You miss my point. First, let's presume that no sane teacher anywhere is exposing children under 10 to "any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals". I think that's fair. In that case, why are they really making this law? To make it illegal for teachers to discuss "any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects". Which, in the context of materials intended for children under 10, means material such as "Daddy's Roommate" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daddy's_Roommate) But basically ALL materials for children under 10 that portray ANY kind of "STRAIGHT" relationship portray a (cis-hetero) gender identity in completely comparable terms and contexts. Cis-hetero gender identity is completely pervasive in nearly every context to which they are exposed. These materials would be just as illegal under the proposed law. But they are "programming" or "grooming" children to be straight rather than gay, bi, non-binary, trans, or rainbow unicorn. So no one would ever prosecute it.