[BartSimpson]

Brenda Brenda:

(edited)

Brenda,
What I take umbrage at is the teaching of sexualized material in the schools. Some years back the Elk Grove Unified School District - along with several other school districts across the country - included a book called "The Wantons" in the required reading list for thirteen and fourteen year old freshman high school kids (Grade 9 in Canada).

You tell me if you think us narrow minded reactionaries were wrong in opposing this and you tell me if you'd be okay with it:

http://www.borders.com/online/store/Tit ... 1596541563

Click on the Google preview on the left side to see a sample of what progressive educators thought kids in 1997 needed to be exposed to.

This is just an example of the kind of nonsense that's led Tennessee to adopt their law.

If the 'educators' would invoke some common sense and not teach kids things that would get you fired for mentioning in an adult workplace then there'd be no need.

In short, nothing offensive is being stopped by this law.

[BartSimpson]

I guess in a nutshell that's my own standard of what should or should not be taught in the public schools.

If I'm not allowed to read it, view it, or repeat it at work then I don't want kids exposed to it at school.

[Brenda]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Brenda Brenda:

(edited)

Brenda,
What I take umbrage at is the teaching of sexualized material in the schools. Some years back the Elk Grove Unified School District - along with several other school districts across the country - included a book called "The Wantons" in the required reading list for thirteen and fourteen year old freshman high school kids (Grade 9 in Canada).

You tell me if you think us narrow minded reactionaries were wrong in opposing this and you tell me if you'd be okay with it:

http://www.borders.com/online/store/Tit ... 1596541563

Click on the Google preview on the left side to see a sample of what progressive educators thought kids in 1997 needed to be exposed to.

This is just an example of the kind of nonsense that's led Tennessee to adopt their law.

If the 'educators' would invoke some common sense and not teach kids things that would get you fired for mentioning in an adult workplace then there'd be no need.

In short, nothing offensive is being stopped by this law.

No, I do not think this should be given out to read to kids at all.
But not being able to discus the fact gay people exist, not being able to make clear that "relationships" like in this book are inappropriate, makes it all a big secret, a big hide, and children will never come forward with it to someone, because that is "not done". Like the abuse by priests. Like touching housekeepers in a hotel.

There are of course boundaries, but by ignoring the existence and making it "bad", you are only creating victims.

[BartSimpson]

Brenda Brenda:

No, I do not think this should be given out to read to kids at all.

So understand that it's things like what I've shown you that have led to this. What is presented as 'sex education' in a public school all too frequently would be found as illegal abuse in any other context.

If it's illegal in any other context, it should be illegal at school, too.

Brenda Brenda:

But not being able to discus the fact gay people exist, not being able to make clear that "relationships" like in this book are inappropriate, makes it all a big secret, a big hide, and children will never come forward with it to someone, because that is "not done". Like the abuse by priests. Like touching housekeepers in a hotel.

There are of course boundaries, but by ignoring the existence and making it "bad", you are only creating victims.

No one is ignoring the existence of these people. What's being prohibited is the inculcation of a sexualized paradigm upon young people. Teaching eight year old kids about the details of sad-masochistic relationships and etc. is overboard yet that's happened repeatedly in US public schools.

Tennessee is acting to deal with that.

Once again, my own standard here is simple: If I'm not allowed to read it, view it, or quote it at work then I don't want it taught in the schools.

[Brenda]

No teaching about breastfeeding in schools then, according to you?
Gays are not being able to talk about their fun weekend with their partner and their parents at work, BECAUSE they are gay, and that is not supposed to be mentioned?

[BartSimpson]

Brenda Brenda:

No teaching about breastfeeding in schools then, according to you?

Nope. I can talk about breastfeeding here. We even have designated lactation rooms for moms.

Brenda Brenda:

Gays are not being able to talk about their fun weekend with their partner and their parents at work, BECAUSE they are gay, and that is not supposed to be mentioned?

Reducto absurdium.

[Brenda]

No, not really. "DON'T SAY GAY" as in "GAYS ARE NOT A SUBJECT TO TALK ABOUT IN SCHOOLS". Which makes that, according to your statement (since you agree with this law, and it is not taught in schools, not even the existence, because gays cannot procreate naturally), gays cannot talk about their partners at work.

[Brenda]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Brenda Brenda:

No teaching about breastfeeding in schools then, according to you?

Nope. I can talk about breastfeeding here. We even have designated lactation rooms for moms.

YOU can, because obviously, your boss is very liberal. But I remember that breastfeeding pics had to be taken down from this site, because people could not go on CKA anymore at work because of it. Just sayin.

[BartSimpson]

You can't post such pictures at my office either, but you can go outside and see the real thing if you want to.

Go figure.

[raydan]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Nope. I can talk about breastfeeding here. We even have designated lactation rooms for moms.

Why???

Mothers should be able to breastfeed anywhere without others getting all weird about it.

[Brenda]

raydan raydan:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Nope. I can talk about breastfeeding here. We even have designated lactation rooms for moms.

Why???

Mothers should be able to breastfeed anywhere without others getting all weird about it.

But we aren't. We also have to cover up our babies with blankets, because people might see a little less skin than I normally show, because when I breastfeed, my baby's face covers my breast for 95%, but when I am not, my shirt and bra don't cover that much. See the logic?

[BartSimpson]

Brenda Brenda:

But we aren't. We also have to cover up our babies with blankets, because people might see a little less skin than I normally show, because when I breastfeed, my baby's face covers my breast for 95%, but when I am not, my shirt and bra don't cover that much. See the logic?

I've a young friend with twin girls who was out to visit at Christmas and when she was at the house just popped one out and fed her little girl. Mrs. Bart's eyes bugged out and I was a tad uncomfortable, too, but I guess it was also a compliment as she felt comfy enough around us to do that.

Logically, I don't mind it all. Still, seeing a healthy, attractive woman's equipment can be distracting. If it doesn't bother a woman that men will stare then I say go ahead and whip it out in public and do your thang.

But don't complain when men predicatbly stare.

[Brenda]

They do anyway.

[BartSimpson]

From today's news:

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2 ... t=FaceBook

$1:

In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money. During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During the same workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?” The unbelievable audio clip is posted here.

Oh, and here's a handout I'm sure everyone wants their kids to read:

[Brenda]

Too much.

Doesn't mean that when you teach sex ed, you shouldn't mention the fact that being gay is not a disease, that homosexual men and lesbian women do exist and are parents too.
Logically, you would expect a sex ed teacher to explain how kids are made, and what happens when you can not conceive naturally. You could talk about surrogates or egg and sperm donation.

I think it is too much to teach kids sexual acts at all. They will figure that out themselves. You could teach them about birth control, safe sex and sexually transmitted diseases tho, and teach them how to use a condom.