a lot of that on the Left. And given how things are going, we will see a lot more pretzel logic.
Eric Blair (bc43a4) — 12/3/2009 @ 9:09 pmThis kind of stuff will be about promoting “safety” in schools, right up until the point where opposing this kind of curriculum becomes a hate crime.
If “anti-straight” hostility or even violence becomes “justifiable outrage”, like much of modern racial activism, and thus gets soft-coated and marginalized, then the sense of both entitlement and being “untouchable” could very well mean an unsafe environment for those who don’t drink the kool-aid.
No one is suggesting that homosexual teens should be persecuted or ostracized. But is discussing and promoting homosexuality, while actively condemning hetros as haters, really what our schools are for?
I guess it is if you view schools as more for indoctrination and promoting social change, than merely educating in academic subjects.
Steve B (5eacf6) — 12/3/2009 @ 10:40 pmYeah, JD, the op-out thing is clearly a ruse.
How can we be under the thumb of such dumb activists when the latest polls show 45% of people are conservatives?
Patricia (b05e7f) — 12/3/2009 @ 10:52 pmLet me explain how schools work these days. Back in the olden days, when schools respected parental rights and responsibilities, schools would send out permission slips.
Permission slips: those pieces of paper that required parental signatures to allow students to participate in things.
Today, schools hand out non-permission slips because, they say, it’s a whole lot easier to get things done because the children don’t get the slips home or the parents are too lazy to sign the sips or the children don’t get the slips back. It’s for the child’s benefit.
Non-permission slips: those pieces of paper that require parental signatures to opt their children out of undesirable or offensive activities.
“Tomorrow, we’re going to have a sexuality education class. We’ll be discussing a whole array of depraved activities in detail where you won’t be allowed to question the depravity but we will be telling you it’s natural and acceptable. If your parents don’t want you to hear this message, have them sign this piece of paper we already know you won’t be taking home.”
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 12/3/2009 @ 10:54 pmAgain, the sexual deviants are trolling for new converts. IT IS A CHOICE!!!! When you are constantly trying to talk kids into to the Deviant lifestyles, you are admitting it is a choice.
I think this teacher ought to be suspended and their office and home searched for kiddie porn. I’d bet you’d find it.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 12/4/2009 @ 6:09 am“pages 8,9,10 of a 15 page handout directly involve sexuality”
Page 8 has a genderless stick figure and uses words like “homosexuality” and “feminine” and “celibate.” Page 9 defines words like that, and page 10 asks about discrimination. Page 15 asks about being an ally.
Now, this of course involves sexuality. But it is far from “sexual content.” It’s defining words, and not even sexual practices. It’s got about as much sex as a teabagger rally.
I think what these parents object to is the fact that their kids might learn and accurately use the words and concepts defined. But this is not an objection to “sexual content.”
imdw (8bb494) — 12/4/2009 @ 6:11 amIf you like the Santa Barbara school decisions, you’ll love this
Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Is Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/12/breaking-obamas-safe-schools-czar-is-promoting-porn-in-the-classroom-kevin-jennings-and-the-glsen-reading-list/
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 12/4/2009 @ 7:12 amObama gonna make your kids gay and get laid.
imdw (d54c8c) — 12/4/2009 @ 9:38 amJerk that knee, imdw!
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 12/4/2009 @ 9:40 amChild Porn is illegal. Maybe your school should have told the story of the boy that cried wolf?
imdw (d54c8c) — 12/4/2009 @ 9:40 amAnd…
You think you are clever, but like most trolls, you are not. Just a colorless partisan hack, straining your shoulders patting yourself on the back for being so…inclusive of other ways of thinking.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 12/4/2009 @ 9:42 amEric – When they call people tebagging they are simply projecting their fantasies onto others.
JD (4c5397) — 12/4/2009 @ 9:55 amLenny Bruce would get in trouble for saying “cocksucker” and I remember a story he told of asking the cop that arrested him for it whether his wife was into that….
imdw (6606df) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:13 am29.Lenny Bruce would get in trouble for saying “cocksucker” and I remember a story he told of asking the cop that arrested him for it whether his wife was into that….
Comment by imdw — 12/4/2009 @ 10:13 am
And what that has to do with militant homosexuals trying to teach schoolchildren that taking it up the ass is ok ….
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:17 amLet me make this perfectly clear:
I don’t care what you like and what you believe and I wish you all the happiness in the world. Just stay away from my kid, perverts.
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:19 amI guess it just means that teabagging ain’t so bad and maybe some people can even enjoy it. But god forbid your kid look it up on urban dictionary!
imdw (efa369) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:20 amMy kid knows what gelding means. And she and I bought matching pocket knives which include a spey blade.
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:32 am“I think what these parents object to is the fact that their kids might learn and accurately use the words and concepts defined. But this is not an objection to “sexual content.”
Comment by imdw ”
Do you really believe that?
Are you insane or something? It’s hard to take you seriously when you use the ‘teabagger’ troll. This is clearly an objection to sexual content. You have very poor analytical skills.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:35 amI would prefer that schools focus on reading, writing, and arithmetic. I would prefer and expect that parents be the ones to address these issues with their children. I would also expect that schools and teachers not try to push an ideology on their students. Apparently imdw feels differently.
JD (ba5ac9) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:36 amimdw, sorry I bothered to dialogue with you. you’re just a pervert troll who hates people who don’t agree with you. Good luck with your ugly life.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:36 amMy live and let live philosophy has not changed. But I now know that homosexuals do not share it. They want their way, their way. I feel stupid for thinking they thought like me. And I don’t like feeling stupid. It makes me mean.
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:37 am“My live and let live philosophy has not changed. But I now know that homosexuals do not share it.”
God forbid anyone walk away from with a “live and let live” attitude from that handout about discrimination and alliances. Since it is apparently “sexual content” to have a genderless line-figure drawing with words like “homosexual” and “celibate” near it, it may be that people are walking away from this with lots of different messages.
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
imdw (f8211e) — 12/4/2009 @ 10:53 amIf anyone is going to teach my kid “live and let live”, it’s going to me and nobody else. Get it, pervert?
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:04 am“If anyone is going to teach my kid “live and let live”, it’s going to me and nobody else. Get it, pervert?”
Wait you talking about me or Martin Luther King?
imdw (62e262) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:15 amMartin Luther King would not even deign to spit on you, asshole.
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:17 am“Martin Luther King would not even deign to spit on you, asshole.”
No but he did preach a form of live and let live, kids get taught about him and his message, and bigots call him a pervert.
imdw (bad260) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:20 amimdw, do you not have a problem with the program being labeled as a “health cirriculum”, bypassing the pre-screening requirement?
People's Front of Judea (44bf37) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:24 amNk – This one worships at the altar of Mother Govt. It believes this is an appropriate thing for the State to be doing. Parents, not so much. Plus you are a bigoted homophobe, so you cannot begin to understand.
JD (2e80c7) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:29 am“imdw, do you not have a problem with the program being labeled as a “health cirriculum”, bypassing the pre-screening requirement?”
It looked more like one of the generic tolerance curricula like I saw years ago like on people with disabilities or ex-cons.
imdw (8e7a13) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:46 amThen why not be upfront with the content if it’s seemingly innocuous?
People's Front of Judea (44bf37) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:52 amIf you want to see more of the “health curriculum” foisted on school children, check out gatewaypundit. It’s Kevin Jennings’ recommended reading list, and it’s porn. Child porn.
Patricia (b05e7f) — 12/4/2009 @ 11:55 am“If you want to see more of the “health curriculum” foisted on school children, check out gatewaypundit. It’s Kevin Jennings’ recommended reading list, and it’s porn. Child porn.”
Child porn is illegal. But that don’t mean obama won’t make your kids gay marry.
imdw (ecc566) — 12/4/2009 @ 12:01 pmSome people are willing to cede the responsibility of parenting to the State.
It is very tolerant to declare to children that their parents are prejudiced and discriminatory because they do not share a political belief, the same belief that Barcky has.
JD (656d48) — 12/4/2009 @ 12:37 pmbigots call him a pervert.
Comment by imdw — 12/4/2009 @ 11:20 am
Not me. A yen for fat, blonde, white women is unseemly in a married preacher but I don’t think it’s perversion. I like them too.
nk (df76d4) — 12/4/2009 @ 4:20 pmTolerance is conditional
SteveG (97b6b9) — 12/4/2009 @ 6:16 pmOut of curiosity to see exactly what kind of books Kevin Jennings and his organization think American students should be reading in school, our team chose a handful at random from the over 100 titles on GLSEN’s grades 7-12 list, and began reading through.
What we discovered shocked us. We were flabbergasted. Rendered speechless.
We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren’t merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air. One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one’s self-esteem. Above all, the books seemed to have less to do with promoting tolerance than with an unabashed attempt to indoctrinate students into a hyper-sexualized worldview.
We knew that unless we carefully documented what we were reading, the public would have a hard time accepting it. Mere descriptions on our part could not convey the emotional gut reaction one gets when seeing what Kevin Jennings wants kids to read as school assignments. So we began scanning pages from each of the books, and then made exact transcriptions of the relevant passages on each page.
Are we exaggerating, or misconstruing quotes that could be interpreted a different way? No: Read the passages below and judge for yourself. There’s no wiggle room. The language is explicit, the intent clear.
Above excerpt from the story at Gateway by way of Ace.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 12/4/2009 @ 9:31 pmSounds like imdw’s regular reading list.