Sex ed

[pne]

In an entry in mock_the_stupid, I found this comment:

I had a Catholic latin teacher and her attitude to sex was that you should wait until you're married. However, if you don't then this is what you need to know. It was the most sensible perspective I've ever heard.

I think I like the way that was phrased and it sounds like a viewpoint I could hold.

Comments

[pne.livejournal.com]

Why can't my job be to teach her about religion, the arts, cultural involvement, communitarian living, and hygiene

I don't have a good answer for that. Except maybe the religion bit (which was not a topic in the school I went to).

I just took it for granted that children had art and music in school.

My first reaction was that, well, maybe parents could teach their children about art or send/not send them to musical education or whatever, but some (many?) parents wouldn't, and having some measure of appreciation for art can be a part of a "well-rounded personality", so it's better if the school does it than nobody. Though this starts a debate on how much schools should be responsible for parents' shortcomings.

I suppose you'd also consider literature part of a parent's prerogative, as part of "culture" in general? And school being more for teaching things that are facts? (As exemplified by the subjects you mentioned.)

They also had a two week unit on washing hands and don't stick your finger in your eye. WTF is that about? What the hell do they think my job is?

I guess this is similar. Some parents might not teach their children about venereal diseases coming from unprotected sex. Or about catching germs or other diseases from improper hygiene. Or may fail other parts of what parents should impart to their children, simply parking them in front of the television as soon as they get home. (Consider the parents whose method of education is a sound slap around the ears and an admonition, "we don't hit other people!")