Washington state Democrats are pushing a bill that would make sure kindergartners will learn about sex starting in 2022. House Bill 2184 states, “In accordance with the requirements in this section and any recommendations of the sexual health education work group established in the 2019-2021 omnibus operating appropriations act that are enacted by the legislature, every public school shall provide comprehensive sexual health education to each student by the 2022-23 school year.”
As radio host Jason Rantz of KTTH points out:
One section of the curriculum for teachers to use as a guide suggests talking to students about the penis as not having “any bones in it, but when people talk about an erection as a ‘boner,’ they’re mistaken.” Girls are taught about a “very sensitive little area at the top called the clitoris.”
Despite the fact that a survey conducted by the Comprehensive Sexual Health Education work group (CSHE) , which was created in 2019 under the Office of Superintendent, found that 54% of respondents felt sex education for children in grades K-5 should not be required, a document from CSHE reportedly stated that such education was necessary because the “social emotional needs of our youngest students must be addressed for prevention of future challenges.” CHSE added that this was “an issue of equity and would help to ensure all students across the state receive quality, evidence-informed instruction, regardless of who they are or where they live,” according to Rantz.
As Rantz points out, “It’s not surprising that the group rejected the public’s input. The entire 16-member, all-female work group were described as in agreement with their findings, though they had conversations about what some of the K-3 curriculum should look like.”
State Representative Michelle Caldier (R-Bremerton), speaking at a House Education Committee hearing, admonished CHSE, stating, “I think that sometimes, you know in politics and when we’re making decisions. that it’s very easy to surround ourselves with people who just agree with us and I think that if the work group just had conversations and no disagreement, that really concerns me because I know there’s a lot of disagreement for that. And I would encourage you guys to go back and really listen to the people who disagree and come back with something better.”
Laurie Dills, from the Office of Superintendent lamely responded that “we were exposed to a wide variety of viewpoints around the state.”
The curriculum includes statements such as these: “This lesson does, however, acknowledge that ‘there are some body parts that mostly just girls have and some parts that mostly just boys have. Being a boy or a girl doesn’t have to mean you have those parts, but for most people this is how their bodies are.’”
Rantz noted, “For Grade 1, teachers should have their students read ‘My Princess Boy’ before teaching the six and seven-year-olds about reproduction.”
“My Princess Boy” describes itself this way on its Amazon website: “Dyson loves pink, sparkly things. Sometimes he wears dresses. Sometimes he wears jeans. He likes to wear his princess tiara, even when climbing trees. He’s a Princess Boy.”