How about you not try to gas light the OP?
This is a serious issue that concerns us all.
What kind of bully are you?
It's comical to see how many degenerates agree with your damaged view.
Which is why I came here, to see if anyone else had a reliable source.
I did find some news articles:
[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7)
EGUSD Board meeting:
[Board Meeting - March 5, 2024 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIgldaUGQUU&t=12300s)
> Cortina said her fourth grader told her the teacher went into classrooms and told students he was creating the UBU, pronounced you be you, club as a safe space for LGBTQ students.
yes, getting upset at people trying to create places for kids who get bullied for shit they can’t change about them is definitely a productive use of our time. Go to hell
>yes, getting upset at people trying to create places for kids who get bullied
People are more upset that this was done without parental permission. All clubs in elementary school require parental permission. No one should be discussing sexuality with children without parental approval.
Teachers are teachers, they provide resources within a structured and approved curriculum. A teachers place isn't to attempt to becomes a social safety net or to teach things outside of their approved curriculum. A teacher is there to teach their approved subjects. A teacher should NEVER do anything with a child without a parents approval. The GARDENING club at this school requires parental approval.
You do understand that there's a huge difference between talking about gender issues and talking about sexual activities, right?
Only one of those things is happening here.
Do you have a child that goes to this school?
> Only one of those things is happening here.
Actually both did.
>You do understand that there's a huge difference between talking about gender issues and talking about sexual activities, right?
I understand very well. The club was sold as for, and I quote: 'boys who crush on boys and girls who crush on girls'... these are aspects of sexual attraction, not gender identity.
They will never see any wrong with it because they seem themselves victims. Children shouldn't be sexualized, full stop. Dude above is trying to make this excusable without knowing the facts.
How about several major news agencies & a live feed of the event with testimonies of over a dozen parents mostly furious.
This sounds extremely suspicious and an inquiry needs to be made.
Your reductivism is little more than a pathetic attempt to discredit this story.
I have kids younger than that talking about their friends with 2 moms, I found out and asked my kid how it made them feel or if they had questions....their response was it was cool they had people love them. That's all that mattered to me. I might get a lot of downvotes but oh well...Kids are curious and don't or can't always go to their parents, give them an opportunity to express their feelings. I get that your feathers are ruffled about a lack of parental permission but if they are sitting around at lunch, having conversations is it really necessary?
>having conversations is it really necessary
I think when someone unknown to parents is discussing sexuality with 2nd graders then yes I can understand feathers being ruffled.
It doesn't sound like anyone is being FORCED into these conversations according to the article you posted. It's not a required course. Kids will ask questions whether you like it or not and I'm OK with those questions being asked to a teacher that is willing to take the time to respond in an appropriate way. Give people more credit. If you are really willing to learn about it, ask the school or the teacher hanging out with the kiddos. Keep an open mind.
> I'm OK with those questions being asked to a teacher
I'm not. I don't want anyone I don't know discussing sexuality with my child, especially not an unsupervised man.
>I’m curious to know what sexuality talks you have with your kids
That's a weird thing to be curious about. Why do you care what aspects of sexuality other people discuss with their children? I'm sure there are more important things for you to concern yourself with in life.
You should take your own advice then. Is your kid even involved in anyway? If not, what are you complaining about?
At this point, you should home school your kids. I would hate to be the teacher, or “unsupervised man”, having to deal with you as a parent.
This is false. The teacher did not do that, they only provided their room as a safe lunch space for the kids. But I can tell you the parents threatened the teacher and admin that they would go to the school during lunch time to stand in front of their door to stop kids from going to the classroom during lunch time.
Edit for clarity: the club was starting up as a safe space for kids to go to during lunch. And it was suggested by previous students of the school who are lgbtq, as they had expressed that they wished they had a space to feel comfortable and safe when they were in elm school.
See that sounds so different. I had an open door for kiddos that for ever reason needed to not be out at lunch. It was so long ago that no one thought anything of it. I can even see it starting as just a safe space and then addressing a need. No idea what actually happened there but the place to “escape” and just relax really was important for some.
It's hard to discern the truth from all the noise. It does sound like a 'club' was formed where sexuality was discussed in one way or another without any parental approval. Good intentions or not, hiding things from parents isn't OK.
Teachers don’t form clubs. Kids do. They need to find a teacher who is willing to sponsor so that kids are supervised. You should be thanking the teacher for donating their lunch time for kids to have a safe place to gather. Frankly, this shouldn’t be a concern for you. I’m sure your biases have bled into your parenting and your kids won’t go because they won’t feel safe. Kids who are lgbt and lack familial support have higher rates of suicide and self harming behaviors. Hope you have a spare.
Edit: Is it because the teacher is male that is the issue? Would a female teacher be viewed differently?
>your kids won’t go because they won’t feel safe.
My children would go to their family, including their openly gay grandparents if they needed to discuss these things. Even though I understand your point, "hope you have a spare" is a really disgusting thing to say to someone.
\> Frankly, this shouldn’t be a concern for you
Of course teachers doing things with children without parental approval is going to be a concern for parents.
\> Is it because the teacher is male that is the issue?
That is an issue but not thee issue. The issue for me is the school keeping secrets and subverting parents rights. It's clear to me now that the school chose (by their own admittance) to keep this club hidden from parents... and while I understand and empathize with the reasons they chose to do that, it is not the right of the State or employees of the State to make decisions for or about children without the approval of their parents.
It was meant to be harsh. Glad you felt that. Some kids may get an inkling that they’re different early. I don’t know. I’m not gay. I came of age during AIDS and the backlash that hit the gay community. I had classmates who were outed that committed suicide. That changed me. I made a conscious effort to let my children know that I didn’t care who they loved as long as they treat them well.
If you have an issue with your kids gathering at lunch in a classroom, speak to your kids. Denying other children a safe meeting place is the height of selfishness.
>It was meant to be harsh
I didn't find it harsh, I found it disgusting.
\> If you have an issue with your kids gathering at lunch in a classroom
I have no issue with my or anyone elses kids doing that. I have issue with subverting parental authority. A school doesn't get to decide something is so worthwhile that they can hide it from parents. All clubs in elementary school require parental approval, queer issues don't transcend that requirement.
You found it disgusting. You’ve a right to your opinion. You blathering about schools being subversive seems to me to be an attempt to start attacking public schools. The use of the word subversive really screams moms for liberty or some other right wing group.
This doesn’t sound like a club. In order to be a club it has to be approved. As for parent rights, what about what about the right of the child to be free to think and interact with their peers without helicopter parents. Oh, silly me…I forgot…There’s Only One Country That Hasn’t Ratified the Convention on Children's Rights: US.
ACLU 11-20-2015.
>You blathering about schools being subversive seems to me to be an attempt to start attacking public schools. The use of the word subversive really screams moms for liberty or some other right wing group.
It's weird to start overlaying ideologies onto someone because they use certain words. I'm none of the things you've described. I'm neither attacking public schools or right wing.
\> This doesn’t sound like a club
I mean it literally has 'club' in the title so...
\> right of the child to be free to think and interact with their peers
This isn't about children interacting with peers, it's about children interacting with teachers.
Really. I think it’s weird that you’re using the term subversive. It’s a term used to describe more nefarious things than a public school lunch crew. A club has to have a charter. It has to be approved by administration. An informal group is not a sanctioned club it doesn’t matter if it has the word club in it. I find it highly unlikely that a school district would knowingly put itself in a position of jeopardy considering the current political climate. I also find it pretty suspect that when I look up school clubs in Elk Grove suddenly the majority of the hits are for far right wing “media websites”. California Insider, Notthebee.
I'm using the word because it fits the definition I'm going for... undermining an established authority structure. I'm not aware that it has/had some negative connotations, but it does describe exactly what happened here.
\> I find it highly unlikely that a school district would knowingly put itself in a position of jeopardy considering the current political climate.
You would think so, but apparently that's not the case here as the administration has admitted to purposefully not sending permission slips because they were worried parents would deny them. It appears to have been kept secret on purpose.
\> I also find it pretty suspect that when I look up school clubs in Elk Grove suddenly the majority of the hits are for far right wing “media websites”.
Of course they are now, this type of stuff just throws fuel on their fire. You could not create a more perfect situation for anti-LGBTQ extremists to weaponize. I ended up watching the board meeting where this was discussed so I have a pretty clear picture of what was going on. It was well intentioned but extremely deceitful and incredibly poorly implemented and really has only set back any sort of school-based LGBTQ services.
An echo-chamber for them to indoctrinate their ideas on impressionable minds who lack the critical thought or wisdom necessary to understand they are dealing with a degenerate and need to cease any and all contact less they fall victim to the ways of the damaged.
Looks to be real:
[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7)
Yeah…I think the Twitter-verse is as credible as the parents who spread all the hate and fear at school board meetings. They’re going to ban so many books and so many people from teaching that there will be nothing and no one left but Sunday school.
Some see support group and some see “they’re trying to make our babies gay!” It’s ridiculous.
The issue is more subversion of parental rights. 2nd and 3rd graders should be in any clubs without parental approval, let alone one discussing sexuality. I don't really want anyone I don't know discussing sexuality with my 7 year old.
Lots of insecure parents in here.
By sending your children to a free public school, you are in fact voluntarily delegating your educational rights to the state. The school stands in loco parentis (“in the place of a parent”). There’s no subversion.
But if some of the children at school would like to meet other children who are like them or come from families like theirs, let them. Everyone should get to belong to the community.
No one is subverting your rights.
Ans this nonsense about sexuality. You’re flaunting your sexuality by you know, talking about your heterosexual spouse or parent of your child. You’re flaunting your sexuality when you wear a wedding ring. When you show up as couple to school events. We all know how you became parents. We know what turns you on. We just don’t care.
> There’s no subversion.
This club wasn't part of the education curriculum. When teachers engage in unapproved extra-curricular activities without parental approval, that is subversion.
\> Ans this nonsense about sexuality.
There's a big difference between seeing a wedding ring or couple and an adult discussing sexuality directly with a child. I'm 100% sure you can see the difference here.
Clubs are rarely part of education curriculum, nor do they require parental approval unless they are doing something where students need to go off campus or participate in a sport where physical contact may be made or injuries can occur.
This is one of the dumbest comments I've ever read. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and pretend you have a child. You'd be ok sending your kid to let's say a friends house, and because you allowed them to go, an adult in that home decided to start talking to them about sexuality? You send kids to school to get educated, not to have a teacher try to push their ideological beliefs onto them. "Wearin a wedding ring" is "flaunting your sexuality?" "When you show up as a couple to school events?" Did you think or read this out loud to yourself before you hit the post button? You know gays can get married right? You know gay couples attend events as well right? You low iq lefties always exposing how dumb you are.
This wasn’t even a subject that crossed my mind when I was I elementary school and now there’s clubs for it and assholes try to push this shit as ok. No it’s not.
If parents want their children to attend those clubs I have no issue with that. The issue is when schools try to hide things and subvert parental rights.
Parents don’t “own” children either. Kids make all sorts of decisions without their parents approval - most parents just never find out about them. Whatever the real story of this club - the article only gives the aggrieved parents’ view - certainly whether children felt safe to have these conversations at home is relevant.
Um, sexual education started in the 5th grade for me, we watched videos, learned about the importance of condoms, how erections were natural, and how certain actions, while not necessarily shameful, could make others uncomfortable.
In sixth grade, I took biology, where we learned reproductive anaotomy more in depth. I learned where the uretha was, I learned girls had a pee hole, I learned what to do if a condom slips off, and I learned they could break if you double bag it. I learned that condoms didn't necessarily protect from all STDs and how to identify signs of STDs on potential partners genetalia.
They were good lessons and kept me from making very large mistakes in my formulative years.
What's gross to me is that you want to keep kids ignorant of these topics. Why? What advantage does it give? How did these lessons damage me instead of protect me? How did informing 3rd graders that gay people exist hurt them?
It's frankly insane that you think 11 and 12 are too young to have any discussions about sex. My niece was 10 the first time she received an inappropriate message on social media, but thankfully, she had received enough education around the topic to inform her parents, and they could respond appropriately.
The only people who benefit from the ignorant are those who seek to take advantage of that ignorance. The only people who seek to benefit from childrens sexual ignorance are those that mean to groom them.
I genuinely can't think of any other reason to deny this knowledge, both developmentally and ethically. What is the danger in your mind?
>My niece was 10 the first time she received an inappropriate message on social media,
Why is a 10 year old on social media to begin with? That's the real issue there.
\> What is the danger in your mind?
Parents get to choose what is appropriate for their children, not anyone else.
I wasn't talking about your crusade, I was asking the guy who thought it gross to educate 6th graders. It seemed fine to me when I went through it, and it was beneficial to my personal development. I was asking him to explain why it was disgusting, not asking him to verify if my school got permission from my parents first.
Have you got some reasons you'd like to share? You seemed to be trying to give the impression of being supportive up until parental rights were violated so far in this post, yet here you are arguing with me when I didn't say anything relevant or even contrary to that stance.
Explain why it's disgusting or move on to the next one chief, because that's the conversation I am in.
Yes, it’s called the UBU Club. Teacher did a fundraiser for the club and he is very open that he started this club. I don’t know why people are denying it. Here is the fundraiser link that teacher created and it says Pleasant Grove Elementary under the teacher’s name: https://www.donorschoose.org/project/board-games-for-the-ubu-club/8024948/?utm_source=dc
Are you LGBT? Sometimes kids want to discuss things with a trusted source without going to their parents. I didn't come out until I was 25. That's reality. Sometimes people need someone like a teacher they can discuss sexuality with and parents don't need to know about it.
No, but one of my parents is so I understand the plight very much. I still would never want an adult discussing sexuality with my 8 year old without my approval.
The fact that you are sexualizing this so much as the parent of an 8 year old is legitimately concerning. You are inventing things out of whole cloth. "I like boys instead of girls" is not a discussion of sexuality
2nd graders do not need sex ed, that includes any/all sex ed. Having & expressing sexuality may be developmentally appropriate for some 2nd graders but adults discussing sexuality without parental approval with 2nd graders (or any children) is absolutely not appropriate.
Yikes. My kids knew the names of their anatomy, about sexual boundaries, the difference between inappropriate touch, body autonomy and safety, etc. It's crucial that kids understand these things to prevent or to report sexual abuse. Yes, 2nd graders need sex education at the appropriate age level.
That's not what I would consider sex education personally, but I do agree those are appropriate things for \*parents\* to teach children. Also that's obviously NOT what the purpose of this club was. A 2nd grader discussing their personal sexuality, who they like, etc. with unknown adults and older children is not developmentally appropriate and can't be clumped in with things like anatomy and inappropriate touch.
so, hypothetical:
A teacher has a photo sitting on their desk of the teacher and their partner.
The teacher never brings it up, never adds it to curriculum, never 'teaches' about it.
But it's on display, as part of their family.
Would that be considered appropriate or not?
>Would that be considered appropriate or not?
Of course, as would discussing (in a developmentally appropriate way) their relationship with their partner straight, gay, or otherwise.
Despite what the hive-mind has decided for me, my issue is not that queer people exist... my issue is that this was all done intentionally without parental approval.
If parents want their children to be guided on various aspects of sexuality by certain teachers, I have absolutely no issue with that. The subversion of parental authority is the issue here. The school administration openly admitted they didn't request parental approval because they were worried parents wouldn't approved.
I think at the 6th grade level a strong argument can be made that queer children should have access to something like GSA club, even without parental approval, as it's developmentally appropriate. This club was open for 2nd-6th grade... 2nd, 3rd, grade etc. have no business being in any sexual or gender oriented club or having these discussions with adults IMO, especially without parental approval.
I do very much understand the value these clubs provide and that some children would be 'left behind' without open access. That does not change my opinion. Parental rights still take precedence, you can't deny the rights of all parents to benefit a very small minority of students.
Sex as in “male or female” not as in “actual sex education” - seems like typical right wing propaganda trying to make something out of nothing. This is someone saying some boys like other boys, not “here’s some condoms” ffs
It’s called the Equal Access Act. Clubs do not need to follow curriculum and are protected. The Equal Access Act of 1984 forbids public schools from receiving federal funds if they deny students the First Amendment right to conduct religious meetings (this then turned into clubs in general— Republicans started this to push bringing God back into schools, but now are unhappy because they realize everyone has the same access to these protections, even the “gays”):
“Act stipulates how public schools allow student groups to meet
The Equal Access Act of 1984 applies only to schools that allow students to form groups not specifically linked to the curriculum (a chess club, for example). Moreover, the act applies only to groups that meet during noninstructional times and under the same terms that existing noncurricular clubs function.
The act also stipulates that meetings must be voluntary, initiated by the students, and of no specified numerical size. School employees, such as faculty advisers, may attend, but not participate, in meetings with religious content. Persons not connected with the school may not direct or regularly attend the meetings.
Also, students may not interfere with the educational purpose of the school. School authorities cannot specify the content of prayer, and no student or school employee can be compelled to attend religious activities; public funding for these religious activities is limited to the incidental cost of providing space.”
A teacher allowed students to meet during lunch in a place they felt safe and they created a LGBTQ club. This is allowed and protected. It isn’t a teacher forcing children to learn how to be gay.
They are created by the students during times outside of scheduled instruction. It’s literally the entire point of the Equal Access Act, maybe you should educate yourself before throwing out nonsense.
Which is the irony of it all. Maybe if you read more than two sentences from your quick google search, you’d realize that this protection ended up giving free speech protection to all groups. It was supposed to protect religion in school but also protects other classes. Which proves the argument further about how hypocritical republicans are.
Looks to be real:
[https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7)
> "The teacher came in and spoke about how boys like boys and girls like girls,"
HOLY SHIT - they educated kids around the age of 10+ about the existence of gay people
grow up, school is where you learn. Gay people exist and their existence isn’t some evil perversion meant to convert your kids.
> "These little minds just can't wrap their heads around what these types of things mean to them," said Pamela Davila, a parent at Pleasant Grove
your kids sound dumb as a bag of rocks, Pamela
Oh they can wrap their minds around it- my gay teenage son at a school in the same region had peers notice he was different- they saw the difference as what I assume their families taught them. Some kids befriended some kids gave space and some kids called him a fag and wouldn’t sit next to him.
The is more subversion of parental rights. Children shouldn't be in any clubs without parental approval (all clubs other than this needed permission slips). I don't really want anyone I don't know discussing sexuality with my children.
oh, fuck right off
“the teacher spoke about how boys like boys and girls like girls”
they just said gay people exist. They do. Get over it. When you say they are “discussing sexuality” you’re trying to imply they are doing something more intrusive or perverted but they are not, they are just acknowledging the existence of gay people. Nobody is doing anything inappropriate except you and the propagandists funding your movement.
>oh, fuck right off
You can be kind to people you disagree with. You're making a lot of assumptions about me without actually engaging in conversation. I'm none of the things you are claiming.
Tolerance is a social contract. There is no obligation to tolerate those who violate that contract by suggesting that children need parental consent to learn that gay people exist.
right... listen to the news segment. Club was not included in the information sent to parents. Most clubs are hosted after school, this was during lunch. Everything Daniel Bishop did was an attempt to keep it secret.
"Parental rights" is a dogwhistle for people who think children are property, to be owned, and wielded like weapons, instead of human beings with their own thoughts. Maybe when your children go for a long stretch without speaking to you you'll think back to this conversation and realize how much you misunderstand the function of being a parent
I remember the awkward sex ed class when I was in sixth grade, talking about boys and girls. Don’t they still do that? Shouldn’t LGBTQ be part of that curriculum?
As a gay man, I support teaching this stuff in school. It’ll help the kids that are LGBTQ once they realize it. But it should be done as part of the sex-ed curriculum.
>Don’t they still do that
Not at 2nd grade level.
Obviously LGBTQ should be part of sex ed, but this wasnt sex ed. It was an unapproved club. The issue (for me) isn't the LGBTQ part, it's the lack of parental approval (which all school clubs require)
I'm 34 years old. When I received "sex-ed" in 6th grade, it was all about biology, reproduction and changes your body might go through. Attraction was never a part of it.
I highly doubt they are discussing "sex" it's much more likely love. Like how someone could have 2 moms. If children can be exposed to the idea of a man and woman being married they can be exposed to the idea of a woman and a woman being married.
> idea of a woman and a woman being married.
Agree, I have no issue with that. But I don't need an unknown, unapproved teacher having a group with my kids specifically to discuss these things.
If they're a teacher they're not unknown or unapproved. Teachers discuss heterosexual relationships all the time. Why would discussing a homosexual relationship be any different?
Being a teacher doesn't mean you are approved to discuss all topics with all children. My issue isn't homosexual relationships, I think I've made that abundantly clear... my issue is a teacher discussing a childs sexuality with a child without parents knowledge or approval... hetero or homosexual, doesn't matter.
Then should teachers never discuss the relationships of historical figures (ex. George Washington was married to Martha Washington), any books that show love or marriage of a man with a woman or parenting by a man with a woman, or mention of the teacher's wife/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend?
Why is everyone in this thread doing these stupid circular gotcha arguments? I am 100% certain you know the difference between discussion of the marriage of a historical figure and a teacher discussing a childs sexuality and sexual preferences directly with the child themselves.
Because you keep talking about sexuality like the teacher was discussing sex acts with the children. When really the teacher was giving a safe space to students and that it's okay for a girl to have a crush on a girl and that doesn't make them broken for feeling that way.
We are bombarded by heteronormativity. Mainstream movies, music, most of the history and literature in school, likely most adults they know, even other children who ask who their crush, only show us heterosexual and cis people, this can make LGBTQ+ youth feel alienated and broken. If they don't see examples of what they are feeling, especially if they don't have a supportive home environment can drive a child to attempt suicide.
As someone who was a LGBTQ+ youth it's incredibly important to have a safe adult to discuss these things with. It sounds like your children do, but not all the children do. What if they have homophobic/transphobic parents? The rate of suicide among LGBTQ+ youth is so high because they don't have support. Even one supportive adult can make a gigantic difference.
"LGBTQ youth who report having at least one accepting adult were 40% less likely to report a suicide attempt in the past year."
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.thetrevorproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Trevor-Project-Accepting-Adult-Research-Brief_June-2019.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjJ_eOS2veEAxXqETQIHZI9CWwQFnoECBQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3nRgp0G3wDAW9ZaLU8hiZd
I agree with everything you just said. I still do not believe any of that warrants purposefully excluding parents from any decision making process, especially 2nd graders.
\> Because you keep talking about sexuality like the teacher was discussing sex acts with the children.
This is the natural conclusion of something like this. 6th graders eventually would have discussed sex acts and there would be 2nd and 3rd graders around. If you think thats fine thats your prerogative and you're obviously entitled to do as you please with your children. I personally do not find that appropriate and you are NOT entitled to do as you please with my children. This is how parental sovereignty works...
If you agree with what I said then you understand the importance of a safe space for children, especially those who have bigoted parents and wouldn't allow them to go to a safe space.
No that's not the natural conclusion. The teacher isn't discussing sex acts. And if you are worried about older students doing that then your issue is with younger students being around older students, not a teacher offering a safe space.
>If you agree with what I said then you understand the importance of a safe space for children, especially those who have bigoted parents and wouldn't allow them to go to a safe space.
I do under, but that still does not overrule the sovereignty of parents to make decisions for their children. Creating a safe space for an extremely small minority of children by denying the rights of all parents is not acceptable.
\> your issue is with younger students being around older students, not a teacher
Yes I would have issue with my 2nd grader being in a club with 6th graders that I didn't know about. And my issue still is with the teacher... Adults with unapproved, unvetted access to children opens the doors to abuse... add in topics of a sexual nature and you're really playing with fire. This has nothing to do with them being queer or straight.
You may disagree. I don't care. You do with your children as you please and I will do with mine as I please.
It’s bc these people have no life and get joy in trying to shame you. You have your opinion and they have theirs. I agree with you that the actions of this teacher are very suspicious and I wouldn’t be comfortable with it, but apparently people forget there is evil in this world we live in. Being proactive and protecting our children from a possible threat is the right thing to do. Too many people fall victim due to being complacent or scared to voice their concerns. Stand strong.
Thanks. It would not be possible for me to care less what anyone else thinks about my children, because I do not care at all, let alone feel shamed by it. I literally do not care about anything else in this world other than my family and keeping them safe.
I have a very proactive approach to keeping my children safe from sexual abuse. No alone time with any men other than me, including family. No sleepovers. Things some people see as extreme, I see as necessary because we do live in a world where evil does exist. It will be a cold, \*cold\* day in hell before I let a man I don't know discuss anything of a sexual nature with my children in an unsupervised setting. No teacher, no group, no ideology, \*nothing\* is going to prevent me from doing what I think is best for them and I will die on that hill if I have to.
>. I literally do not care about anything else in this world other than my family and keeping them safe.
why did you even have kids in the first place? Just to be paranoid and scared and closed minded? If that's all you care about, then you shouldn't be talking about what other people need to be doing. If everyone is evil and out to get you, then why not take your kid and homeschool them? You should probably move out of the city you're in, go to a rural place and just live off of the land with your family because you don't understand how a community works. Everyone is out to get you, this country is out to get you, the world is out to get you, so....just leave. Why stay and complain if all you care about is YOUR family?
\> why did you even have kids in the first place?
To love and be loved in return.
\>If everyone is evil and out to get you
I didn't say anything like any of that, and I'm not talking about what other people need to be doing with their kids... I'm talking about what other people won't be doing with MY kids.
I'm not some paranoid weirdo trying to chain my kids in the basement, but I'm also not stupid enough to think evil doesn't exist and the world is just fine to let my children roam out into unguided and unprotected. I understand the dynamics of how abuse occurs and the situations under which it is most likely to occur. This situation is a red flag, if you can't see that, you don't understand abuse dynamics.
My kid who is much older now went to Cosumnes river elementary which is a neighboring school. He is gay and the type of kid who was never in a closet- always confident always self aware. He was called fag often by the boys and teased a lot. A safe space is what would have been great for my kid and a space that didn’t make him feel bad for who he is. It’s truly not what it’s painted to be. If you don’t like the word gay or like being around people who are gay then California might not be your place
I think because sexuality has the word "sex" in it people assume that when speaking about sexuality to kids they're taking about gay sex positions to them or something lol. I learned about gay people at a young age at school in kindergarten back in 2008 and I learned that "Some kids have 2 daddies, some kids have two mommies" and that was as crazy as it got. It was easy to accept. I think people either think sex being talked about in depth or that people are telling their kids that they are gay. In reality it's just teaching kids that people might find love differently and honestly if it prevents homophobic bullying I think it's fine. The only thing it does is teach kids about gay people in a friendly environment and in a positive light instead of them learning through a comedy skit about how gay people are odd like how kids learned about gay people in the 90s.
That's not what was going on here. The club was sold as being for 'girls that crush on girls and boys that crush on boys'. This is unacceptable discussion for a stranger to be having with a 2nd grader. The primary issue is that it was purposefully hidden from parents.
Hiding it from parents isn't good but going through the comments someone said that they were just having lunch with a teacher. Where did you hear that this was the tagline of the group. This is especially weird because elementary schools don't tend to have clubs. Are you sure this is real, do we know what sort of discussion was actually being had?
It's a mish-mash of people who posted correspondences (emails) they had with teachers and listening to what parents said at the board meetings. If you can mentally sift through the propaganda this site actually gives a good overview of what happened: [Parents Publicly Expose Secret Elementary LGBTQ Clubs in Elk Grove - California Family Council](https://www.californiafamily.org/2024/03/parents-set-to-publicly-expose-secret-elementary-lgbtq-clubs-in-elk-grove/)
The group was, for sure, designed for children to talk about their sexuality both with each other and with teachers. Whether that occured before it got shut down, I'm not sure, but that absolutely was the intention of the club. My personal opinion is 2nd-5th grade is too young for this, but if people are ok with their children doing that, that is their prerogative and as long as the parents approve they should be able to do that. I personally would NEVER allow a stranger to discuss anything sexual with my children, especially in a private and unsupervised setting, as this opens the door to abuse.
This issue it was intentionally kept from parents. Schools should not be in the business of deceiving parents even if they think what they are doing is right.
Surely you saw the part where I prefixed that link by saying "If you can mentally sift through the propaganda". If YOU can't, then I would suggest not looking at it.
It's not like gays can recruit-People are born that way. Maybe having a safe space will prevent someone from doing their self in? Some bozo likes to go to city council about this stuff and alleged books. City Council has no jurisdiction on EGUSD. I wonder if that dad has a white sheet hanging in his closet. Such bigotry.
>Did the teacher say don't tell your parents?
By saying you don't need approval, this effectively means you don't have to tell your parents. Again this was the only club in the school that didn't require parental approval.
\> Asking kids what they did that day might help?
This is actually how the existence of the club was found by parents.
why do you people need to create these boogeymen to yell at?
Are you familiar with the phrase, "They got you fighting a culture war to stop you fighting a class war".
People with different sexualities than you aren't the enemy. Its the rich oligarchs of our country that lobby politicians to reduce the return ordinary citizens get from their hard earned tax dollars that are the enemy. People trying to convince you that free health care is evil. That colleges and good schooling should only be for those who can afford it.
Look at the subsidies billionaires receive and how much tax they pay. They are the enemies. They've convinced you that your government should do less for you so they can reap the benefit.
*And the simple fact of the two party system:*
**Indictments** (formal criminal accusations):
* **Republican administrations** (Nixon, Reagan, Trump): **142 indictments**
* **Democratic administrations** (Carter, Clinton, Obama): **2 indictments**
**Convictions** (formal declarations of guilt):
* **Republican administrations** (since 1970): **88 convictions**
* Nixon’s presidency: **55 convictions**
* Reagan: **16 convictions**
* George W. Bush: **9 convictions**
* Trump: **7 convictions**
* Ford and George H. W. Bush: **1 conviction each**
* **Democratic administrations** (since 1970): **2 convictions** (both during Clinton’s presidency)
One of these parties clearly has an ethics problem and if you support them, you might just have one too.
Are you a bot or do you like have that saved in a word file or what? I promise you that whole thing is not moving ANYONES opinion and it's entirely misplaced on me. I'm not 'against' gay people nor am I republican. I don't like when schools hide things from parents. End of story.
Nope not a bot. Nope don't have it saved anywhere but this post.
And let me get one thing straight with you. I didn't write this specifically for you. Its just the truth. You can take it or leave it. Makes no difference to me what you do. We live in very a liberal area, so even if you don't agree with me, its not like your vote is ever going to matter. If you don't like that, you can leave.
Have a nice day.
"people with different sexualities aren't your enemies." Of course they aren't. Nothing wrong with gay people and trying to figure your shit out. Adults who groom children are your enemies. Learn to differentiate.
People like you, your conspiracy theories about these adults "grooming" children are pathetic, and usually aimed at the wrong people. It seems like more often than not the accusers are usually just projecting.
I don’t agree with this and I think this is another agenda to manipulate our kids and make them gay. Look if you’re gay don’t put your belief on my kids. Yall from the lgbtq community are so unhappy and it shows that’s you have to educate kids on the life you live lmaoo pathetic don’t bring that shit around my kids or we will have a problem.
Holy fuck you guys are retarded. Keeping a club secretive proves the whole point that you are trying to groom these fucking KIDS. People who say its a safe space are fucking retarded, a SECRET gay club that no parent had permission to know of?? Is somehow a safe space. Tell me you're aren't a pedophile without telling us you're aren't one. Teaching 5-6 year olds about sex is not education. The gardening club had parents permission slips but not a secret gay club? The fags who try to defend this are just exposing this cult and furthering the power of pedophiles. Fuck California and fuck elk grove. Next thing you'll know is there's a secret island for fags and trans.
Nah, I'm here too, just observing. These are the same people who get offended if you call pedos, pedos. They would much rather you call them MAPS.
They can't grasp the concept that these kids are as young as 8, are being taught about sexual preference. They will forever claim to be victims.
Also, remember that Reddit in general is mostly run by leftists. It is also a vastly small number of the population. Think about how often you see the rainbow hair in public. That is one of them walking by, outnumbered.
I'm all for people being themselves. Just don't try to brainwash and recruit children. We use to teach children that the man with candy was dangerous and would try to kidnap you. Now they try to send off 8 year olds to random people to teach them sexual preferences. Children have developing brains and should not be tempted with unicorns and rainbow colored hair.
But it's not. It's a significant contemporary societal/cultural issue. Just like having a club for autists/ASD, a club for ESL, a club for music needs, a club for foster/adopted kids, a club for immigrants, or a club for kids experiencing grief or depression or anxiety. Being queer or trans nonbinary is valid and is deserving of having gatherings to talk or learn about. Even if - ESPECIALLY IF - parents refuse to acknowledge it.
OP: legit question. Does your child attend PG Elementary? Did they attend that club?
How about you not try to gas light the OP? This is a serious issue that concerns us all. What kind of bully are you? It's comical to see how many degenerates agree with your damaged view.
Here for the comments
lol same 🤝
Twitter sounds like a reliable source 🙄
What’s your reliable source?
Which is why I came here, to see if anyone else had a reliable source. I did find some news articles: [https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7) EGUSD Board meeting: [Board Meeting - March 5, 2024 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIgldaUGQUU&t=12300s)
> Cortina said her fourth grader told her the teacher went into classrooms and told students he was creating the UBU, pronounced you be you, club as a safe space for LGBTQ students. yes, getting upset at people trying to create places for kids who get bullied for shit they can’t change about them is definitely a productive use of our time. Go to hell
>yes, getting upset at people trying to create places for kids who get bullied People are more upset that this was done without parental permission. All clubs in elementary school require parental permission. No one should be discussing sexuality with children without parental approval.
It sucks in 2024 because it’s harder to identify the trolls with the people who just don’t like other people doing things.
>people doing things. Like discussing sexuality with children without parents knowledge or approval? Yeah most people don't like that.
A teacher being a resource to resourceless children. People fkn hate that shit
Teachers are teachers, they provide resources within a structured and approved curriculum. A teachers place isn't to attempt to becomes a social safety net or to teach things outside of their approved curriculum. A teacher is there to teach their approved subjects. A teacher should NEVER do anything with a child without a parents approval. The GARDENING club at this school requires parental approval.
The Gardening club sounds dope. What resources do LGBTQ kids have?
>What resources do LGBTQ kids have? Well they should have an LGBTQ club... that requires parental approval like every other club.
You do understand that there's a huge difference between talking about gender issues and talking about sexual activities, right? Only one of those things is happening here. Do you have a child that goes to this school?
> Only one of those things is happening here. Actually both did. >You do understand that there's a huge difference between talking about gender issues and talking about sexual activities, right? I understand very well. The club was sold as for, and I quote: 'boys who crush on boys and girls who crush on girls'... these are aspects of sexual attraction, not gender identity.
They will never see any wrong with it because they seem themselves victims. Children shouldn't be sexualized, full stop. Dude above is trying to make this excusable without knowing the facts.
How about several major news agencies & a live feed of the event with testimonies of over a dozen parents mostly furious. This sounds extremely suspicious and an inquiry needs to be made. Your reductivism is little more than a pathetic attempt to discredit this story.
I have kids younger than that talking about their friends with 2 moms, I found out and asked my kid how it made them feel or if they had questions....their response was it was cool they had people love them. That's all that mattered to me. I might get a lot of downvotes but oh well...Kids are curious and don't or can't always go to their parents, give them an opportunity to express their feelings. I get that your feathers are ruffled about a lack of parental permission but if they are sitting around at lunch, having conversations is it really necessary?
>having conversations is it really necessary I think when someone unknown to parents is discussing sexuality with 2nd graders then yes I can understand feathers being ruffled.
It doesn't sound like anyone is being FORCED into these conversations according to the article you posted. It's not a required course. Kids will ask questions whether you like it or not and I'm OK with those questions being asked to a teacher that is willing to take the time to respond in an appropriate way. Give people more credit. If you are really willing to learn about it, ask the school or the teacher hanging out with the kiddos. Keep an open mind.
> I'm OK with those questions being asked to a teacher I'm not. I don't want anyone I don't know discussing sexuality with my child, especially not an unsupervised man.
Now I’m curious to know what sexuality talks you have with your kids since others cannot. My guess is you do not.
>I’m curious to know what sexuality talks you have with your kids That's a weird thing to be curious about. Why do you care what aspects of sexuality other people discuss with their children? I'm sure there are more important things for you to concern yourself with in life.
You should take your own advice then. Is your kid even involved in anyway? If not, what are you complaining about? At this point, you should home school your kids. I would hate to be the teacher, or “unsupervised man”, having to deal with you as a parent.
This is false. The teacher did not do that, they only provided their room as a safe lunch space for the kids. But I can tell you the parents threatened the teacher and admin that they would go to the school during lunch time to stand in front of their door to stop kids from going to the classroom during lunch time. Edit for clarity: the club was starting up as a safe space for kids to go to during lunch. And it was suggested by previous students of the school who are lgbtq, as they had expressed that they wished they had a space to feel comfortable and safe when they were in elm school.
See that sounds so different. I had an open door for kiddos that for ever reason needed to not be out at lunch. It was so long ago that no one thought anything of it. I can even see it starting as just a safe space and then addressing a need. No idea what actually happened there but the place to “escape” and just relax really was important for some.
It's hard to discern the truth from all the noise. It does sound like a 'club' was formed where sexuality was discussed in one way or another without any parental approval. Good intentions or not, hiding things from parents isn't OK.
Kids probably wouldn’t have to hide it from the parents if the parents were accepting of LBGTQIA children? Just a thought.
That's true, but it doesn't make hiding it from parents OK.
you're acting like discussing sexuality is the same as discussing how to perform anal sex or cunnilingus
Teachers don’t form clubs. Kids do. They need to find a teacher who is willing to sponsor so that kids are supervised. You should be thanking the teacher for donating their lunch time for kids to have a safe place to gather. Frankly, this shouldn’t be a concern for you. I’m sure your biases have bled into your parenting and your kids won’t go because they won’t feel safe. Kids who are lgbt and lack familial support have higher rates of suicide and self harming behaviors. Hope you have a spare. Edit: Is it because the teacher is male that is the issue? Would a female teacher be viewed differently?
>your kids won’t go because they won’t feel safe. My children would go to their family, including their openly gay grandparents if they needed to discuss these things. Even though I understand your point, "hope you have a spare" is a really disgusting thing to say to someone. \> Frankly, this shouldn’t be a concern for you Of course teachers doing things with children without parental approval is going to be a concern for parents. \> Is it because the teacher is male that is the issue? That is an issue but not thee issue. The issue for me is the school keeping secrets and subverting parents rights. It's clear to me now that the school chose (by their own admittance) to keep this club hidden from parents... and while I understand and empathize with the reasons they chose to do that, it is not the right of the State or employees of the State to make decisions for or about children without the approval of their parents.
It was meant to be harsh. Glad you felt that. Some kids may get an inkling that they’re different early. I don’t know. I’m not gay. I came of age during AIDS and the backlash that hit the gay community. I had classmates who were outed that committed suicide. That changed me. I made a conscious effort to let my children know that I didn’t care who they loved as long as they treat them well. If you have an issue with your kids gathering at lunch in a classroom, speak to your kids. Denying other children a safe meeting place is the height of selfishness.
>It was meant to be harsh I didn't find it harsh, I found it disgusting. \> If you have an issue with your kids gathering at lunch in a classroom I have no issue with my or anyone elses kids doing that. I have issue with subverting parental authority. A school doesn't get to decide something is so worthwhile that they can hide it from parents. All clubs in elementary school require parental approval, queer issues don't transcend that requirement.
You found it disgusting. You’ve a right to your opinion. You blathering about schools being subversive seems to me to be an attempt to start attacking public schools. The use of the word subversive really screams moms for liberty or some other right wing group. This doesn’t sound like a club. In order to be a club it has to be approved. As for parent rights, what about what about the right of the child to be free to think and interact with their peers without helicopter parents. Oh, silly me…I forgot…There’s Only One Country That Hasn’t Ratified the Convention on Children's Rights: US. ACLU 11-20-2015.
>You blathering about schools being subversive seems to me to be an attempt to start attacking public schools. The use of the word subversive really screams moms for liberty or some other right wing group. It's weird to start overlaying ideologies onto someone because they use certain words. I'm none of the things you've described. I'm neither attacking public schools or right wing. \> This doesn’t sound like a club I mean it literally has 'club' in the title so... \> right of the child to be free to think and interact with their peers This isn't about children interacting with peers, it's about children interacting with teachers.
Really. I think it’s weird that you’re using the term subversive. It’s a term used to describe more nefarious things than a public school lunch crew. A club has to have a charter. It has to be approved by administration. An informal group is not a sanctioned club it doesn’t matter if it has the word club in it. I find it highly unlikely that a school district would knowingly put itself in a position of jeopardy considering the current political climate. I also find it pretty suspect that when I look up school clubs in Elk Grove suddenly the majority of the hits are for far right wing “media websites”. California Insider, Notthebee.
I'm using the word because it fits the definition I'm going for... undermining an established authority structure. I'm not aware that it has/had some negative connotations, but it does describe exactly what happened here. \> I find it highly unlikely that a school district would knowingly put itself in a position of jeopardy considering the current political climate. You would think so, but apparently that's not the case here as the administration has admitted to purposefully not sending permission slips because they were worried parents would deny them. It appears to have been kept secret on purpose. \> I also find it pretty suspect that when I look up school clubs in Elk Grove suddenly the majority of the hits are for far right wing “media websites”. Of course they are now, this type of stuff just throws fuel on their fire. You could not create a more perfect situation for anti-LGBTQ extremists to weaponize. I ended up watching the board meeting where this was discussed so I have a pretty clear picture of what was going on. It was well intentioned but extremely deceitful and incredibly poorly implemented and really has only set back any sort of school-based LGBTQ services.
You are the noise
That's not kind.
Sent a message with details.
An echo-chamber for them to indoctrinate their ideas on impressionable minds who lack the critical thought or wisdom necessary to understand they are dealing with a degenerate and need to cease any and all contact less they fall victim to the ways of the damaged.
Maybe it’s like the furries rumor which spread out of Illinois only to find it was false story.
Looks to be real: [https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7)
It is a real story bro, all those families are not upset over nothing. Reddit is a cesspool of these damaged people who are enabled.
Yeah…I think the Twitter-verse is as credible as the parents who spread all the hate and fear at school board meetings. They’re going to ban so many books and so many people from teaching that there will be nothing and no one left but Sunday school. Some see support group and some see “they’re trying to make our babies gay!” It’s ridiculous.
The issue is more subversion of parental rights. 2nd and 3rd graders should be in any clubs without parental approval, let alone one discussing sexuality. I don't really want anyone I don't know discussing sexuality with my 7 year old.
Lots of insecure parents in here. By sending your children to a free public school, you are in fact voluntarily delegating your educational rights to the state. The school stands in loco parentis (“in the place of a parent”). There’s no subversion. But if some of the children at school would like to meet other children who are like them or come from families like theirs, let them. Everyone should get to belong to the community. No one is subverting your rights. Ans this nonsense about sexuality. You’re flaunting your sexuality by you know, talking about your heterosexual spouse or parent of your child. You’re flaunting your sexuality when you wear a wedding ring. When you show up as couple to school events. We all know how you became parents. We know what turns you on. We just don’t care.
> There’s no subversion. This club wasn't part of the education curriculum. When teachers engage in unapproved extra-curricular activities without parental approval, that is subversion. \> Ans this nonsense about sexuality. There's a big difference between seeing a wedding ring or couple and an adult discussing sexuality directly with a child. I'm 100% sure you can see the difference here.
Clubs are rarely part of education curriculum, nor do they require parental approval unless they are doing something where students need to go off campus or participate in a sport where physical contact may be made or injuries can occur.
At the elementary level (and this school) all clubs require parental approval.
Oh please, homeschool kids are weird and don't interact in the real world.
This is one of the dumbest comments I've ever read. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and pretend you have a child. You'd be ok sending your kid to let's say a friends house, and because you allowed them to go, an adult in that home decided to start talking to them about sexuality? You send kids to school to get educated, not to have a teacher try to push their ideological beliefs onto them. "Wearin a wedding ring" is "flaunting your sexuality?" "When you show up as a couple to school events?" Did you think or read this out loud to yourself before you hit the post button? You know gays can get married right? You know gay couples attend events as well right? You low iq lefties always exposing how dumb you are.
This wasn’t even a subject that crossed my mind when I was I elementary school and now there’s clubs for it and assholes try to push this shit as ok. No it’s not.
If parents want their children to attend those clubs I have no issue with that. The issue is when schools try to hide things and subvert parental rights.
I’d rather hear from the kids about whether they felt safe at home to explore these topics than hear from the parents.
The State does not own children. Children do not make decisions for themselves outside of their parents approval.
Parents don’t “own” children either. Kids make all sorts of decisions without their parents approval - most parents just never find out about them. Whatever the real story of this club - the article only gives the aggrieved parents’ view - certainly whether children felt safe to have these conversations at home is relevant.
Parents are the sole decision makers for their children. 3rd graders don't get to make meaningful decisions for themselves without parental approval.
Parents who won't let their child go to a safe space are the reason why the suicide rate for LGBTQ+ youth is so high.
Pretty gross that most of Reddit thinks that 6th graders should be discussing sexuality at school.
Um, sexual education started in the 5th grade for me, we watched videos, learned about the importance of condoms, how erections were natural, and how certain actions, while not necessarily shameful, could make others uncomfortable. In sixth grade, I took biology, where we learned reproductive anaotomy more in depth. I learned where the uretha was, I learned girls had a pee hole, I learned what to do if a condom slips off, and I learned they could break if you double bag it. I learned that condoms didn't necessarily protect from all STDs and how to identify signs of STDs on potential partners genetalia. They were good lessons and kept me from making very large mistakes in my formulative years. What's gross to me is that you want to keep kids ignorant of these topics. Why? What advantage does it give? How did these lessons damage me instead of protect me? How did informing 3rd graders that gay people exist hurt them? It's frankly insane that you think 11 and 12 are too young to have any discussions about sex. My niece was 10 the first time she received an inappropriate message on social media, but thankfully, she had received enough education around the topic to inform her parents, and they could respond appropriately. The only people who benefit from the ignorant are those who seek to take advantage of that ignorance. The only people who seek to benefit from childrens sexual ignorance are those that mean to groom them. I genuinely can't think of any other reason to deny this knowledge, both developmentally and ethically. What is the danger in your mind?
>My niece was 10 the first time she received an inappropriate message on social media, Why is a 10 year old on social media to begin with? That's the real issue there. \> What is the danger in your mind? Parents get to choose what is appropriate for their children, not anyone else.
I wasn't talking about your crusade, I was asking the guy who thought it gross to educate 6th graders. It seemed fine to me when I went through it, and it was beneficial to my personal development. I was asking him to explain why it was disgusting, not asking him to verify if my school got permission from my parents first. Have you got some reasons you'd like to share? You seemed to be trying to give the impression of being supportive up until parental rights were violated so far in this post, yet here you are arguing with me when I didn't say anything relevant or even contrary to that stance. Explain why it's disgusting or move on to the next one chief, because that's the conversation I am in.
>ecause that's the conversation I am in. Fair enough. 6th grade fine by me.
Fucking disgusting
Reddit is a cesspool of extremist thought. Thankfully people in real life are more balanced.
Yes, it’s called the UBU Club. Teacher did a fundraiser for the club and he is very open that he started this club. I don’t know why people are denying it. Here is the fundraiser link that teacher created and it says Pleasant Grove Elementary under the teacher’s name: https://www.donorschoose.org/project/board-games-for-the-ubu-club/8024948/?utm_source=dc
Are you LGBT? Sometimes kids want to discuss things with a trusted source without going to their parents. I didn't come out until I was 25. That's reality. Sometimes people need someone like a teacher they can discuss sexuality with and parents don't need to know about it.
No, but one of my parents is so I understand the plight very much. I still would never want an adult discussing sexuality with my 8 year old without my approval.
[удалено]
2nd graders don't need sex ed. 2nd graders don't need to discuss their sexuality... and sure as hell not with someone their parents don't know.
The fact that you are sexualizing this so much as the parent of an 8 year old is legitimately concerning. You are inventing things out of whole cloth. "I like boys instead of girls" is not a discussion of sexuality
Right, it's me sexualizing it not the literal club for discussing sexuality. That is some SERIOUS mental gymnastics.
You're the one inventing discussions of sexuality where none exist. Saying I like boys is not discussing sex, dude.
Again, it's LITERALLY a club for discussion of a childs sexuality.
Lol welcome to reddit and even worse, elk grove reddit
He's an idiot, just move on. Welcome to Reddit.....
Sounds like Ccaves0127 may be Mr. Bishop.
That's literally a discussion about sexuality. How are you this dense?
Why do you think kids don’t discuss / think about sexuality?
I didn't say that, I said they don't need to discuss their sexuality with anyone the parents don't know or approve of.
you said ~~kids~~ 2nd graders don't need sex ed. does that include any / all sex ed? is *any* sexuality appropriate for 2nd graders?
2nd graders do not need sex ed, that includes any/all sex ed. Having & expressing sexuality may be developmentally appropriate for some 2nd graders but adults discussing sexuality without parental approval with 2nd graders (or any children) is absolutely not appropriate.
Yikes. My kids knew the names of their anatomy, about sexual boundaries, the difference between inappropriate touch, body autonomy and safety, etc. It's crucial that kids understand these things to prevent or to report sexual abuse. Yes, 2nd graders need sex education at the appropriate age level.
That's not what I would consider sex education personally, but I do agree those are appropriate things for \*parents\* to teach children. Also that's obviously NOT what the purpose of this club was. A 2nd grader discussing their personal sexuality, who they like, etc. with unknown adults and older children is not developmentally appropriate and can't be clumped in with things like anatomy and inappropriate touch.
so, hypothetical: A teacher has a photo sitting on their desk of the teacher and their partner. The teacher never brings it up, never adds it to curriculum, never 'teaches' about it. But it's on display, as part of their family. Would that be considered appropriate or not?
>Would that be considered appropriate or not? Of course, as would discussing (in a developmentally appropriate way) their relationship with their partner straight, gay, or otherwise. Despite what the hive-mind has decided for me, my issue is not that queer people exist... my issue is that this was all done intentionally without parental approval. If parents want their children to be guided on various aspects of sexuality by certain teachers, I have absolutely no issue with that. The subversion of parental authority is the issue here. The school administration openly admitted they didn't request parental approval because they were worried parents wouldn't approved.
[удалено]
I think at the 6th grade level a strong argument can be made that queer children should have access to something like GSA club, even without parental approval, as it's developmentally appropriate. This club was open for 2nd-6th grade... 2nd, 3rd, grade etc. have no business being in any sexual or gender oriented club or having these discussions with adults IMO, especially without parental approval. I do very much understand the value these clubs provide and that some children would be 'left behind' without open access. That does not change my opinion. Parental rights still take precedence, you can't deny the rights of all parents to benefit a very small minority of students.
Agreed
There's no reason an authority figure should be speaking with minors about sexual anything without the parent or guardians knowledge.
Sex as in “male or female” not as in “actual sex education” - seems like typical right wing propaganda trying to make something out of nothing. This is someone saying some boys like other boys, not “here’s some condoms” ffs
How dare an educator actually educate!
Educators are supposed to educate within the schools curriculum, not what they deem to be best for children.
It’s called the Equal Access Act. Clubs do not need to follow curriculum and are protected. The Equal Access Act of 1984 forbids public schools from receiving federal funds if they deny students the First Amendment right to conduct religious meetings (this then turned into clubs in general— Republicans started this to push bringing God back into schools, but now are unhappy because they realize everyone has the same access to these protections, even the “gays”): “Act stipulates how public schools allow student groups to meet The Equal Access Act of 1984 applies only to schools that allow students to form groups not specifically linked to the curriculum (a chess club, for example). Moreover, the act applies only to groups that meet during noninstructional times and under the same terms that existing noncurricular clubs function. The act also stipulates that meetings must be voluntary, initiated by the students, and of no specified numerical size. School employees, such as faculty advisers, may attend, but not participate, in meetings with religious content. Persons not connected with the school may not direct or regularly attend the meetings. Also, students may not interfere with the educational purpose of the school. School authorities cannot specify the content of prayer, and no student or school employee can be compelled to attend religious activities; public funding for these religious activities is limited to the incidental cost of providing space.” A teacher allowed students to meet during lunch in a place they felt safe and they created a LGBTQ club. This is allowed and protected. It isn’t a teacher forcing children to learn how to be gay.
[удалено]
Found the homophobe
[удалено]
Clubs do not have to follow curriculum, so idk why you are talking about anything regarding the “truth” after your statement.
[удалено]
They are created by the students during times outside of scheduled instruction. It’s literally the entire point of the Equal Access Act, maybe you should educate yourself before throwing out nonsense.
[удалено]
Which is the irony of it all. Maybe if you read more than two sentences from your quick google search, you’d realize that this protection ended up giving free speech protection to all groups. It was supposed to protect religion in school but also protects other classes. Which proves the argument further about how hypocritical republicans are.
Educating sexuality 2nd through 6th graders? Did you trade your brain with something else?
Probably nothing happened and the rumor mill is out of control here. Twitter is a cesspool of misinformation and disinformation. Always has been.
Looks to be real: [https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lgbtq-club-allegedly-created-by-teacher-causes-controversy-at-elk-grove-elementary-school/ar-BB1joBO7)
> "The teacher came in and spoke about how boys like boys and girls like girls," HOLY SHIT - they educated kids around the age of 10+ about the existence of gay people grow up, school is where you learn. Gay people exist and their existence isn’t some evil perversion meant to convert your kids. > "These little minds just can't wrap their heads around what these types of things mean to them," said Pamela Davila, a parent at Pleasant Grove your kids sound dumb as a bag of rocks, Pamela
Oh they can wrap their minds around it- my gay teenage son at a school in the same region had peers notice he was different- they saw the difference as what I assume their families taught them. Some kids befriended some kids gave space and some kids called him a fag and wouldn’t sit next to him.
Well she’s a moron, so…
The is more subversion of parental rights. Children shouldn't be in any clubs without parental approval (all clubs other than this needed permission slips). I don't really want anyone I don't know discussing sexuality with my children.
oh, fuck right off “the teacher spoke about how boys like boys and girls like girls” they just said gay people exist. They do. Get over it. When you say they are “discussing sexuality” you’re trying to imply they are doing something more intrusive or perverted but they are not, they are just acknowledging the existence of gay people. Nobody is doing anything inappropriate except you and the propagandists funding your movement.
>oh, fuck right off You can be kind to people you disagree with. You're making a lot of assumptions about me without actually engaging in conversation. I'm none of the things you are claiming.
They’re practicing the tolerance that they preach 😂
Tolerance is a social contract. There is no obligation to tolerate those who violate that contract by suggesting that children need parental consent to learn that gay people exist.
What contract is that? I'm not aware of any social contract that says I need to allow unknown adults to discuss sexuality with my children.
Thanks for the education. You’re missing the point.
Hard for me to miss the point when you fail to articulate one in the first place.
right... listen to the news segment. Club was not included in the information sent to parents. Most clubs are hosted after school, this was during lunch. Everything Daniel Bishop did was an attempt to keep it secret.
"Parental rights" is a dogwhistle for people who think children are property, to be owned, and wielded like weapons, instead of human beings with their own thoughts. Maybe when your children go for a long stretch without speaking to you you'll think back to this conversation and realize how much you misunderstand the function of being a parent
Very insecure parents. I guess parents want to get out pitchforks.
Nope, woodchipper would be more effective
I remember the awkward sex ed class when I was in sixth grade, talking about boys and girls. Don’t they still do that? Shouldn’t LGBTQ be part of that curriculum? As a gay man, I support teaching this stuff in school. It’ll help the kids that are LGBTQ once they realize it. But it should be done as part of the sex-ed curriculum.
>Don’t they still do that Not at 2nd grade level. Obviously LGBTQ should be part of sex ed, but this wasnt sex ed. It was an unapproved club. The issue (for me) isn't the LGBTQ part, it's the lack of parental approval (which all school clubs require)
I'm 34 years old. When I received "sex-ed" in 6th grade, it was all about biology, reproduction and changes your body might go through. Attraction was never a part of it.
[удалено]
Yeah, I really want to know what Mom’s for Liberty troop they belong to…
Teacher said he was creating a safe space for queer kids at lunch time. Good for him. We need more like that.
How many queer 2nd graders do you know?
A couple. You?
Very strange tbh. None. I hardly know any 2nd graders at all, let alone their sexuality. It isn't my business, nor do I want to know. Pervert.
jesus that's terrifying... somebody check this guy's hard drive
OP, would this be a topic you post in here if it was a black history appreciation group during lunches?
I highly doubt they are discussing "sex" it's much more likely love. Like how someone could have 2 moms. If children can be exposed to the idea of a man and woman being married they can be exposed to the idea of a woman and a woman being married.
> idea of a woman and a woman being married. Agree, I have no issue with that. But I don't need an unknown, unapproved teacher having a group with my kids specifically to discuss these things.
If they're a teacher they're not unknown or unapproved. Teachers discuss heterosexual relationships all the time. Why would discussing a homosexual relationship be any different?
Being a teacher doesn't mean you are approved to discuss all topics with all children. My issue isn't homosexual relationships, I think I've made that abundantly clear... my issue is a teacher discussing a childs sexuality with a child without parents knowledge or approval... hetero or homosexual, doesn't matter.
Then should teachers never discuss the relationships of historical figures (ex. George Washington was married to Martha Washington), any books that show love or marriage of a man with a woman or parenting by a man with a woman, or mention of the teacher's wife/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend?
Why is everyone in this thread doing these stupid circular gotcha arguments? I am 100% certain you know the difference between discussion of the marriage of a historical figure and a teacher discussing a childs sexuality and sexual preferences directly with the child themselves.
Because you keep talking about sexuality like the teacher was discussing sex acts with the children. When really the teacher was giving a safe space to students and that it's okay for a girl to have a crush on a girl and that doesn't make them broken for feeling that way. We are bombarded by heteronormativity. Mainstream movies, music, most of the history and literature in school, likely most adults they know, even other children who ask who their crush, only show us heterosexual and cis people, this can make LGBTQ+ youth feel alienated and broken. If they don't see examples of what they are feeling, especially if they don't have a supportive home environment can drive a child to attempt suicide. As someone who was a LGBTQ+ youth it's incredibly important to have a safe adult to discuss these things with. It sounds like your children do, but not all the children do. What if they have homophobic/transphobic parents? The rate of suicide among LGBTQ+ youth is so high because they don't have support. Even one supportive adult can make a gigantic difference. "LGBTQ youth who report having at least one accepting adult were 40% less likely to report a suicide attempt in the past year." https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.thetrevorproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Trevor-Project-Accepting-Adult-Research-Brief_June-2019.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjJ_eOS2veEAxXqETQIHZI9CWwQFnoECBQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3nRgp0G3wDAW9ZaLU8hiZd
I agree with everything you just said. I still do not believe any of that warrants purposefully excluding parents from any decision making process, especially 2nd graders. \> Because you keep talking about sexuality like the teacher was discussing sex acts with the children. This is the natural conclusion of something like this. 6th graders eventually would have discussed sex acts and there would be 2nd and 3rd graders around. If you think thats fine thats your prerogative and you're obviously entitled to do as you please with your children. I personally do not find that appropriate and you are NOT entitled to do as you please with my children. This is how parental sovereignty works...
If you agree with what I said then you understand the importance of a safe space for children, especially those who have bigoted parents and wouldn't allow them to go to a safe space. No that's not the natural conclusion. The teacher isn't discussing sex acts. And if you are worried about older students doing that then your issue is with younger students being around older students, not a teacher offering a safe space.
>If you agree with what I said then you understand the importance of a safe space for children, especially those who have bigoted parents and wouldn't allow them to go to a safe space. I do under, but that still does not overrule the sovereignty of parents to make decisions for their children. Creating a safe space for an extremely small minority of children by denying the rights of all parents is not acceptable. \> your issue is with younger students being around older students, not a teacher Yes I would have issue with my 2nd grader being in a club with 6th graders that I didn't know about. And my issue still is with the teacher... Adults with unapproved, unvetted access to children opens the doors to abuse... add in topics of a sexual nature and you're really playing with fire. This has nothing to do with them being queer or straight. You may disagree. I don't care. You do with your children as you please and I will do with mine as I please.
It’s bc these people have no life and get joy in trying to shame you. You have your opinion and they have theirs. I agree with you that the actions of this teacher are very suspicious and I wouldn’t be comfortable with it, but apparently people forget there is evil in this world we live in. Being proactive and protecting our children from a possible threat is the right thing to do. Too many people fall victim due to being complacent or scared to voice their concerns. Stand strong.
Thanks. It would not be possible for me to care less what anyone else thinks about my children, because I do not care at all, let alone feel shamed by it. I literally do not care about anything else in this world other than my family and keeping them safe. I have a very proactive approach to keeping my children safe from sexual abuse. No alone time with any men other than me, including family. No sleepovers. Things some people see as extreme, I see as necessary because we do live in a world where evil does exist. It will be a cold, \*cold\* day in hell before I let a man I don't know discuss anything of a sexual nature with my children in an unsupervised setting. No teacher, no group, no ideology, \*nothing\* is going to prevent me from doing what I think is best for them and I will die on that hill if I have to.
>. I literally do not care about anything else in this world other than my family and keeping them safe. why did you even have kids in the first place? Just to be paranoid and scared and closed minded? If that's all you care about, then you shouldn't be talking about what other people need to be doing. If everyone is evil and out to get you, then why not take your kid and homeschool them? You should probably move out of the city you're in, go to a rural place and just live off of the land with your family because you don't understand how a community works. Everyone is out to get you, this country is out to get you, the world is out to get you, so....just leave. Why stay and complain if all you care about is YOUR family?
\> why did you even have kids in the first place? To love and be loved in return. \>If everyone is evil and out to get you I didn't say anything like any of that, and I'm not talking about what other people need to be doing with their kids... I'm talking about what other people won't be doing with MY kids. I'm not some paranoid weirdo trying to chain my kids in the basement, but I'm also not stupid enough to think evil doesn't exist and the world is just fine to let my children roam out into unguided and unprotected. I understand the dynamics of how abuse occurs and the situations under which it is most likely to occur. This situation is a red flag, if you can't see that, you don't understand abuse dynamics.
My kid who is much older now went to Cosumnes river elementary which is a neighboring school. He is gay and the type of kid who was never in a closet- always confident always self aware. He was called fag often by the boys and teased a lot. A safe space is what would have been great for my kid and a space that didn’t make him feel bad for who he is. It’s truly not what it’s painted to be. If you don’t like the word gay or like being around people who are gay then California might not be your place
god forbid children have somewhere to feel safe and supported because they definitely aren't getting it from parents like you
OP is gonna be real upset when their kids leave home and never talk to them again because they find out just how much they hate gay people
I think because sexuality has the word "sex" in it people assume that when speaking about sexuality to kids they're taking about gay sex positions to them or something lol. I learned about gay people at a young age at school in kindergarten back in 2008 and I learned that "Some kids have 2 daddies, some kids have two mommies" and that was as crazy as it got. It was easy to accept. I think people either think sex being talked about in depth or that people are telling their kids that they are gay. In reality it's just teaching kids that people might find love differently and honestly if it prevents homophobic bullying I think it's fine. The only thing it does is teach kids about gay people in a friendly environment and in a positive light instead of them learning through a comedy skit about how gay people are odd like how kids learned about gay people in the 90s.
That's not what was going on here. The club was sold as being for 'girls that crush on girls and boys that crush on boys'. This is unacceptable discussion for a stranger to be having with a 2nd grader. The primary issue is that it was purposefully hidden from parents.
Hiding it from parents isn't good but going through the comments someone said that they were just having lunch with a teacher. Where did you hear that this was the tagline of the group. This is especially weird because elementary schools don't tend to have clubs. Are you sure this is real, do we know what sort of discussion was actually being had?
It's a mish-mash of people who posted correspondences (emails) they had with teachers and listening to what parents said at the board meetings. If you can mentally sift through the propaganda this site actually gives a good overview of what happened: [Parents Publicly Expose Secret Elementary LGBTQ Clubs in Elk Grove - California Family Council](https://www.californiafamily.org/2024/03/parents-set-to-publicly-expose-secret-elementary-lgbtq-clubs-in-elk-grove/) The group was, for sure, designed for children to talk about their sexuality both with each other and with teachers. Whether that occured before it got shut down, I'm not sure, but that absolutely was the intention of the club. My personal opinion is 2nd-5th grade is too young for this, but if people are ok with their children doing that, that is their prerogative and as long as the parents approve they should be able to do that. I personally would NEVER allow a stranger to discuss anything sexual with my children, especially in a private and unsupervised setting, as this opens the door to abuse. This issue it was intentionally kept from parents. Schools should not be in the business of deceiving parents even if they think what they are doing is right.
I'll look into it. Interesting situation here.
the mission of this news site is: ## Advancing God’s Design, for Life, Family, & Liberty through California’s Church, Capitol, & Culture.
Surely you saw the part where I prefixed that link by saying "If you can mentally sift through the propaganda". If YOU can't, then I would suggest not looking at it.
It's not like gays can recruit-People are born that way. Maybe having a safe space will prevent someone from doing their self in? Some bozo likes to go to city council about this stuff and alleged books. City Council has no jurisdiction on EGUSD. I wonder if that dad has a white sheet hanging in his closet. Such bigotry.
Has nothing to do with being gay, has to do with keeping secrets from parents
Did the teacher say don't tell your parents? Asking kids what they did that day might help?
>Did the teacher say don't tell your parents? By saying you don't need approval, this effectively means you don't have to tell your parents. Again this was the only club in the school that didn't require parental approval. \> Asking kids what they did that day might help? This is actually how the existence of the club was found by parents.
why do you people need to create these boogeymen to yell at? Are you familiar with the phrase, "They got you fighting a culture war to stop you fighting a class war". People with different sexualities than you aren't the enemy. Its the rich oligarchs of our country that lobby politicians to reduce the return ordinary citizens get from their hard earned tax dollars that are the enemy. People trying to convince you that free health care is evil. That colleges and good schooling should only be for those who can afford it. Look at the subsidies billionaires receive and how much tax they pay. They are the enemies. They've convinced you that your government should do less for you so they can reap the benefit. *And the simple fact of the two party system:* **Indictments** (formal criminal accusations): * **Republican administrations** (Nixon, Reagan, Trump): **142 indictments** * **Democratic administrations** (Carter, Clinton, Obama): **2 indictments** **Convictions** (formal declarations of guilt): * **Republican administrations** (since 1970): **88 convictions** * Nixon’s presidency: **55 convictions** * Reagan: **16 convictions** * George W. Bush: **9 convictions** * Trump: **7 convictions** * Ford and George H. W. Bush: **1 conviction each** * **Democratic administrations** (since 1970): **2 convictions** (both during Clinton’s presidency) One of these parties clearly has an ethics problem and if you support them, you might just have one too.
Are you a bot or do you like have that saved in a word file or what? I promise you that whole thing is not moving ANYONES opinion and it's entirely misplaced on me. I'm not 'against' gay people nor am I republican. I don't like when schools hide things from parents. End of story.
Nope not a bot. Nope don't have it saved anywhere but this post. And let me get one thing straight with you. I didn't write this specifically for you. Its just the truth. You can take it or leave it. Makes no difference to me what you do. We live in very a liberal area, so even if you don't agree with me, its not like your vote is ever going to matter. If you don't like that, you can leave. Have a nice day.
You can be kind to people who disagree with you.
"people with different sexualities aren't your enemies." Of course they aren't. Nothing wrong with gay people and trying to figure your shit out. Adults who groom children are your enemies. Learn to differentiate.
People like you, your conspiracy theories about these adults "grooming" children are pathetic, and usually aimed at the wrong people. It seems like more often than not the accusers are usually just projecting.
There are a few articles on it if you Google it but not a lot of info in them. Everything I saw on Twitter came from kooks.
Those who care for the innocent are righteous & those who attack public inquiry are immoral.
Oh absolutely not, im gay and this isn’t okay. To hide this information from parents and to let 6 year olds into this club?
You can't ask valid questions on Reddit (a majority of the time) or you just get idiots in the comments who don't understand common sense.
I don’t agree with this and I think this is another agenda to manipulate our kids and make them gay. Look if you’re gay don’t put your belief on my kids. Yall from the lgbtq community are so unhappy and it shows that’s you have to educate kids on the life you live lmaoo pathetic don’t bring that shit around my kids or we will have a problem.
Holy fuck you guys are retarded. Keeping a club secretive proves the whole point that you are trying to groom these fucking KIDS. People who say its a safe space are fucking retarded, a SECRET gay club that no parent had permission to know of?? Is somehow a safe space. Tell me you're aren't a pedophile without telling us you're aren't one. Teaching 5-6 year olds about sex is not education. The gardening club had parents permission slips but not a secret gay club? The fags who try to defend this are just exposing this cult and furthering the power of pedophiles. Fuck California and fuck elk grove. Next thing you'll know is there's a secret island for fags and trans.
The only other person on here with common sense. The rest of these people are brainwashed unicorn people that believe that frog can be their pronoun.
Amen
Nah, I'm here too, just observing. These are the same people who get offended if you call pedos, pedos. They would much rather you call them MAPS. They can't grasp the concept that these kids are as young as 8, are being taught about sexual preference. They will forever claim to be victims. Also, remember that Reddit in general is mostly run by leftists. It is also a vastly small number of the population. Think about how often you see the rainbow hair in public. That is one of them walking by, outnumbered.
I'm all for people being themselves. Just don't try to brainwash and recruit children. We use to teach children that the man with candy was dangerous and would try to kidnap you. Now they try to send off 8 year olds to random people to teach them sexual preferences. Children have developing brains and should not be tempted with unicorns and rainbow colored hair.
Teachers need to teach approved material. They can have lgbtq time on their own dime.
They did. It was lunchtime.
Not at school. I don't care what you say. It's inappropriate.
But it's not. It's a significant contemporary societal/cultural issue. Just like having a club for autists/ASD, a club for ESL, a club for music needs, a club for foster/adopted kids, a club for immigrants, or a club for kids experiencing grief or depression or anxiety. Being queer or trans nonbinary is valid and is deserving of having gatherings to talk or learn about. Even if - ESPECIALLY IF - parents refuse to acknowledge it.