"Why is talking sexually in a work place called sexual harassment to adults, but talking sexually to a 4 year old at school is considered essential?"
Kambree (her pseudonym, not mine)
At least with the former it's usually people of roughly similar ages (at least both adults) and not always with a significant power differential. (Obviously as we saw with Clinton/Lewinsky, there can be a massive power differential, and go way beyond just talk) As per my "Sexual Harassment Training" there is no requirement for a power differential for sexual harassment to be present.
With the latter it's always an adult talking to a child, and the adult has a significant degree of power over the child.
But there's no way that could ever be unhealthy, right?
FYI, anybody look at the rise is sexual assault cases in schools over the past decade or so, obviously there's no possible way anyone who's sexually assault a child would take advantage of an environment where talking to children about sexuality and the like is encouraged. Perish the thought, it could never happen, right?
49 comments:
"Talking sexually" to ANYONE of ANY age is inappropriate when it's unwanted.
Assuring a gay teen or a transgender kid that there is nothing wrong at all with who they are is always appropriate.
Trying to make it "inappropriately sexual talk" to show loving gay parents or assure kids that there's nothing wrong with them or their gender or orientation, THAT is a problem.
Understand?
Do you need me to explain to you why it's appropriate to affirm healthy relationships and natural orientations while it's not appropriate to "talk sexually" to anyone in an unwanted scenario? Do you need me to explain why the inappropriate sexual talk of "Oooh, that's sick that he thinks she's a she" or "No, I WON'T call you 'her' or by your chosen name of Sally, that's sinful..." why THAT is also inappropriate sexual talk that is wrong?
It would perhaps be helpful if you could some specific examples and quotes of inappropriate "sexual talk" that is happening in schools.
For instance, I can tell you that some books are being banned from school libraries ("Heather has Two Mommies," for instance) and I would say that ban is sexually inappropriate silencing and harmful.
Would you agree that banning a children's book that merely notes the reality of (gasp!) Lesbian parents is wrong and harmful?
Leave it to Dan to support adults talking to children about sex.
Leave it to Craig to make sex something dirty and creepy. It's kind of what conservatives are famously known for.
Leave it to Craig not answer reasonable questions.
I've been quite clear: I'm fine with adults being kind and saying "you are fine just the way you are" to students who might be LGBTQ. There's nothing dirty or weird about that. What IS dirty and weird is Craig trying to make that basic kindness something unwholesome.
Craig...
"Leave it to Dan to support adults talking to children about sex."
What Dan actually said:
""Talking sexually" to ANYONE of ANY age is inappropriate when it's unwanted."
Harmful, unwanted "sexual talk" is wrong. Whether it's your pervert president you conservatives put into office (and white evangelicals STILL defend and support, by and large) or a sexual predator preying upon children. ALWAYS WRONG.
When someone says it's ALWAYS WRONG, whatever the age, to engage in harmful, unwanted sexualized talk, that doesn't mean that one "supports adults talking to children in a sexual manner."
BUT, a nurse, doctor, mental health worker, social worker, teacher or other adult responsible for working with children talking to children about sex in a helpful, not harmful, manner is not anything at all but rational and moral.
You hopefully can get past your sexual hang-ups to agree about this simple reality.
Sick, sick, sick conservatives.
Let's test your ability to reason, Craig. Here's a story about a book that has been banned in some schools by your type of white conservative evangelicals/christians...
"Every day, everywhere, babies are born. They're kissed and dressed and rocked and fed--and completely adored by the families that love them. With an irresistible rhyming text and delightfully endearing illustrations, this board book is an exuberant celebration of playing, sleeping, crawling, and, of course, very noisy babies doing all the wonderful things babies do best."
The book, "Everywhere Babies" has been banned for unknown reasons, but presumably because a bunch of bigots didn't like seeing two (presumed) lesbian mommies or two (presumed) gay dads depicted enjoying their babies.
https://goodwordnews.com/everywhere-babies-a-picture-book-celebrating-babies-has-just-been-banned/
Can you agree that those who would speak hatefully and with bigotry about such a lovely book are engaging in sick and harmful sexual talk in so doing?
Assuring a gay teen or a transgender kid that there is nothing wrong at all with who they are is NEVER appropriate, because that's lying to them. Dan's a liar, so we expect him to assert falsehoods as if they're true.
"when it's unwanted."
Are you suggesting that 4 year olds really "want" to talk about sex and sexuality on a regular basis?
"Understand?"
Do I understand that you can always come up with reasons to talk to minor children about sex, yes I do.
Do I understand that there is a very tiny likelihood that you'd ever find anything said by a teacher to a minor child about sex or sexuality inappropriate, yes.
Do I understand that you're much more likely to support teachers talking about sex to minor children, that the children parents who might want some input into what their children are being taught, yes.
Yes, I understand where you're coming from.
No, I don;t need you to explain why you think it's so important to talk to children in the primary grades about sex. I'd be interested in how you'd explain talking to these young children about sex, if they indicated that they don't want to talk about it.
"Leave it to Craig to make sex something dirty and creepy."
Yeah, because adults talking to 4-5 year olds about sex isn't creepy at all. Because the amount of sexual assault happening and being covered up by schools, makes school the perfect place to talk to 4-5 year olds about sex, what could possibly go wrong?
"Leave it to Craig not answer reasonable questions."
1. Just following your example.
2. It should read, "Leave it to Craig not answer reasonable questions when it's convenient for Dan.". My answering idiotic questions on my schedule, is not the same as not answering questions, your impatience isn't my problem.
"What IS dirty and weird is Craig trying to make that basic kindness something unwholesome."
Really? Where did I say that " adults being kind and saying "you are fine just the way you are", was "unwholesome?
Are you suggesting that there are no agents of the state at any schools who are going beyond the above bland, generalities, when talking to 4 year olds about sex? Wouldn't school curriculum encouraging pre pubescent children to watch porn, be a bit beyond "you are fine just the way you are"?
"Can you agree that those who would speak hatefully and with bigotry about such a lovely book are engaging in sick and harmful sexual talk in so doing?"
Ahhhhhhhh, the cherry pick one small quote from something and expect people to make judgements based on an out of context quote and Dan's biased hunch tactic.
Craig... "because adults talking to 4-5 year olds about sex isn't creepy at all."
"Hey teacher, why do I have a penis?"
"Oh, dear, it's just how you were made. That's where your pee comes out."
Craig: "That's creepy!"
Good Lord, grow up.
And answer the question: WHAT SPECIFICALLY is being said to four year olds that you are disagreeing with?
These empty claims are for useful idiots willing to be scared into fearing their neighbors and THAT is dangerous and sick. Don't be a useful idiot or a fearmonger. Answer reasonable questions.
Anyone can see you dodging. Anyone can see the reason and morality of what I'm saying.
Craig...
"Are you suggesting that there are no agents of the state at any schools who are going beyond the above bland, generalities, when talking to 4 year olds about sex?"
I'm not saying that there are no pedophiles that get into the school system. OF COURSE, any predatory behavior should be outlawed. And you know what? IT IS. SCHOOLS DO NOT ALLOW OR ENCOURAGE THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOR.
Do you recognize that reality?
Yes, there are some pedophiles who sneak into schools and boy scouts and beauty pageants, etc (we've seen this happen way too often with conservative predators). We're all united against that sort of thing (well, except for Trump supporters/defenders). But this isn't that.
Craig...
"Wouldn't school curriculum encouraging pre pubescent children to watch porn, be a bit beyond "you are fine just the way you are"?"
Yes. But this is almost certainly not happening. Cite something in the real world so we can talk about specifics.
Like I did: Some conservative perverts have banned books in schools like "Heather has Two Mommys" and "Everywhere Babies..." That is a specific real world perversion that is happening with conservatives. Will you deal with some SPECIFIC real world concern and join in denouncing this perversion by your type of people?
"And answer the question: WHAT SPECIFICALLY is being said to four year olds that you are disagreeing with?"
I've posted links, I'll post more, you'll ignore or dismiss them, rinse and repeat.
You do understand that your hypothetical is a question about biology, not sexuality. It's a totally reasonable question (maybe better asked of a parent), and a teacher can give a totally reasonable, age appropriate, biological answer without once discussing sex.
"Why do I have a penis?"
Well, here's a video curriculum that's used at many schools, it's going to tell you to watch porn and get your answer there." or "Well, that's what I use when I have anal sex with my boyfriend."
"Anyone can see you dodging. Anyone can see the reason and morality of what I'm saying."
Coming from someone who dodged multiple questions about biological and athletic performance differences between men and women and the need for "genital flattening underwear sized for 4 year olds, this is pathetic and amusing simultaneously. Especially given the reality that you haven't addressed any of the links I've provided.
"Do you recognize that reality?"
1. Yes, the large number of sexual assaults in schools over the last decade or so indicates plenty of pedophiles (MAP's is the new affirming term), in the schools. Schools may not encourage it, but (per the links I've provided) they sure do cover it up.
2. I recognize the reality that you just pretended like the only alternative to your bland, contrived, hypothetical crap was pedophiles in the schools. Sorry, MAP's. Which, as per usual, doesn't answer the question I actually asked.
3. This tactic of attacking a straw man to avoid a question is tiresome and stupid.
"Yes. But this is almost certainly not happening. Cite something in the real world so we can talk about specifics."
By "cite" do you mean something like posting a link to the actual video curriculum used in school districts with prepubescent children that encourages them to watch porn? If that's what you mean, then I've already done so. The fact that you chose to pretend that I hadn't done so, and make this false claim isn't my problem, it's yours.
"Will you deal with some SPECIFIC real world concern and join in denouncing this perversion by your type of people?"
1. If you won't acknowledge the reality of what's happening with "your type of people", why would I?
2. In this age of the internet, public libraries, used bookstore, Amazon, and the like, there really is no such thing as "banning" books. There are too many ways to get them.
3. Since you haven't provided any specific stories of parents actually "banning" these books, I'm forced to wonder if you've related actual facts or your hunches and straw men.
4. How about if you clearly and unequivocally condemn those on the left who've been pulling books from school libraries because they might use "bad" words?
https://www.marshall.edu/library/bannedbooks/the-adventures-of-huckleberry-finn/
Surely "racist, right wing, bigots" wouldn't want these books removed because of "bad" words, would they?
Craig...
"Since you haven't provided any specific stories of parents actually "banning" these books..."
Dan, already...
https://goodwordnews.com/everywhere-babies-a-picture-book-celebrating-babies-has-just-been-banned/
Craig...
"By "cite" do you mean something like posting a link to the actual video curriculum used in school districts with prepubescent children that encourages them to watch porn? If that's what you mean, then I've already done so."
I've seen no links that support that kind of claim. I've seen one link from you to a Twitter account of an alleged teacher who was allegedly fired for what they said. Again, if you have the data it should be no problem for you to present it. That you don't just presented suggest that this is just another stupidly false diabolically evil the evil lie from my
Craig...
"Well, here's a video curriculum that's used at many schools, it's going to tell you to watch porn and get your answer there." or "Well, that's what I use when I have anal sex with my boyfriend.""
Support it or admit is a devilish lie, vomited from evil, perverse fingers.
This sort of slander that too many conservatives engage in regularly is just stupidly false and it's so dangerous, not to mention anti-Christ as hell.
I've looked back and here's the ONLY link I can find in your recent comments that says something like that...
"Dan, would you encourage your 9 year old to watch porn? This video, shown to elementary school students in NJ (among other places) encourages them to do so. Given the reality that porn is exploitative, harmful, and objectifies women, is the any circumstance where a school should be encouraging it's students to watch porn? Isn't porn "illegal" for people under 18?
https://twitter.com/i/status/1513603622461870083"
That link goes to someone that is/was allegedly a teacher (I have no way of verifying that from the link alone) who ONLY says to students that if you're parents aren't willing to accept them, "F*** 'em..." And IF that was shown in grade schools, the language is certainly inappropriate, BUT the message is right on.
As I have demonstrated in my links and as anyone who knows LGBTQ folk knows, rejection, abuse, mocking, beating and harassment of LGBTQ people by their own families is all WAY too common in our nation. And it's dangerously abusive. So yes, absolutely, to HELL with such families. We don't need abusers.
What's amazing to me (if that's the "link" you're speaking of) is that in what he actually had to say (which was nothing about Porn), the thing you apparently find disagreeable is the expletive and NOT that the families were not accepting of their own children.
Craig... "How about if you clearly and unequivocally condemn those on the left who've been pulling books from school libraries because they might use "bad" words?"
I can find no such instances. Find where liberals are calling for removing books from school libraries and I'll condemn them.
What's interesting here is you're asking me to do that which I'd obviously do in a vague theoretical "example" while I'm citing two new specific examples and you're remaining silent on them.
Here are more examples of books being banned by conservatives for merely acknowledging the reality of LGBTQ people. By the way, are you one of those conservatives who claim to be against so-called Cancel Culture? If so, do you oppose the cancelling of these voices? Do you oppose the Florida schools for cancelling math books containing SEL (which is simply research-driven methods of teaching)?
https://www.marshall.edu/library/bannedbooks/heather-has-two-mommies/
Your original quote...
"Why is talking sexually in a work place called sexual harassment to adults, but talking sexually to a 4 year old at school is considered essential..."
The problem is: What is this person specifically referring to??
IF she's saying some predators are actually secretly speaking to children about sexual intercourse... this is obviously wrong. BUT then, literally NO ONE is calling it essential.
Right?
But if she's talking about helpful appriate talk about matters of sexuality and gender in an appropriate manner... then this IS essential and what rational moral adult would advise against it?
So this is why it's important to be clear what specifically we're talking about.
AND why it's stupidly slanderous to suggest some people are wanting to talk in a sexually titillating manner to children.
Thou shalt not bear false witness...
For gossips and slanderers are not part of the realm of God or the community of rational moral adults.
Dan again purposely strays from the topic in order to promote sexual perversion. He loves to muddy the waters with irrelevant angles which barely relate. Dan believes it's vital to indoctrinate kids to embrace LGBT perversion and disorder as moral and normal. He scream he's doing God's will while accusing us of being religious fanatics equal to Islamic radicals for speaking truthfully about the issue. But I guess if science doesn't support enabling LGBT people, lying and projection is the best Dan has.
"I've seen no links that support that kind of claim."
Not my problem. All I can do is post links. I can't make you see them or visit them.
"Again, if you have the data it should be no problem for you to present it. That you don't just presented suggest that this is just another stupidly false diabolically evil the evil lie"
Since I already have presented the data, I guess the above is just one more evil lie from you to excuse your laziness, or inability to read.
"Support it or admit is a devilish lie, vomited from evil, perverse fingers."
I've supported the video, the other was an example of one possible extreme (it was a hypothetical).
"the thing you apparently find disagreeable is the expletive and NOT that the families were not accepting of their own children"
The think I find "disagreeable" is a teacher telling their students that he's replacing their parents. The obscenity is just a sign of his inability to express himself well.
The link to the video series may be in one of the other threads where this conversation is taking place. I assume that if you're capable of commenting on the same subject over multiple threads, that you can look at links from those same threads.
"I can find no such instances. Find where liberals are calling for removing books from school libraries and I'll condemn them."
https://www.marshall.edu/library/bannedbooks/the-adventures-of-huckleberry-finn/ Here's the link a second time, and I seriously doubt you'll condemn anyone on your side of things.
"What is this person specifically referring to??"
The fact that y'all consider it absolutely essential to talk to prepubescent children (as young as 4) about matters of sex and sexuality in public schools with little or no input from the parents.
"But if she's talking about helpful appropriateAND why it's stupidly slanderous to suggest some people are wanting to talk in a sexually titillating manner to children.
talk about matters of sexuality and gender in an appropriate manner... then this IS essential and what rational moral adult would advise against it?"
!. I love how you automatically assume that all of these conversations are limited to what you think they should be, and that these conversations are "essential" for every single pre pubescent child regardless of the individual development of the child or the desires of the parents.
"So this is why it's important to be clear what specifically we're talking about."
It's a general observation abut how y'all want to protect "adults" from virtually any conversation in the workplace that might strike someone as possibly sexual in nature, while y'all are obsesses with telling pre pubescent children (as young as 4) about all sorts of sexual issues regardless of their ability to understand or process sexual topics. Oh, and use curriculum that encourages pre pubescent children to watch porn.
"AND why it's stupidly slanderous to suggest some people are wanting to talk in a sexually titillating manner to children."
Really, given the number of sexual assault/harassment incidents in schools recently, are you suggesting that there aren't "some people" in schools who want to talk in a "sexually titillating" manner to pre pubescent children? Are you suggesting that you are an expert in what a pre pubescent child might find "sexually titillating"?
I do so love it when you trot out the "gossip and slander" straw men. Especially without proof. Making a general observation, literally cannot be "gossip and slander" because it's literally not directed at a specific person.
Art,
It's par for the course. Ad hom attacks, false charges of "evil", trying to pass off his assumptions as "reality", same bullshit different day.
Hell the link to the video used to tell 9 year olds that watching porn is "normal", is right there in a post. I guess you can't be bothered.
Craig... " I guess you can't be bothered. "
Stupidly false claim again. Of course, as I've already said, I went back and reviewed your recent posts and the comments in them and could find nothing like that. Now, it is entirely possible I'm missing it, but it's not because "I can't be bothered..."
Also, if you KNOW where it is, why not just say that instead of having me hunt and search and waste my time. "Is right there in the post..."? WHAT post?
But this is par for the course for modern conservatives who make vague and unsupported claims as if they were facts and maybe sometimes they are facts, but then, a bunch of the time, they're not.
The closest I can find is this garbled link...
https://www.google.com/search?q=amaze.org+videos+is+it+normal+to+watch+porn&client=firefox-b-1-e&ei=Wh1sYuuGFd-8ytMPquyFkA0&ved=0ahUKEwjrm4-X47n3AhVfnnIEHSp2AdIQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=amaze.org+videos+is+it+normal+to+watch+porn&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsAM6BggAEBYQHjoFCCEQoAE6BQghEKsCOggIIRAWEB0QHkoECEEYAEoECEYYAFCqCFijTGD7UGgBcAF4AIAB7QGIAaoZkgEGNC4yMS4ymAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz
Which is a link to a google search that asks the question, "is it normal to watch porn..."
And just as a reminder, HERE is what you said that I'm responding to...
""By "cite" do you mean something like posting a link to the actual video curriculum used in school districts with prepubescent children that encourages them to watch porn? If that's what you mean, then I've already done so."
You cited a general search on the QUESTION of "is watching porn normal..." and MAYBE in all the resulting links - NINE MILLION PLUS of them with multiple links found in at least some of the links I followed - is something about a school district encouraging students to watch porn, but I literally can't find it.
And just fyi: I'm not going to spend hours trying to find something that YOU are alleging is happening, and doing so with ZERO support.
And also fyi: I call bullshit. I am relatively certain you're making one of those stupidly false Q-anon level false claims so popular amongst the ignorant Right today, trying to scare people into accepting stupidly false claims by making them repeatedly with confidence but no actual support.
Bullshit and diabolical bullshit, at that.
"Also, if you KNOW where it is, why not just say that instead of having me hunt and search and waste my time. "Is right there in the post..."? WHAT post?"
The fact that you can't (for whatever) reason find things isn't my fault. You bitch about not having "proof" spoon fed to you, and it gets old. Especially given your lack of providing any support for so many of your claims.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQvTZRZCoPw
One more time.
The question still remains. Should schools be telling 9 year old children that it is appropriate for them to watch porn?
"The question still remains. Should schools be telling 9 year old children that it is appropriate for them to watch porn?"
No, you damned little pissant. The question still remains: WHERE is there a school advocating that children watch porn?
THAT link you just provided said NOTHING about advocating children should watch porn AND nothing about any schools promoting the idea.
You have ONE last chance, liar, to show you're not a deviant liar making shit up in your ongoing effort to oppress and slander.
Provide a link or admit you were wrong.
Craig
"You bitch about not having "proof" spoon fed to you, and it gets old."
The pathetic irony in this is that you think you've provided some kind of proof that supports what you said and it doesn't. It literally simply does not.
You read things or listen to things and then, you read things INTO what you read or heard, and then you make false claims based upon your interpretations and and straw man False understandings of what was said. And you appear to completely not understand how you're doing this.
Is it just the case that too many modern conservatives have limited reading comprehension skills?
Here's a rough transcript from the video you cite...
"Is it normal to watch porn? Yes! It's normal. Lots of people watch porn. After all it's right there and it's free. And anyway, many people have questions about sex.
BUT - and it's a big butt - you have to remember. .. Porn is not real. It's just a fantasy. Like superheroes movies. Bodies don't look like those in porn movies. In general, everything's exaggerated.
Sex is very different in real life. So don't expect your sex life - when you have one - to be anything like porn..."
Now, WHERE SPECIFICALLY is this endorsing children watching porn? Yes, one could say it normalizes porn AND it doesn't delve into the abusive aspects of porn, so I'm not giving this video an A+ when it comes to sex ed... but it literally isn't endorsing porn for children. It's acknowledging that kids DO view porn and that is not unusual.
It's a counterbalance to evangelical "sex is dirty, bad and evil" message too many conservatives are putting out there.
Now, where are schools showing this particular video and in what context?
Oh. Also, from what I can tell, this appears to be directed more towards prepubescent children of about 12 or 13. Not 9.
Not that you appear to care about facts.
I'm pretty sure I've answered this question in many ways and times, but again:
" Should schools be telling 9 year old children that it is appropriate for them to watch porn?"
No. But there is a difference between telling 9 year olds - as a matter of school policy and programming - that it's "appropriate" for them to watch porn and saying to 12 year olds (or 9 year olds...) that it's entirely normal to be curious about and interested in learning about sexuality. And if children are asking about porn or if you're wanting to open a pre-emptive discussion about porn, it's appropriate to say that it exists and it's normal to be curious about it, but that porn is not an especially helpful/healthy way to learn about sexuality.
Here is a helpful guide to ideas about what are age-appropriate discussions to have with children about sexuality.
https://www.todaysparent.com/family/parenting/age-by-age-guide-to-talking-to-kids-about-sex/
And children start having opinions about their own gender as young as three, which is why it's important for schools, early on, to have policies in place to ensure that children are not maligned or maltreated if they identify as a gender other than their assigned gender at birth.
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/at-what-age-are-children-aware-of-gender-differences-20170406-gveptn.html
Do you recognize the reality that very young children - as soon as they are starting school, oftentimes - are having an emerging awareness of their own gender?
Do you recognize, then, why it would be important for schools to have gender-affirming policies in place, so that children are not ostracized, demonized, mocked or otherwise oppressed for not fitting in with their assigned-at-birth gender?
Are you okay with children of any age being abused, mocked, picked on because they are LGBTQ and that schools should have strong policies and education in place to make sure that doesn't happen?
"Now, WHERE SPECIFICALLY is this endorsing children watching porn?"
When it's shown to 9 year olds as part of their school curriculum.
"WHERE is there a school advocating that children watch porn?"
New Jersey is using the "porn is OK" video as part of their curriculum for students as young as 9.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10709217/New-Jersey-public-school-students-young-10-taught-explicit-sexual-acts-lessons.html
https://www.nj.com/education/2022/04/nj-adopted-new-sex-education-standards-2-years-ago-theres-now-an-uproar-from-republicans.html
You've gone to a lot of effort to dodge the question. So, weasel, how about you answer the damn question, Should 9-10 year olds be told that it's normal to watch porn? It's a simple question, just answer it. Stop dodging.
"It's a counterbalance to evangelical "sex is dirty, bad and evil" message too many conservatives are putting out there."
Where, specifically, are conservatives mandating a "sex is dirty, bad and evil" message as part of school curriculum?
"Now, where are schools showing this particular video and in what context?"
New Jersey, in class.
Please tell me under what "context" is it appropriate to tell 9-10 year old children that it's perfectly OK to watch porn?
"Oh. Also, from what I can tell, this appears to be directed more towards prepubescent children of about 12 or 13. Not 9."
You do understand that 1. "directed" doesn't mean limited. 2. It's being shown to 4th graders who are usually 9-10 years old.
"Do you recognize the reality that very young children - as soon as they are starting school, oftentimes - are having an emerging awareness of their own gender?"
If you say so, although I'm not sure how encouraging them to watch porn as under age children is beneficial to that process.
"Do you recognize, then, why it would be important for schools to have gender-affirming policies in place, so that children are not ostracized, demonized, mocked or otherwise oppressed for not fitting in with their assigned-at-birth gender?"
Yes children should not be bullied. Yet how does encouraging 9-10 year old 4th graders to watch porn (given that they are under age to do so) help solve this problem?
"Are you okay with children of any age being abused, mocked, picked on because they are LGBTQ and that schools should have strong policies and education in place to make sure that doesn't happen?"
No, my views on bullying haven't changed since you just asked the same idiotic question.
But I'm sure that you will explain how encouraging 9-10 year old 4th graders to (under the legal age) watch porn is the best possible way to stop bullying.
I'm sure that the porn watching to stop bullying is all very scientific.
FYI. for all the claims about porn not being "real", I can't believe that you are unaware of the scientific studies documenting how teenagers expectations about sex are shaped by all the porn they watch. FYI, their attitudes and expectations aren't being shaped in a healthy way that shows respect toward girls.
But clearly children aren't influenced at all by the messages that are reinforced to them when they are young.
From your first link (which as far as I can tell, does NOT say anywhere that the schools are endorsing children watching porn)...
"A spokesperson on behalf of Westfield Public Schools said that the materials were a 'simple list of resources' rather than official state policy."
A list of resources. NOT that the school was endorsing children watching porn.
You are a damned liar and you've been caught in it.
Admit it. Apologize. Repent.
Have some decency.
From your second link...
"One clip, designed for children 10-14, says it’s “normal” to watch pornography, but it’s “exaggerated” from reality."
It IS normal for kids at some point to want to watch pornography. That is a simple fact. (Remember your defense of "normal," as normative?) It LITERALLY is normal and that is LITERALLY a fact.
Are you suggesting that it's wrong for schools to link to a whole list of resources about sexual education including the crazy notion of stating a fact that it's normal for kids to want to watch pornography?
Do you recognize that saying it's normal (which it is) is not the same as endorsing it as a matter of school policy.
You are a damned liar caught in telling/repeating slanderous stupidly false claims. It's not even a witty false claim... just stone cold stupid and false.
Shame on you. But you can at least begin to save yourself.
1. Admit that the school did not endorse or say that it is "appropriate for 9 year olds to watch porn." As a simple fact, it didn't. That is a stupidly false claim.
2. Admit that it IS normal for kids to want to watch porn. It just is, do you disagree? Do you have any data to support that false claim (if you're making it)?
3. Apologize for passing on slander and bearing false witness.
4. Apologize for doing so in such a stupid, caustic and arrogant manner.
Ball's in your park (or is that too sexy-sounding for you?)
" Yet how does encouraging 9-10 year old 4th graders to watch porn (given that they are under age to do so) help solve this problem?"
Another way of repeating the same damned lie. The school did NOT "encourage" 9-10 year olds to watch porn.
It did not encourage it. It did not endorse it. It did not recommend it.
Stupidly false claims are dangerous.
Stop being a useful idiot.
"Where, specifically, are conservatives mandating a "sex is dirty, bad and evil" message as part of school curriculum? "
I never said it was part of a school curriculum. But certainly, it's part and parcel of conservatism - and especially conservative religious types - for centuries. Marshal still passes on words very close to that.
https://www.abc.net.au/everyday/how-purity-culture-can-affect-sex-life/12426254
"I never said it was part of a school curriculum."
Yet that's a significant focus of this thread, so why wouldn't you proving your claim be relevant? I'll note that you still didn't provide proof of your claim beyond some link about "purity culture".
1. Please show where "purity culture" hasn't been repudiated by virtually everyone over the past decade.
2. Where does "purity culture" say authoritatively that sex (all sex) is "dirty, bad, and evil"?
Strangely enough, if "purity culture" can affect ones sex life, then surely "hook up culture", would also affect one's sex life. Wouldn't posting nude, partially nude, pictures or sexually objectifying ones self also affect one's sex life?
Wouldn't being exposed to porn and the message that porn is good affect one's sex life?
"Another way of repeating the same damned lie. The school did NOT "encourage" 9-10 year olds to watch porn."
The school literally endorsed/showed a video curriculum that portrayed watching porn as "normal". Are you really going to tell me that in the mind of a 9-10 year old kid that they don't perceive this as encouraging? Or is this one more semantic nitpicking. Perhaps normalizing, or de stigmatizing, or some other word is a slightly better description that "encouraging". But that's just nit picking, innit?
The hilarious thing is that you're literally trying to excuse schools from telling 9-10 year old kids (or steering them to a video series that will tell them) that it's normal to watch porn. Not giving kids to tools to make an informed decision based on the "benefits" v. the harm. Just blanket school encouraged curriculum (or extra curricular school endorsed resources) that normalizes porn for 9-10 year olds. Who knew you'd be so supportive of corrupting children into harmful behavior.
"Are you suggesting that it's wrong for schools to link to a whole list of resources about sexual education including the crazy notion of stating a fact that it's normal for kids to want to watch pornography?"
Yes. Given the demonstrable harm caused by porn, I find it unconscionable to schools would present watching porn as "normal" to 9-10 year olds.
https://extension.usu.edu/relationships/research/effects-of-pornography-on-relationships
https://theconversation.com/pornography-has-deeply-troubling-effects-on-young-people-but-there-are-ways-we-can-minimise-the-harm-127319
"Admit that it IS normal for kids to want to watch porn. It just is, do you disagree? Do you have any data to support that false claim (if you're making it)?"
It might be "normal" by some definition, yet it's also harmful. Why would schools be increasingly normalizing harmful behavior to 9-10 year old children. Are you saying that if children are told "It's normal to watch porn." when they're young an impressionable, that those messages from authority figures/agents of the state aren't going to influence them to watch porn? What other illegal behaviors should schools be normalizing and encouraging?
If anything, I'll just find more evidence. But that won't matter because you'll just keep up the ad hom attacks.
The lie that little kids aren't exposed to porn and other sexual deviancy is proven for what it is.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/05/normalizing_perversion.html
Glenn cites the poorly-named "American Thinker" where the author irrationally says...
"The reasons for the Left's perverse sexualizing of very young children make sense only if you are sexually neurotic. None of it makes sense if you are a rational, healthy, sexually normal person.
For example, what is to be gained by first graders learning about drag queens and transsexuality? How is a child's life improved, how is the culture improved when children whose brains are not physically equipped to process such information get exposed to it?"
1. What is gained by knowing about the reality of drag queens and transgender people? That this is reality and these are perfectly fine human beings, neighbors and friends.
2. That they aren't to be feared.
3. That they ought not be mocked or abused.
4. That they can make fabulous babysitters, friends and mentors.
5. That children's brains ARE entirely capable of understanding, "Oh, that delightful person likes to wear a dress and is kind..."
For starters.
What possible reason would any rational person (outside of bigotry) have for NOT helping children be aware of new people they may not be aware of?
While we're at it, how does exposing children to some of the extremism taught by conservative Christian fundamentalists make sense?
"American Thinker" is 100% appropriately named.
1. What is gained by knowing about the reality of drag queens and transgender people? That this is reality and these are perfectly fine human beings, neighbors and friends.
2. That they aren't to be feared.
3. That they ought not be mocked or abused.
4. That they can make fabulous babysitters, friends and mentors.
5. That children's brains ARE entirely capable of understanding, "Oh, that delightful person likes to wear a dress and is kind..."
Here is pervert Dan again defending the indefensible sexualizing children by teaching them that perversion is a right and natural thing. Dan is extremely evil. And, NO children do not understand about sexual perversion and have to indoctrinated into accepting that which is biologically unnatural and perverse as well as being an abomination to God.
What are you talking about, perversion? These are often gay men wearing fun bright dresses and reading kids stories. You find that perverted?
You're a Republican in today's GOP and THAT'S what you find convert perverted, not your party's president or policies??
Today's GOP and conservative movement are just messed up and upside down and irrational.
Glenn, have you ever been to a drag Queen book reading? That's the kind of scenario where you have drag queens in front of kids.. I have been.
Do you know what happens there?
They show up, wearing their often garish/fun/fabulous dress and they read a story to kids.
That's it.
They don't alk about sex. They don't talk about homosexuality. They don't take off their clothes. They're simply fun, kind and reading a story to kids in an act of kindness and joy.
That you find something dirty about that says way more about you than any LGBTQ folks.
And "sexualizing children..."?
What an actual pervert.
Drag queens are perverts. Homosexual men and women are perverts. God call cross-dressing a sin. He calls homosexual behavior an abomination. Homosexuality is a tiny population getting maximum attention by pervert enablers like Dan. Children are being indoctrinated to accept such evil persion as normal.
They don't have to talk about sex to dress as perverts and make children think queers dressing as women is natural. You supporting such trash says tons about you -- an abject rebel against God.
No, I'm not a Republican, so you just bore false witnesss against me. And no, the republican party's candidates are not perverts and it is the policies of the Demokrats which are destroying this country.
Dan is in an upside-down world. When you point out that perverts are sexualizing children, you suddenly become a pervert!
Dan continues to prove what an evil, wicked, pervert he is.
Glenn... "Drag queens are perverts. Homosexual men and women are perverts. God call cross-dressing a sin."
I GET that these are all your opinions, Glenn. And you can hold on to these bigoted, perverse, awful, irrational and arrogant opinions if you want.
But I'd invite you to lay down your hatred, your bitterness, your irrationality, your opposition to human rights.
I invite you to repent, to turn away from all this anger and emotion and hatred and disrespect of your fellow humans and your presumption to speak for God what God has not said.
I invite you to embrace grace and join the beloved community of God.
You're on the wrong side of history, of morality and the Bible, Glenn. You're an outsider and not in a good way.
Repent.
Glenn, following in the wake of more killings by another white conservative extremist, I ask you to think about your rhetoric.
Can you at least see how to many people of goodwill who are striving to do the right thing... our teachers and aunts and uncles and grandmothers and cousins and hard working neighbors and deacons and Sunday school teachers... How we see our beloved community including people of color and LGBTQ people who are just observably good people liveing good lives trying their best to do the right thing and then we see people like this young white nationalist or you and your allies making extreme comments like denigrating good people by calling them perverts... Can you at least see how you appear to be on the side of evil and not good? Of extremism and hate rather than grace and love? You at least see how you appear to be one of the bad guys with your abusive name calling? Does that not give you pause?
What I said about drag queens, etc, being abomanations to God wasn't my opinion, it is biblical fact and I don't have anything to repent of.
WOW, the media finally found a white supremacist among the many black supremacists we've seen killing whites all over the USA. NO, it wasn't "another white supremacist" because they haven't found others except in your bigoted minds.
Yeah, I get it: a lot of teachers who like to indoctrinate our kids into sexual anarchy do good things now and then; queers and people pretending to be the opposite sex do good things now and then. That doesn't alter the FACT that they are perverts and you are also one to give such support for them.
Look up the words perversion, perverted, and pervert and by golly you'll see that I am using the words 100% accurately.
And you continue to spew your satanic blather.
"Perversion:
showing a deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or unacceptable, often in spite of the consequences.
turned away from what is right or good
obstinate in opposing what is right, reasonable, or accepted"
Two gay men, committing to one another in love and respect... THIS is reasonable, this is objectively, clearly good and beautiful and moral.
Your opposition to what is loving, good, rational and moral is, by definition, perverse.
Post a Comment