[N_Fiddledog]

Here's the subject of the thread...


Liberals can't deny Levin's role with sex-ed curriculum

We have to ask does it matter if Levin had a role with the sex ed curriculum. Well, the details are starting to come out about who we're talking about. Do you want this guy deciding what your kid needs to know about sex, and how he or she needs to learn it.

$1:

Ben Levin proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing



TORONTO - By day, Ben Levin was the esteemed educator, tenured U of T professor, former Ontario deputy education minister, the expert who had the ear of premiers and leaders the world over.

And in his off hours? He liked to frequent an online incest chat room to counsel single moms on how to sexually assault their daughters for his pleasure and theirs, a site where his profile listed his sexuality as “nothing is taboo.”

How frightening to think this was the man who had so much influence on education in this province and beyond. A look at his Facebook page shows that he was speaking at conferences and workshops around the globe before his July 2013 arrest. And all the while, he was going back to his hotel room and logging on to the “M” website — its real name concealed due to ongoing investigations — where he shared, created and discussed the sexual abuse of the very children he sought to educate.

Levin was the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing. And now the wolf has been exposed in all his ugliness and depravity.

His grey-haired head almost buried in his chest, the 63-year-old listened resignedly as the court outlined the agreed statement of facts behind his guilty plea to three offences: creating child pornography, possessing child porn and counselling to commit a sexual assault.

The details were so sick they drew gasps from those who filled the North York courtroom. “It’s even worse than you could imagine,” whispered one woman.

On Aug. 12, 2012, Toronto Police Det.-Const. Janelle Blackadar went on the site posing as a sexually submissive single mother interested in the sexualization of her children. Levin encouraged her to sexually touch her two daughters and told her he had done the same to his own three girls when they were as young as 12. The court heard, though, that it was all talk — there’s no evidence Levin sexually abused his daughters and faces no such charges.

In December, 2012, he was also online with Angela Johnson, a London, Ont. investigator posing as a single mom of three kids. Levin also told her he had been sexually active with his own daughters. “Miss that a lot,” he said online, “but we had many wonderful years.”

“Mr. Levin also stated that he hoped his daughters would ‘share’ their own children (his grandchildren) with him and his wife,” Crown attorney Allison Dellandrea said in reading the agreed statement.

The renowned educator told the London “mom” he would like to “f--- all 3 (of her children) in front of you with your help ... would they submit or would I need to tie them?” Told he would have to be gentle, Levin pledged “no punishment or pain in exchange for your active help and encouragement.”

Between Jan. 29 and July 4, 2013, Levin was chatting on the same website with a single mom from New Zealand who was really investigator Russell Joe Gray. At Gray’s request, Levin wrote a story depicting the violent sexual assault of a 10-year-old.

On June 12, 2013, Blackadar from Toronto Police posed as a different single mom. Levin instructed her on how to groom her daughter for sex and then how to sexually assault her. “Mr. Levin asked D.C. Blackadar if she would hurt her child to ‘please him,’” the prosecutor said.

The Jekyll and Hyde of this man was beyond belief. The Crown told the court that while Levin was counselling this Toronto “mom” on how to sexually assault her child, he was in Norway conducting workshops with municipal leaders in education.

Upon Levin’s arrest, police found a Word document containing information on 1,750 people he had chatted with online about incest, including their children’s ages. He identified some of the users as “fake” but that description didn’t appear beside the names of the three undercover investigators.

Lawyer Clayton Ruby insisted Levin’s “motive was to fulfill his own fantasy,” that this was simply role play and he never had any actual sexual contact with children.

“I apologize unreservedly,” Levin said in a statement released by his lawyer. “I am deeply ashamed of these actions and highly aware that they have caused a great deal of hurt to many people.

“I am appalled every day that my behaviour fell so far below my own standards and previous actions which has led to the loss of my reputation and the loss of my livelihood.”

Or is this wolf just sorry he was finally unmasked?

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/03/03/be ... n-offences

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zip, you're tacitly defending the actions of a convicted child molester.

No, I'm asking which action it is that is so egregious.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zip, you're tacitly defending the actions of a convicted child molester.

No, I'm asking which action it is that is so egregious.

Composing a sex education curriculum that:

1. Sexualizes young children and proposes to those children that they should plan on sexual activity that is by statute illegal in the same Province that is promoting the curriculum.

2. Desensitizes teachers and parents to the grooming techniques of sexual predators by effectively normalizing those techniques into a classroom setting.

Because why would a parent object to a potential sexual predator doing anything that a government salaried teacher would do?

[sandorski]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Here's the subject of the thread...


Liberals can't deny Levin's role with sex-ed curriculum

We have to ask does it matter if Levin had a role with the sex ed curriculum. Well, the details are starting to come out about who we're talking about. Do you want this guy deciding what your kid needs to know about sex, and how he or she needs to learn it.



http://www.torontosun.com/2015/03/03/be ... n-offences

Wait a minute, is the subject about Liberals denying this dudes role in the curriculum or is it about this dude trying to seduce your kids? You are saying the discussion is one thing, then arguing something else.

You also seem to think this one guy has written every word of the curriculum. Certainly he was involved in the process, but I see no indication that he wrote anything of the final curriculum. I'm not saying he didn't, just that your continued assertions have not been evidenced.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Composing a sex education curriculum that:

1. Sexualizes young children and proposes to those children that they should plan on sexual activity that is by statute illegal in the same Province that is promoting the curriculum.

Can you show me where, in the curriculum, it says that children "should plan on sexual activity that is by statute illegal."

Here's Grade 1:

$1:

Human Development and Sexual Health
C1.3 identify body parts, including genitalia (e.g., penis, testicles, vagina, vulva), using correct terminology [PS]
Teacher prompt: “We talk about all body parts with respect. Why is it important to know about your own body, and use correct names for the parts of your body?”

Student: “All parts of my body are a part of me, and I need to know how to take care of and talk about my own body. If I’m hurt or need help, and I know the right words, other people will know what I’m talking about.”

[N_Fiddledog]

sandorski sandorski:

Wait a minute, is the subject about Liberals denying this dudes role in the curriculum or is it about this dude trying to seduce your kids?

Didn't read the article this thread is about did you? In progworld that makes you an expert I suppose, but in the real world we know the article posted showed Ben Levin in his own words describing his involvement in overseeing the development of the curriculum.

Here ya go. Here's more proof for you to ignore.



Okay so once we've established there is a connection, I suggest we can ask, "does it matter?"

And your problem was what, again? Was it this?

$1:

You also seem to think this one guy has written every word of the curriculum.

In what reality did you hear that? My memory doesn't remember being there. I've used the term "Oversee" multiple times by my recollection. Gotta quote for me on what you think you heard?

[Unsound]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

[ I suggest we can ask, "does it matter?"

No. Judge the curriculum by what's in it, not by one of the doubtless dozens or hundreds of people involved in the process of putting it together.

[sandorski]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

sandorski sandorski:

Wait a minute, is the subject about Liberals denying this dudes role in the curriculum or is it about this dude trying to seduce your kids?

Didn't read the article this thread is about did you? In progworld that makes you an expert I suppose, but in the real world we know the article posted showed Ben Levin in his own words describing his involvement in overseeing the development of the curriculum.

Here ya go. Here's more proof for you to ignore.



Okay so once we've established there is a connection, I suggest we can ask, "does it matter?"

And your problem was what, again? Was it this?

$1:

You also seem to think this one guy has written every word of the curriculum.

In what reality did you hear that? My memory doesn't remember being there. I've used the term "Oversee" multiple times by my recollection. Gotta quote for me on what you think you heard?

A video by a nutter is not Proof. Just type your "Proof" if you have any.

I clearly stated that I don't deny this guys involvement. The problem is that you keep arguing against the curriculum simply because of his involvement.

[N_Fiddledog]

sandorski sandorski:

A video by a nutter is not Proof. Just type your "Proof" if you have any.

Just hang on there a sec Sandy.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Was this not you earlier in the thread?

sandorski sandorski:

Instead of attacking the content, Ad Hom it through someone involved in crafting it?

So Ad Hom-ing Ezra is OK, right? You just can't say anything against convicted pedophiles - is that the way it works in Progworld Sandy?

In any case, speaking of not dealing with the content, I notice that's what you're doing, so I'll just tell you what the content is you're ignoring.

Rebel Media did a freedom of information request, and through it they discovered Ben was involved in what he called "Coaching" during the creative sessions of producing the curriculum. They have official documentary evidence of Ben Levin's involvement with the creative process of the curriculum.

[N_Fiddledog]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Can you show me where, in the curriculum, it says that children "should plan on sexual activity that is by statute illegal."

Page 217 C1.4

It's for 12 and 13 year olds. It's written in progspeak, but when I wade through the gobbledygook and translate I get them telling the kids to have a personal plan for when they decide to indulge in sexual activity.

So they should start planning on sex at about 12, you see. That's the way I hear it. I don't imagine my interpretation would hold up in a court of law, but that's the great thing about progspeak. It only means what they want it to mean in any given situation. It's like anything else progressive. The actual direction only becomes clear when you add the incremental. In this case the incremental "coaching" becomes clear throughout the year. And no, all those little comments and visual aids and internet links won't be in the lesson plan for you to decide whether or not your kid needs it so you can decide to decline.

[fifeboy]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Can you show me where, in the curriculum, it says that children "should plan on sexual activity that is by statute illegal."

Page 217 C1.4

It's for 12 and 13 year olds. It's written in progspeak, but when I wade through the gobbledygook and translate I get them telling the kids to have a personal plan for when they decide to indulge in sexual activity.

So they should start planning on sex at about 12, you see. That's the way I hear it. I don't imagine my interpretation would hold up in a court of law, but that's the great thing about progspeak. It only means what they want it to mean in any given situation. It's like anything else progressive. The actual direction only becomes clear when you add the incremental. In this case the incremental "coaching" becomes clear throughout the year. And no, all those little comments and visual aids and internet links won't be in the lesson plan for you to decide whether or not your kid needs it so you can decide to decline.

What C1.4 says is:

$1:

Human Development and Sexual Health
C1.4 identify and explain factors that can affect an individual’s decisions about sexual activity
(e.g., previous thinking about reasons to wait, including making a choice to delay sexual activity and
establishing personal limits; perceived personal readiness; peer pressure; desire; curiosity; self-concept;
awareness and acceptance of gender identity and sexual orientation; physical or cognitive disabilities
and possible associated assumptions; legal concerns; awareness of health risks, including risk of STIs
and blood-borne infections; concerns about risk of pregnancy; use of alcohol or drugs; personal or family
values; religious beliefs; cultural teachings; access to information; media messages), and identify
sources of support regarding sexual health (e.g., a health professional [doctor, nurse, public
health practitioner], a community elder, a teacher, a religious leader, a parent or other trusted adult,
a reputable website) [PS]
Teacher prompt: “How would thinking about your personal limits and making a personal
plan influence decisions you may choose to make about sexual activity?” 216THE ONTARIO CURRICULUM, GRADES 1–8 | Health and Physical Education GRADE 8
Student: “Thinking in advance about what I value and what my personal limits are
would help me to respond and make decisions that I felt comfortable with in different
situations. I would be able to approach a situation with more confidence and stick to
what I had planned. I would be less likely to be caught off guard and have to react
without having thought through the options and possible consequences.”
• • • • •
Teacher prompt: “Why is it important to get information from a credible source before
making a decision about being sexually active? Why is this important for all students –
including those with physical or cognitive disabilities?”
Students: “Having more information – and information that you can trust – helps you
make better decisions for yourself. Taking time to get more information also gives you
more time to think. Teens who consult a health professional before being sexually active
are more likely to use protection, such as condoms, if they choose to be sexually active.”
“Teens with physical or cognitive disabilities still need information about sexual health,
just like everybody else. They may be dealing with different issues, like adapting sexual
health information to their particular needs, or with variations on the same issues, like
privacy and self-image.”

My grand daughter is in Gr.8 and I don't see anything wrong with what is done here. Nobody is demanding kids take part in sex and talking about it isn't "grooming."

[sandorski]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

sandorski sandorski:

A video by a nutter is not Proof. Just type your "Proof" if you have any.

Just hang on there a sec Sandy.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Was this not you earlier in the thread?

sandorski sandorski:

Instead of attacking the content, Ad Hom it through someone involved in crafting it?

So Ad Hom-ing Ezra is OK, right? You just can't say anything against convicted pedophiles - is that the way it works in Progworld Sandy?

In any case, speaking of not dealing with the content, I notice that's what you're doing, so I'll just tell you what the content is you're ignoring.

Rebel Media did a freedom of information request, and through it they discovered Ben was involved in what he called "Coaching" during the creative sessions of producing the curriculum. They have official documentary evidence of Ben Levin's involvement with the creative process of the curriculum.

Again, I don't doubt he had a part. Are you now implying that his "Coaching" in the development of the Curriculum is coaching kids into sex?

[N_Fiddledog]

sandorski sandorski:

Again, I don't doubt he had a part. Are you now implying that his "Coaching" in the development of the Curriculum is coaching kids into sex?

I'm glad you don't doubt he had a part, because he did, and that's what this thread is actually about.

New evidence suggests he coached on the Curriculum, was invited to camps where the production of the curriculum was taking place, was asked for advice and gave it to the people putting the curriculum together.

Now as to his "coaching". This is interesting below. It's from a blogger who has followed the whole trial by attending the court. Only him and sun reporter Faith Goldy can make that brag. The rest of Ontario's media heroes were hoping the story would go away. It didn't.

But here's the interesting bit...

$1:

The Crown continued that his actions could be interpreted as simply trying to get sexual gratification from the chat, but the problem is that he also sent an image to the officer, illustrating his advice. This is not just dirty talk – it also includes coaching about how to commit sexual offense.

http://www.blogwrath.com/child-abuse/be ... ugly/6999/

So I'm not implying. I'm telling you Benjamin Levin liked to coach. He liked to coach what he thought was a sexual submissive on how to groom her children for what he suggested might be his later use. He liked to coach the creators of Ontario's "Progressive" new sex curriculum on how to make children of the province ready for the world of sex.

[N_Fiddledog]

fifeboy fifeboy:

My grand daughter is in Gr.8 and I don't see anything wrong with what is done here. Nobody is demanding kids take part in sex and talking about it isn't "grooming."

No nobody is "demanding" that, but that wasn't the question.

The question was:

$1:

Can you show me where, in the curriculum, it says that children "should plan on sexual activity that is by statute illegal."

Section C1.4 involves, "making a personal
plan [to] influence decisions you may choose to make about sexual activity?"

You're not supposed to be "influencing" 12 and 13 year olds to make decisions about sexual activity. The age of consent for sexual activity in Canada is 16 years old.

They don't need to make a "personal plan" on how to conduct their sexual activity.

I understand why Ben Levin wants them to have one, but why do you?

[xerxes]

Would you rather have the 13 year old boys in their school making their sexual activity decisions then?

And 12 years old isn't too young to start that kind of lesson. The next town over from me, Chilliwack, has a teen pregnancy rate where the average age is 15. That's the worst in BC.

When I was in Prince George trying and failing at being a teacher, I heard a few stories about the middle school there about the R rated activities the students there got into at recess.

I'm sure in a perfect world, teens wouldn't have sex until they get married or find that special someone, but as we all know, reality is far from perfect.