9-12-year-old children must know how to challenge negative peer pressure and promote positive peer influence about sexuality. 

What is negative or positive? Is giving and receiving consensual sex outside of marriage considered positive? Is participating in or affirming same-sex sexual behaviour considered positive?

This section seems ambiguous in isolation. However, in the broader context of the CSE guide, it is clear that these are positives and instead discouragement of sexual activity can be seen as “oppression” and a negative. But should this be the way?

12-15-year-old teenagers must explore gender and social norms and their impact on sexual behaviours.

Topic 3.1 says gender is a social construct. “Gender” refers to a spectrum of many gender identities: male, female, transgender, gender neutral, non-binary, agender, pangender, genderqueer, two-spirit, third gender, and all, none or a combination of these. ^[1]

This is a step up from the 9-12-year-old learning objectives. What examples of positive and negative influences will be used? Will disapproval of same-sex behaviour be considered negative? Will disapproval of gender ideology be considered negative? From the broader context of CSE, the answer is yes.

Teenagers with values that disapprove of LGBTQ ideology will then face peer pressure to conform.

12-15-year-old teenagers must speak out when someone is pressured into a sexual decision that “they don’t want to take.”

What about sexual decisions that teenagers want to take? Why are teenagers not taught to speak out to discourage sexual behaviours outside of marriage in general?

The underlying message of this topic is individual autonomy. Individuals should not be pressured into what they do not want to do. But if they want to do something, they should be free to do it, regardless of “social norms”.

15-18-year-old teenagers are taught to counter negative gender and social norms and peer influence in sexual decision-making.

The entire topic presents social norms as negative and rarely positive. Nuances and benefits of existing social norms seem to be completely ignored. This also inevitably pits parents, communities against individuals who embrace the teachings of such CSE

On the surface, this topic seems good because it teaches students to resist peer pressure. 

However, it also seems to advocate resisting any social and cultural influence that impedes individual autonomy, even if it means challenging parents and communities that deeply care for the well-being of these students.

Is individual autonomy the highest value in life? Since this seems to be the fundamental value of CSE, students will emerge with such a hyper-individualistic worldview, and along the way, create many problems within families and communities, ironically in the name of “inclusivity”.