Last updated on septiembre 29th, 2020 at 09:38 am
An alarming new proposal from the Democratic part in Washington State is raising concern with parents and educators. It’s just the latest example in a growing trend of pushing for “comprehensive sexual health education” in municipalities and states.
The proposal, HB 2184, is described by the bill’s introduction as, “An act relating to requiring comprehensive sexual health education, which includes affirmative consent curriculum, in all public schools by the 2022-23 school year.”
The idea of “comprehensive sexual health education” is nothing new — it’s even got a widely-used acronym, “CSE.” In this case, the “C” might also stand for “compulsory,” since the bill says that its passage would require all public schools to teach it.
But what would the schools be teaching? Well, the act specifies that, too: the curriculum would be”in accordance with the recommendations of [a] sexual health education work group” previously deployed by the legislature. And it is the output of that “work group” that has so many parents concerned.
As Dr. Susan Berry at Breitbart reports, a proposed PowerPoint that teachers could use to guide children through the complexities of sex and gender reads like something out of an Orwellian nightmare [WARNING: Content may be offensive to some readers]:
Most girls have a vulva, which is the name for the area between the legs. The vulva describes the whole area including the small hole where urine or pee comes out called the opening to the urethra, the hole below that, which is a little bigger and is called the vagina that is used when a female has a baby, and the hole below that where a bowel movement, or poop, comes out called the anus. So a person with a vulva has three holes between their legs and a very sensitive little area at the top called the clitoris.
As radical as this seems, it is actually right in line with LGBT+ activist orthodoxy. Human Rights Campaign (HRC), for example — hardly a fringe group in LGBT circles — suggests that the best way of describing a woman’s anatomy is to refer to the “front hole,” a term thought to be more inclusive at it could also refer to the surgical cosmetic prosthesis given to a “trans woman.” Because, after all, the logic goes, not all “women” have “vulvas” and to say otherwise is to be bigoted.
It is unclear at present whether HB 2184 has any real chance of becoming law, but nonetheless the very fact of its consideration should encourage parents everywhere to be vigilant and wary. As this new decade progresses, we can be sure that more and more proposals like this will make their way into local and state governments’ considerations. Before you know it, your kid’s homework won’t only confuse you with the “new math,” but with the much more frightening and dangerous “new biology.”
NOTE: iFamNews has launched a petition urging the legislative leadership in Washington to oppose this bill.