Teacher Resigns After Parent Complains Pride Flag Is "Personal Agenda"

[RDKirk]

Probably because they would've been fired to even insinuate a problem, these days it's not the same situation, but ti doesn't mean black people cannot still be gaslit and condescended to by even their own race, let alone white people that try to act like post MLK Jr. there's no more racial problems at all in society

Nope.

 

[zippy2006]

"If homosexuality cannot be promoted then sexual biology cannot be taught." The absurdity is too hard to hide.

Heterosexual partners do not necessarily have sex, first off and you act as if any sex that isn't penile to vaginal intercourse is immoral when I'm pretty sure there are plenty of other sexual acts that straight couples do and yet you somehow aren't going to mention them because that's undermine your agenda to make everyone sex negative, it seems.

Homosexuality is a normal variation within human sexuality and thus cannot be excluded in terms of discussions of sexual biology, even if it's more an afterthought versus the more basic notions of explaining what we are often very ill educated about in America: human reproduction, specifically female reproductive systems.

The hypocrisy is you treated one group (heterosexuals) as the only norm and permissible to "indoctrinate" children about being "good". Except that's not how a norm works in discussions of human behavior when the variations are not harmful, unlike say someone that is a cannibal versus an omnivore, herbivore, etc, the latter of which are normal variations in human eating habits, while cannibalism is morally abhorrent for a reason.

Well, no. I implied that sexual biology can very easily be taught without promoting homosexuality. These ongoing red herrings of yours have nothing to do with what I said.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Wow, you just go with a subculture creating something and assume it's valid because that's what you think social construction necessarily means.

I haven't given the issue much thought. I'm willing to consider it however you want to...whether you believe it is a result of biology or a social construct. I'm fine with discussing either view.

It's not either/or: there can be biological aspects that have been there since humanity came about and our description of them will shift in how the terminology works, because language is not a fixed thing. You're conflating a biological reality with how we describe it, the latter of which is where the social constructed aspect emerges

Well we can always describe it according to biology....which isn't socially constructed.

In a reactionary sense that is hardly valid because it's little different than invoking straight pride, because neither of those are valid in the idea of pride as self dignity

A moment ago pride had nothing to do with "repression". Remember when you asked me what definition I thought applied? I can go back a page and quote it for you if you forgot. No repression required for pride.

against a society that represses and diminishes their value.

This is you conflating identity and victimhood again.

Gender as gender identity is socially constructed and the understanding

I don't think the science agrees with you on this. More importantly, if this is what you think, then how are you claiming that Super Straight isn't a valid identity?

we have of sexual orientation is a descriptive sense, not the sexual attraction itself

I'm sorry....what's the difference between sexual orientation and sexual attraction in your mind?

Because that's how things started in getting the ball rolling on civil rights. If you want an absolute answer to everything, you're going to be sorely disappointed, because that's not how the world works

You're saying that I shouldn't expect a straight answer from you.

Your posts actually make more sense that way.

and the answer is going to potentially vary because of historical considerations, but also that this is a group you seem to know little about in their struggles

You just claimed I was a part of the group....you said it included straight people, and all genders and orientations.

How can I be detached from a group that includes everyone? Do you write a post and then just forget what you said in the next post?

Saying that they have privilege and need to recognize that is not bigoted

Of course it is...it's possible they have privilege, but there's no reason to assume it just because of skin color.

Again, not racism in calling out societal privileges that give benefits that the majority group seems to not realize and instead gaslights and behaves in a toxic abusive manner to the minorities, like they should be "grateful to whites" and "stop being victims"

You just made a moral accusation against all white people. That's like saying black people are inherently criminal. It's extremely racist.

REmarkable that you think entitled privileged white people are being rational in their claim of "emotional needs"

I didn't say that....I don't equate emotions with rationality.

No, it's because they already have respect and they demand MORE because of their majority status and privilege they don't want to be challenged. This isn't as complex as you're making it and you're not a victim because you're white and straight in a society where being straight is the norm and a culture, American, where being white is historically the norm.

There's that casual racism towards whites I was talking about.

Forgive me if I don't have sympathy or empathy for narcissists that want the status quo to stay the same so they don't have to be altruistic or show any compassion for others in a genuine sense versus it being "socially acceptable" like how people mostly realize that throwing out the n word against black people is unacceptable, especially in the attempted revisionism that the word originally meant ignorant person (it really never did, Websters seems to have confirmed as much historically)

And more moral condemnation of white people. If you were trying to prove I was wrong by saying that whites are the only group that its socially acceptable to be racist against....you're doing a terrible job.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Seems like you enjoy cherry picking examples and then making a broad brush generalization to everyone as if their situations are the same as the one you speak of.

I'm pointing out examples of people claiming victimhood over hurt feelings or outright faking hate crimes to claim victimhood.

It's a relatively new phenomenon that is directly related to your political dogma that equates identity with victimhood.

But then you also speak as if women have always been believed in their claims of sexual assault when that's not remotely based in fact historically.

Never said that.

Obviously we can bring up other issues that come up with, say, a white woman accusing a black man of raping or sexually assaulting her and being believed, but her status as a woman is not necessarily what is at issue here, but her being white and the alleged assaulter being black.

How is that relevant?

You can perceive that, but that isn't based in fact, it's based in more generalizations because of examples you think represent the majority rather than situations that have likely snowballed because of continued microaggressions, bullying and, worst of all, the administration doing little to nothing about it.

I've got no idea what you're referring to in this paragraph.

That's where we get these issues, the status quo being maintained so as not to rock the boat, which includes the idea that someone might be prejudiced against LGBTQ, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, various minority groups that white straight cis people have gotten away with insulting and marginalizing for centuries and are only recently in the last few decades being called to task for it.

Again, this is you associating identity with victimhood. Being black, or asian, or gay, or whatever doesn't make someone a victim. Being white, or straight, or male, doesn't make someone morally deficient.

Those are bigoted views.

 

[Ana the Ist]

you seem to confused and are now talking about the last presidential election

Rob Ford Demands Olympic Rainbow Flag Be Taken Down

That's in Canada.

Couple told to take down Pride flag responds
Threatened with eviction for flying rainbow flag

That's a property owner.

Residents wanted to stop a town from flying the Pride flag.

That's a town deciding what flags should be flown.

Police commissioner ordered pride flag to be removed from a local restaurant.

I'm not really sure what is going on in the last article....

In a phone call, Walsh agreed and said the conversation about the flag “absolutely and unequivocally never took place."

I'm not seeing anyone being labeled a racist, homophobe maybe.

No...the racism accusations were leveled against people flying the Confederate flag, not the Pride flag.

One has to wonder whether or not these issues would even exist if sjws hadn't spent so much time protesting flags because they offended someone.

Many people were upset when Heather Hayer was killed as such a rally

Not upset at the people wearing masks.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If you would like to quote students on how they are upset over the lack of a flag...feel free

That was the context given by another poster.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Like how parents wanted the rainbow flag out of the classroom.

I'm sure you're not the only one who feels that way.

Hopefully the left remembers this lesson the next time they discuss banning hate speech.

 

[Ana the Ist]

but they are and they are doing it to LGBT students....But of course any student dares to be bothered by this is "whiny" and needs psychiatric help

Hilariously, I was just telling another poster that I shouldn't have to explain nuance to everyone....yet here we are....

Physical violence and hurt feelings aren't the same.

 

[Ana the Ist]

and by demanding the flag be taken down it says clearly that everyone is NOT welcome despite what the sign says

Someone was offended.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The problem is insinuating anyone is claiming being white in itself is bad

You mean like this?

Again, not racism in calling out societal privileges that give benefits that the majority group seems to not realize and instead gaslights and behaves in a toxic abusive manner to the minorities, like they should be "grateful to whites" and "stop being victims"

Perhaps they were reading your posts lol.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yeah, you're totally "objective" in making a tu quoque about a select group of people that you think represent the left as a whole and then generalize as if there wasn't discussion just because you don't recall it (argument from incredulity!)

If you can find that conversation I'll gladly give it a read.

However, we've got a more concrete example that perhaps you should consider.

Remember Charlottesville? Remember when President Trump said something stupid (arguably nuetral, but stupid regardless)?

Afterwards, over the next 48 hours every single Republican Congressman and Senator unequivocally condemned white supremacists and their political violence.

I don't recall any such condemnation from the Democratic Party towards Antifa and their political violence. In fact, the opposite happened. They pretended Antifa wasn't a problem. They called tearing down flags and statues progress. They justified riots and looting and then minimized it by calling it "mostly peaceful". They rejected law and order when armed citizens took over public spaces, called it a "summer of love", and basically ignored the fact that it led to multiple murders.

You're upset that perhaps there's a silent few on the left who disagreed with all this...and I'm lumping them in with all those who approved of it?

If they're too gutless to speak up they aren't worth consideration in my eyes.

 

[SilverBear]

No, it does not. It says they want to remain neutral on topics such as sexual orientation, etc.

You just saying it again and again demonstrates nothing.

 

[SilverBear]

I was in elementary school--a segregated black elementary school, with black teachers and a black principal--in the latter 50s and early 60s.

During that time, white people were bombing black churches and murdering black children my own age. White people were burning busses with black people in them. White people were fire-hosing blacks and setting police dogs upon us. I was prevented from interacting with any black children--could not go to the same movie theaters or swimming pools or even the same playground.

And yet, interestingly enough, now that I ponder it, our black teachers and principals never brought up such matters in the classroom. It's certainly not as though it didn't matter to them--they were victims too. But those weren't the issues they had us in the classroom to discuss.

They may have been afraid to do so

 

[SilverBear]

That is not neutrality. Your thinking that LGBTQ deserve recognition and straight people do not is simply your view. And that viewpoint is not what the school is tasked with teaching




"Representation" of any group is not what the school is being tasked with doing. But it is what the teacher said the flag was doing.

“But I followed it up by saying, ‘If you have a problem with the flag representing me, or students who identify as LGBTQ+, then you can probably find a different class,’”

So the school removed it. Therefore, no group was "represented" by the speech of the government school, and there was neutrality.

The school didn't remove it or threaten the teacher with dismissal because they wanted to remain neutral. The school bowed to a parental demand to remove the flag as they complaint that the presence of the rainbow flag was going to make his child homosexual. A complaint based at best in ignorance and at worst in bigotry. Being neutral at this point would have prompted the school to educate the parent on homosexuality but they didn't do that, instead the threatened the teacher with dismissal in he would not agree in writing to never discuss his personal life with students.,..which would include displaying any picture of his spouse. In the end the school was anything but neutral and engaged in bigoted actions that sent a clear message to all students that certain people are not and would not be welcome and safe in there.

 

[SilverBear]

I'm pointing out examples of people claiming victimhood over hurt feelings or outright faking hate crimes to claim victimhood.

It's a relatively new phenomenon that is directly related to your political dogma that equates identity with victimhood.



Never said that.



How is that relevant?



I've got no idea what you're referring to in this paragraph.



Again, this is you associating identity with victimhood. Being black, or asian, or gay, or whatever doesn't make someone a victim. Being white, or straight, or male, doesn't make someone morally deficient.

Those are bigoted views.

No, pretending that LGBT individuals are not the victims of hate, bullying, harassment, threats and outright violence is bigotry
saying that wanting to be safe in school and not be the target of harassment and violence make kids "whiny" is bigotry
Suggesting that kids who protest at being on the receiving end of harassment and violence need psychiatric care is bigotry

 

[SilverBear]

That's in Canada.



That's a property owner.



That's a town deciding what flags should be flown.



I'm not really sure what is going on in the last article....

In a phone call, Walsh agreed and said the conversation about the flag “absolutely and unequivocally never took place."



No...the racism accusations were leveled against people flying the Confederate flag, not the Pride flag.

One has to wonder whether or not these issues would even exist if sjws hadn't spent so much time protesting flags because they offended someone.



Not upset at the people wearing masks.

You are saying that it's somehow different when the flag being protested is the rainbow flag. Tel me is it the flag that makes it different in your eyes or is it because of the group it represents?

 

[SilverBear]

That was the context given by another poster.

But you have repeated it many times as an apparent means of dismissing the the kids in the school as "whiny" and fragile

 

[SilverBear]

I'm sure you're not the only one who feels that way.

Hopefully the left remembers this lesson the next time they discuss banning hate speech.

the rainbow flag is now hate speech?

 

[SilverBear]

Hilariously, I was just telling another poster that I shouldn't have to explain nuance to everyone....yet here we are....

Physical violence and hurt feelings aren't the same.

no threats and harassment and name calling are not the same as physical violence. They are still violent and serve to harm and degrade and terrorize the kids they are directed at. They are still based on hate.

And I don't find it funny in the least that this needs to be explained to you.

 

[SilverBear]

Someone was offended.

Someone thought the flag would turn their kid gay.