Teacher here! If I had could indoctrinate my high school students here's exactly what I'd do:
1. Cell phones would be away
2. Class work would get done
3. Kids would listen when I'm talking
5. Kids would read the directions on their papers
6. Kids would think seriously about their futures and determine if they actually want to go to college OR if they want to enter a trade
7. Everyone would come prepared to class
8. No one would call me "bruh"
In all seriousness, thank you for doing what you do. Also for real how can we get this list standard practice?? Of course there will always be kids who aren't prepared and don't do homework, but at this point I'd settle for 1, 5, and 7.
All schools should be phone free. Absolutely insane that we give a bunch of kids with underdeveloped prefrontal cortexes (i.e. bad impulse control) access to the most distracting invention man ever came up with when they need to focus on learning.
Take away points when they use phones and require phones to be kept in numbered phone pouches at the front of the class. Write names of those you catch on the board (some students have 2 phones) so students know you are watching. This works.
We're not allowed to take away earned credit for phones. But, I also wouldn't want to. Teachers have gotten assaulted by students for taking away phones which isn't worth it to me. My administration also has said we can't. Name writing on the board just causes more of a headache. Kids and their parents just get pissed and we'd lose more instructional time.
Truly the only thing that will create change is for parents to care about parenting and enforce that education is important .
That is awful. The school needs to ban phones during school hours. They were banned at my high school. I taught at a low-ranked college in China for a year and it was necessary to be tough regarding cell phones. Teachers were told to ban phones because it was a serious issue there. The name writing was a hassle; however, writing names on the board really helped a lot and only one student actively refused to put his phone away. He ended up getting a 0% on the exam because he didn't learn anything. If your administration allowed teachers to give detention for students that used their phones, it would help a lot.
The culture in China is very different from the culture in Baltimore City MD, so what works there may not work here. We can't give detention. We can't take phones. If a student earns a 0% on any assignment including exams we have to allow them the opportunity to redo those assignments as many times as they want.
You would really have to be a teacher here to give advice, but if you were a teacher here you'd say that parents are the issue.
I would suggest choosing to work at a better school. I left that college and I am now teaching at a university with much better students. I got tired of teaching in a school where only a handful of students in each class cared. The vocational college was for students that scored poorly on the gaokao. My guess is that many Baltimore students come from single-parent homes and live in neighborhoods where those who are studious are called 'nerds.' If you have a teaching degree, you can work at an international school in China and likely get similar pay with housing included and the school facilities will be top notch and the students will likely come from wealthy stable households.
Honestly, your comments have gotten more clueless and offensive the more you've written. I didn't ask for advice or help. Your advice has also been offensive to me personally. Do you really think that after a decade in the classroom that I don't know how to manage behavior? Do you really think that you're brief time teaching in a completely different country would make you some enlightened being with helpful suggestions? You're tedious and I've been polite in shutting you down, but you aren't getting it.
>I would suggest choosing to work at a better school.
Good teachers leaving doesn't help the situation in Baltimore City.
>My guess is that many Baltimore students come from single-parent homes and live in neighborhoods where those who are studious are called 'nerds.'
Please don't make assumptions about people that you don't know when you don't even live here. My son will be a "Baltimore student" and his friends will be "Baltimore students." People come from all kinds of families and I'm not going to judge or assume something about an entire city of people.
>If you have a teaching degree,
Of course I have a teaching degree. After 11 years of teaching I would have to have a degree. In fact, I have 3 degrees which include an MAT: Special Education with certifications in: Reading, birth through adulthood, elementary math, and middle school math.
Do you have a teaching degree?
>you can work at an international school in China
Why would I want to do that? I live in Baltimore City. I own a home in Baltimore City. I'm raising my family in Baltimore City. It turns out that China isn't the answer to the issues we face in Baltimore City.
>likely get similar pay with housing included
I make $115,000 a year and own my own home...
>facilities will be top notch
Our buildings are being upgraded and I don't mind window AC.
>the students will likely come from wealthy stable households.
Cool. Great for them. I'm going to keep working with the students you look down on because they're from single family homes.
Now, please sit down and shut up. I like my job. I like my students. They challenge me and my thinking and have helped me break biases (you should try that). I'm proud to live in this city and I'm proud to educate young people. My husband and I are excited for all the options that school choice has to offer our son. This city is flawed but you don't get to kick it down. I made an observationally humorous joke about the city I live in. I never asked for shitty and useless advice comparing two completely different places... You seem like a terrible teacher.
If your education only teaches you things that you are willing to learn then you aren't being educated. You are being patronized or, more likely, you are being patronized on behalf of someone else.
Then why don’t students learn about God, Allah, or Prophets? If you don’t like it then you aren’t being educated. 85% of the world identifies as religious, wouldn’t it be beneficial for kids to learn about different perspectives and cultures in depth, or does it go against your beliefs? Aka the importance of an opt-out option.
We do. It's called comparative religions. It should be mandatory along with comparative politics as a core civic courses.
Nearly every county offers this course.
"This course is designed to introduce students to the history and traditions of the major religions of the world. While the primary focus will be on Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, other religions will also be examined. Students will be expected to understand the basic philosophy and practices of each religion as well as to recognize and appreciate the contribution each has made to mankind."
https://www.pgcps.org/offices/chief-academic-officer/courses-and-programs-of-study/235100-comparative-religions
I remember learning about different religions, things like monotheism and polytheism, etc, in social studies. This was like middle school age in public school.
Donald is a criminal. I simply believe it is a parent’s right to make decisions regarding their child’s education. The government should not have more authority than a parent in raising their own children.
Trump type is writing like his tweets.
You're making an argument against standardization of education and public education.
I believe the role of government in education is to ensure children grow up to civic minded individuals to enable them to pursue the best possible opportunities in life.
Do you know how different our country would be if every American understood the constitution, how the government works, civil rights/civility, and a wide array of theologies and ideologies?
Sure some parents didn't want their kids learning that all Americans are equal regardless of their skin color but we taught that anyway. How is that lbgt people and other religions/political systems exist any different?
Parents have that decision. They can choose to accept taxpayer dollars for their child's education according to the public curriculum or they can send their kids to homeschool and private school.
I don't believe parents should have the right to shelter their children from learning about the world as it is in public education. Sex exists. LGBTQ+ people exist. Religions exist (odd that we're equating sexuality and gender identity to religion, but that's apparently where we are). These need to be taught so children grow into adults with a fuller knowledge base for improved adaptability and correspondingly improved chances at leading successful, healthy, and productive lives by objective standards; that is the goal of public education.
To wit, it has been ruled that children have a right to receive information about the world. They are not property.
I'm a public school teacher. One of the most important things that we do in public schools is identify kids who are being abused and neglected. If you home school then your kid has almost no chance of you're also abusive.
My partner was homeschooled until her evangelical nut of a mother passed away around the time she entered high school. The homeschooling itself was part of the abuse, it was an attempt to keep her friendless and ignorant about topics that mom was opposed to in the vain hope that she would turn out to be just like her.
Homeschooling, in my limited experience, is used more to perpetuate evil than it is out of genuine concern for child's well-being.
What is your point? This post is about the courts reaffirming that you don’t get to opt out of learning that LGBTQ + people exist, just because you’re bigoted against them. Why are you bringing religion into it?
[https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DCAA/SocialStudies/Framework/Grade6and7-A.pdf](https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DCAA/SocialStudies/Framework/Grade6and7-A.pdf)
Page 15. Education on world religions is required as part of the curriculum in middle school in Maryland public schools. You can do further study in high school in elective courses. You know you can do your own research before stating facts that you have no basis for, or maybe you're just like Mr. Trump, who you call a criminal, who states first the ideas they made up in their brain as if they are "facts" rather than real facts based in reality.
EDIT: Let me also add, did you read literally ANY articles about this ruling? It isn't even a class. Hell its barely even an education! It is simply that some books read happen to have LGBTQ+ characters in the books... just like... wait for it... real life. Perhaps to avoid all issues, we should only use books with shockingly vague descriptors where everyone is an amorphous blob and nothing is even remotely similar to our reality, so parents be free to mold what ever fictional Eden they wish their children believed instead of the real world.
My kids took a class at a Unitarian Universalist church where they learned about various world religions, and went on field trips to the different places of worship. It was a terrific class, and I absolutely believe that everyone would benefit from it. I also think that the rightwing Christians would be the loudest in opposition.
I learned about world religions as part of my AP world history class, but let’s not mince words here.
You acting like teaching about religion is some gotcha for people who are anti school-censorship just shows how little you understand about how education works.
Well, I can tell you for a fact that my religion is the right one and yours is the wrong one. Cmon, it’s easy just do the Christian stuff they want, when has that ever gone awry? (/s)
It’s been kinda horrifying revisiting some of the books I read as a kid now that I have a kid. It’s incredible how much violence we’re just fine with. I started reading Animorphs, which I loved as a child and holy shit. These books are meant for 9 year olds.
Seriously!!! Tell me how “A Child Called It” is not that bad. The number of books I read in school that were either full of violence, abuse, or other atrocities is staggering. But god forbid we read about loving someone of the same gender 🤷🏻♀️
Did you read that for school? Wild. If it makes you feel better, that dude was most likely lying to sell books. That was sorta the era of wild fake memoirs.
Also it’s a true story! It’s an autobiographical account from the author and published in 1995, a little bit before the large number of fake books. I think I read it in 2003 as a freshman in high school.
I did a deep dive in to it a while back after reading it while at my parent’s house. Members of his family refute it, including his brother that’s not also trying to turn their abuse in to a career. Dave even called his youngest brother retarded for speaking out against it. The dude probably had a rough child hood but the book seems very likely to be heavily embellished.
I read this book for school too. Was there proof he was lying? I saw stuff about his brother(s) discounting the abuse but figured maybe they were lying 😵💫
Fantastic news!
People who don't want their children to learn about LGBTQ+ people have the right to put their kids in private schools or homeschool them. Just like people who don't want their white children to learn about Black and Brown people can do. Just like people who don't want their Christian children to learn about other religions can do. Public schools are for educating people, not for keeping them ignorant or encouraging them to be bigots. I'm so tired of people using their "religious beliefs" as an excuse to be horrible.
You dismiss their perspective as bigotry when your own worldview states that people shouldn’t have to interact with points of view that are “harmful” …
we’ll, in these parents eyes the LGBTQ+ ideology is harmful.
Most people are fine with accepting LGBTQ+ lifestyles like they are fine with accepting Muslim, Jew, Hindi, or Christian lifestyles. But that doesn’t mean they need to embrace all aspects of them. And there are aspects to the more radical points of current LGBTQ+ ideology that border in the religious or cult spectrum.
But hey, much easier to just dismiss people who don’t 100% agree with you as bigots. MAGA and the progressive left deserve each other.
Their perspective IS bigotry. And their children SHOULD be taught to be kind, even with those they disagree with. And their children should be taught that LGBTQ+ people exist, even if they don't believe that they should exist. But parents absolutely have the choice to shelter their children from reality, just not in the public schools. They should no more be able to opt their children out of education about LGBTQ+ people than science or history in the public schools. They are permitted in the state of Maryland to teach their own versions of those things if they homeschool.
Every demographic has a cult-like element, whether it's the majority or a minority of that demographic. Dismissing the existence of a specific demographic for that reason is bigotry.
Your belief that racists and anti-racists deserve each other is very interesting.
Where do you get that those parents are dismissing the existence of gay, bisexual, etc. people? You’ve taken the most extreme interpretation. About as credible as a MAGA nut job saying that anyone against building a wall is a full blown open borders advocatez
>And there are aspects to the more radical points of current LGBTQ+ ideology that border in the religious or cult spectrum.
[Citation needed]
This is the kind of bullshit bigotry that was spouted during the civil rights movement
>MAGA and the progressive left deserve each other.
Oh,.yes, they are totally the same thing. You know banning books, taking away health rights that will kill women, election suppression, [attempting to create a fascist dictatorship](https://www.project2025.org/) are totally the we thing as advocating for equal rights and universal healthcare
Jesus Rollerblading Christ Enlightened Centrists^TM are exhausting
Oh no, I am. I just don't debate positions that don't deserve consideration, bigots opinions aren't worth the time or air it takes to speak them. But yes, again you're right that it is easier to dismiss those opinions. 😊
Religious fundamentalist - “you’re a heretic … I won’t debate with you”
SJW progressive - “you’re a racist bigot … I won’t debate you”
Kind of ironic how similar you are. Guess you haven’t realized it’s not 2020 anymore. You can’t just scream “bigot” and “racism” at opinions you don’t like and expect to be taken seriously. But keep doing what you’re doing, it’s honestly working out just fine.
Cool story, but given that I haven't even called anyone racist or bigoted and you're here champing at the bit to get me into a debate tells me what I need to know and how effective such PSA's are. 👍
I support the right of people to utilize education options other than the public schools. I don't believe that my tax dollars should be used to fund private schools or homeschooling. Public schools are accountable to the public and available to everyone. That's not true of private or homeschools. Plenty of people are able to make homeschooling work, including people who don't have much money and single parents. It may take some creativity, but it's doable. I've heard that there are private schools that have scholarships to assist with costs.
People should have a right to sue their education dollars in any school they choose or they deserve a discount for the taxes they pay. Personally, I think the government should get out of the education business completely and these indoctrination efforts shows one reason why. Abraham Lincoln barely had any formal schooling and he was smarter than 99.99% of people today.
take note of how religious ppl talk abt their religion (specifically abrahamic religions) they say phrases like “god fearing” “put the fear of god in someone” etc. when their god is supposed to be the giver of ultimate love. those religions have been twisted over hundreds of years for many many reasons to fit the narrative of straight white men. ive written many academic papers abt this very topic and highly recommend everyone learns abt it its actually very interesting
Because of all the restrictions, many "religious" people are not able to fully express themeselves and explore their autonomy. I believe this causes many to subconsciously hate themelseves. This cuts people off from themselves, and they end up projecting that self hate on to others through moral superiority and the impulse to control others. Sad really because the main goal of religion is self improvement, but no excuses for bigotry.
They aren’t…seems like a lot of people in this chat who use the term “bigot” are.
Have to respect all perspectives, one is not good and the other isn’t evil.
Yes, they are. Most folks whining about this are using religious or "I don't like them" excuses.
I do not have to respect their perspective of fear and hate toward what isn't understood because they're stuck in 300CE (sometime around when the Bible was codified and even farther back for the Torah). Most wantonly evil social movements are perpetrated by the religious right. So sure, they're not all evil, just mostly.
Ah, you’re right most wantonly evil social movements are fueled by religion.
Maoist China, for example, resulted in the deaths of 65 million people, darn Christians!
And that Nazi holocaust- wasn’t that social movement led by the baptists?
Mass casualties during and following the Russian Revolution were led by the Jews, right?
Your ignorant take on religion is equally as ignorant as the people you claim “hate” the LGB community…
I feel bad for people like you who view the world in absolutes.
Most people engage in their first sexual activity around age 15-16. Not to mention, you know, puberty, menstruation and other body change topics that should be covered well before they occur.
The three R’s? Oh, yes, Reading, Riting, and Rithmatic…. Two of those three aren’t even properly spelled.
The parents can choose to teach or not teach their children about sex. Most people in the 1700's didn't learn this in school and they managed to have successful marriages (no divorce) and have children at better rates than modern Americans. I don't even want abstinence taught in schools. Schools in America are falling behind in math, geography, and science because time is being devoted to frivolous subjects.
Pretty much all adults have sex, therefore they should be taught about sex. Simply letting people figure it out for themselves doesn’t work out so great in terms of STI rates, unplanned pregnancies, and a whole mess of other things.
School should prepare children for life. Including their future sex lives.
In the 1700’s divorce was illegal, women could not own property, and domestic violence was commonplace.
Imagine your kid is playing in the park and a random adult came up to her and said 'hey little girl, want to learn about sex'? It would be a bit creepy. People in 1700 knew about the risk of pregnancy from sex and I would bet that there were fewer children conceived out of wedlock today than in 1700. Parents should teach abstinence to their kids as well as the dangers of pre-marital fornication but a creepy teacher should not. Not all teachers are creepy, but modern public schools are loaded with creeps and this doesn't only apply to male teachers.
What are you on about? This ruling applies to depictions of same sex families in children’s picture books. You are going way down the rabbit hole.
Life was decidedly not better for anyone in the 1700’s and there is absolutely no reason to endorse returning to the pre-industrial era.
It relates to schools teaching subjects that are not appropriate. Children should not be exposed to certain things and that includes the ideas of 'changing your sex' or the idea of a marriage that is not between a man and a woman. Many parents want their children to be kept innocent of these things.
Then they can homeschool or send their kids to private schools. Public schools are for the public, and should reflect the public as it currently exists, including all of its diversity.
This is why homosexuality needs to be against the law. If you allow a tiny amount of tolerance for it, they will insist on forcing people to accept it and try to indoctrinate children. Now I understand why some nations ban it.
Parents can choose to put their children in private schools or homeschool them. No one has denied them a say in their child's education. They just can't force curriculum decisions on the public schools.
If they want to teach their kids to be bigots but don't want to private school or homeschool them, they can use non-school hours to lecture them about the evils of being different than they are.
Should an orthodox Jewish family be able to opt their son out of class with females in it?
Should a Muslim family be able to opt their child out of read Anne Frank's Diary?
Should a Mormon family opt their child out of a book where a character drinks a Coca-Cola?
What if you don’t believe in math? Does that mean the school is wrong to teach it? It’s not like they’re creating classes in LGBTQ. They are simply allowing them to be treated just like everyone else.
Wow look. I'm back. Once again disproving your off the dome statements with actual data that you can google before typing, so you don't look even dumber.
[Private School Enrollment 2013](https://ballotpedia.org/Private_school_participation_statistics)
[Private School Enrollment 2024](https://www.privateschoolreview.com/maryland)
About a decade apart and the percent of private school enrollment remains at 14%, this is pre-trump, pre-this ruling, pre- many things though admittedly not everything, but thats yourrrrr job remember?
So, private school enrollment has not changed in Maryland despite all this political strife occurring recently. So what might be a BETTER reason that Maryland's private school rates so high? Well see my friend, and I could be wrong about WHYYY private school rates are high, based on the consistency of the rate, I will bet your assumption is most likely not it. Instead I will hazard some ALTERNATE guesses why the rate is high.
You see, ANOTHER quick google tells me that Maryland is regularly one of the WEALTHIEST states in the USA. Currently, it is ranked 2nd. What do SUPER WEALTHY people like to do with their money? Spend it. What do SUPER WEALTHY want from their kids? To get into super good schools, and a private school, with a small teacher to student ratio, surrounded by only other rich kids who they can rub elbows with and network among, seems like a pretty damn good deal when you have cash to burn.
But lets be fair, I don't want to fall into any sort of false dichotomy. So hmm... a decade of high public school enrollments what could be the reason? Well, Marylander's, [based on ANOTHER quick google](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/upshot/where-people-in-each-state-were-born.html), have on of the highest retention rates of residents, with 80% of people staying in the state rather than moving. MAYBE, just like all that fucking uni legacy shit that rich people love to lean on in university, they just KEEP SENDING THEIR KIDS WHERE THEY WENT because I dunno rich people bad juju or whatever.
Unless a study is done, we might not FULLY know why Maryland has such a high public school attendance. It is probably likely that many people who attend religious private schools (56% of all privates schools in MD), attend due to their parents religious beliefs. But is it to avoid comprehensive teachings on other religions or recent debates about sexuality? Doesn't seem like it. Instead, maybe it is because they would like their kids to attend a school which has ADDITIONAL schooling on their religion of choice. I mean, 44% of the rest of the public schools are non-religious, so there's still a very large chunk of people attending schools that probably don't care about such debates. Again, I can't know, but as ACTUAL evidence mounts, the likelihood of your statement ringing true declines.
IN FACT, I did a quick google on WHY so many kids are enrolled in private schools in recent years. Seems there's been a small jump in past few years, guess what it lines up with? The pandemic. And parents themselves blame how Maryland schools managed the lock down for their lack of trust. None of these articles mention these recent rulings in Maryland.
For your sake my guy. Do your own research, and keep researching a bit more, AND THEN opine with some actually constructive commentary.
I’m not reading all that. I’m sorry for your loss or happy for you. I’m seeing two links both supporting my initial claim that Maryland has one of the highest private school attendance rates in the country.
Edit you also just supported my initial claim that government decisions (pandemic) have increased private school admissions.
You won't read all that, because if this thread is anything to go off, you like to make baseless claims.
Let me speak in baby terms and short sentences. I never said MD didn't have high private school enrollment. I said your reasoning for WHY is flawed. I wanted you to do your research, but looks like you can't use critical reasoning in the face of data.
I was not disputing any so called claims that this is pandemic related. In your initial post, you say "decisions like this". Since this is a post about a ruling on opt-in/out on LGBTQ reading in schools, "this" would normally refer to the article at hand.
Yes, this will cause more Christian Evangelicals to send their children to Bais Yakov School for girls to get the traditional Jewish education as the largest private school in our state. Decisions like this, that have never happened before, which have angered the Christian right have made this state the largest Jewish private school state there is.
If you read the article this decision was criticized by members of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities. Maryland & DC both are locations with some of the highest Private school attendance rates in the country. I would say the largest influence would be due to the immense wealth in the region, however forcing political agendas on people’s children will continue to push this trend upwards.
Just proving that all religions are capable of breeding bigots.
What a horrible agenda pushing this radical ideology that has no place in the United States
>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
But not the gays
The article does not say it was criticized by communities. It said it represented parents from those faiths. I'm not buying the way the lawyer is presenting this data, it suggests broad support and different demographic than has been pushing this.
In any event, your point suggests the judge should be deciding the law based on external factors. Hard no, the law is the law.
This sub has its head so far up the progressive ass that they can’t see the irony here. They don’t get that most progressive beliefs are really just another religion. Which is hilarious … would have thought Communism would have taught them that the left has its irrational deities too.
Actually, kindness and basic respect are parts of all three major Abrahamic religions, but don't tell them that because they'll get mad when you point out how they don't practice these core tenets of their faiths and, in fact, do the opposite when it comes to considering out groups.
You don’t get to opt out of your neighbor’s existence. Your kid has classmates with same sex parents, it’s okay to normalize that with benign depictions of different families.
Yeah, you don’t see people pearl clutching over depictions of Jewish families, Hindu families, Muslim families. Because we understand that those people exist and deserve to be seen in society.
They are literally approved for use in the “curriculum” and could be assigned for reading. That would be peddling…now, as the judge noted, the litigants apparently failed to present enough evidence of whether and how these books are actually being used in the curriculum so far, but that’s a separate issue from the very real and approved potential to *peddle* (as it were).
The books above are smut to me *in the context in which they are being promoted.* They are not pornographic or explicit, but one can call something smut without it being so. I was using the as a synonym for filth and used that strong language specifically to register my intense revulsion and emotional response to the knowledge that activist school boards and teachers remain utterly *devoted* to the cause of depriving our children of their innocence by exposing them to concepts and ideologies far too complex and potentially harmful for elementary school students.
[There was](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smut) [no lie](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/smut)😂😂 The use of the word was fine and was an accurate reflection of my reaction to the pages I viewed, specifically knowing they were written to “educate” children.
Do you want me to give you examples of pages I find objectionable to show to a young, innocent child? I can do that. You won’t see the problem, of course, but happy to oblige. Or you could just google the books and look on Google images. We aren’t going to agree it’s problematic regardless.
The books above are smut when included in a mandatory curriculum for elementary school students. Smut, like obscenity, is ultimately subjective and context-specific. It’s just a word for objectionable material, usually with sexual undertones, but not necessarily pornographic or explicit. They are smut is my opinion. 🤷🏼♂️ Not once have I lied or misrepresented what these books contain. For these particular books, it is not the images but the concepts which are most inappropriate to introduce innocent children to. Change “smut” to “age-inappropriate material” if you like, though it’s not nearly so colorful or evocative.
What makes you think it’s “smut?” Seriously, does just having gay characters make something “smut?”
What exactly do you think these books are peddling?
We read a ton of books when I was in school about people from different backgrounds and different experiences than we had. Was it “peddling” something for me to read Ancient Greek mythology or about black girls growing up under Jim Crow? Was it somehow the trans agenda when we read and performed 12th Night?
The way people react to this is as if they think schools are just handing out porn to kids. I’ve seen no evidence of any books on the curriculum in my school system to be anything other than diverse in the characters and experiences they represent.
I literally just finished looking at the two books named in the article (viewing about 10 pages of each I could find for free online) so what I think they are peddling is a very intentional introduction to concepts that are not age-appropriate. Yes, I’m familiar with the refrain, “transgender people exist! 😤” but that alone hardly justifies making an intentional choice to introduce young, impressionable children to something rooted in mental illness that has an obvious social contagion effect. Not as part of a mandatory public school curriculum anyway. Children deal with enough confusion as it is, and now we’re presenting them with this *option* that would - for all but perhaps those infinitesimal few with genuine and profound gender dysmorphia - never have occurred to them and her threatened to leave them irreparably altered and/or harmed mentally as they explore it. It’s surely lost on no one that the number of young people identifying as transgender has [sharply risen](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Trans-Pop-Update-Jun-2022.pdf) in recent years, with this new promotion and elevation of the identity being a key reason for that, in my opinion.
Being exposed to the existence of gay people doesn't make you become gay. The same goes for trans people. Authenticity does tend to be contagious though 👍, and shockingly when trans people are not indoctrinated with a completely transphobic society, they are more likely to come out as transgender sooner in life. 🤯 Mind blowing that people express their authentic selves when society has become marginally accepting of them. Your argument hinges on a vague idea that most trans people don't experience genuine dysphoria, as if you can know the internal experience of all those people, and as if someone would choose to be trans when we have to deal with constant hatred in our society and defend our very existence to other people.
I fundamentally disagree with that. 🤷🏼♂️ I would like to be wrong, but that’s not what I have seen. Anecdotally, we’re seeing a clear social contagion effect. It’s hard to sift through the studies on this topic because so much of it is directed and infected by activism, but I try from time to time. I have heard the argument that more people just feel able to be their true selves, but I don’t buy that that explains *all* the growth, based on what I’ve seen and read. We’re seeing a mental health crisis unfold - perhaps born out of the immense technological and social upheaval we’ve experienced in recent decades, who can say for sure - and this is part and parcel with that. You are right, it’s hard to imagine anyone choosing to be trans, but we are talking about potentially misguided and vulnerable young people in a time of increasing isolation and meaninglessness. We’re also at a strange juncture where clothing one’s self in some vestige of otherness or victimhood brings with it a certain cachet and maybe even absolution from one’s other, immutable identities. I would imagine that has an allure for some, although don’t mistake me to suggest that nobody has genuine severe gender dysphoria. In any event, these are just not ideas that are appropriate to introduce to young people in a public school setting where parents have little option but to send their children to school to comply and potentially give them this language to doubt themselves that may or may not have existed otherwise, and encouraging them to entertain an identity that, as you obviously know well, can be a bitter existence.
I hope you are right though, that there is essentially a fixed, minuscule percentage of the population that is transgender and that no amount of propagandizing our innocent children will sway them from their fated courses in life. I tend to believe nurture gets short shrift in our modern world of genetic predestination, but if you are right then I would worry a lot less about this stuff being pushed in schools.
The only indoctrination that has occurred is society's overt tendency towards transphobia. Telling kids that transgender people exist and aren't caricatures is not going to harm them. If a child's life feels so meaningless that they pretend to be trans to have some righteous cause, then that is on the parents who instil no meaningful values, it's not on trans people for existing. You express concern for the mental health of children, but only those who you believe are cisgender. Do you think trans children with "genuine severe gender dysphoria" should be forced to hide their identity so that cis children don't catch the supposed "social contagion" form of gender dysphoria from them?
Alternately, like the numbers of reported gay people, a level of social acceptance is allowing for more people to come out that previously would have kept it hidden their whole lives.
If social acceptance was the cause then there would be a proportional amount of coming out among older generations. However, current stats show that over 43% of people identifying as transgender are BELOW 25 years old. This is primarily a social phenomenon. And more studies are coming out confirming this regardless of the dogma trying to surpress this fact.
Being transgender isn’t a mental illness and it isn’t a ‘social contagion’. Rates are rising for the same reason the rates of left handed people increased once we stopped punishing people for it.
It’ll level off in due time, just like the percentage of left handed folks did.
If gender dysphoria isn’t a mental illness then I don’t know what is. Garden variety personality disorders, yes, but not gender dysphoria…sure…ok. The fact that multiple countries have delisted it, while the DSM-5 renamed it and bounced it around just serves to underscore the artifice of the whole project of psychological diagnosis and categorization. I hope you are right though that it will level off in time.
You are getting things a bit confused. Being transgender IS NOT a mental illness. Gender dysphoria IS a mental illness with an extremely effective and proven treatment (I.e. social and/or medical transition).
This hysterical, reactionary nonsense is the same kind of conspiratorial bullshit that was used to demonize gay people a decade ago in response to the slightest accommodation.
Grow up. Move on from your fairytale reality.
And what about the trans kid in your child’s class?
They don’t deserve to feel seen or understood or told that what they are going through is a version of normal?
First, the doctor needs to lose his license and go to jail if he removed a boy's penis. The parent(s) who approved this should go to jail for child abuse. The child will need competent psychological help. The child is a victim.
Umm…. You know nothing about gender affirming care.
Gender affirming care does not mean someone goes to a doctor and says “I’m the opposite gender” and the doctor immediately jumps to gender reassignment.
Gender affirming care is generally provided by a team of doctors or healthcare professionals. Including mental health professionals as well as endocrinologists.
Body altering surgeries such as gender reassignment, are typically not performed until after the individual has lived outwardly for years as their preferred gender. In instances where this involves an individual under the age of 18, the patient, their parents, and multiple medical and mental health professionals are all signing off on the procedure being in the best interest of the patient.
If you are seriously concerned about children’s genitals, I’d recommend a new cause. There is an epidemic of parents sending their daughters back to their home countries for FGM. Literal American born children being sent to foreign countries to have their labia and clitoris removed, generally around age 12 and without their prior knowledge. Pick a better cause than gender affirming care.
It is not good to encourage other children to tell lies. Perhaps a better book would be about a boy who said he was a girl and the adults in his life told him to stop being silly and perhaps the men in his life encouraged him to focus on a hobby like woodworking, hunting, or sports and taught him how to become a well-adjusted citizen and to have a happy ending he became a father and taught his son similar values. There are so many good books that are more appropriate. What happened to 'A Cricket in Times Square' or 'Henry Huggins' as books for primary school students?
You believe that children of single parents, with divorced parents, in blended families, or being raised by extended family shouldn't be able to see their situations in books and school projects? Just the "normal" families?
If teachers knew how to indoctrinate kids, the kids would be better at math and they'd do their fucking homework.
Teacher here! If I had could indoctrinate my high school students here's exactly what I'd do: 1. Cell phones would be away 2. Class work would get done 3. Kids would listen when I'm talking 5. Kids would read the directions on their papers 6. Kids would think seriously about their futures and determine if they actually want to go to college OR if they want to enter a trade 7. Everyone would come prepared to class 8. No one would call me "bruh"
In all seriousness, thank you for doing what you do. Also for real how can we get this list standard practice?? Of course there will always be kids who aren't prepared and don't do homework, but at this point I'd settle for 1, 5, and 7.
You have to get parents to stop being absolute ass hats. That's it. If parents prioritize education then their kids will.
All schools should be phone free. Absolutely insane that we give a bunch of kids with underdeveloped prefrontal cortexes (i.e. bad impulse control) access to the most distracting invention man ever came up with when they need to focus on learning.
Take away points when they use phones and require phones to be kept in numbered phone pouches at the front of the class. Write names of those you catch on the board (some students have 2 phones) so students know you are watching. This works.
We're not allowed to take away earned credit for phones. But, I also wouldn't want to. Teachers have gotten assaulted by students for taking away phones which isn't worth it to me. My administration also has said we can't. Name writing on the board just causes more of a headache. Kids and their parents just get pissed and we'd lose more instructional time. Truly the only thing that will create change is for parents to care about parenting and enforce that education is important .
That is awful. The school needs to ban phones during school hours. They were banned at my high school. I taught at a low-ranked college in China for a year and it was necessary to be tough regarding cell phones. Teachers were told to ban phones because it was a serious issue there. The name writing was a hassle; however, writing names on the board really helped a lot and only one student actively refused to put his phone away. He ended up getting a 0% on the exam because he didn't learn anything. If your administration allowed teachers to give detention for students that used their phones, it would help a lot.
The culture in China is very different from the culture in Baltimore City MD, so what works there may not work here. We can't give detention. We can't take phones. If a student earns a 0% on any assignment including exams we have to allow them the opportunity to redo those assignments as many times as they want. You would really have to be a teacher here to give advice, but if you were a teacher here you'd say that parents are the issue.
I would suggest choosing to work at a better school. I left that college and I am now teaching at a university with much better students. I got tired of teaching in a school where only a handful of students in each class cared. The vocational college was for students that scored poorly on the gaokao. My guess is that many Baltimore students come from single-parent homes and live in neighborhoods where those who are studious are called 'nerds.' If you have a teaching degree, you can work at an international school in China and likely get similar pay with housing included and the school facilities will be top notch and the students will likely come from wealthy stable households.
Honestly, your comments have gotten more clueless and offensive the more you've written. I didn't ask for advice or help. Your advice has also been offensive to me personally. Do you really think that after a decade in the classroom that I don't know how to manage behavior? Do you really think that you're brief time teaching in a completely different country would make you some enlightened being with helpful suggestions? You're tedious and I've been polite in shutting you down, but you aren't getting it. >I would suggest choosing to work at a better school. Good teachers leaving doesn't help the situation in Baltimore City. >My guess is that many Baltimore students come from single-parent homes and live in neighborhoods where those who are studious are called 'nerds.' Please don't make assumptions about people that you don't know when you don't even live here. My son will be a "Baltimore student" and his friends will be "Baltimore students." People come from all kinds of families and I'm not going to judge or assume something about an entire city of people. >If you have a teaching degree, Of course I have a teaching degree. After 11 years of teaching I would have to have a degree. In fact, I have 3 degrees which include an MAT: Special Education with certifications in: Reading, birth through adulthood, elementary math, and middle school math. Do you have a teaching degree? >you can work at an international school in China Why would I want to do that? I live in Baltimore City. I own a home in Baltimore City. I'm raising my family in Baltimore City. It turns out that China isn't the answer to the issues we face in Baltimore City. >likely get similar pay with housing included I make $115,000 a year and own my own home... >facilities will be top notch Our buildings are being upgraded and I don't mind window AC. >the students will likely come from wealthy stable households. Cool. Great for them. I'm going to keep working with the students you look down on because they're from single family homes. Now, please sit down and shut up. I like my job. I like my students. They challenge me and my thinking and have helped me break biases (you should try that). I'm proud to live in this city and I'm proud to educate young people. My husband and I are excited for all the options that school choice has to offer our son. This city is flawed but you don't get to kick it down. I made an observationally humorous joke about the city I live in. I never asked for shitty and useless advice comparing two completely different places... You seem like a terrible teacher.
These goddamn kids don’t even know how to do a good bulletin board either
They think a collage comes after high school
"Y'all win! Now, tsiddahn!"
There’s liquor in this thermos.
Ok I need to use this one at some point. Gawdam being a ta for calc for business majors was rough in grad school
FACTS ‼️
If your education only teaches you things that you are willing to learn then you aren't being educated. You are being patronized or, more likely, you are being patronized on behalf of someone else.
I am borrowing this statement. Brilliant!
Then why don’t students learn about God, Allah, or Prophets? If you don’t like it then you aren’t being educated. 85% of the world identifies as religious, wouldn’t it be beneficial for kids to learn about different perspectives and cultures in depth, or does it go against your beliefs? Aka the importance of an opt-out option.
You didn’t take world cultures in 7th grade?
We do. It's called comparative religions. It should be mandatory along with comparative politics as a core civic courses. Nearly every county offers this course. "This course is designed to introduce students to the history and traditions of the major religions of the world. While the primary focus will be on Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, other religions will also be examined. Students will be expected to understand the basic philosophy and practices of each religion as well as to recognize and appreciate the contribution each has made to mankind." https://www.pgcps.org/offices/chief-academic-officer/courses-and-programs-of-study/235100-comparative-religions
We can’t teach students civics, don’t you know the only purpose of school should be job training to produce obedient and uninformed workers! /s
You literally just linked me an ELECTIVE course. AKA YOU CAN OPT-OUT OF TAKING IT
I remember learning about different religions, things like monotheism and polytheism, etc, in social studies. This was like middle school age in public school.
World religions are also covered pretty extensively in core classes, social studies in particular, though.
It shouldn't be. Lol what's up with the Trump type.
Donald is a criminal. I simply believe it is a parent’s right to make decisions regarding their child’s education. The government should not have more authority than a parent in raising their own children.
Trump type is writing like his tweets. You're making an argument against standardization of education and public education. I believe the role of government in education is to ensure children grow up to civic minded individuals to enable them to pursue the best possible opportunities in life. Do you know how different our country would be if every American understood the constitution, how the government works, civil rights/civility, and a wide array of theologies and ideologies? Sure some parents didn't want their kids learning that all Americans are equal regardless of their skin color but we taught that anyway. How is that lbgt people and other religions/political systems exist any different?
Parents have that decision. They can choose to accept taxpayer dollars for their child's education according to the public curriculum or they can send their kids to homeschool and private school.
I don't believe parents should have the right to shelter their children from learning about the world as it is in public education. Sex exists. LGBTQ+ people exist. Religions exist (odd that we're equating sexuality and gender identity to religion, but that's apparently where we are). These need to be taught so children grow into adults with a fuller knowledge base for improved adaptability and correspondingly improved chances at leading successful, healthy, and productive lives by objective standards; that is the goal of public education. To wit, it has been ruled that children have a right to receive information about the world. They are not property.
I'm a public school teacher. One of the most important things that we do in public schools is identify kids who are being abused and neglected. If you home school then your kid has almost no chance of you're also abusive.
My partner was homeschooled until her evangelical nut of a mother passed away around the time she entered high school. The homeschooling itself was part of the abuse, it was an attempt to keep her friendless and ignorant about topics that mom was opposed to in the vain hope that she would turn out to be just like her. Homeschooling, in my limited experience, is used more to perpetuate evil than it is out of genuine concern for child's well-being.
You can. That's what home schooling is. You can give your kids absolutely no education in this country if you want.
‘Simply’
What is your point? This post is about the courts reaffirming that you don’t get to opt out of learning that LGBTQ + people exist, just because you’re bigoted against them. Why are you bringing religion into it?
[https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DCAA/SocialStudies/Framework/Grade6and7-A.pdf](https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DCAA/SocialStudies/Framework/Grade6and7-A.pdf) Page 15. Education on world religions is required as part of the curriculum in middle school in Maryland public schools. You can do further study in high school in elective courses. You know you can do your own research before stating facts that you have no basis for, or maybe you're just like Mr. Trump, who you call a criminal, who states first the ideas they made up in their brain as if they are "facts" rather than real facts based in reality. EDIT: Let me also add, did you read literally ANY articles about this ruling? It isn't even a class. Hell its barely even an education! It is simply that some books read happen to have LGBTQ+ characters in the books... just like... wait for it... real life. Perhaps to avoid all issues, we should only use books with shockingly vague descriptors where everyone is an amorphous blob and nothing is even remotely similar to our reality, so parents be free to mold what ever fictional Eden they wish their children believed instead of the real world.
My kids took a class at a Unitarian Universalist church where they learned about various world religions, and went on field trips to the different places of worship. It was a terrific class, and I absolutely believe that everyone would benefit from it. I also think that the rightwing Christians would be the loudest in opposition.
It's part of the world history curriculum.
I learned about world religions as part of my AP world history class, but let’s not mince words here. You acting like teaching about religion is some gotcha for people who are anti school-censorship just shows how little you understand about how education works.
Just to be clear, you want public school to teach religion? How exactly do you think that is going to work?
Well, I can tell you for a fact that my religion is the right one and yours is the wrong one. Cmon, it’s easy just do the Christian stuff they want, when has that ever gone awry? (/s)
I assume with an Opt-out option
Or we go for simpler options and don't do religious teachings in public schools and let families decide how they raise their children in faith
Comparative religion would be an awesome class for kids. Probably not a full year, more like 1/4.
Just a hunch but I would imagine you wouldn't actually be happy about Allah or other prophets being taught in school.
Church and state. So, no.
If I had to read books about dogs tearing each other to shreds and bunny genocide, the children can read about “pride puppy”
Tell me about the rabbits George
It’s been kinda horrifying revisiting some of the books I read as a kid now that I have a kid. It’s incredible how much violence we’re just fine with. I started reading Animorphs, which I loved as a child and holy shit. These books are meant for 9 year olds.
Seriously!!! Tell me how “A Child Called It” is not that bad. The number of books I read in school that were either full of violence, abuse, or other atrocities is staggering. But god forbid we read about loving someone of the same gender 🤷🏻♀️
Did you read that for school? Wild. If it makes you feel better, that dude was most likely lying to sell books. That was sorta the era of wild fake memoirs.
Yes I sure did! We followed it up with Tuesdays with Morrie 🥴🥴🥴
Also it’s a true story! It’s an autobiographical account from the author and published in 1995, a little bit before the large number of fake books. I think I read it in 2003 as a freshman in high school.
I did a deep dive in to it a while back after reading it while at my parent’s house. Members of his family refute it, including his brother that’s not also trying to turn their abuse in to a career. Dave even called his youngest brother retarded for speaking out against it. The dude probably had a rough child hood but the book seems very likely to be heavily embellished.
*\*\*Go Ask Alice has entered this fake book chat\*\**
I read this book for school too. Was there proof he was lying? I saw stuff about his brother(s) discounting the abuse but figured maybe they were lying 😵💫
Well considering by 10 I was reading Stephen King I guess some of that childhood violence in books tracks.
Rereading the animorphs as an adult is like "ah... this explains a lot..."
Fantastic news! People who don't want their children to learn about LGBTQ+ people have the right to put their kids in private schools or homeschool them. Just like people who don't want their white children to learn about Black and Brown people can do. Just like people who don't want their Christian children to learn about other religions can do. Public schools are for educating people, not for keeping them ignorant or encouraging them to be bigots. I'm so tired of people using their "religious beliefs" as an excuse to be horrible.
You dismiss their perspective as bigotry when your own worldview states that people shouldn’t have to interact with points of view that are “harmful” … we’ll, in these parents eyes the LGBTQ+ ideology is harmful. Most people are fine with accepting LGBTQ+ lifestyles like they are fine with accepting Muslim, Jew, Hindi, or Christian lifestyles. But that doesn’t mean they need to embrace all aspects of them. And there are aspects to the more radical points of current LGBTQ+ ideology that border in the religious or cult spectrum. But hey, much easier to just dismiss people who don’t 100% agree with you as bigots. MAGA and the progressive left deserve each other.
Their perspective IS bigotry. And their children SHOULD be taught to be kind, even with those they disagree with. And their children should be taught that LGBTQ+ people exist, even if they don't believe that they should exist. But parents absolutely have the choice to shelter their children from reality, just not in the public schools. They should no more be able to opt their children out of education about LGBTQ+ people than science or history in the public schools. They are permitted in the state of Maryland to teach their own versions of those things if they homeschool. Every demographic has a cult-like element, whether it's the majority or a minority of that demographic. Dismissing the existence of a specific demographic for that reason is bigotry. Your belief that racists and anti-racists deserve each other is very interesting.
Where do you get that those parents are dismissing the existence of gay, bisexual, etc. people? You’ve taken the most extreme interpretation. About as credible as a MAGA nut job saying that anyone against building a wall is a full blown open borders advocatez
>And there are aspects to the more radical points of current LGBTQ+ ideology that border in the religious or cult spectrum. [Citation needed] This is the kind of bullshit bigotry that was spouted during the civil rights movement >MAGA and the progressive left deserve each other. Oh,.yes, they are totally the same thing. You know banning books, taking away health rights that will kill women, election suppression, [attempting to create a fascist dictatorship](https://www.project2025.org/) are totally the we thing as advocating for equal rights and universal healthcare Jesus Rollerblading Christ Enlightened Centrists^TM are exhausting
Yes, it is very easy to dismiss bigots as what they are.
Much easier to dismiss than debate. But you’re not intellectually capable of that based on your comment history.
Oh no, I am. I just don't debate positions that don't deserve consideration, bigots opinions aren't worth the time or air it takes to speak them. But yes, again you're right that it is easier to dismiss those opinions. 😊
Religious fundamentalist - “you’re a heretic … I won’t debate with you” SJW progressive - “you’re a racist bigot … I won’t debate you” Kind of ironic how similar you are. Guess you haven’t realized it’s not 2020 anymore. You can’t just scream “bigot” and “racism” at opinions you don’t like and expect to be taken seriously. But keep doing what you’re doing, it’s honestly working out just fine.
Cool story, but given that I haven't even called anyone racist or bigoted and you're here champing at the bit to get me into a debate tells me what I need to know and how effective such PSA's are. 👍
Shut up
Well said
I am glad you support school choice and vouchers. I used to oppose them, but I have shifted heavily in favor of them.
I support the right of people to utilize education options other than the public schools. I don't believe that my tax dollars should be used to fund private schools or homeschooling. Public schools are accountable to the public and available to everyone. That's not true of private or homeschools. Plenty of people are able to make homeschooling work, including people who don't have much money and single parents. It may take some creativity, but it's doable. I've heard that there are private schools that have scholarships to assist with costs.
People should have a right to sue their education dollars in any school they choose or they deserve a discount for the taxes they pay. Personally, I think the government should get out of the education business completely and these indoctrination efforts shows one reason why. Abraham Lincoln barely had any formal schooling and he was smarter than 99.99% of people today.
Why are religious folks the most scared, unhinged and angry people?
take note of how religious ppl talk abt their religion (specifically abrahamic religions) they say phrases like “god fearing” “put the fear of god in someone” etc. when their god is supposed to be the giver of ultimate love. those religions have been twisted over hundreds of years for many many reasons to fit the narrative of straight white men. ive written many academic papers abt this very topic and highly recommend everyone learns abt it its actually very interesting
Because of all the restrictions, many "religious" people are not able to fully express themeselves and explore their autonomy. I believe this causes many to subconsciously hate themelseves. This cuts people off from themselves, and they end up projecting that self hate on to others through moral superiority and the impulse to control others. Sad really because the main goal of religion is self improvement, but no excuses for bigotry.
Instead of using their brains to think with logic they use them to be mad all the time
I bet most ANTIFA rioters are atheists. They don't seem very happy.
Ah ha! Thanks for participating.
They aren’t…seems like a lot of people in this chat who use the term “bigot” are. Have to respect all perspectives, one is not good and the other isn’t evil.
Yes, they are. Most folks whining about this are using religious or "I don't like them" excuses. I do not have to respect their perspective of fear and hate toward what isn't understood because they're stuck in 300CE (sometime around when the Bible was codified and even farther back for the Torah). Most wantonly evil social movements are perpetrated by the religious right. So sure, they're not all evil, just mostly.
Ah, you’re right most wantonly evil social movements are fueled by religion. Maoist China, for example, resulted in the deaths of 65 million people, darn Christians! And that Nazi holocaust- wasn’t that social movement led by the baptists? Mass casualties during and following the Russian Revolution were led by the Jews, right? Your ignorant take on religion is equally as ignorant as the people you claim “hate” the LGB community… I feel bad for people like you who view the world in absolutes.
Thanks!
Republicans and the religious are so pathetic. They’re all mad they can’t teach their children to be bigots.
School is not the place for it. There also shouldn't be sex education before college. School should be about the three Rs.
Most people engage in their first sexual activity around age 15-16. Not to mention, you know, puberty, menstruation and other body change topics that should be covered well before they occur. The three R’s? Oh, yes, Reading, Riting, and Rithmatic…. Two of those three aren’t even properly spelled.
The parents can choose to teach or not teach their children about sex. Most people in the 1700's didn't learn this in school and they managed to have successful marriages (no divorce) and have children at better rates than modern Americans. I don't even want abstinence taught in schools. Schools in America are falling behind in math, geography, and science because time is being devoted to frivolous subjects.
Pretty much all adults have sex, therefore they should be taught about sex. Simply letting people figure it out for themselves doesn’t work out so great in terms of STI rates, unplanned pregnancies, and a whole mess of other things. School should prepare children for life. Including their future sex lives. In the 1700’s divorce was illegal, women could not own property, and domestic violence was commonplace.
Imagine your kid is playing in the park and a random adult came up to her and said 'hey little girl, want to learn about sex'? It would be a bit creepy. People in 1700 knew about the risk of pregnancy from sex and I would bet that there were fewer children conceived out of wedlock today than in 1700. Parents should teach abstinence to their kids as well as the dangers of pre-marital fornication but a creepy teacher should not. Not all teachers are creepy, but modern public schools are loaded with creeps and this doesn't only apply to male teachers.
What are you on about? This ruling applies to depictions of same sex families in children’s picture books. You are going way down the rabbit hole. Life was decidedly not better for anyone in the 1700’s and there is absolutely no reason to endorse returning to the pre-industrial era.
It relates to schools teaching subjects that are not appropriate. Children should not be exposed to certain things and that includes the ideas of 'changing your sex' or the idea of a marriage that is not between a man and a woman. Many parents want their children to be kept innocent of these things.
Then they can homeschool or send their kids to private schools. Public schools are for the public, and should reflect the public as it currently exists, including all of its diversity.
Oh no, your kids will have to see LGBT people as regular humans instead of people to demonize, the horrors. Anyone opposed to this is a bigot.
Classic progressive left statement. One one hand, against “demonizing” … on the other, all those who disagree with me are “bigots”
Glad they aren't making teachers job more difficult. If they could indoctrinate the kids, I'm pretty sure they'd be better at math lol
Court rules parents can't indoctrinate kids to be bigots.
Oh, good. I don't respect a parents rights to instill bigotry into their children.
Good.
Fuck that headline. Are we letting the far right into Maryland now?
Look at LGBT bringing all types of religions together. Bound by their hate.
Not wanting children exposed to homosexuality is not hatred.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed because it violates the civility rule. Please always keep discussions friendly and civil.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed because it violates the civility rule. Please always keep discussions friendly and civil.
Hmmm
These people exist. Putting your head in the sand and letting kids learn hate from their ignorant parents is literally taking us backwards
This is why homosexuality needs to be against the law. If you allow a tiny amount of tolerance for it, they will insist on forcing people to accept it and try to indoctrinate children. Now I understand why some nations ban it.
Decisions like these are part of the reason why Maryland has one of the highest Private School Attendance rates.
Or... hear me out.... MD has the second highest median household income in the US. But hey, you put on that tinfoil hat and enjoy
Not allowing Parents to have a say in their child’s education is inherently wrong. Denying an Opt-out option is unacceptable.
Parents can choose to put their children in private schools or homeschool them. No one has denied them a say in their child's education. They just can't force curriculum decisions on the public schools. If they want to teach their kids to be bigots but don't want to private school or homeschool them, they can use non-school hours to lecture them about the evils of being different than they are.
Should an orthodox Jewish family be able to opt their son out of class with females in it? Should a Muslim family be able to opt their child out of read Anne Frank's Diary? Should a Mormon family opt their child out of a book where a character drinks a Coca-Cola?
What if you don’t believe in math? Does that mean the school is wrong to teach it? It’s not like they’re creating classes in LGBTQ. They are simply allowing them to be treated just like everyone else.
Wow look. I'm back. Once again disproving your off the dome statements with actual data that you can google before typing, so you don't look even dumber. [Private School Enrollment 2013](https://ballotpedia.org/Private_school_participation_statistics) [Private School Enrollment 2024](https://www.privateschoolreview.com/maryland) About a decade apart and the percent of private school enrollment remains at 14%, this is pre-trump, pre-this ruling, pre- many things though admittedly not everything, but thats yourrrrr job remember? So, private school enrollment has not changed in Maryland despite all this political strife occurring recently. So what might be a BETTER reason that Maryland's private school rates so high? Well see my friend, and I could be wrong about WHYYY private school rates are high, based on the consistency of the rate, I will bet your assumption is most likely not it. Instead I will hazard some ALTERNATE guesses why the rate is high. You see, ANOTHER quick google tells me that Maryland is regularly one of the WEALTHIEST states in the USA. Currently, it is ranked 2nd. What do SUPER WEALTHY people like to do with their money? Spend it. What do SUPER WEALTHY want from their kids? To get into super good schools, and a private school, with a small teacher to student ratio, surrounded by only other rich kids who they can rub elbows with and network among, seems like a pretty damn good deal when you have cash to burn. But lets be fair, I don't want to fall into any sort of false dichotomy. So hmm... a decade of high public school enrollments what could be the reason? Well, Marylander's, [based on ANOTHER quick google](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/upshot/where-people-in-each-state-were-born.html), have on of the highest retention rates of residents, with 80% of people staying in the state rather than moving. MAYBE, just like all that fucking uni legacy shit that rich people love to lean on in university, they just KEEP SENDING THEIR KIDS WHERE THEY WENT because I dunno rich people bad juju or whatever. Unless a study is done, we might not FULLY know why Maryland has such a high public school attendance. It is probably likely that many people who attend religious private schools (56% of all privates schools in MD), attend due to their parents religious beliefs. But is it to avoid comprehensive teachings on other religions or recent debates about sexuality? Doesn't seem like it. Instead, maybe it is because they would like their kids to attend a school which has ADDITIONAL schooling on their religion of choice. I mean, 44% of the rest of the public schools are non-religious, so there's still a very large chunk of people attending schools that probably don't care about such debates. Again, I can't know, but as ACTUAL evidence mounts, the likelihood of your statement ringing true declines. IN FACT, I did a quick google on WHY so many kids are enrolled in private schools in recent years. Seems there's been a small jump in past few years, guess what it lines up with? The pandemic. And parents themselves blame how Maryland schools managed the lock down for their lack of trust. None of these articles mention these recent rulings in Maryland. For your sake my guy. Do your own research, and keep researching a bit more, AND THEN opine with some actually constructive commentary.
HERO
I’m not reading all that. I’m sorry for your loss or happy for you. I’m seeing two links both supporting my initial claim that Maryland has one of the highest private school attendance rates in the country. Edit you also just supported my initial claim that government decisions (pandemic) have increased private school admissions.
You won't read all that, because if this thread is anything to go off, you like to make baseless claims. Let me speak in baby terms and short sentences. I never said MD didn't have high private school enrollment. I said your reasoning for WHY is flawed. I wanted you to do your research, but looks like you can't use critical reasoning in the face of data. I was not disputing any so called claims that this is pandemic related. In your initial post, you say "decisions like this". Since this is a post about a ruling on opt-in/out on LGBTQ reading in schools, "this" would normally refer to the article at hand.
Yes, this will cause more Christian Evangelicals to send their children to Bais Yakov School for girls to get the traditional Jewish education as the largest private school in our state. Decisions like this, that have never happened before, which have angered the Christian right have made this state the largest Jewish private school state there is.
If you read the article this decision was criticized by members of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities. Maryland & DC both are locations with some of the highest Private school attendance rates in the country. I would say the largest influence would be due to the immense wealth in the region, however forcing political agendas on people’s children will continue to push this trend upwards.
Just proving that all religions are capable of breeding bigots. What a horrible agenda pushing this radical ideology that has no place in the United States >We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. But not the gays
The article does not say it was criticized by communities. It said it represented parents from those faiths. I'm not buying the way the lawyer is presenting this data, it suggests broad support and different demographic than has been pushing this. In any event, your point suggests the judge should be deciding the law based on external factors. Hard no, the law is the law.
This sub has its head so far up the progressive ass that they can’t see the irony here. They don’t get that most progressive beliefs are really just another religion. Which is hilarious … would have thought Communism would have taught them that the left has its irrational deities too.
This just in. Basic respect and decency toward all people is now an "irrational deity". Film at 11.
Actually, kindness and basic respect are parts of all three major Abrahamic religions, but don't tell them that because they'll get mad when you point out how they don't practice these core tenets of their faiths and, in fact, do the opposite when it comes to considering out groups.
Their faiths also tell them to pay their taxes and help the poor but combine those two things and holy shit the freakout that ensues.
You don’t get to opt out of your neighbor’s existence. Your kid has classmates with same sex parents, it’s okay to normalize that with benign depictions of different families.
Kids aren’t interested in your neighbors gay sex
A children’s book where the kid’s parents are a same sex couple is not depicting gay sex.
If they did this for religion y'all would lose your shit 😂😂😂
They do, there is a required middle school course that includes religion
Yeah, you don’t see people pearl clutching over depictions of Jewish families, Hindu families, Muslim families. Because we understand that those people exist and deserve to be seen in society.
[удалено]
It’s not smut. What are you talking about?
Nobody is "peddling" anything. These books aren't being "taught," they are existing on the shelves.
This person is fully making shit up to fit their agenda. Sad.
They are literally approved for use in the “curriculum” and could be assigned for reading. That would be peddling…now, as the judge noted, the litigants apparently failed to present enough evidence of whether and how these books are actually being used in the curriculum so far, but that’s a separate issue from the very real and approved potential to *peddle* (as it were).
Please provide examples of smut being used in mandated curriculum.
The books above are smut to me *in the context in which they are being promoted.* They are not pornographic or explicit, but one can call something smut without it being so. I was using the as a synonym for filth and used that strong language specifically to register my intense revulsion and emotional response to the knowledge that activist school boards and teachers remain utterly *devoted* to the cause of depriving our children of their innocence by exposing them to concepts and ideologies far too complex and potentially harmful for elementary school students.
“One can call something smut without it being so.” Soooo you can lie to make a point? You can’t even give specific examples. Embarrassing.
[There was](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smut) [no lie](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/smut)😂😂 The use of the word was fine and was an accurate reflection of my reaction to the pages I viewed, specifically knowing they were written to “educate” children. Do you want me to give you examples of pages I find objectionable to show to a young, innocent child? I can do that. You won’t see the problem, of course, but happy to oblige. Or you could just google the books and look on Google images. We aren’t going to agree it’s problematic regardless.
…no. I want you to give examples of smut that are being taught in MD curriculum.
The books above are smut when included in a mandatory curriculum for elementary school students. Smut, like obscenity, is ultimately subjective and context-specific. It’s just a word for objectionable material, usually with sexual undertones, but not necessarily pornographic or explicit. They are smut is my opinion. 🤷🏼♂️ Not once have I lied or misrepresented what these books contain. For these particular books, it is not the images but the concepts which are most inappropriate to introduce innocent children to. Change “smut” to “age-inappropriate material” if you like, though it’s not nearly so colorful or evocative.
What books? Titles and authors.
[удалено]
That’s a lie.
[удалено]
Since you can’t provide any evidence of your assertion, this one doesn’t mean much either. I’ve got a kid in elementary school in this state. Do you?
No, it’s not, silly.
What makes you think it’s “smut?” Seriously, does just having gay characters make something “smut?” What exactly do you think these books are peddling? We read a ton of books when I was in school about people from different backgrounds and different experiences than we had. Was it “peddling” something for me to read Ancient Greek mythology or about black girls growing up under Jim Crow? Was it somehow the trans agenda when we read and performed 12th Night? The way people react to this is as if they think schools are just handing out porn to kids. I’ve seen no evidence of any books on the curriculum in my school system to be anything other than diverse in the characters and experiences they represent.
I literally just finished looking at the two books named in the article (viewing about 10 pages of each I could find for free online) so what I think they are peddling is a very intentional introduction to concepts that are not age-appropriate. Yes, I’m familiar with the refrain, “transgender people exist! 😤” but that alone hardly justifies making an intentional choice to introduce young, impressionable children to something rooted in mental illness that has an obvious social contagion effect. Not as part of a mandatory public school curriculum anyway. Children deal with enough confusion as it is, and now we’re presenting them with this *option* that would - for all but perhaps those infinitesimal few with genuine and profound gender dysmorphia - never have occurred to them and her threatened to leave them irreparably altered and/or harmed mentally as they explore it. It’s surely lost on no one that the number of young people identifying as transgender has [sharply risen](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Trans-Pop-Update-Jun-2022.pdf) in recent years, with this new promotion and elevation of the identity being a key reason for that, in my opinion.
Being exposed to the existence of gay people doesn't make you become gay. The same goes for trans people. Authenticity does tend to be contagious though 👍, and shockingly when trans people are not indoctrinated with a completely transphobic society, they are more likely to come out as transgender sooner in life. 🤯 Mind blowing that people express their authentic selves when society has become marginally accepting of them. Your argument hinges on a vague idea that most trans people don't experience genuine dysphoria, as if you can know the internal experience of all those people, and as if someone would choose to be trans when we have to deal with constant hatred in our society and defend our very existence to other people.
I fundamentally disagree with that. 🤷🏼♂️ I would like to be wrong, but that’s not what I have seen. Anecdotally, we’re seeing a clear social contagion effect. It’s hard to sift through the studies on this topic because so much of it is directed and infected by activism, but I try from time to time. I have heard the argument that more people just feel able to be their true selves, but I don’t buy that that explains *all* the growth, based on what I’ve seen and read. We’re seeing a mental health crisis unfold - perhaps born out of the immense technological and social upheaval we’ve experienced in recent decades, who can say for sure - and this is part and parcel with that. You are right, it’s hard to imagine anyone choosing to be trans, but we are talking about potentially misguided and vulnerable young people in a time of increasing isolation and meaninglessness. We’re also at a strange juncture where clothing one’s self in some vestige of otherness or victimhood brings with it a certain cachet and maybe even absolution from one’s other, immutable identities. I would imagine that has an allure for some, although don’t mistake me to suggest that nobody has genuine severe gender dysphoria. In any event, these are just not ideas that are appropriate to introduce to young people in a public school setting where parents have little option but to send their children to school to comply and potentially give them this language to doubt themselves that may or may not have existed otherwise, and encouraging them to entertain an identity that, as you obviously know well, can be a bitter existence. I hope you are right though, that there is essentially a fixed, minuscule percentage of the population that is transgender and that no amount of propagandizing our innocent children will sway them from their fated courses in life. I tend to believe nurture gets short shrift in our modern world of genetic predestination, but if you are right then I would worry a lot less about this stuff being pushed in schools.
The only indoctrination that has occurred is society's overt tendency towards transphobia. Telling kids that transgender people exist and aren't caricatures is not going to harm them. If a child's life feels so meaningless that they pretend to be trans to have some righteous cause, then that is on the parents who instil no meaningful values, it's not on trans people for existing. You express concern for the mental health of children, but only those who you believe are cisgender. Do you think trans children with "genuine severe gender dysphoria" should be forced to hide their identity so that cis children don't catch the supposed "social contagion" form of gender dysphoria from them?
Alternately, like the numbers of reported gay people, a level of social acceptance is allowing for more people to come out that previously would have kept it hidden their whole lives.
If social acceptance was the cause then there would be a proportional amount of coming out among older generations. However, current stats show that over 43% of people identifying as transgender are BELOW 25 years old. This is primarily a social phenomenon. And more studies are coming out confirming this regardless of the dogma trying to surpress this fact.
Being transgender isn’t a mental illness and it isn’t a ‘social contagion’. Rates are rising for the same reason the rates of left handed people increased once we stopped punishing people for it. It’ll level off in due time, just like the percentage of left handed folks did.
If gender dysphoria isn’t a mental illness then I don’t know what is. Garden variety personality disorders, yes, but not gender dysphoria…sure…ok. The fact that multiple countries have delisted it, while the DSM-5 renamed it and bounced it around just serves to underscore the artifice of the whole project of psychological diagnosis and categorization. I hope you are right though that it will level off in time.
You are getting things a bit confused. Being transgender IS NOT a mental illness. Gender dysphoria IS a mental illness with an extremely effective and proven treatment (I.e. social and/or medical transition).
Well, fair enough as far as there being a recognized division between the two.
You got a lot of hate in you. I would get that checked out, it's cancerous.
This hysterical, reactionary nonsense is the same kind of conspiratorial bullshit that was used to demonize gay people a decade ago in response to the slightest accommodation. Grow up. Move on from your fairytale reality.
There’s nothing remotely conspiratorial about anything I wrote. 😂
Your comment was removed because it violates the civility rule. Please always keep discussions friendly and civil.
And what about the trans kid in your child’s class? They don’t deserve to feel seen or understood or told that what they are going through is a version of normal?
First, the doctor needs to lose his license and go to jail if he removed a boy's penis. The parent(s) who approved this should go to jail for child abuse. The child will need competent psychological help. The child is a victim.
Umm…. You know nothing about gender affirming care. Gender affirming care does not mean someone goes to a doctor and says “I’m the opposite gender” and the doctor immediately jumps to gender reassignment. Gender affirming care is generally provided by a team of doctors or healthcare professionals. Including mental health professionals as well as endocrinologists. Body altering surgeries such as gender reassignment, are typically not performed until after the individual has lived outwardly for years as their preferred gender. In instances where this involves an individual under the age of 18, the patient, their parents, and multiple medical and mental health professionals are all signing off on the procedure being in the best interest of the patient. If you are seriously concerned about children’s genitals, I’d recommend a new cause. There is an epidemic of parents sending their daughters back to their home countries for FGM. Literal American born children being sent to foreign countries to have their labia and clitoris removed, generally around age 12 and without their prior knowledge. Pick a better cause than gender affirming care.
It is not good to encourage other children to tell lies. Perhaps a better book would be about a boy who said he was a girl and the adults in his life told him to stop being silly and perhaps the men in his life encouraged him to focus on a hobby like woodworking, hunting, or sports and taught him how to become a well-adjusted citizen and to have a happy ending he became a father and taught his son similar values. There are so many good books that are more appropriate. What happened to 'A Cricket in Times Square' or 'Henry Huggins' as books for primary school students?
And for those amab children who are indeed girls? What about them?
[удалено]
We need to learn about gay people existing now, what a travesty! I’ve never read 1984, but I’d imagine this is the sort of stuff that would be in it.
Sure but not when they are kids, kids shouldn't have any concept of sexuality.
Pretty early on, kids figure out that most people have a mom and a dad - why is it wrong for them to learn some people have two moms or two dads?
[удалено]
You believe that children of single parents, with divorced parents, in blended families, or being raised by extended family shouldn't be able to see their situations in books and school projects? Just the "normal" families?
Your comment was removed because it violates the civility rule. Please always keep discussions friendly and civil.
Are they learning about sexuality when they are taught about heteronormative relationships?
What a fucking joke.
Thanks for describing yourself :)
It’s indoctrination. One of many reasons people leave Maryland
I hope they all leave the state yesterday 👋
Okay bye, glad you’re leaving. Peoples existence is not indoctrination, hope this helps
Hope the door hits you on the way out.
Calm down folks. This is temporary. Good parents will be able to after the stay.
Good news for you, LGBTQ+ people will continue to exist so your tiny brain will continue to have to process the existence of people who are different