of course i agree with sex...ed

okay, so the first job i had out of college was a sex ed teacher. the appropriate term was abstinence education instructor. i actually really liked this job. it was through a holier-than-thou company in charleston and i worked in the school system that i grew up in. i disagreed with some of the information given just because it was arbitrary. i spent that first year as an abstinence education instructor in shock. i was amazed at how many of my girls (6th through 9th grade) were misinformed about pretty serious stuff. they learned things from friends, older siblings, bathroom walls...some had never had a conversation about sex. i even had girls whose parents had put them on birth control who knew nothing other than 'i can't get pregnant or catch anything because i'm on the pill'...what?? so, i totally agree with sex education...for every little girl whose parents don't step up to the plate and have the 'talk' with her. but what's in the news now is NOT sex ed...it's friggin' kama sutra class. how does anyone justify teaching sexual positions to a third grader...what's the point? at third grade, maybe we should work more at biology, self-respect, and respect for others to start introducing sex ed. no child needs to be taught the different 'angles of penetration'...they need to be taught about the risks (both physical and emotional). i definitely believe that kids need to be taught more than abstinence, because if you only teach abstinence you're not fulfilling your responsibility to the kid...but 'kid' refers to high school 'kid'. they're all gonna wanna do it as soon as they 'fall in love' anyways...as adults, we shouldn't be pushing it. how would this kind of early 'sex/position ed' have changed your childhood? better? worse? at all? in our world, we have to find the boundary between protecting innocence and preparing for adulthood...i just don't think that transition should be done at third grade.