How do you feel that LGBT will now be taught to Primary School children?

[Speedwell]

Ya, you ended up stretching it out. Me saying "you stretched it out" is me giving you consideration that this lack of reasoning you are displaying is all intentional.


If you are a reasonable person you would not need any clarification of family crayon drawings from teaching sexuality.Stop trying to save face.

Kids at that age do not recognize or comprehend sexuality through marriage, in fact if 5 year olds understood or were showing direct curiosity of sexual expression that would normally be taken seriously as to where this child has been learning these things that early. We are not teaching them sexuality, we are teaching them actual family relationships.

Apparently you're that dense that you can't even understand the difference of certain social constructs and telling me that you need to be held by the hand on these details.


Based on #94, you pretty much where trying to go "see, you just don't like gay people that is why you are ok with heteros being talked about and not them".

We're not just talking about 5 year old kids anyway.

 

[Cis.jd]

We're not just talking about 5 year old kids anyway.

i'm just randomly selecting an age with in Primary school.

 

[Desk trauma]

Ya, you ended up stretching it out. Me saying "you stretched it out" is me giving you consideration that this lack of reasoning you are displaying is all intentional.

I went from what you posted. That you had not considered all the implications is not on me.

Kids at that age do not recognize or comprehend sexuality through marriage, in fact if 5 year olds understood or were showing direct curiosity of sexual expression that would normally be taken seriously as to where this child has been learning these things that early. We are not teaching them sexuality, we are teaching them actual family relationships.

Which, going all the way back to curriculum that spawned this thread, is what teaching kids about sexuality is in this case. Straight couples exist, gay couples exist. That's about the extent of the age approbate content for younger kids.

Based on #94, you pretty much where trying to go "see, you just don't like gay people that is why you are ok with straights being talked about and not them". That is why i've referenced you as a liberal.

I asked for clarification and now I'm of a political stance that I have clearly articulated that I am not. Interesting.

 

[Cis.jd]

I went from what you posted. That you had not considered all the implications is not on me.

But as I have been saying. Your attempt in poking holes in my statements because of not giving such implications is completely absurd. What you don't realize is that you are advising me to be so extreme that the wearing marriage rings or family drawings has to be implicated for specification. Seriously?

Which, going all the way back to curriculum that spawned this thread, is what teaching kids about sexuality is in this case. Straight couples exist, gay couples exist. That's about the extent of the age approbate content for younger kids.

No. Here is what you are refusing to acknowledge. Children are not learning anything related to sexual expression or orientations because a teacher is wearing a wedding ring or from making family drawings.

If i plan to teach kids about family values to a bunch of 1st graders by putting on Disney's Lion King 2 (where Simba has a kid) do I need to disclose that I am not directly teaching about Simba's hetero-sexual attraction towards Nala that lead to them having a cub? It is amazing how you are spinning this.
--

LGBT is a very mature topic for primary schools, and bringing this to kids is already is already a form of shoving this leftist ideology. You wouldn't want your 7 year old daughters having teachers who are teaching them about dating boys having any sexual attractions towards them yet, would you? At the same time why would you be all ok with same-sex relationships being taught. That makes no sense other than because of this being a leftist political ideology.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Most places primary school is considered to run from Kindergarten to Grade 6. By then, depending on the age cutoff date in the district, students may be 12 or 13 years old and beginning to mature sexually. The average age of menarche in the US is 12.5 years.

I don't consider any person older than 11 to be a child . I am curious as to what grade level people think sexuality should be addressed in school. It seems that the word child is not that universally defined. Should a 5 year old be taught about LGBT and Heterosexuals? What is the rationale behind any decision on those things?

 

[Speedwell]

I don't consider any person older than 11 to be a child . I am curious as to what grade level people think sexuality should be addressed in school. It seems that the word child is not that universally defined. Should a 5 year old be taught about LGBT and Heterosexuals? What is the rationale behind any decision on those things?

That the information be accurate and appropriate to their age.

 

[hedrick]

Here's a pointer to some official answers. You have to look at this carefully and follow pointers. Relationships education, relationships and sex education, and health education - Department for Education - Citizen Space When you do, you find that at the primary level, sex education is not required. It's "relationship education." They list a lot of things there. The only thing that seems relevant is "family structure," which would be that some families have two parents of the same gender, among other differences.

Of course individual schools can cover stuff that's not required. If the UK is anything like the US, there will be a few schools that do weird things. But I think this discussion is about UK policy.

 

[Desk trauma]

LGBT is a very mature topic for primary schools, and bringing this to kids is already is already a form of shoving this leftist ideology.

Age appropriate information on homosexuality, some families have two daddies or two mommies for younger grades some boys like boys some girls like girls for older ones, is identical to that on heterosexuality.

You wouldn't want your 7 year old daughters having teachers who are teaching them about dating boys having any sexual attractions towards them yet, would you?

That would be inappropriate information for that age group.

 

[Desk trauma]

I don't consider any person older than 11 to be a child . I am curious as to what grade level people think sexuality should be addressed in school.

All of them, at an age appropriate level.

Should a 5 year old be taught about LGBT and Heterosexuals?

In the most basic of outline yes. Some families have a mom and dad, some have two moms or dads, some only have a mom or a dad.

What is the rationale behind any decision on those things?

To help them have better understanding and be better equipped to live in the world they are in, as with all other instruction.

 

[grasping the after wind]

That the information be accurate and appropriate to their age.

Who is to decide what is accurate and appropriate?

 

[grasping the after wind]

All of them, at an age appropriate level.

Could you be a little more vague? Who decides what is the age appropriate level? Do you contend that every child at age 8 has the exact same readiness for receiving and processing information?

In the most basic of outline yes. Some families have a mom and dad, some have two moms or dads, some only have a mom or a dad.

Why is there any need to teach LBGT based upon that information? Children's parents and caregivers private lives ought not be a subject of class discussion in primary school IMO. BTW although there are numerous combinations of caregivers one might address as mom or dad, , in reality ( and should not all school instruction be tethered to reality) every human being only has one mother and one father.

To help them have better understanding and be better equipped to live in the world they are in, as with all other instruction.

AFAIK the goal of school is to teach children how to think. Not to tell them what to think.

 

[Desk trauma]

Could you be a little more vague?

I have given brief examples of what I consider age appropriate intimation.

Who decides what is the age appropriate level?

The same people who with the training in education and child development that create the rest of the curriculum.

Do you contend that every child at age 8 has the exact same readiness for receiving and processing information?

No.

Do you contend that the lowest common denominator as far as intellectual maturity should be the base level for all instruction?

Why is there any need to teach LBGT based upon that information?

The exact same anything bout heterosexuality is mentioned. It's part of reality and something that there is no reason to keep kids in the dark about.

BTW although there are numerous combinations of caregivers one might address as mom or dad, , in reality ( and should not all school instruction be tethered to reality) every human being only has one mother and one father.

Now that would make for a very interesting school board or PTA meeting. From hear on out our policy shall by that those who are not the biological parents of their child shall be called caregivers.

AFAIK the goal of school is to teach children how to think. Not to tell them what to think.

I don't see how that is in conflict what what I said.

 

[ThievingMagpie]

Why is there any need to teach LBGT based upon that information? Children's parents and caregivers private lives ought not be a subject of class discussion in primary school IMO.

We covered this earlier in the thread: to prepare them for the world around them, I'm not sure why this is a controversial idea. Also it's not really the "private lives" it's the makeup and reality of modern families.

When I was young we went on school trips to the local church, gurdwara, mosque and synagogue. We learned about their practises and history. We didn't need this experience, but it taught us the reality of the communities that make up modern Britain, which is really valuable knowledge for any citizen. BTW The gurdwara was easily the best - they gave us crisps.

 

[98cwitr]

There will be no OPT OUT OPTION.............

It's happening slowly in America too. Thankfully we have private Christian schools we can send our kids to.

 

[Speedwell]

It's happening slowly in America too. Thankfully we have private Christian schools we can send our kids to.

Why shield them from facts about human psychosexual development?

 

[Desk trauma]

Why shield them from facts about human psychosexual development?

They might catch teh gay!

 

[98cwitr]

Why shield them from facts about human psychosexual development?

Same reasons we shield them from inappropriate contentography, violence, and foul language. Because their frontal cortexes have not developed to the degree required to process such information in a way that is conducive to healthy living.

The extreme examples of this are Desmond Is Amazing and www.savejames.com; these parents failed their children by both exposing and encouraging them to psychosexual information prior to their development and to their detriment.

The next step for the "world" to take is to normalize pedophilia and classify it as a sexual orientation. Mark my words.

 

[Desk trauma]

Same reasons we shield them from inappropriate contentography, violence, and foul language. Because their frontal cortexes have not developed to the degree required to process such information in a way that is conducive to healthy living.

Hence using age approbate information.

The next step for the "world" to take is to normalize pedophilia and classify it as a sexual orientation. Mark my words.

The good old blood libel that gets trotted out in every discussion of LGBT issues. I have been listening to it for two decades now yet no movement in that direction in terms of legal consent nor social acceptance but oh it's coming!

 

[98cwitr]

Hence using age approbate information.

A bit vague and subjective to each parent don't you think?

The good old blood libel that gets trotted out in every discussion of LGBT issues. I have been listening to it for two decades now yet no movement in that direction in terms of legal consent nor social acceptance but oh it's coming!

TEDx speaker argues that pedophilia should be accepted as "an unchangeable sexual orientation" - Metro Weekly

https://stillnessinthestorm.com/201...-as-sexual-orientation-in-california-schools/

Again, mark my words...it's the next step

 

[Desk trauma]

A bit vague and subjective to each parent don't you think?

No, I have given examples in this thread.

TEDx speaker argues that pedophilia should be accepted as "an unchangeable sexual orientation" - Metro Weekly

https://stillnessinthestorm.com/201...-as-sexual-orientation-in-california-schools/

Again, mark my words...it's the next step

Just like fusion is the future of energy, and all ways will be. People have been repeating the gay blood libel for decades yet as I have said no legal moves in that direction in that time. If anything the laws have become more strict.