Don't Say Gay?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

I haven't been posting much of late, but I was surprised there was no thread on this issue, as it has been national news for some time. I am, of course, speaking about the Parental Rights in Education bill, labeled by opponents as Don't Say Gay. I'm sure some of you remember that my little brother is gay, my favorite uncle is gay, that I supported same sex marriage well over a decade longer than Obama, always supported the right of homosexuals to serve in the military and have zero issue with homosexuals having the same protections, rights and privileges as any other person. I have to say though, I find some of the reaction to this law extremely perplexing. The law, quite literally, states the following;

The measure bans “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through third grade. It also prohibits such teaching “in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students,”

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/dont-say-gay-bill-florida-senate-passes-controversial-lgbtq-school-mea-rcna19133

Now, I can see taking issue with the vagueness of the underlined, laws should be as specific as possible and that part is obviously open to interpretation. What I cannot understand, at all, is being upset about not teaching children under nine years old about this topic in school. I realize I grew up in the 70's and 80's, but I literally didn't even know what sex was, let alone same sex relationships, until later elementary school (which not inconsequently coincided with a friend of mine having a dad with a huge Playboy collection). I could absolutely see this as discriminatory if hetero sex education was taking place for that age group, but that's not the case. I can also absolutely see a parent wanting to be in control of that particular topic, most especially for young children.

I'm certainly not as liberal as I was in my youth, probably as a result of the extreme politics in this state coupled with my profession and being a well established home owner. But I absolutely cannot understand the extreme reaction this law is getting, or the apparently deliberate misrepresentation of what it entails by many of its detractors.

[NATI BENGALS]

I try to tune out the "national news" when it is these bullshit inflammatory intentionally divisive issues.

Pretty sure we learned about the body in elementary school. But I don't think sex ed was until 6th or 7th grade. Right at the start of the teen years.

I mean what's going on in Florida? Is there a big time sex ed program for their kindergarten through 3rd graders and teachers are spending too much time on sexual orientation and gender identity?

[HarleyDog]

We have to stop inflicting ideology into children. Geez, let them grow up and live a happy childhood instead of confusing them with stuff they don't even care about. We are robbing their innocence?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-23-2022, 07:53 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I try to tune out the "national news" when it is these bullshit inflammatory intentionally divisive issues.

Pretty sure we learned about the body in elementary school. But I don't think sex ed was until 6th or 7th grade. Right at the start of the teen years.

Yeah, I definitely remember the day the boys and girls watched their gender specific film, that was in third grade.  Even so, learning about your body is not the same thing, at all, as discussing sexual orientation or gender identity.

Quote:I mean what's going on in Florida? Is there a big time sex ed program for their kindergarten through 3rd graders and teachers are spending too much time on sexual orientation and gender identity?

I don't know, but that's a good question.  Let's examine it from both possible answers.  If it's not happening already, then why the outrage over a law that stops something that's not even going on?  If it is happening then is it appropriate for the schools to be teaching that topic to children nine and under?  I think either way you answer your question you have a hard time casting this law in a negative light, at least logically so.

[treee]

Legislating against a problem that doesn't exist for cheap political points. A tale as old as time. Red meat for the base.

[masonbengals fan]

(03-23-2022, 08:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: We have to stop inflicting ideology into children. Geez, let them grow up and live a happy childhood instead of confusing them with stuff they don't even care about. We are robbing their innocence?

Rep

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-23-2022, 08:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: We have to stop inflicting ideology into children. Geez, let them grow up and live a happy childhood instead of confusing them with stuff they don't even care about. We are robbing their innocence?

Quit sending them to church?

[HarleyDog]

(03-23-2022, 08:46 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Quit sending them to church?

That's parental. Not school. But, nice shot across the bow (for whatever reason you seen fit).

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-23-2022, 08:46 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Quit sending them to church?

I'm a guy who hasn't attended church once since I turned eighteen and my parents no longer made me go.  I went my entire childhood/adolescence, never liked it and couldn't wait to never go again.  That being said, this kind of mentality is why the left is losing so much ground with parents.  Mocking the concerns of parents and likening teaching children under nine about sexual topics to attending a religious ceremony really comes off as dismissive and condescending.  People generally don't like be dismissed and condescended to.

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-23-2022, 08:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, I definitely remember the day the boys and girls watched their gender specific film, that was in third grade.  Even so, learning about your body is not the same thing, at all, as discussing sexual orientation or gender identity.


I don't know, but that's a good question.  Let's examine it from both possible answers.  If it's not happening already, then why the outrage over a law that stops something that's not even going on?  If it is happening then is it appropriate for the schools to be teaching that topic to children nine and under?  I think either way you answer your question you have a hard time casting this law in a negative light, at least logically so.

I'm not a fan making up laws prohibiting speech for a problem that doesn't exist but would make a teacher teaching a kid the facts of life a law breaker. Kids say the darnedest things. Shitty parents exist. Me and you looked at playboys when we were little kids, imagine having a cell phone and internet access when you were a kid.

It's illegal for Caitlyn Jenner to go talk to a kindergarten class in Florida now... Cool i guess.?

[Stewy]

(03-23-2022, 08:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: We have to stop inflicting ideology into children. Geez, let them grow up and live a happy childhood instead of confusing them with stuff they don't even care about. We are robbing their innocence?

Amen Brother

[CKwi88]

What constitutes "instruction"?

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-23-2022, 08:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm a guy who hasn't attended church once since I turned eighteen and my parents no longer made me go.  I went my entire childhood/adolescence, never liked it and couldn't wait to never go again.  That being said, this kind of mentality is why the left is losing so much ground with parents.  Mocking the concerns of parents and likening teaching children under nine about sexual topics to attending a religious ceremony really comes off as dismissive and condescending.  People generally don't like be dismissed and condescended to.

Dudes dress in long gowns. Then get mad the kids want to dress in gowns...

[NATI BENGALS]

Those were jokes there fellas don't get your pant...

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-23-2022, 09:01 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I'm not a fan making up laws prohibiting speech for a problem that doesn't exist but would make a teacher teaching a kid the facts of life a law breaker.

How could they be breaking the law if the law addresses something you yourself stated doesn't even exist?

Quote:Kids say the darnedest things. Shitty parents exist. Me and you looked at playboys when we were little kids, imagine having a cell phone and internet access when you were a kid.

Oh, I agree with everything you say here.  The problem is you can't legislate away shitty parenting.  You can mitigate it in certain areas, but you can't eliminate it.  I've dealt with a family where the mom had ten plus children from eight different men.  Every single one of her kids ended up on probation, with most of them ending up in state prison after they turned eighteen (remember I covered the same area for over ten years, I got to know some families very well).  That doesn't change, or even address, the argument that teachers should not be teaching children under nine about this kind of subject.

Quote:It's illegal for Caitlyn Jenner to go talk to a kindergarten class in Florida now... Cool i guess.?

Is it?  Where exactly are you getting that from?

[Belsnickel]

So, I haven't been paying any attention to this because, well, it's Florida and I don't really care a ton about what goes on down there. What I can say is that I hate this sort of political grandstanding. Curriculum issues should be left up to the state's education department, board of education, whatever. This isn't something that should be legislated and doing so is really all about optics. I'm just tired of it.

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-23-2022, 09:10 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How could they be breaking the law if the law addresses something you yourself stated doesn't even exist?



Oh, I agree with everything you say here.  The problem is you can't legislate away shitty parenting.  You can mitigate it in certain areas, but you can't eliminate it.  I've dealt with a family where the mom had ten plus children from eight different men.  Every single one of her kids ended up on probation, with most of them ending up in state prison after they turned eighteen (remember I covered the same area for over ten years, I got to know some families very well).  That doesn't change, or even address, the argument that teachers should not be teaching children under nine about this kind of subject.



Is it?  Where exactly are you getting that from?

It doesn't exist until you make the law limiting speech.

To go with that I don't know how you can say that and just gloss right over the fact the kids with shitty parents may need help from an adult who isn't their parent. And sometimes that help is answering their questions. Is there a biological law that makes kindergartners through 3rd graders have no self awareness or sexual thoughts?

The law you quoted. "classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity.”

[GMDino]

(03-23-2022, 08:46 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Quit sending them to church?

I get what you're saying here.  Most people have the religion and biases that go with it because their parents forced them to attend somewhere.  A few of us grew out of it.


But I'm sure the counter argument is that church is optional based on the family versus school being mandatory.

I do agree though that I doubt any schools are "teaching" homosexuality vs just acknowledging it exists.  As usual the law is left vague enough to allow the "small government" gop to attempt control over it.

Its sad and its tiring.

[*Nately120*]

Here is the true story of how I found out what gay was.  I was 8 or 9 or so and were in the car listening to the radio and Rocket Man by Elton John was on and when I heard the line "I miss the earth so much, I miss my wife" I asked who Elton John's wife is.  My mom simply replied that Elton John is a homosexual and I asked what that was and she said he's a man who is attracted to other men.

And that was that.  So when I was a kid "gay people" were Elton John and Freddie Mercury.  My parents got the idea across in a non-judgement manner, but the lack of normality in the openly gay community sure made being gay seem a lot more glamorous and over the top than it was.

(03-23-2022, 08:02 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: We have to stop inflicting ideology into children. Geez, let them grow up and live a happy childhood instead of confusing them with stuff they don't even care about. We are robbing their innocence?

Good idea in theory, but if you don't inflict ideology on your kids someone else will.  My parents kept things pretty sanitized, which just led to me hearing things from older kids and then having a real "Wow, where has this stuff been all my life!" moment.  I did manage to accumulate a bunch of good stories of trying out new words and phrases I heard "the cool kids" saying and finding out just how taboo some of them were.  Life is trial and error.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-23-2022, 09:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, I haven't been paying any attention to this because, well, it's Florida and I don't really care a ton about what goes on down there. What I can say is that I hate this sort of political grandstanding. Curriculum issues should be left up to the state's education department, board of education, whatever. This isn't something that should be legislated and doing so is really all about optics. I'm just tired of it.

I get what you're saying, but there has to be a limit.  If Texas decided to instill curriculum that minimized the Holocaust, or even denied it occurred, I don't think many would share your position.  I think you would remain consistent, but most people aren't you in this regard.

(03-23-2022, 09:24 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: It doesn't exist until you make the law limiting speech.

That's not what you said.  You claimed the law is addressing an occurrence that doesn't exist.  If the law covers something that never happens then no one could ever break it.

Quote:To go with that I don't know how you can say that and just gloss right over the fact the kids with shitty parents may need help from an adult who isn't their parent. And sometimes that help is answering their questions. Is there a biological law that makes kindergartners through 3rd graders have no self awareness or sexual thoughts?

I can tell you when I worked in a group home I got asked sensitive questions by the kids there all the time.  In every instance I informed them that wasn't a subject that I should be discussing with them, and I worked in the 10-14 year old boys cottage.  The teacher's job is to educate kids on hard facts, not to discuss sexual topics.  Or I should say it's definitely not their purview to discuss sexual topics with children nine and younger.  A Sex Ed class at Jr. High level or higher?  No problem.  My absolute favorite high school teacher taught biology, I had him for regular and AP biology.  Every once in a while he would have a class session where we all discussed important topics.  He merely presented a topic and sometimes added a fact or two. But it was really an opportunity for us to discuss something openly among ourselves.  He didn't try and convince us of anything, his goal was to get us to think and listen to others points of view.  Of course, I was sixteen and seventeen when I took his classes, which is a far cry developmentally from a nine year old or younger.

Quote:The law you quoted. "classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Your position seems to be that the only thing Catelyn Jenner could possibly have to discuss with a classroom is being transgendered.  I think, unwittingly, you just reduced her as a person to being solely a transgendered person with no other identity or information to share.