'Not Out Here In The Country': Parents In Rural Washington Outraged By Sex-Ed STD Unit
Salon's Tracy Clark-Flory has penned a neat summary of and reflection on the controversy swirling around rural Washingtonian elementary school principal C.J. Gray: a principal accused, as one irate papa put it, of "raping" his daughter's mind early this month.
How'd Ms. Gray perform this brain-rape? By doing her job. Briefly: Ms. Gray was teaching the sex-ed curriculum known as FLASH -- that is, Family Life And Sexual Health. Her pupils were 5th graders, and the subject under discussion was HIV/AIDS. From Salon:
The lesson plan for the HIV portion of the fifth- and sixth-grade classes explains, “We use the term ‘sexual intercourse’ as an umbrella expression to represent all three risky sexual behaviors: oral, anal and vaginal intercourse,” it says. “These will be spelled out in later grades.” But here’s the important part: “That’s not to say that you can’t define them simply if students ask about them.” That’s exactly what Gray did: A student asked about oral and anal sex, and she responded with a straightforward description.
There was no demonstration, and no one's reporting that Ms. Gray used foul language. She merely explained what went where. And she even explained the anotomical particulars in heterosexual terms. A girl does so-and-so to a boy; a boy does so-and-so to a girl.
Nevertheless, The Blaze twice used word "trauma" to describe the event. And FOX News characterizes the damage thusly:
The Pannkuk and Gilliland families said they knew something was wrong when the daughters came home from school. They were quiet and withdrawn.
“You could tell she was embarrassed,” Jean Pannkuk told Fox News Radio. “She didn’t want to have to repeat what had been said. It was really sad to see her struggle with feeling like she was responsible.”
Pannkuk and her husband sat their daughter down and asked her explain what she was taught in the class.
... “Steam was coming out my ears,” he said. “I was very, very upset. I understand that they need to teach these kids sex education – but 11-year-olds? I have a problem with that. The wife and I were very – very upset.”
Gilliland said another child explained to their parents that [oral sex] “was basically like a lollipop.”
“There are a lot of pissed off parents besides this pissed-off cowboy,” he said. “I’ve been told they’re getting sexually active, younger and younger – maybe in the city – but not here in the country.”
But Supt. Fenter told Seattle’s Fox affiliate that parents were sent a notice informing them about the program – and that they had a right to review the curriculum. But he said, only three parents showed up.
Mrs. Pannkuk said she was aware of the class “but I didn’t know it was going to be that explicit.”
Gilliland said he has no problem teaching sex education – but this particular class went too far.
“It’s one thing to teach about reproduction,” he said. ‘She knows about breeding her guinea pigs, horses, dogs and so on. She knows how babies are born and how they are created, but when they go teaching them these extra acts – it’s appalling.”
Mrs. Gilliland said it’s important for parents across the nation to get involved and to pay attention.
“Be more involved in your school,” she said. “See what your kids are learning. Pay attention. Talk to your kids.”
She said many of the families are now dealing with the aftermath of the class.
“She should be bouncing on the trampoline, riding horses – doing normal kid stuff,” she said of her daughter. “We don’t need to talk about that stuff at that age.
But now they do.
“The damage is done,” Pannkuk said.




I think most 11 year olds have some knowledge of sex. But at eight I was having sex with an older man and I thought we were wrestling. So their little girl at eleven should know a thing or two if they want to avoid that fate - or worse a Spring Awakening.
Posted by: Markt | Jun 24, 2012 5:41:18 PM
@Tim
"Wow. 5th grade? We didn't get sex ed until 8th grade and even then most kids were too immature for it to do much good. I was 9 years old in 5th grade and seems this is a bit young for these conversations. Of course, they need to be taught these things but at such a young age?! If this is really the appropriate age, then by all means, but it does seem awfully young to me...."
It may seem like 5th grade is too young.. but do some research.
A quick google search pulled up this article:
http://tinyurl.com/73wrxg9
"1 in 4 American teenagers gets diagnosed with a sexually transmitted disease every year. The most common sexually transmitted diseases that teenagers are diagnosed with include Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, Genital Warts (also known as HPV - human papillomavirus), and Herpes.
Approximately 2,000 children and teenagers in the United States is diagnosed with HIV or AIDS every year."
I've seen stories of kids as young as 9 having sex already, and while it's unlikely that it is common for 9 year olds, isn't it "better to be safe than sorry"?
And as was stated in the article here, the parents were invited to check out what the curriculum is, and only three showed. If these people weren't in that group, it's their own fault. I'm all for parents taking the lead in what their children are taught, but in the US, they don't seem to want the job. If they're unwilling to talk details with their children, then at least allow the schools to take up that slack.
Posted by: theotherlee | Jun 24, 2012 6:29:00 PM
Of course, these parents could send their kids to a private Catholic school, where they could be taught by a kindly priest that... oh, wait.
Posted by: bobbyjoe | Jun 24, 2012 7:19:55 PM
Somebody needs to educate these parents, of course they will always think of their children as little kids but they need to snap out of it and realize that kids do have sex and it can happen anywhere and it is better they know the truth about what can happen. The time to hide the truth about sex is ending and time to live in the new is here. They have even proven that the earth is not the center of the universe.
Posted by: Dave | Jun 24, 2012 8:52:35 PM
People are stupid.
Posted by: Solomon | Jun 24, 2012 9:10:30 PM
This class was mainly about preventing STD. Do the parents want their kids to think that anal and oral sex have no risk of STD's?
There are kids (older than 11) out there who think you'll get pregnant just from seeing a penis.
Yea, I'm gonna root for education!
ps. Pannkuk: Kuk is a naughty, naughty word in Norwegian. LOLZ
Posted by: Tanoka | Jun 24, 2012 9:47:34 PM
do these parents in the country believe that their kids aren't going on the internet and reading about this kind of thing anyway ? It's much better for them to get factual information in an educative setting. Kids start talking about sex as soon as they are aware that they have genitals. Kids get pregnant, kids get stds. This isn't about sexual politics its about protecting their children from ruining their lives or someone elses.
Posted by: paul | Jun 24, 2012 10:02:41 PM
How will gay parents explain that Daddy sucks Daddy's. And female gay parents? That's going to be a tricky one. We'll save anal sex for another day. "Some people may be too stupid to have children in the first place."
Posted by: Jason | Jun 24, 2012 11:15:05 PM
What's sex?
Posted by: UFFDA | Jun 24, 2012 11:47:01 PM
My parents didn't let us go to the sex-Ed sessions--and that was in Idaho in the 1970s!
Posted by: Jimstoic | Jun 24, 2012 11:55:31 PM
THE PROBLEM IS PARTLY THAT THESE LAWS ARE STATEWIDE.
Yes, sheltered kids in the sticks could due with hearing such frankness at 13, not 11, but inner-city kids in Tacoma need to hear it by 11, as getting pregnant at 12 is not unknown.
These parents might have a bit of room in their heads for that.
Posted by: Bob | Jun 25, 2012 3:20:39 AM
As a longtime educator, I certainly respect parents' opinions and desire for involvement with their child's education. However, the sad fact is that most parents do not have these critical conversations with their children and then we ALL pay the price for collective ignorance. While the debate about "how soon" or "too early" will likely never be settled to a point of universal acceptance, the fact is that children are undergoing puberty at earlier ages and the need for accurate sexual information is emerging much sooner than most parents wish to accept. What REALLY is needed are sex education classes for parents--how to talk to children, how to approach certain "sensitive issues," and how to respond to children's questions. Too few parents are well-equipped for these discussions, and it is often those parents who are the strongest opponents of the school's efforts to deal with yet another "parental responsibility" that has been foisted upon public education!
Posted by: JeffB | Jun 25, 2012 7:37:07 AM
Due to so many hormones in our food systems, kids are reaching puberty at earlier ages than ever before Girls as early as 9 years and boys as early as 10 are able to fully sexually function and reproduce.
Teaching them SOMETHING about the dangers of unprotected sex and the consequences of having sex with an STD-infected person is a good thing by any standard. And that means informing them about ALL the positions and playtime fun that can cause the latter.
Eventually, these hilljacks will figure it out, putting part A into part B results in pregnency or an STD.
I guess they'd rather take little Sally or Timmy to the doctor and get really embarrassed when their child tests positive for an STD.
Posted by: johnny | Jun 25, 2012 9:07:22 AM
This is real simple. If you don't care for what is being taught to your child(ren) in school, take them out of public school and home school.
Posted by: Ted | Jun 25, 2012 12:33:44 PM
I don't think the kids are as traumatized or the parents so outraged as they are acting. Seems like somebody figured they could make some money off a lawsuit.
Posted by: Eddie | Jun 25, 2012 12:44:42 PM
Sex education Rule #1: Keep the queer out of it.
Posted by: David | Jun 25, 2012 1:50:41 PM
These parents WANT some kids to get STDs as a negative example to their little angels. It's magical thinking. Too bad when their little angels become the negative examples without help or guidance...
Posted by: Hazumu | Jun 25, 2012 3:06:10 PM
It'd be interesting to look at the ACTUAL teen pregnancy statistics for that area and see if they support the claim that sex education isn't needed "out in the country." I seriously doubt it.
Posted by: Caliban | Jun 25, 2012 3:10:34 PM
"The wife and I were very – very upset"
And that's probably why (not because) "something was wrong when the daughters came home from school."
Posted by: Randy | Jun 25, 2012 3:26:17 PM
These topics are more properly the area that parents and the family physician should be talking to these children about. Schools need to concentrate on Math Science, geography, history etc. They should stay out of these private family matters.
Posted by: andrew | Jun 25, 2012 4:10:06 PM