Albuquerque resident Dominique Santistevan wrote an eloquent and spirited guest column making the case that students need better LGBTQ sex-ed in public education. (The Albuquerque Journal, May 10, 2021).
Citing a report from the New Mexico Department of Health, Santistevan noted that those in the LGBTQ population are “three times more likely to be victims of sexual assault and experience dating violence.”
“Age-appropriate inclusive sex-ed” is necessary not only to “give youth the words they need to name their experiences” as they trek the uncharted journey of “deciphering their gender identity,” but also to provide kids “examples of healthy LGBTQ+ relationships.”
LGBTQ sex-ed wouldn’t just be for prospective LGBTQers, though. It’s also “essential” for “non-LGBTQ+ peers,” Santistevan wrote.
(“LGBTQ+ peers” is apparently parlance for “straight people.”)
It’s been a minute since I took sex-ed, and by most standards I’m probably vanilla, but last I checked there are only so many ways to do it. I don’t remember being “given words” to name my sexual experiences, nor do I recall a class in school presenting examples of any kids of relationships, straight or gay or B or T or Q.
Because that’s not what sex education is for. I don’t pay taxes so you can get gay sex-ed.
It’s not the government’s job to connect you with a non-straight community of peers, and if bullying is the problem, we need sex-ed for short guys and chess club.
Foisting our education failures onto teachers and school administrators has been as effective as blaming cops for rising crime. Particularly in New Mexico, where do-gooder legislators dump hundreds of millions of dollars into new buildings and student resources and social programs hoping it will make a difference, we’re reminded every year that quality education doesn’t exist without quality parenting.
We could erect the finest LGBTQ sex-ed building in the country and it wouldn’t make kids stop teasing each other.
Our emphasis on emotional health and mental illness and divergent sexualities seems only to have created more suicidal teenagers — which actually makes sense, because there is no value in gender.
Society gains nothing from unique pronouns. A person is not important, useful, or special because of how they prefer to engage sexually.
Regardless, the tyranny of the minority will likely win out.
Normal people are afraid of being labelled as whatever-phobic for opposing anything advocated by someone who isn’t white, male, and straight (immutable characteristics the likes of Martin Luther King once considered ignorant and backward as a basis for crafting social policy).
How long before our state legislators fall to the same pressure and waste more taxpayer dollars on problems we used to solve with sports, music, church, and a dad at home.