Showing posts with label Teen Talk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Teen Talk. Show all posts

Monday, May 4, 2020

The Fifteen Problems with Teen Talk, by Skip Hellewell

Review of Teen Talk Sex Ed Curriculum for Compliance with CHYA and CHYA Purposes
Background:

The author (R. Skip Hellewell) worked the last two years as a citizen volunteer to improve sex
ed curricula in CA secondary school districts, beginning in the Capistrano USD (CUSD) where his
family have gone to school. Skip served with parent on the CUSD citizen sex ed task force to
provide guidance as the district developed their own curriculum. The CUSD curriculum, though
an improvement, fell short of the CA Healthy Youth Act (hereafter CHYA) purposes so he helped
develop the HEART sex ed curriculum. HEART is offered as a free public service for use by CA
secondary school districts at their discretion.



A telling observation by the author from reviewing many sex ed curricula is that they reflect the
viewpoint of the author(s) regarding the role of sexual self-restraint. In the traditional view,
sexual expression should be delayed until adulthood (codified in laws protecting minors) and
ideally to a single lifetime partner (referred to as the only medically certain protection of sexual
and reproductive health). A contrasting viewpoint became common in the sexual revolution of
the ‘70s that advocated unrestrained sexual expression. As the saying went, “If it feels good, do
it.” The viewpoint of curriculum author(s) becomes obvious as the curriculum addresses the
CHYA requirements. It should be noted that CHYA aligns with the traditional viewpoint.

On 1/29/20, at the invitation of the Downey USD, the author reviewed the “Teen Talk” middle
school sex ed curriculum, 2018 Edition. The standard reference for this analysis is compliance
with the purposes and requirements of the CA Healthy Youth Act, as guided by the Center for
Disease Control and Prevention (hereafter CDC). The purposes of the CA Healthy Youth Act
(expressed in Ed Code 51930, paraphrased here by author) are:
1. Provide knowledge and skills to protect student’s sexual and reproductive health.
2. Provide knowledge and skills for healthy attitudes regarding adolescent growth and
development, body image, gender, sexual orientation, relationships, marriage, and
family.
3. Teach sexuality as a normal part of human development.
4. Teach pupils to protect their sexual health, including prevention of HIV infection.
5. Provide knowledge and skills for healthy, positive and safe relationships and behaviors.
Conclusion: Teen Talk (2018 Edition) does not meet the CHYA-modified Ed Code purposes for
sex ed in CA secondary schools.
Discussion: The conclusions is mainly based on the following 15 compliance problems in the
twelve Teen Talk sessions (lessons).

Session 1: Introduction, Values Clarification, Parent Communication, and Resources
Problem #1: This opening lesson, in the reviewer’s reading, offends the purposes of CHYA and
the laws protecting minors from sex by injecting confusing details. It introduces 7th graders to
sex and infers they can consent to sex—seems to even ‘groom’ them for sex—rather than lay a
foundation for CHYA’s five protective purposes.
Discussion: Two issues are confused in this lesson: intricacies for mandated reporting by
responsible roles such as teachers (why should this confusing legal information be taught to 7th
graders?), and long-established laws barring minors from sexual acts. The four points for
consent to sex by adults are then introduced inferring that minors can give consent (why should
consent to sex be taught to middle school minors when it’s an adult issue?). This leaves
incorrect impressions, such as some minors can have sex per law (16-17-year-olds), that a 20-
year-old can have sex with a 14-year-old, and that minors can legally consent to sex.

Problem #2: The pretest injects sexual topics not typical for middle school children, many not
required by CHYA. The questions explore sexual topics including:
• How pregnancy happens,
• Condom use,
• Urination source,
• Clinics for sex care,
• No parent permission for medical consent,
• Birth control duration,
• Emergency contraception,
• HIV in saliva,
• Whether you can detect STI by looking at someone,
• Age to buy condoms,
• Issues of sexting, etc.

Summary: The Teen Talk lessons introduce a great deal of material about having sex, rather
than about knowledge and skills for protecting sexual and reproductive health.

Problem #3: The “Values” exercise has a Lord of the Flies type of social pressure as students are
required by physical movement to agree or disagree with values statements they have not been
prepared for, and may be asked to explain. This seems more about crowd influence than sex ed.
Neutral positions are not allowed. No guidance supportive of healthy behavior is given, some
value questions go beyond CHYA, and some topics aren’t even values. Examples:

• It is normal to masturbate.
• Middle school students are mature enough to have sex.
• It’s OK to have sex with a lot of people. (Inferring that sex with a few people would
surely be OK.)
• People should be able to express gender however they want.
• Get tested for STIs before having sex. (Again, inferring that sex by minors is OK if done
right.)
• It’s easy for teens to get sexual health services.
• Having a baby is a way to keep a relationship.
• Middle school kids can be good parents.

Problem #4: The section, “Giving your parents ‘The Talk’,” undermines the legal rights of, and
respect for the role and authority of parents. The material includes statements:
• “What should you do if your parents discuss values you don’t agree with” including
advice such as “Sometimes you must agree to disagree.”
• You can say ‘I can see what you’re saying but I don’t agree. I think that . . .’”
• If your parent/guardian starts to lecture or yell, just gently remind them that you’re just
asking questions.
• Also includes guidance “For some people, it might be better to look for advice and
information from another adult you can trust . . .”

Session 2: Sexual and Reproductive Anatomy:
This lesson, like the first lesson, is an in-your-face introduction of sex and sexual topics to
middle school pupils, many of whom are still quite innocent. The lesson acts to normalize sex
(usually a private and personal topic), through repetitive introduction of sexual terms. The
lesson fails to support the laws protecting minors from sexual exploitation or the purposes of
CHYA (please note, it’s called the “Healthy Youth Act” not the “Introduction to Sex Act,”) as
previously noted.

Problem #5: The lesson on anatomy goes well beyond the requirements of CHYA, adds
confusing detail to the already complex subject of sex ed, and forces this on middle school
children. Examples of repetitive introduce of sexual terms:
• Introduces 17 anatomical male features,
• Introduces 17 anatomical female features,
• Introduces anus, rectal fluids, pubic hair, and orgasm,
• Has an absurd activity, “Pin the part on the pelvis” that offends the real purpose of the
CA Healthy Youth Act—less emphasis on sex.

Session 3: Gender and Sexual Identities:
CHYA requires that three terms be taught: gender, gender expression, and gender identity.
Exploration of any harm from gender stereotypes is also required (though it should be
supported by scientific studies).

Problem #6: The lesson goes beyond a reasonable interpretation of CHYA requirements,
introducing:
• The non-scientific idea that sex is “assigned,” as though randomly, when in fact gender
has always been “recognized” by the presence of male or female genitalia.
• Introduces the non-scientific Genderbread identity prezi which suggests that gender is a
preference than a scientific reality present in every cell of the body.
4
• Introduces the confusing and rare birth defect of ‘intersex,’ a term not mentioned in
CHYA.
• Introduces other terms not in CHYA, including cisgender, transgender, non-binary,
gender queer, gender fluid, agender, gender-neutral, androgynous, asexual, pansexual
and SOGIE. Middle school students are typically experiencing puberty, the first phase of
adolescence, and their gender identify and expression is not clear. This school-based
intrusion into their natural sexual development has potential for harm and violates the
rights and role of parents who best know and love their children.
• The referenced video materials, “Intersex,” “Straitlaced,” and “A Place in the Middle,”
will offend the values of most parents and go beyond the requirements of CHYA.

Session 4 Not Having Sex: Abstinence
At the beginning of Session 4 students have been exposed to 190-265 minutes of sex-drenched
teaching that go well beyond a reasonable interpretation of CHYA requirements, and offends
the purposes of CHYA. At this point a brief 30-35 minute lesson on abstinence, negatively
expressed as “not having sex” rather than focusing on the positive benefits of waiting until the
maturity of adulthood to begin sexual activity, is presented.

Problem #7: It’s always about sex. The lesson fails to build a foundation of support for
abstinence but rather continues the practice of repeatedly introducing sexual topics to middle
school children, including:
• Oral and anal sex (even before mentioning the more mainstream vaginal sex) without
noting the laws against sex by minors. Body and genital touching are also introduced.
• A discussion activity of the three forms of sex in terms of risk of pregnancy and STIs.
• Introduction of “hickeys” (see below).
There is one abstinence related activity, but it is only an “additional activity,” and it has one
good topic (#4) out of the four options offered: “Ways to show affection without sex.” This one
good discussion is side-tracked by mentioning how to make a “hickey” thus injecting a sexual
activity into the ways to show affection without sex. No wholesome reasons for abstinence are
provided.
Presuming topic #4 is selected by the teacher and 10 minutes is spent on it, we finish Session 4
having spent just ten minutes out of 220-300 minutes on the main point of CHYA: that delaying
sex until maturity is the only medically certain safe protection of sexual and reproductive
health.

Session 5: Birth Control
About half of students will initiate sex before reaching adulthood thus it is appropriate, and
supported by CHYA, to provide information about how to reduce the risk of unintended pregnancy. Six categories of contraception are presented. “Abstinence,” is presented first but
as an option requiring “strong values about not having sex, self-control, and strong
communication skills.”



Problem #8: The material on abstinence in this lesson continues the Teen Talk failure to provide
a positive and encouraging message about delaying sex, noted in CHYA as the only medically
certain safe path. The fact that about half of students abstain from sex is evidence that the
average student can do it—that it doesn’t require “strong values . . . self-control . . . or strong
communication skills. (Italics added.)

Session 6: Pregnancy Options
This is a brief (30-35 minutes) review of facts regarding pregnancy options.

Problem #9: Pregnancy, for a minor girl, is a difficult and highly emotional topic with significant
and long-lasting consequences. The lesson presents the basic information about options, but
little or no information about emotions and consequences. This is a disservice to girls who may
become pregnant, or have pregnant friends.

Problem #10: Although options to terminate pregnancies are presented, there is no information
on protecting the health of the embryo/fetus (neo-natal care instruction). The focus on ‘killing
rather than protecting life offends the values of many parents.

Session7: Sexually Transmitted Infections
This lesson provides information on nine common STIs. The lesson tends to “white-wash” these
diseases—understating the seriousness of the disease—a disservice to the pupils, and would be
better if it included these summary facts:
1. The number and variety of STIs, and the resistance of some to treatment, continues to
increase—an ominous trend suggesting we haven’t seen the worst of these diseases.
2. The rates of STI infections, after several decades of decline, have significantly increased
to near-epidemic levels in the last five years of reported data. This suggests that the
emphasis on condom use for not-so- safe sex (rather than also encouraging abstinence)
has been a national failure.
3. Girls experience STIs differently than boys and are much more vulnerable to harms such
as pelvic inflammatory disease (PID, a cause of infertility).
These STI facts lead to a conclusion that a complete lesson might include: The human immune
system cannot safely protect against casual sex (meaning multiple partners). This should be
taught to meet the healthy purposes of CHYA.
HIV infections are a major emphasis of CHYA (HIV is mentioned about 53 times in the 3+ pages
of the CHYA act). Though HIV infection rates have significantly declined in the general population since the ‘90s, they have tragically persisted at about 26,000 per year among males
having sex with males (known as MSM). A reasonable conclusion is that what we’ve suggested
hasn’t worked so better guidance is needed.

Problem #11: Because anal sex will happen, pupils deserve accurate protective information. The
full CDC guidelines for HIV infection risk reduction are not presented and specific guidelines for
testing are not included, nor is there a reference to connect pupils with evolving CDC-approved
protections. Though anal sex is introduced as one of six forms of risk for HIV, factual
information about the much greater magnitude of the risk for MSM is not presented, nor is
information presented re the much higher risk for the “receptor” of the act. It is also not noted
that condoms are not FDA-approved for anal sex.

Problem #12: As noted above, the national emphasis on condom use has failed to adequately
protect. Condoms in typical use reduce annual pregnancy risk by about 82% and reduce STI risk
by 30-50% depending on the STI. If these facts were known, few parents would accept these
levels of protection for their children and adolescents lack brain development needed for
effective risk management. Even worse, trends for condom use have declined to about half of
kids consistently using them during sex. One conclusion is that emphasis on abstinence should
get more frequent and more effective attention and Teen Talk fails to do this, despite the
emphasis given in CHYA on risk avoidance.

Session 8: Relationships

Healthy relationships based on mutual respect and affection are a CHYA emphasis. Sadly, there
is little in this lesson that teaches the needed knowledge and skills for wholesome and healthy
relationships. As in prior lessons, the emphasis is on sex, including the darker sides of sex.
Examples:
• In 8.2 Healthy Reasons to Want a Relationship, middle school students are given choices
“partners” (not defined), “hooking-up” and “friends with benefits” (suggesting a sexual
benefit), “long-term committed relationships” and “marriage” (adult relationships).
• In 8.3 Sex Trafficking, the dark side of exploitive relationships is one part of two options.
• In 8.4 the “Join in one love” couplets use cartoon characters that might be minors (age is
indefinite) to discuss the relationship problems of intensity, control, anger, put downs,
disrespect, and guilt. Some couplets infer a sexual aspect to the relationships.

Problem #13: Knowledge and skills for healthy and wholesome relationships typical of middle
school pupils are not well taught and are displaced by adult topics. This is a major failing of
compliance with CHYA purposes.
Session 9: Body Image and the Media
No serious issues with this lesson.

Session 10: Sexual Violence Prevention
There is an inference in this lesson that middle school pupils could consent to sexual violence if
the four elements (active, equal power, a choice, a process) of adult consent are followed. The
lesson also fails to clearly state that sexual violence is wrong and provide guidance on how it
may be a crime. Perhaps this would be included as another “problem” if further considered.
Session 11: Decision Making
Decision making knowledge and skills are noted in the lesson title but not well-taught in the
lesson. The lesson offends the purposes of CHYA with repetitive presentation of sex situations:
• Two of the lesson objectives include discussions of why to have sex, without noting the
facts of laws protecting minors.
• Section 11.2 presents three scenarios, all about sex.
• Additional Activity 1 Toothpaste invites students to think about sex. Four sexual
situations are presented.
• Additional Activity 2 “Are They Really Ready,” presents 8 real-life first sexual
experiences in which the majority did have sex as minors. Little or no guidance is given
as to how to make a healthy choice.
Section 11.3 My Super Future provides a good framework for planning but doesn’t provide
guidance on how to succeed with the life goals, not does it involve parents in the process.

Problem #14: The lessons fail to provide protective knowledge and skills for refusal and
negotiation in the repetitious presentation of sexual situations. This leaves the impression that
everyone, or nearly everyone, is doing it. Fortunately, this isn’t the truth but you don’t find this
information or support for it in these lessons.
Session 12: Review
One overriding problem is included under the review session:

Problem #15: The historical foundation for healthy and lasting relationships is marriage.
Throughout history, marriage and family have been the primary foundation societal
institutions. There is no significant material in the 12 lessons that provides knowledge and skills
for building lasting, healthy committed relationships such as marriage, or that even note the
many benefits of marriage.

Monday, April 20, 2020

Call to Action: Contact Downey Unified, Tell Them to Have Parents on Sex-Ed Curriculum Committee

A victory in before the Downey Unified School Board! But there’s still more work to do! PLEASE HELP!
As you know, last year the Downey Unified School Board voted to implement the “Teen Talk” curriculum, a radical, very graphic sex-ed program. MassResistance parents began a campaign to stop it.

Over the past six months, CA MassResistance activists emails, phone calls, and attendance at the school board meetings have really paid off!
We are pleased to report that the School Board members and staff have announced that they will convene another sex-ed curriculum committee to discuss the changes that need to be made to the curriculum!
Here’s the statement that Superintendent John Garcia wrote to our team leaders:
"To demonstrate that the community feedback process works as designed in our Board Policy, all of you came to our Board of Education meetings and provided input, and we ultimately are revising the curriculum as a result of your input."
But there’s still one big problem. The school administration has said that the committee for the new sex-ed curriculum will not include parents!
Downey parents and residents at curriculum committee meeting last year

This is precisely what caused all the issues the last time. It will consist of basically the same kind of people who thought that “Teen Talk” was just fine for children.
Instead of having parents directly involved, they want to do what they did last time: Let parents “review and give feedback on” a presentation of the new curriculum once it’s already decided. That process didn’t work before and won’t work again.
There is no excuse for leaving parents out of the curriculum design process. In fact, part of the reason why we complained to the school board is that there was so little input, transparency, and decision-making to reflect the concerns from the community to begin with!
We need as many of you as possible to continue putting pressure on the school board to the do the right thing: Set up a completely new committee to review and prepare the sex ed curriculum and include Downey parents in the process.

CA MassResistance Parent Meeting in Downey

What you can do right now!
The Downey Unified School Board will be meeting this Tuesday, April 21, at 4:00 pm. The meeting will be held via video. The link to join the Board meeting will be posted HERE no later than 3 pm on April 21. (Scroll down to the April 21, 2020 meeting.) Other info on the meeting is posted there now.
You can email a comment that will be read at the meeting:
Persons who want to comment on any topic are invited to submit comments via email to publiccomment@dusd.net on or before April 21 by 4:00 pm.
All public comments will be read into the record at the meeting.
Please limit comments to 300 words or less (3 minutes).
HERE are some talking points:
1. The Teen Talk sex-ed curriculum had numerous problems, and it's good that the Downey School Board is scrapping that sex-ed curriculum
2. MassResistance organized parents and the community to contact the school board to reject Teen Talk. They need to keep listening to the parents.
3. The biggest problem now is that the Superintendent, Dr. John Garcia and Assistant Superintendent Roger Brossmer, will not allow Downey parents on the new sex-ed curriculum committee. That is wrong!
4. There needs to be more transparency in this process, not less. Parents need to be on the new sex-ed curriculum committee.
5. Some people in Downey, CA have already volunteered to serve on the committee. There is no reason for the School Board to leave out Downey parents, as they had done the last time.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
California MassResistance


Thursday, December 12, 2019

BREAKING: MassResistance Faces Outrageous Push to Cover Up Sex-Ed Materials in Torrance Unified School District


BREAKING: Outrageous Push to Cover Up Sex-Ed Materials in South Bay Community in Los Angeles County

California District Refuses to Let MassResistance Photograph, Record Sex-Ed Curriculum
Full Report Here!

On December 10, 2019, Arthur Schaper, our Activism Director, attended a meeting to look at the sex-ed curriculum which his local school district had adopted.

Torrance, California is a relatively quiet suburb located in the southwestern section of Los Angeles County. The school district is well-known for hiring good teachers and providing a safe learning environment for students. Many parents pay top dollar to move into the city of Torrance in order to enroll their students in Torrance Unified.


Torrance Unified Education Material Building
Arthur had submitted a number of FOIA requests to the Torrance Unified District to get more information about the student enrollment and to find out what the district was teaching students from K-12 in connection with the California Healthy Youth Act (AB 329).
The District was slow to respond to Arthur’s requests initially. Arthur had to refile the FOIA request to know which sex-ed curriculum they had selected. Finally, the school district got back to him, and they scheduled a time for him to look over the sex-ed curriculum.
December 10, 2019
Arthur arrived at the Torrance Unified School District Education Services office, right across the street from the district main office.
When he entered the building, he was greeted by two staffers, who then directed him to the Categorical Funding Specialist, Orly David, who was going to show him the different curricula that Torrance Unified had adopted for sex ed.
For the record, a categorical funding specialist directs and facilitates the implementation of state and federal programs. Much of these monies come from different grants and categories.  These programs include supplemental materials for students from low-income families as well as students who do not speak English as a first language. Additionally, funding specialists help provide programs for teacher and administrator training, as well as professional development.


Categorical Funding Specialist Orly David
Mr. David was friendly, and invited him up to the second floor into another meeting room. As soon as they arrived, David asked Arthur if he was familiar with the rules, i.e. what he would and would not be allowed to do in connection with the curriculum.

Arthur asked “What’s going on?”

David then explained to Arthur that he would not be allowed to take photos of the curriculum!
This was really shocking to Arthur, since he had been able to take photos and record the content of the sex-ed curriculum at the Downey Unified School District. When pressed to explain why Arthur would not be allowed to record or take photos, David responded: “Those are the orders that I have been given.”



Positive Prevention Plus is WORSE
than Teen Talk according to a number of sources
Sex-Ed for Elementary School?!



Who gave the orders? Ramona Cheng, the Director of Curriculum at Torrance Unified School District.

Arthur brought Brian Camenker, the President of MassResistance, into the conversation by speaker phone. Brian was livid, and he demanded to know why Torrance Unified would not permit Arthur to take photos and record video, but Downey Unified had allowed him to.

When Arthur took out his camera to record, David right away took the materials away!


Dr. Ramona Chang of Torrance Unified (Click here for video)
At this point, Dr. Ramona Chang  was brought into the room vias speaker phone, as well. She told Arthur that she could look at the curriculum, but he would not be permitted to take photos or record the curriculum.

Here’s the entire interaction below:


Dr. Chang explained that because the materials were copyrighted, no one would be permitted to take photos or record video. This makes no sense, since school materials are funded by public dollars. 

Doesn’t the public have a right to know and share information that will be taught to their students? Like David, Dr. Chang hid behind the color of authority, informing Arthur that Dr. Katie Krumpe, the Chief Academic Officer for Torrance Unified, had ordered all staffers that no one would be allowed to take photos or record video of the curriculum.

This is really strange, since Arthur had already taken photos of the sex-ed curriculum used in Downey Unified. Furthermore, the California Healthy Youth Act and the Fair Use Doctrine connected to federal copyright laws disputes all of this.

Key sections of the California Healthy Youth Act read as follows (with key portions highlighted:

"The Legislature intends to create a streamlined process to make it easier for parents and guardians to review materials and evaluation tools related to comprehensive sexual health education and HIV prevention education
"At the beginning of each school year... The notice shall do all of the following: Advise the parent or guardian that written and audiovisual educational materials used in comprehensive sexual health education and HIV prevention education are available for inspection....

Here’s Information about the Fair Use Doctrine in Copyright laws:

Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances. Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is a fair use and identifies certain types of uses—such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use.  Section 107 calls for consideration of the following four factors in evaluating a question of fair use:
  • Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes:  Courts look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and noncommercial uses are fair.  This does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below. 

  • Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole:  Under this factor, courts look at both the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work.

  • Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work:  Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright owner’s original work. In assessing this factor, courts consider whether the use is hurting the current market for the original work (for example, by displacing sales of the original) and/or whether the use could cause substantial harm if it were to become widespread.

According to the criteria listed above, MassResistance had every right to take photos and record video of the sex-ed programs selected by Torrance Unified. Our intent has always been to inform and educate the public about the sex-ed programs that schools are pushing on children. Based on our motives and results, MassResistance activists have every right to take photos and record video of school materials.

Arthur reached out to a fellow activist who has documented curriculum materials in other school districts, as well. Even though she faced a great deal of opposition from school boards and administrators, she would record anyway, and no one stopped her.

At the Torrance Unified School District, however, Orly David intervened and took the curriculum materials away right away. Dr. Chang asked Arthur  over the speaker phone if he would be content to just looking at the curriculum or leave.  Arthur requested to speak with Dr. Krumpe, but she was not available. Since the district would not allow Arthur to photograph or videotape the curriculum, Arthur decided to leave.



However, he recorded his interaction with Mr. David and other staffers:

Mr. David complained about his privacy being violated. However, school districts are public entities, and staff and curriculum are funded by public dollars. Right-to-know should trump any public official’s demand for privacy, especially when it comes to teaching perverted material to children all under the label of sex-ed.

Follow-Up

School districts around the country face increasing pressure for lobbyists and non-profits to promote certain agendas. The LGBT movement has been relying on these groups for a long time to force their way into public schools, and in turn to find ways to indoctrinate students into accepting sexual deviance an other perversions as appropriate and mainstream.

MassResistance is committed to exposing everything about this destructive agenda forcing its way into every aspect of our communities and our culture. For now, MassResistance is going to explore what legal options are available for pursuing Torrance Unified regarding this stunning amount of secrecy around Positive Prevention Plus and Puberty Talk. For a district to go to such lengths to hide the sex-ed curriculum that they are giving to children, it certainly suggests that that there is something very sinister and wrong about what they want to teach Torrance youth.