Several dozen people spoke out Tuesday night about the Santa Barbara Unified School District's plan to implement updated sexual education classes in junior high school.
It was the second time in two weeks that critics blasted the proposal, but this time advocates of the curriculum spoke out in support of the program. Nearly 200 people packed the district's meeting room, with many of them spilling over into an overflow room. The district failed to put out enough seats for the audience members and many people had to stand for more than an hour while waiting to talk.
Others took seats at the front of the room, crowding the area where the board members sit.
"Growing up in this generation a lot of kids don't get the opportunity to take these sex ed classes or they are not well-informed either," said Emily Jimenez, a junior at San Marcos High School.
She said she took Planned Parenthood classes and they were helpful to teach her how to stay safe sexually, emotionally and mentally.
"I see many of my friends how they turn to pornography as a source to see what supposedly real love is, when it is really not," she said. "As more young teens turn to porn it could lead to abusive and unhealthy sex lives."
The district proposed a curriculum called Teen Talk in order to meet new state standards for health education in public schools. Families have the ability to opt out of the classes, but even so, some parents believe the curriculum has no place in public schools.
Some parents raised questions about the curriculum, which includes talk of condoms, anal sex and masturbation. The curriculum provides information on values about gender roles, relationships, and sexuality; provides information about where to obtain reproductive health care; encourages parent and trusted-adult communication; incorporates multi-day parent/trusted-adult interview homework assignment for students; and gender inclusive language.
The district is trying to comply with AB 329, the California Healthy Youth Act, which was passed in 2016. The program is intended to provide “education regarding human development and sexuality, including education on pregnancy, contraception, and sexually transmitted infections,” including HIV.
Although the state requires the training, it does not dictate the specific curriculum but provides suggestions.
Some parents prefer a less aggressive curriculum.
"No one in this room is disputing that we want sex ed for you guys, not one person," said Sheridan Rosenberg, a critic of the Teen Talk program. "What we are discussing is what is the best curriculum for you guys. That's all the discussion is about."
Rosenberg asked for a public discussion comparing the Teen Talk curriculum with the HEART curriculum, preferred by some of the critics, including Rosenberg.
She also said the district has a "terrible problem with communication," particularly in reaching out to Latino families who may not be on ParentSquare or have access to the internet. She said those families are counting on information coming home in a Friday folder, but the information is not there.
Speaker Caroline Abate agreed that the curriculum is inappropriate for junior high school students.
"Teaching explicit sexual content to children does absoutely nothing to help students become more academically proficient," Abate said. "All it does is hurt them mentally, emotionally, physically, and academically. These disgusting sexual programs have infiltrated into our public schools because of politicians from the Democrat Party."
Esmeralda Perez, a senior at Dos Pueblos High School, was one of the students who gathered at the front of the board room in support of the Teen Talk curriculum.
"As a young Latina, I have grown up in a household where sex isn't spoken about," Perez said. "I know my peers are in the same boat. It's even worse for my fellow LGBTQ plus peers. Without our schools talking about sex, it leaves our community members vulnerable to sicknesses or diseases. We won't even know to look out for symptons if one of us is sick. My classmates look to pornography and other unverified sources."
The school board took no action Tuesday night and will revisit the issue in March.
— Noozhawk staff writer Joshua Molina can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.
