California elementary school students could soon be the targets of progressive sexual indoctrination if new health guidelines are approved.
The guidelines, listed under the California Department of Education’s proposed Health Education Framework, include educational resources that teach children to reject gender stereotypes and embrace a rainbow of possible gender options. One recommended book called “Who Are You?” teaches that there are at least 15 genders, and that it’s impossible to determine whether a baby is a boy, a girl or something else.
“Babies can’t talk, so grown-ups make a guess by looking at their bodies,” an excerpt reads.
One chapter in the proposed guidelines offers suggestions on how to explain sexuality with kindergartners.
“Discuss gender with kindergarteners by exploring gender stereotypes and asking open-ended questions, such as what are preferred colors, toys, and activities for boys/girls, and then challenging stereotypes if presented,” chapter three reads. “Throughout this discussion, show images of children around the same age who do not conform to typical gender stereotypes. Examples do not have to be exaggerated or overt. Simple differences, such as colors or toy preferences, can demonstrate acceptance of gender non-conformity.”
What about parents who would prefer that their children not be exposed to errant gender ideology? Unfortunately, there would be no opt-out option.
Brenda Lebsack, a writer for EdSource.org, first called attention to the proposed guidelines back in December. Lebsack, who has been a public educator for 20 years, is also a member of the Orange Unified School District board of education in Orange County.
“Since few people will read the nearly 1,000-page draft, which unfortunately is only available in English, I am sharing below some examples that parents and educators may be especially interested in,” she wrote. “Because the California Department of Education is inviting public comment on the draft, I urge all California residents to review the framework and provide input.”
Lebsack highlights several problematic chapters in the new guidelines. Chapter five, for example, includes this tip for discuss sexuality with seventh and eighth graders:
“Some students may be non-monogamous and the term ‘partner(s)’ may be used to be more inclusive,” it reads.
Polyamory, defined as “the practice of, desire to, or orientation toward having consensual non-monogamous relationships (i.e. relationships that may include multiple partners)” and “polyfidelity (which involves more than two people being in romantic and/or sexual relationships which is not open to additional partners), amongst many other set-ups” are discussed as just two of many acceptable options for young people.
Lebsack notes that many of the terms described in the middle and high school resources will be unfamiliar to parents, adding that “many of them are not in the English dictionary.” Despite this, parents won’t be able to choose whether or not their children receive these questionable teachings.
“While parents may assume they can opt out of this instruction, as they can with sexual health education and HIV prevention, this simply is not true,” she writes. “Instruction about gender or sexual orientations that is implemented through the adoption of the framework is exempted from parent notification and opt out requirements (California Education Code 51932b). According to The California Safe School Coalition, state law provides that ‘instruction or materials that discuss gender, sexual orientation, or family life and do not discuss human reproductive organs and their functions’ are not subject to parental notice and opt-out laws.”
Lebsack noted that if passed, the guidelines could be “disastrous” for school districts like Orange, which is already “facing declining enrollment and teacher layoffs.” She noted the real possibility that parents could remove their children from the public school system, “or even leave the state.”
The State Board of Education will vote on the 2019 guidelines in May.