Indiana "Don't Say Gay" Law???

[SnoopLoggyDog]

 

[Flash-hider]

Sadly, if the schools don't, many kids will never get anything outside of porn. If sex education consisted only of the biology of sex (in humans/mammals), the science, then we're good. At a proper age to understand of course. Just like many here advocate gun education in schools to help demystify guns and encourage safety, sex education should serve the same end. Demystify a biological process and help kids make better choices.

In my opinion the schools are no more qualified to teach sex education indoctrination than the porn industry.
Unfortunately, the decades long attempts at it has gotten us to where we are today.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

 

[Flash-hider]

At the right age, kids knowing what repercussions their actions can carry is a positive thing.

But the problem is there are no repercussions for their actions because we have that wonderful entitlement system that has taken that away.

 

[Ark]

I don't believe for a second that our RINO legislature will actually do something about groomers in schools.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Maybe I misunderstood, but isnt this law for not teaching k thru 3rd grade about sexuality? If that IS the case Im for it, its not the schools responsibility to teach a 6 year old about homosexuals and or sex of any kind.

This!

When the big brouhaha occurred over the Florida law, any "news" article that didn't mention it was explicitly about kindergarten through third grade was, IMO, purposeful disinformation.

 

[chipbennett]

Thread title is clickbait.

Why feed a straw man? There is no such thing as a "Don't Say Gay" bill or law.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Thread title is clickbait.

Why feed a straw man? There is no such thing as a "Don't Say Gay" bill or law.

Maybe when you call it what its actually called, nobody knows what you are talking about because the media refuses to call it by its proper name.

 

[chipbennett]

Maybe when you call it what its actually called, nobody knows what you are talking about because the media refuses to call it by its proper name.

That is, of course, by design.

 

[ljk]

Bake the Cake!!

 

[Libertarian01]

I don't see a problem teaching kids about "sex" in kindergarten, so long as it's at a kindergarten level.

To my thinking the goal of "school" is to make certain that when a young adult leaves it they have a fairly basic idea of how the world works in all of its wonderful ways, and will thus be able to navigate it and succeed in it. They should also be taught how to think. Not what to think, but how to use logic and weed out facts from BS. In other words, to question everything and consider all sides before following the herd.

So we start teaching math, reading, writing, science (geology, biology, astronomy etc), geography and so on. In math we don't start with advanced calculus. We're not Krell for heavens sake. We start with simple addition and subtraction. Then over the years build onto it and go deeper into it.

As sex is a subset of biology it should be taught, but again starting at a very basic level in kindergarten. Trees and flowers have seeds, reptiles lay eggs, mammals have live births and so on. That's it. But that IS sex education at an extremely rudimentary level. As the years pass students should learn about how the seeds are fertilized, DNA, chromosomes, and what passes from parents to children and how it is passed. What I am talking about is hair colour, skin colour, connected or disconnected ear lobes, widows peak or no.

The problem I see many teachers having is that kids are really smart, curious, and capable of asking extremely interesting questions without realizing they may be crossing a social taboo. OR that some other kid has been told something by their parents and when the answer may conflict with their parents teaching they are upset. This then can cause issues.

To address porn briefly as it was brought up before NO porn is about sex, it's about fantasy. Porn is selling a fantasy that is completely unrealistic. Older guy gets the hot babysitter. Younger guy gets the hot neighbor, or teacher or whatever. Porn is sexual, but it is fantasy, not sex.

And on that thought...

Regards,

Doug

 

[chipbennett]

I don't see a problem teaching kids about "sex" in kindergarten, so long as it's at a kindergarten level.

To my thinking the goal of "school" is to make certain that when a young adult leaves it they have a fairly basic idea of how the world works in all of its wonderful ways, and will thus be able to navigate it and succeed in it. They should also be taught how to think. Not what to think, but how to use logic and weed out facts from BS. In other words, to question everything and consider all sides before following the herd.

So we start teaching math, reading, writing, science (geology, biology, astronomy etc), geography and so on. In math we don't start with advanced calculus. We're not Krell for heavens sake. We start with simple addition and subtraction. Then over the years build onto it and go deeper into it.

As sex is a subset of biology it should be taught, but again starting at a very basic level in kindergarten. Trees and flowers have seeds, reptiles lay eggs, mammals have live births and so on. That's it. But that IS sex education at an extremely rudimentary level. As the years pass students should learn about how the seeds are fertilized, DNA, chromosomes, and what passes from parents to children and how it is passed. What I am talking about is hair colour, skin colour, connected or disconnected ear lobes, widows peak or no.

The problem I see many teachers having is that kids are really smart, curious, and capable of asking extremely interesting questions without realizing they may be crossing a social taboo. OR that some other kid has been told something by their parents and when the answer may conflict with their parents teaching they are upset. This then can cause issues.

To address porn briefly as it was brought up before NO porn is about sex, it's about fantasy. Porn is selling a fantasy that is completely unrealistic. Older guy gets the hot babysitter. Younger guy gets the hot neighbor, or teacher or whatever. Porn is sexual, but it is fantasy, not sex.

And on that thought...

Regards,

Doug

What is the age-appropriate educational content regarding sex for a 5-year-old?

Given that the current debate regarding The Science revolves around it now being controversial to teach that boys are boys, girls are girls, and boys and girls are different (i.e. the answer to my previous question), how effective would that lesson be?

Note: yes, I did see how you answered your own question. But those are matters of the cycle of life and reproduction in general, not human sexual intercourse specifically.

 

[Ziggidy]

I don't see a problem teaching kids about "sex" in kindergarten, so long as it's at a kindergarten level.


As sex is a subset of biology it should be taught, but again starting at a very basic level in kindergarten. Trees and flowers have seeds, reptiles lay eggs, mammals have live births and so on. That's it. But that IS sex education at an extremely rudimentary level.

There IS a difference between teaching"SEX" and "REPRODUCTION". Biology is reproduction. Sex, is well, sex.

Sex should never be taught in any grade or any school.

IMHO

 

[manifest destiny]

Telling a 6yo that birds lay eggs isn't sex education. Telling a 6yo how Biff and Ludwig like to do it while wearing leather is perversion. Stop. Perverting. Children.

 

[breakingcontact]

Don't send your kids to the government for education. How about that?

 

[Tombs]

Telling a 6yo that birds lay eggs isn't sex education. Telling a 6yo how Biff and Ludwig like to do it while wearing leather is perversion. Stop. Perverting. Children.

It's amusing to me how this is such a simple concept everyone innately understands, yet people get wrapped up in semantics.

It's a good tell for who should probably be on the registry if they can't grasp what you said.

 

[Vodnik4]

Telling a 6yo that birds lay eggs isn't sex education. Telling a 6yo how Biff and Ludwig like to do it while wearing leather is perversion. Stop. Perverting. Children.

You understand this, I understand this. To the groomers this is anathema.

From reading comments on LofTT, and interacting with some of them here in Bloomington: even mention of normal family, or biological facts, sends the freaks into a tizzy because it’s hated “heteronormative”, and they must counter it with every color and shade of mutation and perversion they can dig up.

They are extremely damaged people, who know they are damaged and are angry at everyone who is not, and trying to spread their disease around, so they wouldn’t feel so lonely. And children are soft targets.

 

[Libertarian01]

What is the age-appropriate educational content regarding sex for a 5-year-old?

Given that the current debate regarding The Science revolves around it now being controversial to teach that boys are boys, girls are girls, and boys and girls are different (i.e. the answer to my previous question), how effective would that lesson be?

Note: yes, I did see how you answered your own question. But those are matters of the cycle of life and reproduction in general, not human sexual intercourse specifically.

What is "age-appropriate" is the question that will NEVER be answered as each human being has a different idea of what that means. The sexes, or "genders", is where much debate is now occuring. I believe the "sexes" are two (2) in number. Gender? I'm not so sure. I believe that there is more to gender than many conservatives are comfortable with, but there is far too less of gender than the liberals want there to be. Where the most "truth" lies is probably within the middle but it could be decades before we reasonably understand it.

Telling a 6yo that birds lay eggs isn't sex education. Telling a 6yo how Biff and Ludwig like to do it while wearing leather is perversion. Stop. Perverting. Children.

But how is the teacher supposed to respond when the 6yo (or a classmate) honestly asks how the egg got inside the bird? Children are wonderfully smart, insightful and curious. I want teachers to be able to answer openly, honestly and directly without fear of some parental outrage.

There IS a difference between teaching"SEX" and "REPRODUCTION". Biology is reproduction. Sex, is well, sex.

Sex should never be taught in any grade or any school.

IMHO

I agree that there is a nuanced difference between sex and reproduction, but the two (2) do overlap.

I do think sex (broadly defined) should be taught to children before they can reasonably engage in it. They must understand the seriousness of what they may soon be doing or pressured to do. There is a huge responsibility to getting pregnant or catching an STD that may never go away. To my thinking it is like teaching a kid how to drive before they get olde enough to drive, or gun safety before they can carry on their own. Ignorance is the breeding ground of avoidable outcomes.

All that said it shouldn't be "dirtied" up. In my opinion "sex" education should be taught from a far more biological bent and a far less prurient one.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Tombs]

Gender? I'm not so sure. I believe that there is more to gender than many conservatives are comfortable with, but there is far too less of gender than the liberals want there to be. Where the most "truth" lies is probably within the middle but it could be decades before we reasonably understand it.

The issue is, gender, under the context they use it in, has no practical implications.

To all intents and purposes, it's irrelevant. Especially as something communicated publicly.

Which is why the concept doesn't need embraced. It's adult fantasy roleplay, best kept in private.

 

[jamil]

I don't see a problem teaching kids about "sex" in kindergarten, so long as it's at a kindergarten level.

To my thinking the goal of "school" is to make certain that when a young adult leaves it they have a fairly basic idea of how the world works in all of its wonderful ways, and will thus be able to navigate it and succeed in it. They should also be taught how to think. Not what to think, but how to use logic and weed out facts from BS. In other words, to question everything and consider all sides before following the herd.

So we start teaching math, reading, writing, science (geology, biology, astronomy etc), geography and so on. In math we don't start with advanced calculus. We're not Krell for heavens sake. We start with simple addition and subtraction. Then over the years build onto it and go deeper into it.

As sex is a subset of biology it should be taught, but again starting at a very basic level in kindergarten. Trees and flowers have seeds, reptiles lay eggs, mammals have live births and so on. That's it. But that IS sex education at an extremely rudimentary level. As the years pass students should learn about how the seeds are fertilized, DNA, chromosomes, and what passes from parents to children and how it is passed. What I am talking about is hair colour, skin colour, connected or disconnected ear lobes, widows peak or no.

The problem I see many teachers having is that kids are really smart, curious, and capable of asking extremely interesting questions without realizing they may be crossing a social taboo. OR that some other kid has been told something by their parents and when the answer may conflict with their parents teaching they are upset. This then can cause issues.

To address porn briefly as it was brought up before NO porn is about sex, it's about fantasy. Porn is selling a fantasy that is completely unrealistic. Older guy gets the hot babysitter. Younger guy gets the hot neighbor, or teacher or whatever. Porn is sexual, but it is fantasy, not sex.

And on that thought...

Regards,

Doug

 

[jamil]

What is "age-appropriate" is the question that will NEVER be answered as each human being has a different idea of what that means.

Yeah. There is some wiggle room. Okay. So what’s the age range where teachers can break out the butt plugs and lube and teach students how to use them? 3 - 18?

That’s obviously an extreme example to illustrate that the wiggle room for what’s age appropriate is not all that broad. For some topics maybe we can quibble about a few years. But certainly you get the point that yes, we can indeed determine age appropriate subjects within a reasonable range. The diversity in children’s maturity is not that great with few exceptions.

The only times in history when “age appropriate” is hard to figure out is during cultural revolutions. A revolution towards child grooming is not evolutionary.

The sexes, or "genders", is where much debate is now occuring. I believe the "sexes" are two (2) in number. Gender? I'm not so sure. I believe that there is more to gender than many conservatives are comfortable with, but there is far too less of gender than the liberals want there to be. Where the most "truth" lies is probably within the middle but it could be decades before we reasonably understand it.

This is not rocket surgery. Sex is biologically determined. There are two. So we agree on that.

Gender is the quality of being masculine or feminine. Some girls are more feminine than others. But some are more masculine than feminine. But, most are feminine apart from social influences. Some boys are more masculine than others. Some are more feminine than masculine. But. Most boys are masculine.

That proclivity for girls being feminine and boys being masculine is largely nature, but can also be influenced by nurture.

That’s really all there is to it. The rest is critical theory pretending to be “the science”.