This is complete bullshit. Since the curriculum was released there have been links galore from both the government and various news sources.

Maybe it was just me, but every single article I read failed to link to that information. And, so does the article linked in the original post here.

Why that number? Kids are not stupid, they are just small. My kid had questions all over the spectrum from the time she could speak. I made sure to answer in age appropriate ways using correct terms.

As I mentioned, an arbitrary number I came up with. I'm sure lots of people have a number of their own. Age-appropriateness is incredibly subjective, and as you demonstrated it's most effective between parents and their children. How do you average age-appropriateness across an entire class with a range of maturity and level of understanding?

You do understand that children are very aware of what is going on around them...from commercials to advertising to people on the street. They notice EVERYTHING and they have questions. They are also inquisitive about their own bodies and anyone who thinks that their child hasn't explored and found what does and does not feel good are sorely misleading themselves. None of what is going to be taught is going to be new to kids unless they are living in a bubble.

I completely agree with everything here. My issue is not that kids are going to be "unnaturally exposed" to anything, but that context is the key. What you teach your kids about sexuality (not reproductive science, rather sexual health and activity) will not necessarily be the same things that another parent will be teaching. That's why the classroom poses a problem.