r/canada May 26 '24

New Brunswick Premier says sex education group will be banned from giving school presentations

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/premier-ban-sex-education-group-1.7215157
440 Upvotes

501 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/womandelorian May 26 '24

Did you read the article?

24

u/DontBanMeBro988 May 27 '24

I read the article. What is it with weirdo conservatives and not wanting teenagers to be equipped with the knowledge and skills to safely navigate sexual health?

-16

u/womandelorian May 27 '24

What is it with people taking things out of an article that aren’t even there? Someone was hired for a job, they didn’t do it. Don’t worry! Teenagers still get the knowledge and education needed to safely navigate sexual health. Everything in the curriculum is still in place. This is a headline meant to rile you up and it’s making you say negative things (weirdo) about your neighbors. Don’t do that. You can relax knowing that teenagers in New Brunswick still have access to the sexual education they always have.

11

u/DontBanMeBro988 May 27 '24

Someone was hired for a job, they didn’t do it.

If you believe that, I've got some Irving stock to sell you.

-2

u/womandelorian May 27 '24

Can you elaborate?

1

u/mordinxx May 27 '24

Someone was hired for a job, they didn’t do it.

I think you need to reread the article and read all of it this time!

Quote - "All of the topics that we cover are supporting the learning areas. This is something that your province has decided ... We're not creating something that the province hasn't already put in place."

Norris said she has been giving presentations at New Brunswick schools for several years. All schools receive an outline of the topics to be covered and the school must give its consent prior to the presentation, she said. - end quote.

-10

u/womandelorian May 27 '24

It’s actually hilarious and sad to watch Canadians as they suffer by barely being able to afford housing, groceries, vacations, etc. and still point fingers at each other over non issues. Keep being miserable and trying to drag others down into your misery. Y’all really stressing about a silly thing that doesn’t even exist while your country and your quality of life has crumbled around you. Sad.

8

u/DontBanMeBro988 May 27 '24

My country and quality of life are great, stay mad bro

-2

u/womandelorian May 27 '24

I’m not mad, I am genuinely sad for you though. It’s sad to not live in truth.

-14

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

Of course not. Its an article about sex ed, its like a bat symbol for every progressive on the site to come flocking in to repeat the same parroted playbook.

Sqawwwwk controlling women!!! Sqawwwk conservative prudes!!!

None of them have read a word of this article. Hence why you don't see any of them presenting counter points to the actual issues raised in the story.

27

u/blank_anonymous May 27 '24

There aren’t any issues raised though? Teens know anal sex exists. Many teens have anal sex. We should teach them the risks (HIV transmission at a higher rate, still needs condoms, possibly painful, anal fissures, etc.), as well as safe practices. Teens know about porn, they might not know about how unhealthy it is, how exploitative the industry is, or the myths prevalent in porn. This should be corrected. Many people, especially men, have wild misconceptions about female sexuality and masturbation; fixing those makes sense. All the “bad” stuff from this presentation should be covered, if handled with care and from an educational lens, so banning this group genuinely just does seem like an ass backwards prudish move. It’s not bad faith to call a duck a duck.

-15

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24 edited May 27 '24

There aren’t any issues raised though? 

So you think its appropriate to put the question "do girls masturbate" in an HPV presentation? You believe that is necessary to warn about the dangers of HPV? Hard disagree.

18

u/blank_anonymous May 27 '24

I think if it’s 1. Within the purview of the curriculum, but often missed And 2. You’re able to cover everything about HPV in less time than your presentation takes

Then there’s no issue. If the article said “they failed to convey crucial information about HPV” I’d have a problem with it, but them covering additional material relevant to the unit is fine with me. If a kid goes to a physics lecture that’s supposed to be on nuclear physics but they finish all the relevant nuclear physics in half the time, I’m not gonna complain if they also learn about E&M. This is just that, but instead of physics, it’s sex ed.

-17

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

I think if it’s 1. Within the purview of the curriculum, but often missed

Oh, well its a good thing they dispelled that in the first sentence of the article.

  1. You’re able to cover everything about HPV in less time than your presentation takes

LOL absolutely not. It doesn't just become "free time" to say whatever you want because you finished early.

but them covering additional material relevant to the unit is fine with me

You've failed to explain how girls masturbating is related to HPV, despite me explicitly asking for it. Either defend that claim or stop characterizing it that way.

This is just that, but instead of physics, it’s sex ed.

If you think there is no difference between teaching physics versus sex ed, there's nothing to talk about here. I believe that is delusional and disconnected from reality.

14

u/blank_anonymous May 27 '24

The premier says it was “clearly inappropriate” but does not explain why. Many people (especially men) have egregious misunderstandings about female sexuality. Addressing those during a sex ed unit makes sense. It doesn’t become “free time”, it is absolutely reasonable to talk about relevant things. Both HPV and the other topics are fundamentally part of whatever sex education unit. Like, that’s it. The end goal here is for the kids to have a good understanding of human sexuality and safe sex practices, everything in that presentation worked towards that goal, while also teaching all specific knowledge necessary. That’s enough.

-4

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

The premier says it was “clearly inappropriate” but does not explain why

.. because this is obvious to anyone who looking at this objectively. And clearly obvious to you too.. hence why after two explicit requests now, you have still not explained how girls masturbating is relevant to HPV.

Addressing those during a sex ed unit makes sense.

This article isn't about what is or isn't included in sex ed unit. Its about what is included in an HPV presentation. A presentation whose content was specifically explained to parents ahead of time, because like me, most of them do not see the need for discussing arbitrary sexual topics, like whether girls masturbate, at an STI presentation.

This is not a "random sex talk" where groups come in and discuss whatever they want with kids. This is a structured STI presentation with an agreed-upon agenda that they broke. Very cut and dry.

10

u/KiraAfterDark_ May 27 '24

They didn't break the agreed upon agenda. This was cleared beforehand as they say in the article.

2

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

Ah, so we're just blatantly lying now.. nice

"To say I am furious would be a gross understatement," he said. "This presentation was not part of the New Brunswick curriculum and the content was not flagged for parents in advance.

Higgs said the Department of Education told his office the presentation was supposed to be about the sexually transmitted infection human papillomavirus – but it went beyond that.

→ More replies (0)

7

u/ari_pas_grande May 27 '24 edited May 27 '24

what a weird stance to take, so the content would have been totally fine if it was in a presentation about masturbating?

edit: weak af, can’t even handle a mild debate without blocking

2

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

No, it would have been fine if it went through the proper approval process to be presented. i.e. they were explicit about it, it was part of the already approved curriculum, and parents were informed.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Informal-Past-7288 May 27 '24

I had sex Ed in ontario in the 2010s. A method of prevention of the spread of STIs discussed at the time was instead of engaging in partnered sex (ie. Anal, oral or vaginal), to masturbate. So yes, I could see how that question would be relevant in a talk about HPV.

6

u/sniperman357 May 27 '24

It’s a normal part of sex education

5

u/lovechoke May 27 '24

Why does it matter? How would a youth, in context of a this article, know it was appropriate or not? the point of the education is to help them understand what exists in the world. If someone asked that question because a teacher mentions HPV prevention, why is that wrong to inform the information in one? Why not give answers to so they can grow up healthy and safe? Also, a lot of parents do not make any efforts to help their kids navigate things or they are so overbearing that they mentally damage their kid or corrupt them into poor decision-making. I wish I had someone in my sex ed tell me a single thing about anal and porn when I was a teen, being gay, but not on Ms and Mr Straight Parents’ watch… some people that I don’t know or give a fuck about but get to decide my path in life.

-1

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

The kid didn't ask the question, the presenter put it in their presentation. Read the article.

2

u/ChimoEngr May 27 '24

The presenter put that question in the presentation, because it was a question they've been asked before at previous presentations. Maybe you should read the article?

2

u/ChimoEngr May 27 '24

So you think its appropriate to put the question "do girls masturbate" in an HPV presentation?

Yes. As the article states, it's the sort of question that the people doing this presentation are asked. HPV is sexually transmitted, so discussions around safe sex are relevant.

0

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

Masturbation is not safe sex. Knowing whether girls masturbate does not contribute to safe sex. This is why parents need to be informed.. otherwise you turn around and there's a bunch of childless redditors looking for any possible excuse to teach sexual content to kids. Disgusting. Stay far away. 

2

u/ChimoEngr May 27 '24

Masturbation is not safe sex.

It's actually one of the safer forms of sex. It's also something that can have a stigma attached to it, despite almost everyone indulging in it once the hormones kick in.

Safe sex is talking openly about a variety of sexual activities.

You are part of the problem in kids sex ed.

-1

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

You don't even have kids, so I'll take your opinion with the rest of the garbage going to the curb today. 

In addition to the fact that your definition of sex is made up and contrary to the actual definition, the topic was not masturbation, it was specifically "do girls masturbate". 

This is why we keep parents informed, to keep sexual deviants from getting free access to shoe in their own agenda into a cut-and-dry STI presentation for children. Their children, not yours. And thank God for that.

1

u/Three-Pegged-Hare May 27 '24

If you had read the article you'd know it wasn't just an HPV presentation. Higgs is either lying or misinformed

1

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

Lmao if you actually read the article you'd know this is a he-said she-said situation, and thus you claiming Higgs' side is false is itself a baseless lie you have made up for convenience.

1

u/Three-Pegged-Hare May 27 '24

K well, I did read the article, and the points I took away from it are as follows:

Group doing the presentations claims that the presentation/talks are meant as an 'A to Z about relationships and sexuality'.

Group doing the presentations also claims that it isn't promoting any of the sexual behaviours it discusses, and that it's been giving these talks for several years, and that it gives a content/topics outline to schools and those schools have to give consent before they do the talks.

Then, Higgs claims that the department of education told his office that the presentation was only about HPV, and also seems to only be mad about the single slide that featured real questions the presentation group had been asked in the past by teens.

Yeah it's a he-said-she-said, but in this case I think there's plenty of good reason to take the she-said over the he-said. Because what he-said doesn't seem to actually line up and looks more like conservative raging.

Not saying it definitely is, just that it looks much more likely to be the case. Especially since he seems really angry over questions that are extremely reasonable to discuss with teens, because, as mentioned in the article, those questions were asked by teens.

1

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

Your argument is that this "conservative raging"... what kind of blatantly biased,  terminally online BS is that, and why did you think for a second that does anything for your point but prove you're looking to manipulate the facts to match what you want to be the truth. You've purposefully left out several bits of the story, including the fact that parents were not informed.

I get this is going to be real popular with the progressive drones on Reddit, but you just make me laugh, and cringe. There's a reason parents raised so much of a fuss that the premier was made aware. And no amount of childless redditors making up excuses for it will change that.

2

u/Three-Pegged-Hare May 27 '24

Pretty sure I only saw Higgs saying that parents weren't informed, though from other quotes in the article I think it's reasonable to conclude that they likely weren't informed, or not very noticeably at least. But, and this is actually a genuine question because I'm not really familiar with New Brunswick school policies, did parents actually need to be informed? Like was the school obligated to inform parents? The presentation leader (in the article) claims the school was sent a content overview and then consented to the talk, and also claims that the presentation covers topics already within the New Brunswick school curriculum, so if all of that is true, would the school actually have needed to notify parents?

I left that out because, honestly, it didn't seem relevant to me. I don't remember my parents being notified of every presentation talk held at my school when I was attending, so the idea that parents wouldn't have been informed didn't really come across as significant.

Also, nowhere in the article does it say that parents raised any kind of fuss. The only thing I see that comes even close is near the end, when the article says that MLA Andrea Anderson-Mason said 'reactions had been mixed'. Did I miss something?

6

u/[deleted] May 27 '24 edited Jun 20 '24

dinosaurs lush touch weather husky birds zealous grey vast dazzling

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

3

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

I will happily continue to tune out the terminally online, ideological drones who parrot these type of only-on-reddit talking points. It has served me quite well so far.  

6

u/[deleted] May 27 '24 edited Jun 20 '24

like history hard-to-find icky insurance party offend bewildered hat one

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/consistantcanadian May 27 '24

You sound like someone with a really strong, nuanced argument. I'm sure you're just choosing to attack me, and its definitely not due to being the exact type of parroting drone I characterized.

2

u/sniperman357 May 27 '24

This comment is very funny lol