All Things LGBTQ+ (3 Viewers)

[Farb]

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/sup...y-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

• The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a unanimous defeat to LGBT couples in a high-profile case over whether Philadelphia could refuse to contract with a Roman Catholic adoption agency that says its religious beliefs prevent it from working with same-sex foster parents.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion for a majority of the court that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services once it learned that the organization would not certify same-sex couples for adoption.

I will admit, I was hopeful for this decision by the SCOTUS but I was surprised by the unanimous decision.

While I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with same sex couples adopting and raising children (I actually think it is a good thing as it not an abortion) but I also did not want to see the state force a religious institution to bend to a societal norm.

 

[Sandman]

Why can't they? They can even say the word 'gay' despite what the narrative is. Probably not a good idea to plan lesson plans around gender theory though, especially at that age. Would you not agree?

First time a gay teacher is asked about his/her spouse and mentions that he/she is gay, some parent is going to sue. You know that is true. So, the bill's actual effect is to "don't say gay."

 

[Optimus Prime]

Why can't they? They can even say the word 'gay' despite what the narrative is. Probably not a good idea to plan lesson plans around gender theory though, especially at that age. Would you not agree?

What do you mean exactly by "lesson plans on gender theory"

If you mean by explaining that men love women, women love men, men can love men and women can love women, some kids can have 2 moms, some kids can have two dads and it's all okay

Then I'm fine with that

It's like that saying, "Explain it to me like I'm 6 years old" and here you are literally doing exactly that

I didn't have any official sex ed in school until 5th grade and I'm fine going into more detail about LGBTQ then (just like all other sex ed issues).

Prior to that answer questions is an age appropriate manner

I think some people think that teachers are telling 2nd graders about their sexual exploits like it's a Penthouse forum letter

"Gather round children, it's storytime, now I never thought this would happen to me but......."

 

[MT15]

I rest my case.

You can't even admit that what you are seeing is unfair.

You’re full of shirt. I did admit it. More than once. Quit trying to just score points in some sort of measuring contest and just talk to people as if they are actually people and not adversaries. Good lord, grow up.

 

[MT15]

If only that is all we are talking about.

So you believe the sex offender registry is 'authoritarian'? How about probation?

More straw men. What I said is that you have a disturbing tendency to believe that everything you don’t like or choose not to understand is somehow perverted. You have some real issues, and you refuse to do anything but deflect away from them.

 

[Farb]

More straw men. What I said is that you have a disturbing tendency to believe that everything you don’t like or choose not to understand is somehow perverted. You have some real issues, and you refuse to do anything but deflect away from them.

Was it a strawman or was it me simply asking you to explain your thoughts a little more.

 

[MT15]

Was it a strawman or was it me simply asking you to explain your thoughts a little more.

But you really didn’t ask me to explain. You stated what you think I believe. There’s a huge difference.

 

[Farb]

What do you mean exactly by "lesson plans on gender theory"

If you mean by explaining that men love women, women love men, men can love men and women can love women, some kids can have 2 moms, some kids can have two dads and it's all okay

Then I'm fine with that

It's like that saying, "Explain it to me like I'm 6 years old" and here you are literally doing exactly that

I didn't have any official sex ed in school until 5th grade and I'm fine going into more detail about LGBTQ then (just like all other sex ed issues).

Prior to that answer questions is an age appropriate manner

I think some people think that teachers are telling 2nd graders about their sexual exploits like it's a Penthouse forum letter

"Gather round children, it's storytime, now I never thought this would happen to me but......."

https://educators4sc.org/topic-guides/teaching-about-gender-identity/

1. Lesson Plans to Help Students Understand Gender and to Support Transgender and Non-Binary Children: Welcoming Schools has put together a page soley devoted to compiling various lesson plans that teachers can use in their classrooms to help students understand gender and support those who identify differently than themselves. The plans are geared towards either elementary or middle school students (depending on the lesson), but there is something for everyone. Some lesson plans involve reading children’s stories, discussing a specific topic (gender stereotypes, gender expression, gender identity, etc.), and a corresponding craft. Others involve group discussions or writing persuasive essays on information learned or gathered from books or historical figures.

You personally can think this is a good idea, but why is it being hidden from parents, in some cases, actively hidden?
I have a friend who lived in DC and she just moved back to Florida because her 4 year old came home and asked her when he was going to become a girl. That is creepy.

 

[Farb]

First time a gay teacher is asked about his/her spouse and mentions that he/she is gay, some parent is going to sue. You know that is true. So, the bill's actual effect is to "don't say gay."

No where in the bill does it say anything like that. You are making an assumption. There are several things that a teacher should not discuss with a student even if asked directly. The student's parents would be notified and told to discuss with the kid. Sex used to be one of those but now everyone thinks their story is so 'brave' or whatever and will not miss an opportunity to talk about themselves.

If teaching little kids about gender theory does not happen, then why the push back by the teachers unions?

 

[coldseat]

https://educators4sc.org/topic-guides/teaching-about-gender-identity/

1. Lesson Plans to Help Students Understand Gender and to Support Transgender and Non-Binary Children: Welcoming Schools has put together a page soley devoted to compiling various lesson plans that teachers can use in their classrooms to help students understand gender and support those who identify differently than themselves. The plans are geared towards either elementary or middle school students (depending on the lesson), but there is something for everyone. Some lesson plans involve reading children’s stories, discussing a specific topic (gender stereotypes, gender expression, gender identity, etc.), and a corresponding craft. Others involve group discussions or writing persuasive essays on information learned or gathered from books or historical figures.

You personally can think this is a good idea, but why is it being hidden from parents, in some cases, actively hidden?
I have a friend who lived in DC and she just moved back to Florida because her 4 year old came home and asked her when he was going to become a girl. That is creepy.

You do realize that's and origination that provides educational resources for a whole host of topics, don't you. Most are liberal, but not all. Are you arguing that organizations that independently provide educational resources shouldn't be allowed to exist? If so, can we also outlaw the multitude of conservative organizations that provide educational resources on a whole host of topics that I would disagree with?

 

[MT15]

No where in the bill does it say anything like that. You are making an assumption. There are several things that a teacher should not discuss with a student even if asked directly. The student's parents would be notified and told to discuss with the kid. Sex used to be one of those but now everyone thinks their story is so 'brave' or whatever and will not miss an opportunity to talk about themselves.

If teaching little kids about gender theory does not happen, then why the push back by the teachers unions?

Teachers are pushing back because they will be sued by any idiot in the public with an ax to grind about this issue. They are pushing back because they have been threatened with being monitored by people who aren’t even parents of school children. They are pushing back because they are being asked to do hours and hours of extra work to post entire lessons on line. They are pushing back because they are being treated like criminals for doing their job. But I suspect you know all that. And sex education was a thing back when I was in school - so no, it’s not something that the schools would refuse to talk about with kids at least since the 1960s.

 

[Sandman]

No where in the bill does it say anything like that. You are making an assumption. There are several things that a teacher should not discuss with a student even if asked directly. The student's parents would be notified and told to discuss with the kid. Sex used to be one of those but now everyone thinks their story is so 'brave' or whatever and will not miss an opportunity to talk about themselves.

If teaching little kids about gender theory does not happen, then why the push back by the teachers unions

Because people like you will sue the school/teachers the first time a kid comes home and mentions that either his teacher is gay or one of his fellow students mentions he has gay parents. You won't care the context of how that happened, just the opportunity to push your anti-gay agenda.

Opportunities to teach come up all the time outside the normal lesson plan based on questions from children. You seem to suggest that teachers ignore students' questions. My best teachers were the ones that interacted with students and addressed some "hot-button" issues that were asked about by students. The worst teachers were the ones that "stuck to the curriculum" and basically just read the text book to us each day.

As for the bill, it is overly broad and intended to be broad so that parents could sue in almost any situation. The bill doesn't have to say "don't say gay" in order to have that effect. Quite honestly, it is chicken ****. If you want to submit a bill that says teachers can't discuss these subjects with students, own it and put it down just like that. The way it is worded now is intended to give people such as yourself cover when you support it. We know what you are about Farb. You have no interest in the kids. You just want to keep the different people down. I guess it makes you feel that you are more important. It would be sad if it were not so harmful.

 

[SystemShock]

Nice attempt at a dodge. I'm not letting you off the hook.
The Democrats aren't passing laws to prevent the trans kids from playing. The Republicans are.
They are the ones that are claiming they are doing this for fairness and to prevent injury. It is complete garbage. They are doing it because they are transphobic and bigots. There are many more "man-childs" out there than trans-kids playing sports. Yet there is no call to stop the unfair competitive advantage in those instances. If you support the trans-kids ban, but have not contacted your congressperson about stopping the man-children, then you at best, a hypocrite. If you can't acknowledge your hypocrisy, then you are probably a bigot.

You claim this is for safety but have ignored safety concerns staring you in the face for years. So is it about safety or is it to keep the different kids from playing? You know the answer. I don't do this to be mean, but because I think you are better than this. You are being manipulated and used by lesser people for their own political gain. Ask yourself, what do you actually gain from the trans-kids sports laws personally? Even if these laws pass, and trans-kids don't play sports, is the US or your state any better off? Our infrastructure is falling apart in this country, yet these laws are at the top of the list for lawmakers. This isn't for your benefit or for the benefit of the state. It is to make you scared so that you keep voting for these bunch of do-nothings. You are getting played, and you should be damn angry about it.

I think you are confusing me with someone else.

 

[SystemShock]

You’re full of shirt. I did admit it. More than once. Quit trying to just score points in some sort of measuring contest and just talk to people as if they are actually people and not adversaries. Good lord, grow up.

Can you please point out where in your response you answered "yes" or "no" to the question I posed to you, "Do you see fair play in those pictures? "

You can't, because you didn't... instead, you did the exact same thing I said in my post.

I am not trying to score points, nor am I the one talking to anyone as if they were adversaries, or telling people they are full of shirt, or telling people to grow up.

 

[MT15]

Can you please point out where in your response you answered "yes" or "no" to the question I posed to you, "Do you see fair play in those pictures? "

You can't, because you didn't... instead, you did the exact same thing I said in my post.

I am not trying to score points, nor am I the one talking to anyone as if they were adversaries, or telling people they are full of shirt, or telling people to grow up.

I don’t have to say “yes” or “no”, there’s room for nuance. What I said was that there is a big difference between people who have obviously gone through puberty and then transitioned and the children who are the targets of these laws. You said that it doesn’t look like this individual has lost their advantage because of hormone therapy and I pointed out that we don’t know if this person has even had any hormone therapy. And then you pounced with your post. I did say that there are issues with people who have gone through puberty and then transitioned, and it’s dishonest of you to claim that I denied it.

What you are doing is using an extreme example to justify laws which will target children. You are playing “gotcha” by twisting my words. I stand by my words to you.

 

[V Chip]

Thomas was ranked like 400th or something nationally in mens swimming, he is what, 1 or 2 at this point in womens (if he is 1, then I think that other ivy league guy is ahead of him in womens). What about the high school trans boys. They were average and then champs as women.

A boys soccer team can beat the the US womens team. The William sisters lost to a very average male player. Both of them.
No matter how bad you want this to be true to 'own the cons' doesn't make it so. In reality, it is silly.

You’re comparing cisgender men to cisgender women. After two years of hormone therapy, I doubt any trans man could beat either of the Williams sisters with regularity.

 

[SystemShock]

I don’t have to say “yes” or “no”, there’s room for nuance.

Where is the nuance in the picture? Please point it out to me.

What I said was that there is a big difference between people who have obviously gone through puberty and then transitioned and the children who are the targets of these laws. You said that it doesn’t look like this individual has lost their advantage because of hormone therapy and I pointed out that we don’t know if this person has even had any hormone therapy. And then you pounced with your post. I did say that there are issues with people who have gone through puberty and then transitioned, and it’s dishonest of you to claim that I denied it.

It is not dishonest. The posts are there for everyone to see. I said that when I ask directly whether the pictures depict fair play, I get told about studies and laws and this and that, but never a yes or no answer. Then I asked you directly and you responded exactly as I described.

What you are doing is using an extreme example to justify laws which will target children. You are playing “gotcha” by twisting my words. I stand by my words to you.

I am using an example. It is not a "gotcha", nor am I twisting anyone's words. But even if I'd concede the example I used is extreme, you still couldn't bring yourself to admit the images depict unfair play.

So you can call me dishonest all you want, say I twisting your words all you want, tell me to grow up all you want, it doesn't matter. Proof is in the text.

 

[insidejob]

That is a parents job, not a government employee.

Not when it's the parents molesting them. Then what?

 

[MT15]

Where is the nuance in the picture? Please point it out to me.

It is not dishonest. The posts are there for everyone to see. I said that when I ask directly whether the pictures depict fair play, I get told about studies and laws and this and that, but never a yes or no answer. Then I asked you directly and you responded exactly as I described.



I am using an example. It is not a "gotcha", nor am I twisting anyone's words. But even if I'd concede the example I used is extreme, you still couldn't bring yourself to admit the images depict unfair play.

So you can call me dishonest all you want, say I twisting your words all you want, tell me to grow up all you want, it doesn't matter. Proof is in the text.

You are twisting - you’re defending bills that target school children by using adult people who have clearly gone through puberty and then transitioned later. It’s just all kinds of dishonest.

If people are adult, there are all kinds of situations that cannot be answered with a yes or no answer, and the fact that you are demanding such a simplistic answer is explicit proof of a “gotcha”. It’s a definitive example of one. It’s delusional to pretend otherwise.

I don’t pretend I understand your motives in defending this. It’s probably better to just disengage.