Things that cause Hatred, like a false belief of Hatred (1 Viewer)

[The_Doc_Man]

Doc, you're buying into the the narrative of the left. Just because parents don't want their children exposed to adult sexual concepts, doesn't mean they hate gays or cross-dressers, etc or even want to ban such activities in adult context.

The race war was dying down so the left needed something else to divide the country and drag queens are the forefront of this new war. Near as I can tell, there was never a problem with drag shows when they were adult entertainment. It was only once warped people thought it was not only appropriate but required to expose children to them that they have become a problem. It isn't men dressing up as women (we all loved uncle Miltie), it is the sexually explicit aspect of the performances that disturb the parents. I personally think the "beauty pagent" cult that includes young children also sexualizes young girls as they are encouraged to live out the fantasies of their mothers. I was appalled when I watched a couple of episodes of the TV series that followed several children at the way they were dressed and taught to dance suggestively and make teasing poses.

Am I buying in to the narrative of the left? When people of the Jim Crow era wanted strict segregation, it was because they didn't want kids to even be in the same schools as blacks. Didn't want them to find out that horrible truth... that black kids are just kids! Denying children exposure to the fact that some people are maybe a little different is an attempt to deny their existence. Kids need to know - maybe NOT at 3rd grade, because the issues are still beyond their education - but certainly no later than junior high ('scuse me... middle school), where biology classes start to get more detailed, wen topics of genetics and breeding become a potential sub-topic.

Pat, I know that a lot of parents want to protect their kids... but from what, exactly? If it is merely that the kids aren't quite ready for "that" discussion about birds, bees, and cross-pollination, that is one thing. On the other hand, I have been around people whose reactions are very hard to distinguish from hatred. I sincerely wish it weren't so, but I think the divisive nature of politics has opened the floodgates for hatred to become normal, to become commonplace, in many other subjects.

 

[AccessBlaster]

@The_Doc_Man I hear what you're saying about kids who are questioning their sexuality, I have no beef with that. My beef is with grown men interacting with kids in a way that's inconsistent with 90% of society. It's not that we're disrespecting them, they're kind of disrespecting our values. But because everything has to be viewed thru the lens of victimhood the 90% are not allowed to speak for fear of alienating the 10%.

 

[Pat Hartman]

it was because they didn't want kids to even be in the same schools as blacks

Joe Biden actually said this out loud on video

Doc, children are not born bigots. They learn that from their family and the society around them if their families don't teach them to hate those who are different. Maybe there is no need to have children have to see drag performances. Maybe, we can just send the parents and "educate" them so we can let the children be innocent for a few more years.

Think about it this way, would you approve of your children's school taking your children to church services without your express permission? How about to voodoo services where they sacrifice animals? Should your children be taken to "Gentlemen's" clubs where scantily clad women dance around poles? How about to a boxing match? At what point would you draw the line? If It is OK for young children to see suggestively clad men perform sexual movements, why is it not OK to take them to see women wearing the same type of costume, performing the same types of movements?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Doc, children are not born bigots. They learn that from their family and the society around them if their families don't teach them to hate those who are different.

Hence my posting of that song from South Pacific, "They've Got to Be Carefully Taught".

Your question is perfectly valid, Pat. I happen to agree there is an age that is "too young" for bringing "adult stuff" into the classroom or into a performance that is open to younger public. But where the disservice occurs is when the parents cross the line. It is entirely one thing to say "I would prefer that my child not go on that particular field trip" and another to say "Let's arrest the performers and charge them as sex offenders. Let's sue the school for even considering this." Don't tell me this hasn't happened, either. At some point, the kids will have to be old enough to understand that there is a furor over the topic. My parents were terribly repressive in some ways. I didn't find out about gays for a long time.

Here is another part of the problem and I get this from my step-daughter who is a 20-year+ school teacher. All too often parents want the schools to be the surrogate parents - but only if they act in certain ways. Otherwise, it is time for them to sue the schools, sue the teachers, sue the school board, and generally raise a stink. But this runs into the problem of a multiplicity of families with different viewpoints, where if you do it one way you rile up sub-group X, but another way ticks off sub-group Y. This particular question is one that no school will EVER be able to handle because they don't have enough teachers to customize each class. With shrinking budgets, schools have become - of necessity - one size fits all.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Schools used to be able to handle the problem. Think about when you were in school. Were children allowed to disrupt the learning of everyone else in the class? NO!! Schools have lost control over discipline. I don't remember any teacher ever striking any student (although they still did in Catholic school back in the 50's and 60's) but one of my high school teachers used to throw things at us. The man could have pitched for the Red Sox, he was that good. He also almost always caught the return. Some kids just couldn't throw. It wasn't his fault. He was also the best teacher I ever had and I was lucky to have him for two years for both algebra and geometry. Our windows (8 feet tall and a solid wall of them of at least 25 feet) looked out on the football field and there was always something going on to distract us so the first thing at every class was to pull the shades down. After that, anyone caught peeking under or around the shades got beaned with an eraser or a piece of chalk. He never missed. He assigned homework EVERY day. He collected it the next day and handed it back the day after. I doubt he missed three days in two years. No other teacher ever beat that record. His wife occasionally sub'd for him and operated exactly the same way. She had a better record with the chalk than with the eraser Talk about respect. That man was respected. I don't know how they teach teachers to take command of a room, but that is critical to their success. I doubt anyone who ever got beaned complained. They knew they deserved it so they took it with grace. Children who disrupt classes have to be removed and they used to be. This is a failure in the current teaching philosophy. Allowing one disruptive child to impact the learning of 20 other students is just plain wrong and parents need to complain about THAT rather than whining about Johnny getting too much homework.

 

[Jon]

Information is power. Thing is, children often know more than their parents nowadays, what with the internet, ChatGPT and so on!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Schools used to be able to handle the problem. Think about when you were in school. Were children allowed to disrupt the learning of everyone else in the class? NO!! Schools have lost control over discipline. I don't remember any teacher ever striking any student (although they still did in Catholic school back in the 50's and 60's) but one of my high school teachers used to throw things at us. The man could have pitched for the Red Socks, he was that good. He also almost always caught the return. Some kids just couldn't throw. It wasn't his fault. He was also the best teacher I ever had and I was lucky to have him for two years for both algebra and geometry. Our windows (8 feet tall and a solid wall of them of at least 25 feet) looked out on the football field and there was always something going on to distract us so the first thing at every class was to pull the shades down. After that, anyone caught peeking under or around the shades got beaned with an eraser or a piece of chalk. He never missed. He assigned homework EVERY day. He collected it the next day and handed it back the day after. I doubt he missed three days in two years. No other teacher ever beat that record. His wife occasionally sub'd for him and operated exactly the same way. She had a better record with the chalk than with the eraser Talk about respect. That man was respected. I don't know how they teach teachers to take command of a room, but that is critical to their success. I doubt anyone who ever got beaned complained. They knew they deserved it so they took it with grace. Children who disrupt classes have to be removed and they used to be. This is a failure in the current teaching philosophy. Allowing one disruptive child to impact the learning of 20 other students is just plain wrong and parents need to complain about THAT rather than whining about Johnny getting too much homework.

Pat, it isn't the CHILD doing the disruptions these days... it is the parents demanding special treatment for their little angel, never mind the behavior of the other 30 or so demon spawns from Hell. Most of the younger kids don't have the intellectual development to decide how to best disrupt a class. But their parents do. When I was a kid, parents were involved in the parent/teacher groups. Hell, my mother was PTA president three times in my middle school. I couldn't get away with doodlum squat 'cause it would get back to her in a heartbeat. Now? Going to a PTA meeting includes teachers in body armor (ok... maybe exaggerating a LITTLE bit.)

 

[Pat Hartman]

Information is power. Thing is, children often know more than their parents nowadays, what with the internet, ChatGPT and so on!

The concept of an AI that can answer questions is very appealing. The problem is trust. The AI is programmed by people and those people (or the people who pay those people) have an agenda. I'm not sure how we overcome that. At the moment, the AI is not benign any more than the search results from Google are benign. Whatever the creator's bias is dictates your result.

Have you ever noticed the way people believe what they find on the Internet? There is actually no such thing as a reliable source any more and there is no way to turn off the search engine's bias so you can view alternate opinions/facts. I used to actually trust the WSJ. It was the last bastion of more or less honest reporting. My primary criterion for determining whether or not to believe something I read, is the presence/absence of purple words and opinion. If the writer is trying to bias my opinion by using purple words and innuendo, I just stop reading. NOTHING they say can actually be trusted. I know headlines are what induces you to click so they have become unrelated to the actual story they bring up. But, the more negative the headline, the less likely I am to bite.