The fact that this even had to reach the Supreme Court should trouble us all. We are not talking about funding or governance or complex school zoning
The fact that this even had to reach the Supreme Court should trouble us all.
We are not talking about funding or governance or complex school zoning.
We are talking about how, when, and by whom children are taught about sex and sexuality.
This wasn’t just a dispute about whether children should learn that people of all backgrounds and identities have made meaningful contributions to the world. This was about children—children—raising their hands, their voices, or their eyes and saying:
“Stop. I’m not comfortable with this.”
Some mocked them.
Some dismissed them.
Some labeled them hateful.
But few asked what those children were truly trying to say.
🛑 Children Have the Right to Say “Stop”
Children don’t need to explain why something feels off.
They don’t owe us a backstory, a breakdown, or a justification.
But for the sake of understanding, here’s what could be true:
They might not be developmentally ready.
The content may clash with the values being taught in their home or culture.
They may be dealing with trauma or abuse that hasn’t yet been disclosed.
They may be confused, frightened, or just emotionally flooded—and that matters too.
This is why we teach that a child-centered approach means starting with one question:
What does this child need right now?
Not: What do we want them to know?
Not: What makes us feel affirmed or progressive as adults?
What. Do. They. Need?
👂 What We’ve Always Done as Child Advocates
Even as domestic and sexual violence advocates, we’ve been in classrooms across the country. But never without preparation, planning, and accountability. Weeks before stepping into a school, we would meet with:
Teachers
Counselors
Administrators
Together, we would collaborate on age-appropriate sessions on healthy relationships—not trauma, not graphic content. And at the very beginning of every session, we told students:
“If at any point you feel overwhelmed or uncomfortable, you are allowed to raise your hand, and your teacher will help you take a break. No explanation needed.”
And if a child ever directly asked us to stop altogether?
We would have. Immediately.
Because child safety first means child emotional safety first too.
⚖️ Even the Justice Seemed Bewildered
During the court hearings, one of the justices questioned why children were being introduced to terms like BDSM (a mischaracterization or misunderstanding by the justice because of a leather zippered jacket) in school settings.
The issue revolved around a children’s alphabet book used in Pre-K through 5th grade, particularly the letter “L” (“leather”). One page featured a character in a leather jacket with a zipper, and a related exercise asked kids to find items like “leather,” “lip ring,” “underwear,” etc. His question was simple, yet revealing:
“How could this possibly be age-appropriate?”
He wasn’t being inflammatory. He was confused—as many adults would be if they slowed down long enough to listen.
This never should have gone this far.
It should not take six Supreme Court justices to remind us that children deserve a say in what they are exposed to when it comes to sex.
I understand that this case will have implications for future cases involving race and other important issues. But that doesn’t change a fundamental truth: children have the right to speak up when they feel uncomfortable around topics related to sex. They have the right to set their own boundaries—and adults have a responsibility to respect them.
When I have trained parents. They commonly report that whether or not children actually do have the right to set their own boundaries is often a source of conflict and tension in extended families.
📣 Moving Forward: Let’s Learn the Lesson
If there’s a lesson here for all of us, it’s this:
Children are speaking. The question is—are we listening?
Let’s not waste this moment.
Let’s educate ourselves as adults.
Let’s deepen our understanding of age-appropriate education.
Let’s return to the basics of centering children—not agendas, not ideologies, not institutional pride.
Just children.
Let us be the generation of adults who don’t need to be taken to court to protect their assertion of “no”.
Link to oral arguments Mahmoud v Taylor
The referenced exchange is on page pages 151–153 of the Mahmoud v. Taylor oral argument transcript. The book is Pride Puppy. Please feel free to read it for yourself. The storybook is NOT the reason that this case was brought. I do not believe it is part of the curriculum anymore.