I don't accept homosexuality, and couldn't be arsed to care about some dudes sexuality
How do you manage to do both at once? lol
Spatial Mind said:I do hate it when transgenders read fictional books to elementary school kids and tell them how they choose their gender.This is actually something I somewhat agree with, the same way that I think making kids learn The Bible is wrong.
Depends how they go about it. I mean, can discussing conceptions of gender, in general, really be compared to teaching the bible? Theology is perfectly welcome in schools as long as no particular faith is being presented as fact. Gender should be no different. It's one thing to tell a child that scientific evidence exists for something for which it doesn't, or to openly push a political agenda. It's entirely another to tell them that gender is not the same as sex, and to present the possibility that they are free to choose their lifestyle, related to it, regardless of sex.
And I think giving children hormones to make them more like the opposite sex is manslaughter.This is always the issue cherry-picked to make the entire cause sound wrong.
How many hormone cases are even given to children relatively speaking? It's a red herring issue that only seems to come up from people who have no other, objective reasoning, as once I bring this up they go on more about 'the depravity of it all' essentially, if not appealing to the slippery slope of people trying to become other things like when 'gay marriage' being proposed as a legal thing had people thinking it'd lead to people marrying their cars and pets and shit.
This.
I don't fuck with American radical feminists though and I don't fuck with any extremism like collective guilt movements etc. Victimism is bad. Abusing people for who they are is bad. Everybody chiiiiillll.
Radical feminists are rare though, far right people are way more common and even radical muslims.
I don't fuck with American radical feminists though and I don't fuck with any extremism like collective guilt movements etc. Victimism is bad. Abusing people for who they are is bad. Everybody chiiiiillll.
Radical feminists are rare though, far right people are way more common and even radical muslims.
They aren't that rare in the US depending on where you live, and so goes the US so too does the world.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
Spatial Mind said:I do hate it when transgenders read fictional books to elementary school kids and tell them how they choose their gender.This is actually something I somewhat agree with, the same way that I think making kids learn The Bible is wrong.Depends how they go about it. I mean, can discussing conceptions of gender, in general, really be compared to teaching the bible?
As you say, it depends how they go about it, but I'd argue as a parallel that Christianity could have an equally soft hand about God as well.
It's attempting to package an idea to sell during the impressionable, formative years, and regardless of if it's progressive or regressive it falls under the same learning curve and conceptual hardening.
It's attempting to package an idea to sell during the impressionable, formative years, and regardless of if it's progressive or regressive it falls under the same learning curve and conceptual hardening.
Theology is perfectly welcome in schools as long as no particular faith is being presented as fact.
This is a sticky situation imo, as if they're too loud about it or otherwise have an administrative role that doesn't jive with the school itself it can lead to disciplinary action, much like how a teacher at my school was able to get away with covering '666' on someone's shirt from it being 'religious' in nature.
Gender should be no different. It's one thing to tell a child that scientific evidence exists for something for which it doesn't, or to openly push a political agenda.
Again, depends how they go about it.
To preach tolerance is one thing, as that's more about how one handles another's choices as well as the cultural expectation of how others will respond to your own, but it's another to push the idea at people as if the trans question applies to a greater number of people than I'd argue that it genuinely does.
It's not hard to identify with pretty much anything that hits us in key points in life, it's a large part of how Disney and shit have spawned furries. If this isn't handled right we could end up pushing transtrender movements further, rather than offering help to those who were already saddled with the issue.
To preach tolerance is one thing, as that's more about how one handles another's choices as well as the cultural expectation of how others will respond to your own, but it's another to push the idea at people as if the trans question applies to a greater number of people than I'd argue that it genuinely does.
It's not hard to identify with pretty much anything that hits us in key points in life, it's a large part of how Disney and shit have spawned furries. If this isn't handled right we could end up pushing transtrender movements further, rather than offering help to those who were already saddled with the issue.
It's entirely another to tell them that gender is not the same as sex, and to present the possibility that they are free to choose their lifestyle, related to it, regardless of sex.
While I generally agree with preaching tolerance, I'd prefer it be presented as an aesthetic non-issue similarly to how obesity is treated now, rather than have it become a furthered matter of nurture.
The path of tolerance will lead to gender liquidation, the irrelevance of it's roles, while pushing the LGBTQ message too hard risks furthering the perception of gender roles at all. They should be taught that it's okay to be themselves within a large span of options, rather than being confronted with yes or no question scenarios on gender where they may end up taking a path that's not for them, potentially even locking into it like we already see happening with formative component subcultures.
The path of tolerance will lead to gender liquidation, the irrelevance of it's roles, while pushing the LGBTQ message too hard risks furthering the perception of gender roles at all. They should be taught that it's okay to be themselves within a large span of options, rather than being confronted with yes or no question scenarios on gender where they may end up taking a path that's not for them, potentially even locking into it like we already see happening with formative component subcultures.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
I don't fuck with American radical feminists though and I don't fuck with any extremism like collective guilt movements etc. Victimism is bad. Abusing people for who they are is bad. Everybody chiiiiillll.
Radical feminists are rare though, far right people are way more common and even radical muslims.
They aren't that rare in the US depending on where you live, and so goes the US so too does the world.
Really? Please point me in the direction of some radical feminists. lol
I don't fuck with American radical feminists though and I don't fuck with any extremism like collective guilt movements etc. Victimism is bad. Abusing people for who they are is bad. Everybody chiiiiillll.
Radical feminists are rare though, far right people are way more common and even radical muslims.
They aren't that rare in the US depending on where you live, and so goes the US so too does the world.
Really? Please point me in the direction of some radical feminists. lol
Pretty much any liberal town with a college nearby's going to have it's share.
I only really had that presence quiet down in my life once I left school.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
Spatial Mind said:I do hate it when transgenders read fictional books to elementary school kids and tell them how they choose their gender.This is actually something I somewhat agree with, the same way that I think making kids learn The Bible is wrong.Depends how they go about it. I mean, can discussing conceptions of gender, in general, really be compared to teaching the bible?As you say, it depends how they go about it, but I'd argue as a parallel that Christianity could have an equally soft hand about God as well.
It's attempting to package an idea to sell during the impressionable, formative years, and regardless of if it's progressive or regressive it falls under the same learning curve and conceptual hardening.
In some sense I agree, but do you see formative propaganda as avoidable in our society?
Theology is perfectly welcome in schools as long as no particular faith is being presented as fact.This is a sticky situation imo, as if they're too loud about it or otherwise have an administrative role that doesn't jive with the school itself it can lead to disciplinary action, much like how a teacher at my school was able to get away with covering '666' on someone's shirt from it being 'religious' in nature.
Someone wearing a 666 shirt is not the same as a theology class. lol
But yes, sometimes teachers and administrators break rules for their personal beliefs. I'd say that's a separate issue.
Gender should be no different. It's one thing to tell a child that scientific evidence exists for something for which it doesn't, or to openly push a political agenda.Again, depends how they go about it.
To preach tolerance is one thing, as that's more about how one handles another's choices as well as the cultural expectation of how others will respond to your own, but it's another to push the idea at people as if the trans question applies to a greater number of people than I'd argue that it genuinely does.
It's not hard to identify with pretty much anything that hits us in key points in life, it's a large part of how Disney and shit have spawned furries. If this isn't handled right we could end up pushing transtrender movements further, rather than offering help to those who were already saddled with the issue.
What, you think they're going into classrooms and telling kids that they're transgender? lol
It's entirely another to tell them that gender is not the same as sex, and to present the possibility that they are free to choose their lifestyle, related to it, regardless of sex.While I generally agree with preaching tolerance, I'd prefer it be presented as an aesthetic non-issue similarly to how obesity is treated now, rather than have it become a furthered matter of nurture.
As would I, but that ignores the context of the world we live in.
The path of tolerance will lead to gender liquidation, the irrelevance of it's roles, while pushing the LGBTQ message too hard risks furthering the perception of gender roles at all. They should be taught that it's okay to be themselves within a large span of options, rather than being confronted with yes or no question scenarios on gender where they may end up taking a path that's not for them, potentially even locking into it like we already see happening with formative component subcultures.
Do you see this as worse than any other way that kids are pushed to "be themselves"?
last edit on
4/10/2021 9:16:06 PM
Spatial Mind said:I do hate it when transgenders read fictional books to elementary school kids and tell them how they choose their gender.This is actually something I somewhat agree with, the same way that I think making kids learn The Bible is wrong.Depends how they go about it. I mean, can discussing conceptions of gender, in general, really be compared to teaching the bible?As you say, it depends how they go about it, but I'd argue as a parallel that Christianity could have an equally soft hand about God as well.
It's attempting to package an idea to sell during the impressionable, formative years, and regardless of if it's progressive or regressive it falls under the same learning curve and conceptual hardening.In some sense I agree, but do you see formative propaganda as avoidable in our society?
It's easier to avoid now that cable's not as dominant, but in it's place it's now multiple subcultural sources of propaganda rather than 'what's on tv'. Through the presentation of variety you can end up with a more well-rounded child, rather than presenting tons of media with elements in common as if to normalize it.
Theology is perfectly welcome in schools as long as no particular faith is being presented as fact.This is a sticky situation imo, as if they're too loud about it or otherwise have an administrative role that doesn't jive with the school itself it can lead to disciplinary action, much like how a teacher at my school was able to get away with covering '666' on someone's shirt from it being 'religious' in nature.Someone wearing a 666 shirt is not the same as a theology class. lol
Woah woah, theology classes instead of just theology itself?
I've never seen theology taught in non-religious schools, barring colleges. At best there's maybe a History class or two where the teachers were a bit more bold, as otherwise it's an issue 'best left avoided' as a matter of liability risk.
I've never seen theology taught in non-religious schools, barring colleges. At best there's maybe a History class or two where the teachers were a bit more bold, as otherwise it's an issue 'best left avoided' as a matter of liability risk.
But yes, sometimes teachers and administrators break rules for their personal beliefs. I'd say that's a separate issue.
It was seen as presenting religious iconography at school, and if she couldn't spout Christian propaganda then she won't allow her students to do so either.
She actually won that case when it was brought to the principle, and the kid had to wear duct tape on those portions for the rest of the day.
She actually won that case when it was brought to the principle, and the kid had to wear duct tape on those portions for the rest of the day.
Gender should be no different. It's one thing to tell a child that scientific evidence exists for something for which it doesn't, or to openly push a political agenda.Again, depends how they go about it.
To preach tolerance is one thing, as that's more about how one handles another's choices as well as the cultural expectation of how others will respond to your own, but it's another to push the idea at people as if the trans question applies to a greater number of people than I'd argue that it genuinely does.
It's not hard to identify with pretty much anything that hits us in key points in life, it's a large part of how Disney and shit have spawned furries. If this isn't handled right we could end up pushing transtrender movements further, rather than offering help to those who were already saddled with the issue.What, you think they're going into classrooms and telling kids that they're transgender? lol
No, but they're presenting it as a general question rather than a disorder or condition that only spans (according to studies anyway) to around 5% of people. When trended like this it's liable to be modeled off of, rather than tolerated as not a big deal, as hype rather than as acceptance.
To illustrate my point, should we have people go to schools to ask if everyone's ADD or ODD?
To illustrate my point, should we have people go to schools to ask if everyone's ADD or ODD?
It's entirely another to tell them that gender is not the same as sex, and to present the possibility that they are free to choose their lifestyle, related to it, regardless of sex.While I generally agree with preaching tolerance, I'd prefer it be presented as an aesthetic non-issue similarly to how obesity is treated now, rather than have it become a furthered matter of nurture.As would I, but that ignores the context of the world we live in.
I don't think it'd be that difficult to float tolerance-driven media, rather than forcing their hand, such as how Hey Arnold handled it.
We need flawed LGBTQ and racial characters if we're going to even the playing field, rather than presenting them as psychics, media-savvy snarkers, or freedom fighters. If we keep presenting the 'safe' demographics with flaws and the 'unsafe' demographics as untouchable it'll continue to sell as untrue to life, much like the trend on family cartoons to make the fathers bumbling and stupid while the mothers are on top of everything (Rick and Morty, Family Guy, Simpsons, Fairly Odd Parents, I could go on and on). Flipping the genders on those shows would play out as backwards as All In The Family, and when flaws are applied to only some demographics and not others it implies that 'white men' for example need flaws to be on equal footing with their racially and sexually handicapped team members.
We need flawed LGBTQ and racial characters if we're going to even the playing field, rather than presenting them as psychics, media-savvy snarkers, or freedom fighters. If we keep presenting the 'safe' demographics with flaws and the 'unsafe' demographics as untouchable it'll continue to sell as untrue to life, much like the trend on family cartoons to make the fathers bumbling and stupid while the mothers are on top of everything (Rick and Morty, Family Guy, Simpsons, Fairly Odd Parents, I could go on and on). Flipping the genders on those shows would play out as backwards as All In The Family, and when flaws are applied to only some demographics and not others it implies that 'white men' for example need flaws to be on equal footing with their racially and sexually handicapped team members.
The path of tolerance will lead to gender liquidation, the irrelevance of it's roles, while pushing the LGBTQ message too hard risks furthering the perception of gender roles at all. They should be taught that it's okay to be themselves within a large span of options, rather than being confronted with yes or no question scenarios on gender where they may end up taking a path that's not for them, potentially even locking into it like we already see happening with formative component subcultures.Do you see this as worse than any other way that kids are pushed to "be themselves"?
Yes, as even if this becomes acceptable behavior in society it still means people taking risks as a matter of status quo.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
4/10/2021 11:11:27 PM
QuietBeef said:Depends how they go about it. I mean, can discussing conceptions of gender, in general, really be compared to teaching the bible? Theology is perfectly welcome in schools as long as no particular faith is being presented as fact. Gender should be no different. It's one thing to tell a child that scientific evidence exists for something for which it doesn't, or to openly push a political agenda. It's entirely another to tell them that gender is not the same as sex, and to present the possibility that they are free to choose their lifestyle, related to it, regardless of sex.
I don't think gender discussion or religion should be within the domain of elementary schooling—best left for the parents or for middle school should the parents be incompetent. I understand not everyone will agree with this, but I think its good to let children exist in some semblance of innocence before the onset of puberty and everything that it brings.