Transgender Rights

[KilroywasNOTHere]

For most of human history, if you had a problem of that type, you went to your priest. And your priest gave you as much help as most get from therapy.

Even just having somebody to trust to talk to helps more than most know. But.... If you have to pay somebody to care, to be trustworthy, is that really worth it?

Yeah but the question is how much of it is faulty wiring.

 

[Ixian]

I have to completely disagree. You should not homeschool your children unless you are rich enough to hire tutors or are very intelligent yourself. There are two main reasons first is that the kids being homeschooled might not be be academically taught well this is a problem the low class evangelicals and baptists will have. The second issue is that the kids will be sheltered, especially if you limit access to everything so they don't know anything. You want to teach them about other sides especially the enemy so they won't rebel and go full woke the second they get freedom.


Lol the fuck? What fucked up definition are you using where Samurai are not nobles. Samurai are basically Japense knights how are knights not nobles?

Your knowledge of history is pretty fucking spotty not sure we can trust your takes.

You don't need fancy private tutors, and a homeschool education up to the high school level can easily be just as good as a shitty public school where everything is routine memorization and standardized testing.

As to social isolation or lack of socialization, that can be a problem, hence why you can't just let your kid languish at home 24/7. You'll need to involve them in clubs, sports, and other social activities.

Its a lot of work, and lazy parents will screw their kids future up if they slack off, but with the right dedication homeschooling is a far superior choice.

 

[Ixian]

To me that sounds terrible, only good for raising a child with an incredibly narrow worldview who will almost certainly be at a disadvantage later in life.

I mean, you CAN do that. But by and large, more experience with more things is better than less experience with less things. Not to mention the issue of their social education, being largely cut off from others their age at school.

I've known homeschool kids. They're... weird.

Their worldview would only be as narrow as their parents decided. It has nothing inherently to do with homeschooling.

You have known sheltered kids who happened to be homeschooled. Again with proper social activities it isn't an issue.

Super judgmental of you however.

 

[evilchumlee]

Their worldview would only be as narrow as their parents decided. It has nothing inherently to do with homeschooling.

Super judgmental of you however.

The issue being that... it seems most homeschool specifically to ensure that their children are presented a narrow worldview...

It's fairly rare to potentially unheard of to find someone homeschool being public school isn't doing enough to provide a broad worldview to their children and homeschooling is the only way their children will be exposed to all manner of topics that public school is lacking.

In your case, you specifically noted homeschooling was the way to go to prevent certain topics being exposed to your child.

It's hard not to be judgmental when you take a somewhat paradoxical position of "It's not a narrow worldview" while at same time, "narrowing the worldview" is the entire point of doing it...

 

[Ixian]

The issue being that... it seems most homeschool specifically to ensure that their children are presented a narrow worldview...

It's fairly rare to potentially unheard of to find someone homeschool being public school isn't doing enough to provide a broad worldview to their children and homeschooling is the only way their children will be exposed to all manner of topics that public school is lacking.

In your case, you specifically noted homeschooling was the way to go to prevent certain topics being exposed to your child.

It's hard not to be judgmental when you take a somewhat paradoxical position of "It's not a narrow worldview" while at same time, "narrowing the worldview" is the entire point of doing it...

it's as narrow or as wide as the parents want it to be, not inherently one or the other.

Some things a kid just doesn't need to "learn", for example there is zero reason a white child needs to hear they are inherently evil for their skin color. There is zero reason for a child to learn how to solicit gay sex on grindr, both things that are "taught" at many public schools.

While on the other hand, there is nothing preventing a homeschooled kid from learning about other cultures and belief systems should the parents wish.

You position is based on the idea that children should be exposed to any idea/beliefs on the basis of a "wider worldview", without taking into consideration that some things are inappropriate or unnecessary for a child to learn, especially at a younger age.

It also ignores the fact that at the end of the day, the parents are the ultimate authority which it comes to decisions about their children, not the school system, not the government, and certainly not a bunch of political zealots who hate straight and white people.

 

[evilchumlee]

There is zero reason for a child to learn how to solicit gay sex on grindr, both things that are "taught" at many public schools.

This right here is the end of the discussion. I can't have any sort of actual discussion with somebody who is so far removed from reality as to say something like this.

 

[DarthOne]

This right here is the end of the discussion. I can't have any sort of actual discussion with somebody who is so far removed from reality as to say something like this.

Its really not. Really, really not. In fact its been pretty much been happening like that for years now.

 

[Abhorsen]

Its really not. Really, really not. In fact its been pretty much been happening like that for years now.

I haven't heard of them teaching grindr specifically.

This right here is the end of the discussion. I can't have any sort of actual discussion with somebody who is so far removed from reality as to say something like this.

He's talking about "This Book Is Gay", which was offered by a teacher to middle schoolers, and here's a page:

It also mentions Grindr, but doesn't quite endorse the use of it. Still, this isn't something a teacher should be offering to kids.

 

[evilchumlee]

He's talking about "This Book Is Gay", which was offered by a teacher to middle schoolers, and here's a page:

It also mentions Grindr, but doesn't quite endorse the use of it. Still, this isn't something a teacher should be offering to kids.

Maybe, but it is definitely around the time that kids will start experimenting.

I would probably be more in favor that being a more high school-available text.

In all fairness though, the book does seem to geared towards "If you're going to do this, here's how to do it more safely". That's usually not a bad thing?

I'm also curious just how prevalent the book is out in the wild. I do know that in High School anyway, my library had books about (hetero) sex available back in the early Naughties. We had Mein Kampf too, just as an aside.

But... despite my judgements, homeschooling is absolutely still an option. My opinion on what you want your kids to learn or not is irrelevant.

 

[DarthOne]

I haven't heard of them teaching grindr specifically.

Hence why I said 'pretty much'. But it also wouldn't surprise me either.

 

[Ixian]

This right here is the end of the discussion. I can't have any sort of actual discussion with somebody who is so far removed from reality as to say something like this.

Lol, go look up "Gender Queer" and "This Book is Gay" among a host of other such books that are being provided to elementary, middle, and high schools and then get back to me.

The only person removed from reality here is yourself, via willful ignorance.

 

[evilchumlee]

Lol, go look up "Gender Queer" and "This Book is Gay" among a host of other such books that are being provided to elementary, middle, and high schools and then get back to me.

The only person removed from reality here is yourself, via willful ignorance.

Are these being taught in the classroom as part of a course, or simply available in some libraries?

I can find precisely zero evidence of such things being actively instructed in schools.

Libraries have books, which aren't always Reactionary Conservative Approved. I'm shocked.

 

[Ixian]

Maybe, but it is definitely around the time that kids will start experimenting.

I would probably be more in favor that being a more high school-available text.

In all fairness though, the book does seem to geared towards "If you're going to do this, here's how to do it more safely". That's usually not a bad thing?

I'm also curious just how prevalent the book is out in the wild. I do know that in High School anyway, my library had books about (hetero) sex available back in the early Naughties. We had Mein Kampf too, just as an aside.

But... despite my judgements, homeschooling is absolutely still an option. My opinion on what you want your kids to learn or not is irrelevant.

... they start experimenting around that time? Middle schoolers are between the ages of 11 to 13. The only reason they would be "experimenting" is if they have been sexualized and groomed.

 

[Ixian]

Are these being taught in the classroom as part of a course, or simply available in some libraries?

I can find precisely zero evidence of such things being actively instructed in schools.

Libraries have books, which aren't always Reactionary Conservative Approved. I'm shocked.

Why the fuck are soft core pornographic books being offered TO CHILDREN? Why do children need to know the ins and outs of intercourse, gay or straight?

What exactly are you defending here? Are you making the argument that children need this information to avoid a "narrow world view", because to be honest, at this point I wouldn't allow my child within 1,000 feet of you or people who share your seeming belief structure.

 

[Jormungandr]

@evilchumlee Looking at the last train of discussion... what the fuck, bro?

 

[evilchumlee]

... they start experimenting around that time? Middle schoolers are between the ages of 11 to 13. The only reason they would be "experimenting" is if they have been sexualized and groomed.

I experimented around that time... I was not sexualized or groomed. I just... liked girls. I was like 12-13 when I first tried some sexual stuff.

Why the fuck are soft core pornographic books being offered TO CHILDREN? Why do children need to know the ins and outs of intercourse, gay or straight?

What exactly are you defending here? Are you making the argument that children need this information to avoid a "narrow world view", because to be honest, at this point I wouldn't allow my child within 1,000 feet of you or people who share your seeming belief structure.

Don't get me wrong. I would be more comfortable with this being available in a High School library.

Gay people exist. Shocking, I know. Sometimes, they're even pretty young. It's not something that they just decide to be when they hit their 18th birthday.

 

[Ixian]

I experimented around that time... I was not sexualized or groomed. I just... liked girls. I was like 12-13 when I first tried some sexual stuff.



Don't get me wrong. I would be more comfortable with this being available in a High School library.

Gay people exist. Shocking, I know. Sometimes, they're even pretty young. It's not something that they just decide to be when they hit their 18th birthday.

So, in your opinion these materials are perfectly acceptable for children to access? Or at least you think it's fine for high schoolers and just okay for middle schoolers? Don't suppose any of the studies that point out that over sexualization is bad for child development mean anything?

I know gay people exist, bisexual remenber, hell, most children know gay people exist circa 2023. What exactly is wrong with a a book that simply says that? Why exactly do these books need to be sexually explicit?

 

[evilchumlee]

So, in your opinion these materials are perfectly acceptable for children to access? Or at least you think it's fine for high schoolers and just okay for middle schoolers? Don't suppose any of the studies that point out that over sexualization is bad for child development mean anything?

I know gay people exist, bi sexual remenber, hell, most children know gay people exist circa 2023. What exactly is wrong with a a book that simply says that? Why exactly do these books need to be sexually explicit?

I think the book is potentially appropriate for middle school and definitely for high school.

The thing is, books like these provide information on how to do the things they're going to do... safely.

"Gay people exist". No shit.

Now the 16 year old kid who IS gay thinks "Oh man, I would love to do this"... they can either just... wing it and figure out, or maybe have some guidance about how to do it in a relatively safe manner?

Let's just use a different subject to make it make more sense.

I'm... 15, and I want to shoot guns. I obtain a gun. Is it better if I just... screw around and figure it out on my own, or maybe read a book that shows me how to properly do so in a safe manner?

We get worked up because of "THE GAYS!" but really, it's just a book showing how to do "potentially dangerous thing" in a safer manner.

 

[Abhorsen]

In all fairness though, the book does seem to geared towards "If you're going to do this, here's how to do it more safely". That's usually not a bad thing?

The issue is that teaching someone how to do something safely, also teaches them how to do it, and usually has an implication of 'you should do it'. More, this book teaches a lot of how to do stuff, along with safety advice. Teaching how to use a condom is one thing. Talking about all the different types of ways to have sex, then going "also here's how to use a condom" is fucked.

Quite bluntly, this shouldn't be available at all for middle schoolers, and probably not high schoolers. It's way too encouraging.

... they start experimenting around that time? Middle schoolers are between the ages of 11 to 13. The only reason they would be "experimenting" is if they have been sexualized and groomed.

They do. In middle school, I knew people who were at least fingering each other at school, who probably did more outside of it. Maybe they were abused, IDK, but they definitely should be told to use a condom, but not told exactly how to have sex.

 

[Ixian]

I think the book is potentially appropriate for middle school and definitely for high school.

The thing is, books like these provide information on how to do the things they're going to do... safely.

"Gay people exist". No shit.

Now the 16 year old kid who IS gay thinks "Oh man, I would love to do this"... they can either just... wing it and figure out, or maybe have some guidance about how to do it in a relatively safe manner?

Let's just use a different subject to make it make more sense.

I'm... 15, and I want to shoot guns. I obtain a gun. Is it better if I just... screw around and figure it out on my own, or maybe read a book that shows me how to properly do so in a safe manner?

We get worked up because of "THE GAYS!" but really, it's just a book showing how to do "potentially dangerous thing" in a safer manner.

Name the store where a unaccompanied 15 year old can walk in and acquire a firearm without parental consent.

Also, we have things like sex ed that explain the risks of sex, do we really need to teach an 11 year old in middle the level of detail gone into by the above books?

Finally, I can't help but notice that within the space of this discussion you went from "that isn't happening, you're removed from reality" to "it is happening, and its a good thing". Classic leftist/sex cultist tactics.