On Ontario’s Proposed New Sex Education Curriculum, and the Element of Opportunism

Ontario’s currently sitting Liberal government announced a bit ago that they were moving forward with a controversial new physical education and sex education curriculum, and there’s a few people not happy about it.

Some parents are concerned that some things are going to be taught too soon for their liking. Some parents want to be the first to talk to their children about these things. Some parents feel that enough isn’t going to be taught (where’s the discussion points on examining a woman’s natural fertility cycle and fertility awareness)? Morality-wise, obviously some parents don’t like how the content is going to be presented (in what may surprise some, a lot of the content they would be fine with being taught, but they may not like how it is approached).

Speaking of morality, there’s others who are taking this as a flagrant attack against Catholicism, for obvious reasons. Yes, Catholic schools are publicly funded, but what’s the point of having a Catholic school board if you’re going to transform it into Public Schools 2.0? Well, unless the point of it is to attempt to subvert and transform Catholicism into a bastardized version of itself, since Catholicism is the biggest threat to rampant sexual relativity.

On a personal level, something that bothers me is I fail to see why the idea there are six genders is being taught in grade school, while mental illness is officially being taught in Grade 11/12. Inexcusable. This is in the same document as everything else. Anal sex is more important than mental illness, at least until the next time a large corporation makes a day of things (#BellLetsTalk).

There’s all sorts of articles, blogs, and websites out there that highlight the above. And it’s been all over social media, with lots of people chiming in with their opinion. And make no mistake, I’m glad people are talking about this, as it never hurts to have a discussion. Which is actually one of parents’ big concerns; many felt they weren’t consulted. This perception was augmented when the announcement of this thing happened a few months before originally expected, conveniently leaked/announced early to distract people from fraud charges.

Which ties into perhaps the most under-discussed and under-reported element of this curriculum, is the political component. The political motives as to why this curriculum is coming down the pipes rapidly, the “whys”. As a political junkie, it’s hilarious to see the Wynne government pretend to say that they’re actually trying to put kid’s interests first, when the reality is she’s out for exactly two things:

1) Political survival.
2) Political legacy.

The latter to be looked at in a positive light is an impossibility at the moment. Teflon Dalton got out when the going got gone, and Wynne had to pick up the pieces – with all the same players Dalton had near the end. When the election got called, she was behind in the polls and was fighting for her political life. Imagine being the Liberal leader who couldn’t keep the streak of Liberal governments alive? So she’s fighting for her political life, trying to survive long enough to leave something lasting.

In order to do this, she had/has to pick up some wins. During the election, she courted the unions, knowing our province was dirt broke. Hudak admitted cuts were incoming, Wynne said none were needed, and made promises to unions that they would be taken care of. She sat in Walkerton decrying cuts saying that the Harris government caused the Water Scandal, when anyone with actual knowledge of the situation knows that the Federal Liberals cut transfer payments, the previous NDP and Liberal provincial governments spent like drunken sailors, so cuts happened. And of course, ignoring two brothers with alcohol issues and weren’t qualified to do the work were working there (small towns, gotta love them sometimes). she said she would manage the provinces assets better than anyone else.

Now?

1) Elementary school teachers are going work to rule, because Wynne turned around and said “you’re not only not getting what was promised, but we’re cutting benefits and pay. And making your work life harder, all without using collective bargaining”. Wynne says she wants teachers to think about the kids, but I’m sorry; she’s showing kids it’s okay to demonize your opposition, do the acts you demonized the opposition over, and that it’s okay to re-neg on your promises so long as you get what you want.

2) She cut service to road clearing, so the roads are more dangerous in the winter. In Ontario, where we have enough snow that one particular location is called “the snow belt”.. Because they need to balance the books. Do we really need to think about how many deaths that caused? No inquiry over that, by the way. Unlike Walkerton, which she continues to use as a bully pulpit.

3) Managing provinces assets better = selling them to the private sector, apparently.

4) Scandals. Oh so many scandals. It’s reaching Tyson Zone levels where I’m not surprised anymore with the scandals that show up weekly. Spending scandals, distancing herself from the guy that helped designed this very curriculum, corruption . Fraud.

Meanwhile, Harper gets pilloried in most of the papers (justifiable in some cases), but I see nothing in the Globe or the Star over Wynne’s/McGuinty’s transgressions.

Which brings us to this delightful bit of smokescreen. How much attention does this curriculum have? (A lot). Is it distracting people from scandals and mismanagement? (it is). Is it really out for the kid’s best interest? It very well may be debatable.

This is *exactly the same* as the last one that got proposed, had an uproar, and they backed down saying they would consult parents and make changes. No changes were made. Instead, it almost feels like this was dragged out of the mothballs to coincide with the fraud charges, to deflect attention. Because, changes. You’d think mental health advocates like myself, if consulted, would have said to bump that topic to an earlier slot. You’d think there would have been more announcements, more promotion this was incoming. You’d think there would be more public discussion on how the Catholic Boards will approach this, and that changes specific to reflect the Catholic board would have been made. But no, exactly the same.

Desperate people do desperate things, She won’t win again, she has no hope. She’s done. She knows she’s done. The scandals, everything. She will not win. So she has three years to leave a legacy, and she’ll burn whoever she can to get it done. Betray unions? Sure! Sell provincial assets? Why not? In her riding is one of the largest public schools in the province, with a HUGE Muslim population within. Most of those kids and their parents can vote in three years. Care to guess what side of this curriculum discussion they will be on? She doesn’t care. She’s toast, there’s no way out. So she has three years to leave a legacy.

The curriculum, such as it is, served as a legacy grab and a distraction. Kids first? Hardly. Just another political shark seeking to grab a portion of history.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in General Site Info. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s