Mental health funding in schools

[BCP1928]

I said it was in government, not that it was quoted or referenced in the Constitution.

It has been quoted and read in Congress and in public schools since the founding. Prayer has been part of both since rhe founding. This cannot be argued. It is a fact. Founders and presidents have quoted it and mentioned it.

However the left has fought this for a long time now and found a sympathetic Supreme Court to step in and stop it in many places.

You know this. You aren't dumb.

Which Bible?

 

[BCP1928]

I must have missed all that bible and prayer during my 13 years in public school (not to mention 10 years of college). Perhaps I went to those schools that followed the law.

I didn't. I was educated by Catholics and the Bible was part of it, of course, but I didn't learn anything about it that would tend to make me want to support Trump.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's Critical Gender Theory. Look it up.

I don't believe for a second that those who whinging away about "transgender ideology" can quote a single concept from academic gender theory. They make it clear it isn't about some irrational fear of "marxism".

 

[A2SG]

And I answered that question.

I don't recall seeing that link previously, and certainly not in any post directed to me, but thank you for providing it.

But....from what I read, it doesn't indicate any specific "transgender ideology" as part of a school curriculum, as you indicated. At best, the case was about parents objecting to "books featuring LGBTQ+ characters for inclusion in its language-arts curriculum." There is no indication in the link you provided that there was any sex education classes involved at all. The issue stems from books that simply feature LGBTQ+ characters, and not the promotion of any lifestyle in any way. And, specifically to transgender people, they doesn't seem to be involved at all, in any way. As the article states: "One book used for young children, Pride Puppy, tells the story of a puppy that gets lost during a Pride parade. Another book tells the story of a girl attending her uncle’s same-sex wedding."

How do those books, in any way, promote anything even resembling a "transgender ideology"?

As to the issue of not being allowed to opt out of reading classes:

When the county announced in 2023 that it would not allow parents to opt to have their children excused from instruction involving the storybooks, a group of Muslim, Catholic, and Ukrainian Orthodox parents went to federal court. They contended that the refusal to give them the option to opt their children out violated their constitutional right to freely exercise their religion – specifically, their ability to instruct their children on issues of gender and sexuality according to their faith and to control when and how these issues are introduced to their children.​

​

The lower courts rejected the parents’ request for an order that would temporarily require the county, while the litigation continued, to notify the parents when the storybooks would be used and give them a chance to opt out of instruction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit explained that on the “threadbare” record before it, the parents had not shown that exposure to the storybooks compelled them to violate their religion.​

Remember back when I first replied to you? I said: "Could it be simply that they are acknowledging that transgender people exist?"

It isn't even that. Transgender people aren't even mentioned here, so they got their wish in that respect. It seems the parents involved here don't want to acknowledge that any LGBTQ+ people exist at all. And, unfortunately for them, or any who agree with them, denying the existence of other people (or requiring public schools to do so) isn't within their legal rights as Americans.

Is an abject falsehood.

It isn't. I asked a handful of questions, and none have been answered, nor have any specifics been offered for any of the assertions you've claimed. Even in the above where you finally did provide some form of evidence, it did not support your allegation at all, in any way whatsoever.

You have yet to demonstrate an ability to answer the questions I've posed. Whether that's due to inability to answer, or your unwillingness to do so, I can only speculate.

-- A2SG, and, apart from all that....what has that case to do with mental health funding in schools anyway? Nothing about that was even mentioned.....

 

[RDKirk]

I don't believe for a second that those who whinging away about "transgender ideology" can quote a single concept from academic gender theory. They make it clear it isn't about some irrational fear of "marxism".

I answered your question, and now you're deflecting to what you think other people know.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't believe for a second that those who whinging away about "transgender ideology" can quote a single concept from academic gender theory. They make it clear it isn't about some irrational fear of "marxism".

Gender is just a social construct
There's a difference between sex & gender
Hegemonic masculinity
Cis-Hetero Normative power structures

...is that the kind of stuff you're asking about?


So while "Transgender ideology" may not be an officially recognized academic term, the aspects people are referring to when they say that, is the manifestation and social outcomes of bits and pieces of critical theory from each of the above listed topics.



This is very similar to when people advocating for gun control are told to sit down and shut up because they don't know all of the nitty gritty and technical terms pertaining to guns.

A person can see certain outcomes occurring, and know the source of those outcomes, without being advanced-tier experts on that particular source.

For instance, a person doesn't need be able accurately define uppers, lowers, various firing rates, know all of the cartridge sizes, etc... to have an opinion on guns, or know that the "gun culture" has some responsibility in our elevated murder rates.

 

[BCP1928]

Gender is just a social construct

True. Not part of an ideology.

There's a difference between sex & gender

True. Not part of an ideology.

Hegemonic masculinity
Cis-Hetero Normative power structures

Characterizations of actual sociological phenomena. Because of the buzzwords used in the characterization, that might qualify as ideological. However, the conservative characterization--which pretty boils down to, "that's how God wants it to be" is also ideological.

...is that the kind of stuff you're asking about?

Pretty much.

So while "Transgender ideology" may not be an officially recognized academic term, the aspects people are referring to when they say that, is the manifestation and social outcomes of bits and pieces of critical theory from each of the above listed topics.



This is very similar to when people advocating for gun control are told to sit down and shut up because they don't know all of the nitty gritty and technical terms pertaining to guns.

A person can see certain outcomes occurring, and know the source of those outcomes, without being advanced-tier experts on that particular source.

For instance, a person doesn't need be able accurately define uppers, lowers, various firing rates, know all of the cartridge sizes, etc... to have an opinion on guns, or know that the "gun culture" has some responsibility in our elevated murder rates.

And the conservative response generally is that , "there is no such thing as gun culture." which is similar to the conservative response to trans.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

True. Not part of an ideology.

The user I was replying to was asking for "concepts" from academic gender theory.

Characterizations of actual sociological phenomena. Because of the buzzwords used in the characterization, that might qualify as ideological. However, the conservative characterization--which pretty boils down to, "that's how God wants it to be" is also ideological.

Almost all ideologies are formed by the conglomeration of various concepts. (and the subsequent rules that go along with them that attempt to dictate behaviors)

And the conservative response generally is that , "there is no such thing as gun culture."

How is that any different than the response of "there is no transgender ideology" that progressives use as a rebuttal?

If something has slogans, symbols, flags, language rules, certain precepts that are required as a "buy-in", starts having its own holidays, seeks to squash contrasting viewpoints, and those concepts are used as a lens by which they view everything in the world and functions both as a framework for interpreting reality and as a guide for political action (IE: demanding consequences for non-adherence)... and being a supporter of those precepts becomes the primary part of a person's identity.

...then it's definitely within the realm of an "ideology".


For example, merely saying "I prefer hamburgers over hot dogs" isn't an ideology.

However, saying
- Preferring hamburgers is the only acceptable choice
- Here's a list of things you can't say about hamburgers
- We use these symbols as a way of showing the world we prefer hamburgers and support the people who do
- We should only vote for pro-hamburger candidates
- Here's what the social penalties should be for preferring hot dogs
- Every sociopolitical issue should be evaluated through the hamburger vs. hot dog lens
- We need to radically redefine how grills are made so that they specifically cater to the cooking of hamburgers.

...would be indicative of an ideology.

 

[BCP1928]

The user I was replying to was asking for "concepts" from academic gender theory.

Those first two are not "concepts: they are observations of human behavior. That's what "academic gender theory" is, a theory of human behavior.

Almost all ideologies are formed by the conglomeration of various concepts. (and the subsequent rules that go along with them that attempt to dictate behaviors)

The things that makes them "ideologies" are--as the word implies--ideas in the form of axioms which cannot be questioned or altered.

How is that any different than the response of "there is no transgender ideology" that progressives use as a rebuttal?

If something has slogans, symbols, flags, language rules, certain precepts that are required as a "buy-in",

Right. Those are the "ideas" which make it an ideology.

starts having its own holidays, seeks to squash contrasting viewpoints, and those concepts are used as a lens by which they view everything in the world and functions both as a framework for interpreting reality and as a guide for political action (IE: demanding consequences for non-adherence)... and being a supporter of those precepts becomes the primary part of a person's identity.

...then it's definitely within the realm of an "ideology".

Sounds like the Christian Right, too.

For example, merely saying "I prefer hamburgers over hot dogs" isn't an ideology.

However, saying
- Preferring hamburgers is the only acceptable choice
- Here's a list of things you can't say about hamburgers
- We use these symbols as a way of showing the world we prefer hamburgers and support the people who do
- We should only vote for pro-hamburger candidates
- Here's what the social penalties should be for preferring hot dogs
- Every sociopolitical issue should be evaluated through the hamburger vs. hot dog lens
- We need to radically redefine how grills are made so that they specifically cater to the cooking of hamburgers.

...would be indicative of an ideology.

It would certainly be an indication of an ideology, no better or worse in that way than any other ideology.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Those first two are not "concepts" they are observations of human behavior. That's what "academic gender theory" is, a theory of human behavior.

I would pushback on that just a little...

They're "very selective" observations in that, they ignore much more abundantly evident observations in favor of "intentionally observing" the outlier scenarios with the aims of redefining things so that the prevailing "norm" isn't viewed as "the norm".

Meaning, they're not objective in their intent.

Intentionally observing the outlier as a means to disprove the norm so that things can be "redefined" in ways that are self-serving isn't really a genuine observation.

A good example would be the recent mini-wave of articles coming out (most of them derived from a published paper by Abigail Anderson from 2023) that seeks to "debunk" the long commonly-held understanding of the "hunter-gatherer" dynamic with regards to the gendered division of labor. As a means of reinforcing a particular viewpoint and being able to say "see, we were wrong about gender" and reframe things in a post-modern feminist viewpoint.


However, other scientists were quick to call out the methods Abigail used

Scientists say media storm around "Myth of Man the Hunter" study was unjustified and misleading

A new critique of a 2023 study disputes claims about widespread female hunting participation in foraging societies, highlighting methodological flaws and selection biases that likely led to overestimated involvement.

www.psypost.org

“When we saw the Anderson et al 2023 PLoS ONE study published in July 2023, we realized we’d been studying the same material but coming to very different conclusions. We wanted to figure out why. So we tried to replicate the Anderson study. Unfortunately, we learned that their methods were not reliable and biased toward finding evidence for women’s hunting, and therefore their conclusions are not robust.”

The things that makes them "ideologies" are--as the word implies--ideas in the form of axioms which cannot be questioned or altered.

Right. Those are the "ideas" which make it an ideology.

Sounds like the Christian Right, too.

It would certainly be an indication of an ideology, no better or worse in that way than any other ideology.

Yes, religions and political persuasions are ideologies.

However, I suspect the reason why so many on the progressive wing bristle at the notion of their views being labelled as "an ideology" is because they've used the term in a pejorative sense in the past to try to diminish the views of their opponents, and want their views to be perceived as being "above" the whole "subjective ideas which are put on a pedestal and can't be questioned" and sometimes "rational-resistant" nature that can be associated with ideologies.

 

[rjs330]

I must have missed all that bible and prayer during my 13 years in public school (not to mention 10 years of college). Perhaps I went to those schools that followed the law.

Laws and rules that were created a LONG time after the founding and after the creation of the constitution. Thats part of my point.

 

[rjs330]

Which Bible?

Who cares. Probably the one most available and at hand.

 

[rjs330]

True. Not part of an ideology.

Yes it is. Gender roles and gender expectations are social constructs and pretty much always have been. They were based however on sex becauae gender and sex were terms for the same thing. Even Money who really started the whole modern ideology of gender still was referencing sex. It wasnt until much later that gender definitions evolved into the current thought process that its a mere function of identity that is not fixed and can be whatever a person says it is for them. Which most certainly is an ideology

True. Not part of an ideology.

It didn't used to be. It is now.

Characterizations of actual sociological phenomena. Because of the buzzwords used in the characterization, that might qualify as ideological. However, the conservative characterization--which pretty boils down to, "that's how God wants it to be" is also ideological.

Certainly there are Christians who have usdd that argument. However there are Christians (more of them)who have not. Me being one of them. And there are millions of non-Christians who most certainly have not used that argument. So you characterization is so far off base its patently ridiculous and out right false.

 

[BCP1928]

Laws and rules that were created a LONG time after the founding and after the creation of the constitution. Thats part of my point.

Right. Anglo-Protestant culture is no longer the dominant or normative American culture, so Protestant prayer and Bible study have no unique Place in American public schools.

 

[BCP1928]

Yes it is. Gender roles and gender expectations are social constructs and pretty much always have been. They were based however on sex becauae gender and sex were terms for the same thing. Even Money who really started the whole modern ideology of gender still was referencing sex. It wasnt until much later that gender definitions evolved into the current thought process that its a mere function of identity that is not fixed and can be whatever a person says it is for them. Which most certainly is an ideology

And that's your ideology. Not only is it an inaccurate charization of gender roles and gender expectations it ignores the subjective cognitive and affective states that form the basis of trans--intentionally, in an attempt to trivialize it.

It didn't used to be. It is now.

Certainly there are Christians who have usdd that argument. However there are Christians (more of them)who have not. Me being one of them. And there are millions of non-Christians who most certainly have not used that argument. So you characterization is so far off base its patently ridiculous and out right false.

It depends on what they are arguing against.

 

[BCP1928]

Who cares. Probably the one most available and at hand.

People used to care a good deal. Once upon a time in the good old days of American Christianity little Catholic kids were beaten for not bringing the right translation of the Bible with them to school, or for saying the wrong version of the Lord's Prayer. People still care a good deal. Oklahoma wants the KJV, and the KJV only in it's schools. Louisiana wanted a specifically Protestant version of the Ten Commandments in its schools. Why are they doing that if nobody cares?

 

[RDKirk]

Right. Anglo-Protestant culture is no longer the dominant or normative American culture, so Protestant prayer and Bible study have no unique Place in American public schools.

Anglo-Protestant culture is pretty much still the dominant and normative American culture, even if it's not still attached solely to religion.

 

[BCP1928]

Anglo-Protestant culture is pretty much still the dominant and normative American culture, even if it's not still attached solely to religion.

I wonder, when I see that aspects of traditional (I should have said that before) AP culture as envisioned by, say, Hillsdale College, has to be enforced by executive order. In fact, AP culture as it really exists is quite liberal in many aspects.As a member in good standing (WM, English speaking, UK roots) I would feel just as comfortable voting for Bernie Sanders as another might feel voting for Trump.without either of us compromising our membership.

 

[RDKirk]

I wonder, when I see that aspects of traditional (I should have said that before) AP culture as envisioned by, say, Hillsdale College, has to be enforced by executive order. In fact, AP culture as it really exists is quite liberal in many aspects.As a member in good standing (WM, English speaking, UK roots) I would feel just as comfortable voting for Bernie Sanders as another might feel voting for Trump.without either of us compromising our membership.

You don't seem to realize that up to this century, AP culture was easily both "liberal" and "conservative."

It's only been within the last 25 years, as Critical Theory has become the dominant liberal ideology, that there's even been a significant challenge to AP culture in the US. But it's still dominant.

You don't seem to be able to see it any more deeply than overt religious presentations. Sanders exists quite comfortably in AP culture, and has all his life.

 

[BCP1928]

You don't seem to realize that up to this century, AP culture was easily both "liberal" and "conservative."

It's only been within the last 25 years, as Critical Theory has become the dominant liberal ideology, that there's even been a significant challenge to AP culture in the US. But it's still dominant.

You don't seem to be able to see it any more deeply than overt religious presentations. Sanders exists quite comfortably in AP culture, and has all his life.

Do you check under your bed every night in case some Critical Theory is lurking there? People become liberals who have never heard of or been influenced by Critical Theory. Many liberals, having heard of it dismiss it as silly. Do you really think that Critical Theory is such a threat that the liberal side of our cultural heritage should be stamped out?