Too much information?

poster listing sex acts isn’t appropriate for 13-year-olds, says a Missouri father. The school says it’s part of the sex education curriculum.

About Joanne


  1. So the school thinks the main problem was that the poster wasn’t removed after the lesson was over? How clueless is that school administration?

    The dad was right – what the kids were being taught had nothing to do with abstinence, nothing to do with sexual reproduction, and was therefore inappropriate. At the very least, parents should have been notified in advance and given the option to take their kids out. And for the school to suggest that if only the poster had been taken down afterwards then everything would have been okay – that betrays the fact that they *know* that they crossed a line with that smut, and they *know* that parents would not approve of that material.

    “Aligned to national standards” my arse. That throwaway line is most often used as a refuge by scoundrels, for scoundrels ~

  2. I’ve come to believe that about 15 years ago some nerd, like Howard Wolowitz, hacked into the Department of Education, changed the “approved” curriculum to make it easier to get girls.

  3. Thinly Veiled Anonymity says:

    It’s petty of me, I know. But have you ever seen a more perfectly stereotypical bureaucrat in your entire life? She oozes insincerity and lack of substance.

    • It’s only the presence of the camera, and the attendant possibility of uncomfortable public scrutiny, that extracts even the strained patience being exhibited.

      It’s understandable though. The proper role of the public is to fund public education and not ask impertinent questions of the experts. The proper role of parents is to deliver their children into the hands of the public education system and not make too much of a nuisance of themselves.

      Given those assumptions I thought Leigh Anne Neal acquitted herself quite well.

  4. Sounds like they are brining it up to the level of the D.A.R.E. program — lots of knowledge on topics your child wouldn’t even have dreamed of. Be nice if they could offer career guidance in the same level of detail.

  5. Richard Aubrey says:

    Somebody said this administration has made paranoid conspiracy nuts perfectly ordinary.
    An effort to decouple kids from family?
    Well, as Melissa Harris-Perry, she of the tampon earrings and sneering at the Romney adoption said, yes.
    They’re not your kids.

  6. Richard Aubrey says:

    Oh, yeah. When a ‘crat is substanceless and insincere, discussing anything with them is like shooting BBs at a bowling ball. Meaningless.

  7. “It should never have been left up after the lesson was ended.”

    Exactly, that would make it possible for kids to take pictures and parents to find out what was going on.

    What is wrong with these people? Half the things on that chart weren’t in any way connected with “sexual education” – in the educational sense.

    The poster seemed intended (as so much of our entertainment and media seems intended) to introduce kids to every adult practice as early as possible. In other words, to tear down every earlier cultural norm and desensitize kids to every conceivable adult act, good or bad. Once you complete that process (and you could argue that we’re in the end game, since we now have something that is part of the curriculum that would have gotten a teacher instantly fired forty years ago), then nothing is right, nothing is wrong and kids can be directed to anything the bureaucracy desires.

    I’m not trying to sound melodramatic, but, when you get right down to it, this is just how you end our American culture. It’s nearly done and it happened right under our noses. Shame on us.

  8. D's Squirrel Food says:

    Few 13 year olds will be hearing these terms for the first time. There is plenty of reason to discuss them. Some acts can lead to pregnancy or spread disease, while others can’t.

    When I was in 7th grade one of my classmates asked if you could get pregnant from [oral sex]. I’m glad she was set straight.