It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Call it 'gender fluidity': Schools to teach kids there's no such thing as boys or girls

page: 15
40
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: theabsolutetruth



It is at DNA level when it denies the existence of biological male and female, which are chromosomal, biological facts.

The discussion is about factors beyond biological male and female.


But the curriculum aims to instruct students that 100% male and 100% female are non-existent, thereby trumping biology.
edit on 5/16/2015 by new_here because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: spirit_horse



Everyone has opinions. You don't think a teacher thinking they are always right and everyone else is wrong is not self serving?

Yes, everyone has opinions. The trouble is, some opinions can be harmful to those who hold them and/or to those affected by them. Like the opinion that there is something wrong with people with different sexual feelings?

So, you think it's just an "opinion" that people have different views of their sexuality? You think that those people should be taught that there is something wrong with them? That they are defective?

Some teachers may think they are always right and everyone else is wrong. I don't recall ever encountering one myself (my own or my child's). But even if that were the case, how is it self serving to disseminate that opinion? Unless, of course in this case, that teacher is unconventionally gendered.

Feel free to express your self serving opinions to your children. Especially the ones that express how much more normal you are.

edit on 5/16/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

So, you think it's just and "opinion" that people have different views of their sexuality? You think that those people should be taught that there is something wrong with them? That they are defective?


I never said it was just an opinion about sexuality, where did you see that?
I never said that something was wrong with them, where did you see that?
I never said they were defective, where did you see that?



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

According to many, this isn't a new curriculum, either. Which is it? They are teaching that there is no set gender, which is unmitigated BS.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Articles that have no data, but claim their competition is lying? Yeah, because that isn't biased at all.....

When it comes out that what is claimed is exactly what they are teaching, what will your response be?



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: spirit_horse

I never said it was just an opinion about sexuality, where did you see that?
The topic is sexuality. You were talking about teachers dissemination of their self serving opinions on the topic.
 


I never said that something was wrong with them, where did you see that?
I never said they were defective, where did you see that?


For starters.

What I am not fine with is that you want to take my children and put those ideas or beliefs in their head as "normal" or "healthy". I disagree because as a faith based person it is not healthy as you will be punished by the creator.


If it is not normal and healthy, what it is? What's the opposite of normal and healthy?

I'm sure your opinions, being correct, will drown out anything those self serving teachers can come up with.
edit on 5/16/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   
< slowly claps in mockery >

Way to go, ATS. In keeping with American Stupidity, an embarrassing chunk of this thread immediately jumped straight to knee-jerk conclusions, simultaneously making asses of themselves and making the country look even worse intellectually.

A simple class, which doesn't even have a formal lesson plan yet, means to expound on the not-so-black & white definitions of gender (which isn't the same as one's sex/genitalia, come ON) Instead of seeing this for what it is -- education in attempt to remove/temper prejudice -- people crap their pants & claim it's ruining the country with immorality? No, it's people like you ruining the country with bad morals, who just flat refuse to try to even begin to understand what you think of in simpleton terms isn't THAT limited after all, there's a sliding scale for identification of self, not cookie-cutter Leave It To Beaver ish.




retard
verb re·tard ri-ˈtärd

: to slow down the development or progress of (something)

transitive verb
1
: to slow up especially by preventing or hindering advance or accomplishment : impede
2
: to delay academic progress by failure to promote


Examples of RETARD

The chemical will retard the spread of fire.
The problems have retarded the progress of the program.

www.merriam-webster.com...

That up there, take a good look at the proper definition & use. ^^^ In the strictest dictionary sense of the word, ATS & America exemplify what it means for a society to become dangerously retarded.
edit on 5/16/2015 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell




check out here in Indonesia where they say there’s 5 genders



An enlightened society that executes drug smugglers instead of life imprisonment. A society where the military is mandated 38 seats in parliament. Whats your point of 5 genders?



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

The source in Foxnews article made the claim that they are going to teach the children that there are no such thing as 100% boys and 100% girls. That's silly to think that. The source lied about that part.


edit on 5/16/2015 by Deaf Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Considering the crap I have heard, that isn't really a stretch. These days, normal is treated as wrong. Plus, based on the descriptions they have given, that sounds pretty accurate, even if couched in vague terminology.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   
originally posted by: Phage


The topic is sexuality. You were talking about teachers dissemination of their self serving opinions on the topic.

No, I was talking about when I was in school and the teacher making those comments and nothing to do with the topic. Sorry if I didn't make that clearer.


If it is not normal and healthy, what it is? What's the opposite of normal and healthy?

I see your point. What I was saying is that for a person who believes in their faith, it would not be healthy for the person to condone it and that person would face the wrath of their creator for going against the law laid out in scripture. I was not saying it was that for anyone else. I hope that clears it up.


I'm sure your opinions, being correct, will drown out anything those self serving teachers can come up with.

I am quite sure my opinion won't last out the front door!


edit on 16/5/15 by spirit_horse because: typos



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: spirit_horse



I am quite sure my opinion won't last out the front door!

Then you aren't doing it right.
Or your opinion doesn't make sense.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Well that's your opinion and we will see how it turns out later. As for now there is no lesson plan or anything. The source still lied as have been proved in this thread. I can't see the teachers teaching the kids that there are no such thing as boys and girls. That would be way too silly.

I see nothing wrong with teaching kids tolerance and gender identity.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Zuzusmom




Now no one cares about women wearing pants.

I do if she's got a beer gut. If she wears stockings and short pants I get excited and a swift ribbing by my wife.
I agree in preventing suicide in sexually confused or bullied humans at all costs.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:11 PM
link   
No one has yet addressed this:

Let's say we have a school with 20 girls and 20 boys. Then one day, one of the boys decides he is a actually transgender - girl in a boy body - and demands the right to use the facilities with the girls. Supposedly, this is because he/she is uncomfortable using facilities with individuals of a gender he/she does not think he/she is. So he/she is psychologically traumatized by being uncomfortable with the boys.

So now we have 19 boys who couldn't care one way or the other.

And we have 20 girls who are now forced to share facilities with a boy. No matter how much he/she says he/she is a girl. They're going to be naked in the locker room with a naked boy. It is inevitable that a large proportion of the 20, perhaps all 20, are going to be upset about that, possibly traumatized, much like our transgender girl is traumatized at the thought of sharing facilities with the boys.

So, in order to avoid traumatizing one person. We are likely traumatizing a good number of 20. How does that compute?

And why must we order the sharing of facilities to resolve this? Isn't there some other accommodation that could be reached that would avoid traumatizing anyone?



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

You're making the mistake that most phobics do. You're assuming that a person that is bisexual or homosexual, or identifies as a gender different than their genitals is depraved, a predator. If someone is exposing themselves to people unwilling to look it isn't sexuality or gender that is the problem. They're a predator.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

You're making the mistake that most phobics do. You're assuming that a person that is bisexual or homosexual, or identifies as a gender different than their genitals is depraved, a predator. If someone is exposing themselves to people unwilling to look it isn't sexuality or gender that is the problem. They're a predator.


No, I haven't seen that. I have people worrying that boys will take advantage of this to get into a locker room full of naked girls. Not because they are transgender, but because they are teenage boys.

I have also seen people, like myself, worried that in order to make one person feel better about themselves, we make everyone else uncomfortable. I'm not worried about the transgender girl being a predator so much as I'm upset that all the other adolescent girls who are already uncomfortable enough with their bodies will now be having to expose themselves to what looks like an adolescent boy, too. Doesn't matter what you tell them; it matters what they see.

So you make the majority feel as bad as the transgender did in accommodating the transgender.



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



And why must we order the sharing of facilities to resolve this? Isn't there some other accommodation that could be reached that would avoid traumatizing anyone?


Don't get your panties in a twist.



“There seems to be confusion in the audience. This is not about change. Misinformation and fear about [changing] bathroom or locker room policy is simply not true. It is just an update,” board member Megan McLaughlin said during the meeting.

www.washingtontimes.com...



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



Let's say we have a school with 20 girls and 20 boys. Then one day, one of the boys decides he is a actually transgender - girl in a boy body - and demands the right to use the facilities with the girls.


...and then he joins the girls tennis team and basketball team, and sets his sights on The Olympics some day.
Really, how does it all play out?



posted on May, 16 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




And, of course, all pedophiles are homosexual and all homosexuals are pedophiles. Your ignorance is telling.


I am not implying that. I probably should have worded that better. Sadly the pedophiles in the ruling class are getting away with. Homosexuals are not pedophiles. All I implied or mean was that the act of forced pederasty with no consequences is abhorrent. The rest of your argument about my sliding scales comment I will not respond to because you either get it or dont.

Perhaps if I repeat my sentence in full you may get the context.


Even after your son expresses his disdain for the assault, you will call him a dinosaur? I'm afraid there is a larger agenda here. I'm not attacking your ideas of tolerance towards others as I agree that is a fine ideal


I have no hate towards homosexuality.




top topics



 
40
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join