APS looking to make sex Ed coed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with it. We’re all mammals, nothing we do naturally is anything to be ashamed of.

That is true. Also true that tweens are awkward AF and may feel more comfortable in gender segregated classes for when learning about their bodies.

Probably because they have internalized shame from their parents. Kids learn this stuff, you know. They don’t come naturally equipped with it as any toddler can tell you.

Normalize what is natural, and maybe you won’t have male legislators taxing period products and thinking ectopic pregnancies can end in a healthy term infant.

Children are not blank slates. The tabula rasa theory of people is incorrect. Modesty and shame are developmental, not imposed from others.

If you're going to use psychology as your justification, don't get it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was definitely co-ed for my fifth grader in APS. Reports from my kid and others was positive - no one made stupid jokes or laughed etc. Every kid got a piece of paper and had to write something on it, a question or otherwise, and they were collected ahead of time and answered. They could also raise hands and ask questions.

This approach covers kids who may be embarrassed.

The way this plays out is that kids do not want to be seen submitting a question. Slips of paper don’t work. Perhaps a google form would be better. Either way, many tweens (no matter how enlightened or virtuous their parents may be) are awkward and uncomfortable discussing sex and more so around kids of the opposite sex. I also worry that parents from more religious or traditional backgrounds will opt their kids out if coed and sex Ed is very important as many families do not teach this at home. This isn’t the hill I’m going to die on but making sex Ed coed is problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was definitely co-ed for my fifth grader in APS. Reports from my kid and others was positive - no one made stupid jokes or laughed etc. Every kid got a piece of paper and had to write something on it, a question or otherwise, and they were collected ahead of time and answered. They could also raise hands and ask questions.

This approach covers kids who may be embarrassed.

The way this plays out is that kids do not want to be seen submitting a question. Slips of paper don’t work. Perhaps a google form would be better. Either way, many tweens (no matter how enlightened or virtuous their parents may be) are awkward and uncomfortable discussing sex and more so around kids of the opposite sex. I also worry that parents from more religious or traditional backgrounds will opt their kids out if coed and sex Ed is very important as many families do not teach this at home. This isn’t the hill I’m going to die on but making sex Ed coed is problematic.

100. have seen this with our kids. Daughter preferred to talk to me about periods and products. Son was an embarrassed walking mess. Both are good now but middle school was rough.

And there are plenty of more traditional families in APS than we are who won’t want their kids in coed sex ed. I want to see the opt out numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.


https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with it. We’re all mammals, nothing we do naturally is anything to be ashamed of.

That is true. Also true that tweens are awkward AF and may feel more comfortable in gender segregated classes for when learning about their bodies.

Probably because they have internalized shame from their parents. Kids learn this stuff, you know. They don’t come naturally equipped with it as any toddler can tell you.

Normalize what is natural, and maybe you won’t have male legislators taxing period products and thinking ectopic pregnancies can end in a healthy term infant.

Children are not blank slates. The tabula rasa theory of people is incorrect. Modesty and shame are developmental, not imposed from others.

If you're going to use psychology as your justification, don't get it wrong.

You think kids don’t learn and internalize our hang ups? That girls are born wanting to cover themselves in burkas in 100 degree heat and humidity and quit sports so they can hide natural processes?

Modesty and shame may be developmental, but come on now with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with it. We’re all mammals, nothing we do naturally is anything to be ashamed of.

That is true. Also true that tweens are awkward AF and may feel more comfortable in gender segregated classes for when learning about their bodies.

Probably because they have internalized shame from their parents. Kids learn this stuff, you know. They don’t come naturally equipped with it as any toddler can tell you.

Normalize what is natural, and maybe you won’t have male legislators taxing period products and thinking ectopic pregnancies can end in a healthy term infant.

The psychology behind it doesn’t matter. The point is, some kids are more comfortable asking questions when members of the opposite sex aren’t present. Whether you think that’s weird isn’t the point.

+1

+2. And APS has an obligation to teach this stuff to a wide group of students of different backgrounds. Why not offer a co-ed class, and maintain the single-gender classes, and let the students pick which class they are more comfortable attending? I would hate for people to opt out or disengage because they are uncomfortable with the new setup.

Because if a transgender girl chooses the girl class, it defeats the purpose of the cisgender girls choosing the girls class....not wanting to discuss these things with cisgender boys. And that surely won't cause any transphobia accusations or lawsuits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was definitely co-ed for my fifth grader in APS. Reports from my kid and others was positive - no one made stupid jokes or laughed etc. Every kid got a piece of paper and had to write something on it, a question or otherwise, and they were collected ahead of time and answered. They could also raise hands and ask questions.

This approach covers kids who may be embarrassed.

Yes, as long as they already know their questions ahead of time, since they are collected at the beginning.
They could collect them at the end instead. That could be more helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

FGM is abuse. Stop trying to equate it to circumcision. When an American is taken overseas for the purpose of FGM, it is a crime. Not a cultural practice the merits of which can be debated, or a procedure of dubious medical benefit, or even a religious requirement. FGM is a crime.

If educating 1,000 students per year is what saves one Arlington daughter of immigrants from being shipped overseas to be mutilated in this way than it was worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

FGM is abuse. Stop trying to equate it to circumcision. When an American is taken overseas for the purpose of FGM, it is a crime. Not a cultural practice the merits of which can be debated, or a procedure of dubious medical benefit, or even a religious requirement. FGM is a crime.

If educating 1,000 students per year is what saves one Arlington daughter of immigrants from being shipped overseas to be mutilated in this way than it was worth it.

Genuinely interested in how educating a bunch of kids is going to prevent a parent from shipping their daughter overseas and doing this to their her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

FGM is abuse. Stop trying to equate it to circumcision. When an American is taken overseas for the purpose of FGM, it is a crime. Not a cultural practice the merits of which can be debated, or a procedure of dubious medical benefit, or even a religious requirement. FGM is a crime.

If educating 1,000 students per year is what saves one Arlington daughter of immigrants from being shipped overseas to be mutilated in this way than it was worth it.

This also isn't a thing. It doesn't happen like that...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

FGM is abuse. Stop trying to equate it to circumcision. When an American is taken overseas for the purpose of FGM, it is a crime. Not a cultural practice the merits of which can be debated, or a procedure of dubious medical benefit, or even a religious requirement. FGM is a crime.

If educating 1,000 students per year is what saves one Arlington daughter of immigrants from being shipped overseas to be mutilated in this way than it was worth it.

This also isn't a thing. It doesn't happen like that...

That’s exactly how it happens, which is why we had to make it a crime. A summer trip home to grandma results in a girl being horribly mutilated. Please educate yourself.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-information-resources/fact-sheet-on-female-genital-mutilation-or-cutting.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

FGM is abuse. Stop trying to equate it to circumcision. When an American is taken overseas for the purpose of FGM, it is a crime. Not a cultural practice the merits of which can be debated, or a procedure of dubious medical benefit, or even a religious requirement. FGM is a crime.

If educating 1,000 students per year is what saves one Arlington daughter of immigrants from being shipped overseas to be mutilated in this way than it was worth it.

This also isn't a thing. It doesn't happen like that...

https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-law-fgm/texas-woman-charged-with-taking-girl-abroad-for-fgm-in-landmark-u-s-case-idUSL8N2JP3UX

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with it. We’re all mammals, nothing we do naturally is anything to be ashamed of.

That is true. Also true that tweens are awkward AF and may feel more comfortable in gender segregated classes for when learning about their bodies.

Probably because they have internalized shame from their parents. Kids learn this stuff, you know. They don’t come naturally equipped with it as any toddler can tell you.

Normalize what is natural, and maybe you won’t have male legislators taxing period products and thinking ectopic pregnancies can end in a healthy term infant.

Children are not blank slates. The tabula rasa theory of people is incorrect. Modesty and shame are developmental, not imposed from others.

If you're going to use psychology as your justification, don't get it wrong.

You think kids don’t learn and internalize our hang ups? That girls are born wanting to cover themselves in burkas in 100 degree heat and humidity and quit sports so they can hide natural processes?

Modesty and shame may be developmental, but come on now with that.

Disgusting and ethnocentric of you to make judgments of other peoples culture and religion. Just because a people don’t embrace western sexual mores doesn’t mean that their views on sex and modesty are wrong. As an Arab and Muslim who is against the burqa, I am becoming more and more appalled by the lip service supposedly “open minded” Americans pay to diversity. You embrace diversity but only if we minions adopt your values and beliefs. There is nothing wrong with modesty and being embarrassed about asking certain questions in front of the opposite sex. This isnt some weird concept. I bet you most Americans, not matter their cultural, religious or political background agree with me. It’s you who is the outlier not us. Not every girl who feels shy about talking about puberty in front of boys is going to wear a burka. What a ridiculous comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS feedback on this issue is just one more example of the "performative engagement" that they excel in. As usual, tiny little text boxes limited to 500 characters.

In contrast, Fairfax did a real survey and 85% of respondents didn't support the switch to gender combined lessons. Some of their school board members even raised the issue that there is a "lack of research available on gender combined and gender separate sex education lessons". I don't have an opinion yet but what's the rationale for the proposed change. I applaud fairfax for forming a committee to advise on these changes rather than the APS approach of put it up in the summer and hope no one comments.

https://www.insidenova.com/headlines/fairfax-schools-committee-updates-recommended-changes-for-coed-sex-education-lessons/article_d4bfb7a0-176b-11ee-9917-23666abac151.html#comments

Also Why are we adding female genital mutilation to the content areas covered? It seems like it already covers alot of ground, and we're adding more. Is FGM necessary to include in the APS course? Is it an issue in APS? It's a horrific practice but it doesn't make sense to me why it's part of the APS curriculum.



https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/CTAJW34F1AEF/$file/I-7.1.8%20Combined.pdf

Agree and agree.
FGM isn't exactly "sex education." It's cultural and legal studies.
Does the existing curriculum cover circumcision? Sorry to admit, I don't know - haven't looked at the curriculum that closely.

Sadly this is necessary. We have students who come from cultures where the parents will send them back home to grandma to get mutilated, despite the fact it is a crime.

However you feel about circumcision (I am anti-), if the curriculum covers sexual abuse it needs to cover FGM. There is no debate that FGM is abuse, has no legitimate medical purpose in any context, and is illegal.

I disagree. Sexual abuse is covered because kids need to recognize when they are being abused. Circumcision happens at birth and FGM is a cultural thing that is not considered abuse by many of the people exercising it. To teach it is wrong to kids from families that practice it is akin to teaching Jewish kids that circumcision is wrong. FGM is (rightfully, imo) illegal here and horrific; but it's not something all kids need to be aware of for their personal ongoing experiences and safety to recognize when they are being sexually abused by someone.

FGM is abuse. Stop trying to equate it to circumcision. When an American is taken overseas for the purpose of FGM, it is a crime. Not a cultural practice the merits of which can be debated, or a procedure of dubious medical benefit, or even a religious requirement. FGM is a crime.

If educating 1,000 students per year is what saves one Arlington daughter of immigrants from being shipped overseas to be mutilated in this way than it was worth it.

This also isn't a thing. It doesn't happen like that...

That’s exactly how it happens, which is why we had to make it a crime. A summer trip home to grandma results in a girl being horribly mutilated. Please educate yourself.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-information-resources/fact-sheet-on-female-genital-mutilation-or-cutting.html

I'm the poster who asked and will ask again: how will including this in the sex ed courses and teaching it to a bunch of young kids stop an adult from doing this to their daughter?