Mother Loses Job After Publicly Questioning School’s Sexual Education Curriculum

By: Georgia | Last updated: Nov 11, 2023

In the heart of Benicia, a controversial debate emerged as Janet Roberson voiced her concerns at a Benicia Unified School District (BUSD) meeting. 

She aimed her remarks at the district’s new approach to sexual education, expressing discomfort with its methodology.

Controversial Topics Addressed

At the BUSD gathering, Janet specifically questioned the curriculum’s handling of gender topics. 

Advertisement

Source: Tim Mossholder/Unsplash

She expressed reservations about introducing topics such as puberty blockers and the importance of identifying pronouns to ten-year-old students.

Advertisement

A Concern Over Requirements

Janet indicated that the curriculum’s approach pushes boundaries. “The inclusion of pronoun identification for ten-year-olds goes beyond state requirements,” she stated. 

Advertisement

Source: Gabrielle Henderson/Unsplash

She believed it introduced complexities in an environment already strained with multiple educational challenges.

Addressing Educational Truths

Janet emphasized the importance of having fixed standards in education. She mentioned, “Teaching children that they can adopt any belief system is misleading.” 

Advertisement

Source: Max Fischer/Pexels

She was particularly concerned about the curriculum’s stance on gender identity and felt it could be potentially confusing for young students.

Janet's Digital Response

In reaction to her growing concerns about the curriculum, Janet decided to amplify her voice through the digital realm. 

Advertisement

Source: Luke Southern/Unsplash

She set up a website, sharing a video that encapsulated her perspective on the matter. The content quickly gathered attention across various social media platforms.

Articulating Her Position

Janet’s primary argument revolved around the importance of age-appropriate education. She felt that educational content should respect the developmental stages of children. 

Source: Christin Hume/Unsplash

Furthermore, she was an advocate for encouraging meaningful discussions that respect these boundaries.

Advertisement

Facing Criticism

However, standing up for her beliefs meant Janet also had to face detractors. 

Source: Andrea Piacquadio/Pexels

There were those in her community who disagreed with her stance and openly criticized her public remarks.

Advertisement

Counter Arguments Presented

William “Billy” Innes, a resident, took a particularly strong stance against Janet’s opinions. In a published letter, he referred to her statements as a “bigoted diatribe.” 

Source: kaleidico/Unsplash

He also drew parallels between her beliefs and prejudiced views, covering a broad spectrum from racism to transphobia.

Advertisement

Professional Repercussions

 Amidst this contentious atmosphere, Janet faced consequences in her professional life. 

Source: Tim Gouw/Unsplash

Compass, her associated company, informed her that they would be discontinuing their business relationship with her. They clarified that she was not an employee, but an independent contractor.

Advertisement

Broad Spectrum of Views

Nathalie Christian, affiliated with the Progressive Democrats of Benicia, also commented on Janet’s expressed views. 

Source: Priscilla Du Preez/Unsplash

She categorized them as being contrary to principles of equity, inclusivity, and choice. This widespread attention prompted Compass to release a statement regarding their association with Janet.

Advertisement

Janet's Reaction to Developments

The unfolding events left Janet startled. She conveyed her surprise at the company’s decision, suggesting it differed from the initial explanation provided to her. 

Source: energepic.com/Pexels

She described the entire experience as highly stressful and said it had a profound impact on her family.

Advertisement

Legal Implications

Legal intricacies further complicated Janet’s situation. 

Source: Scott Graham/Unsplash

California’s anti-strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) laws restricted her ability to legally counter those who might have impacted her career, as their statements were seen as political rhetoric.

Advertisement