[nabs-l] Sex Education Curriculum

Tue Jul 17 12:27:22 UTC 2012

Good morning, David,

Yeah, I guess there could have been some undue, bombast at play just 
to say that, no adaptations need be made for such a basic, basic 
activity. 04 PM 7/16/2012, you wrote:
>Carly,
>Thanks for your message. I quite agree that in some or most circumstances
>no adaptations would be needed. My point is that from a legal perspective
>sex education shouldn't be treated differently than anything else.
>
>David
>
>On Monday, July 16, 2012, Carly Mihalakis <carlymih at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Good afternoon, David,
> >
> > At least in my experience, a course in sex ed did find me via ways in
>which sex is supposed to be conveyed, on a purely, physical plane in which
>no particular adaptations or modifications were necessary. I mean, how else
>do people expect to learn these concepts, honestly? And Those weird,
>so-called anatomically correct googoo dolls they gave me in 6th  grade were
>corny, beyond belief in fact.  Besides, I know I only fully grasp concepts
>after seeing how it applies to my own experience.
> > In fact one thing I did learn from seeing the female googoo doll was that
>I don't need a fur burger. 'taught me about shaving. the20 AM 7/16/2012,
>you wrote:
> >>
> >> I do not think we can or should treat sex education different from any
> >> other type of education. If a person needs adaptations so that they can
> >> understand the concepts and any required assesmsnfs then that needs to
>take
> >> place in an qppeopraite way.
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> On Monday, July 16, 2012, Wasif, Zunaira <Zunaira.Wasif at dbs.fldoe.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > How is sex ed different than math or science or any thing else?  Most
> >> > subjects have a visual component.  Does that mean  that we need a
> >> > special curriculum for every thing?  You learn about sex in the same
>way
> >> > you learn about any other social interaction.  Like some other people
>on
> >> > the list, I don't understand why this can't be discussed openly on the
> >> > list.
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> >> > Behalf Of Desiree Oudinot
> >> > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 11:07 PM
> >> > To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
> >> > Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Sex Education Curriculum
> >> >
> >> > Hi all,
> >> > I don't see why this discussion should be banned from the list. This is
> >> > just my opinion, and I don't mean to be rude, but it seems to me that
> >> > there is a lot of hesitation and outright disgust that's being talked
> >> > about here. And, let's be honest, how are we ever going to clear up
> >> > people's misconceptions if we don't talk about them?
> >> > I think it's probably easier for people to discuss these matters on a
> >> > list where they can be anonymous. Given the ages of some of the people
> >> > here, I can see why there would be some embarrassment involved if some
> >> > of you don't know what certain things are. I think it's probably
> >> > beneficial at this point to try and help each other out. It's a little
> >> > late for us to have better sex ed, so why not try to stop all this
> >> > nervous tittering about terminology? The terms Brandon used weren't
> >> > offensive. They were the anatomically correct terms. Plus, while I hink
> >> > the examples he uses are slightly exaggerated, that's not to say they
> >> > can never happen, and I think if we're going to have a discussion of
> >> > this nature, we need to be up front about it. We're all adults here, or
> >> > at least the age of consent.
> >> > I'm not talking about some of the religious convictions that certain
> >> > members have expressed. Those are personal, and if that's how you feel,
> >> > there's nothing wrong with that. But please take a step outside those
> >> > for a moment and think of how this discussion benefits others who are
> >> > reading. I'll bet there are some people who are sitting here reading
> >> > this, and have questions and concerns they would like to express, but
> >> > feel they can't for whatever reason. I implore you all not to ruin it
> >> > for those who really could use this information.
> >> >
> >> > On 7/12/12, Arielle Silverman <arielle71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >> Don't take this the wrong way, but if any of you have anatomy
> >> >> questions, you can email me offlist at arielle71 at gmail.com Seriously,
> >> >> I did learn a lot about this stuff in my biology classes.
> >> >> Best,
> >> >> Arielle
> >> >>
> >> >> On 7/12/12, Ignasi Cambra <ignasicambra at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> Ashley,
> >> >>> I believe you didn't know about any of these things because you
> >> >>> didn't inform yourself, not because you are blind...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Jul 12, 2012, at 4:23 PM, Ashley Bramlett
> >> >>> <bookwormahb at earthlink.net>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Sophie,
> >> >>>> I, too, took a sex ed class and it was useful. But, we still lack
> >> >>>> knowledge usually. I don't think this replaces school education, it
> >> >>>> supplements it.
> >> >>>> Having nonvisual access such as a description, diagrams, or model
> >> >>>> would further aide in  our understanding of such a matter.
> >> >>>> Guys you may want to skip the next parag
>
>--
>----------------------------------
>David Dodge
>Diversity in Disability Planning Committee Chairperson
>English Major
>University at Buffalo
>306 Clemens Hall
>Buffalo, NY 14260
>daviddod at buffalo.edu
>_______________________________________________
>nabs-l mailing list
>nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nabs-l:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/carlymih%40comcast.net