Trans

[coldel]

Hugely right wing interviewer interviews right wing psychologist, which proves what exactly? He isn't challenged on any of the issues he raises, she says 'yes yes yes' as he is speaking, nothing more than a biased propaganda video - not sure what we are meant to draw from this?

 

But am going to call it out, the whole teaching of LGBT in schools is a religious back-lash as its against what their books tell them to do. Nothing else, it's not about morals, or influence or anything else - otherwise why teach religion to children? Surely let 'kids be kids' do not burden them with having to adopt a religion at such a young age. 

 

It will be interesting to see what happens as there has been a backlash today from pro LGBT groups that the government hasn't reacted quick enough to educate protesters about what exactly is being taught to each age group and why it is being taught. 

[davey_83]

Do Muslim protest outside gambling establishments or beer festivals? No, those are against what is written in their books. They are protesting towards their young children's minds being confused by what I haven't yet seen any evidence is more than a mental condition. 

 

The type of people that sling hate towards the lbgt community or any other community isn't going to be tackled by teaching children another way of life is out there. A lack of love, self worth and fulfillment possibly are reasons to want to call it a day on life. 

 

I like most on this forum treat others I meet with respect and equality. If I walk pass a stranger in the street ie a staright male so the majority of the UK male demographic, i don't high five, I don't say hello how are you, I don't look down my nose I simply walk by. Guess what I'd do the a member of the LGBT community, the exact same. As an adult, me being aware of that person doesn't mean il will treat them any different.

 

Again the type of people that sling hate towards another, isn't going to be addressed by knowing of their existence. If next year's roll out helps brings the suicide rate down in the LGBT community, then I'm all for it if it doesn't then love and fulfillment will need to be sourced elsewhere other than parades and exposure. 

[coldel]

They are teaching children about relationships that exist for each child's immediate family - this is hugely relevant and the fundamentals of education at a young age is 'draw a picture of your family'. They aren't confused they are more than capable at the age of 7 understanding that some children have mummy's and no daddy's and vice versa, my son had his friends mummy and mummy scenario filled in for him, took a few minutes, he gets it now, its a non issue for him, he isn't confused at all and now understands that is how some relationships work - or maybe he is some sort of super genius.

 

You are launching yourself off down the road about hate as adults, and yes I hinted at that on one post, but that is not the issue here you are making that the focus. Children at 7 are being taught about difference in relationships (not sexual differences relationship differences) because it is there everyday in front of them. If anything if they are not told why some of their friends have no daddy and two mummy's they will be even more confused - if that is purely your rationale?

Edited July 15, 2019 by coldel

[TT350]

Coldel. I do share some things in common with lefties. I don't like to upset people. But, unlike them, I believe everyone has the right to total freedom of speech. And not just the stuff I agree with. People are, or should be allowed to disagree without being shouted down and silenced/laws made against them.

 

I do feel a minority of the left are eroding freedom of speech by making the most noise. 

 

"You can't say that!! My feelings are hurt!!!" 

 

No one talks any more. And when they do, it's always instantly aggressive. 

 

Debate is good. Don't get so defensive. I, nor anyone else on here (I hope) will think any less of you for your opinions. 

[docwra]

26 minutes ago, TT350 said:

I believe everyone has the right to total freedom of speech. And not just the stuff I agree with. People are, or should be allowed to disagree without being shouted down and silenced/laws made against them.

So inciting racial hatred, publishing inaccurate propaganda and being able to scream personal abuse at people is OK then?

Disagreeing is one thing, deliberately causing offence or encouraging violence is another entirely. 

[coldel]

TT350. Not defensive at all, but posting up further right or left wing propaganda is hardly a point of debate here - maybe it would be on something like a free for all PistonHeads thread but having met so many people from here I would think we are a bit better than that. I understand you have a point of view, and have read it, and thats fine, but propaganda videos serve very little purpose - if someone posted up a video stand alone of some 'leftie' going on I am sure you would have enjoyed pulling it apart.

 

The way I see it is there is a small number of lefties that are what you might call offended at everything, but that's their right, what is wrong are people shouting 'snowflake' and making comments that they are 'having their feelings hurt' as much as someone right wing would not want to be called a racist or a bully. In the case of the LGBT for example this has been pushed out to 'left wing silliness' when in fact its a very relevant subject children face into day to day, teachers and ex-pupils have expressed concern about how they tackle the subject. The government have taken on board feedback from loads of sources and put out a consistent text and guideline to schools. Face into it and explain in simple terms to children this is part of families when they teach about families, its real and its relevant. I get how religious groups have rallied against it though.

 

People are talking more than ever, I can have a rational chat about politics, sorry if it comes across as aggressive but its to the point and not personal.

Edited July 15, 2019 by coldel

[sipar69]

5 hours ago, TT350 said:

Coldel. I do share some things in common with lefties. I don't like to upset people. But, unlike them, I believe everyone has the right to total freedom of speech. And not just the stuff I agree with. People are, or should be allowed to disagree without being shouted down and silenced/laws made against them.

 

I do feel a minority of the left are eroding freedom of speech by making the most noise. 

 

"You can't say that!! My feelings are hurt!!!" 

 

No one talks any more. And when they do, it's always instantly aggressive. 

 

Debate is good. Don't get so defensive. I, nor anyone else on here (I hope) will think any less of you for your opinions. 

No offence bud but your whole left wing right wing preoccupation seems to be stopping you from recognising that topics like the one you started cannot be turned into a simple left v right argument.  They are much too complicated and nuanced to be neatly packaged up in that way.  

 

Also, have you really thought what “total freedom of speech” would actually mean?  I guess it would be ok for anyone who felt like it to go around saying “Hey everyone, let’s kill some black people for fun, let’s molest some kiddies etc?”  You can’t say no to that or anything else if you have “total freedom of speech”.  There are certain restrictions on what people can say for very good reasons.  

[Stutopia]

This isn’t a political issue, it’s one of awareness. There’s no subject that is improved by withholding information from people. Keeping ideas from people only serves one end. Same reason Latin is so prevalent in certain teachings, we’ll tell you what they mean, you don’t need to worry yourself about it.

[davey_83]

I disagree, some information can either be a good or bad influence. To prove point the below link is a clear example of a bad influence. Also with the LGBT community, they'll have to teach kids part of the lifestyle and not depression or the suicide rate. At what age do you teach self harm? If it's was only a very small minority that sadly choose this route, then it's not the norm and not a true reflection of the demographic. 

 

Who chooses what's the right amount of trans information to teach children? If your child asks is there any bad points to the pride community? Errrr no, no bad points. 

 

If a child asks their parent or carer why does Tim at school have two dads? It's a conversation that doesn't need to be more than a few minutes long. How is same sex relationships a lesson for a 5yr old? 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/04/fortnite-warning-schools-tell-parents-game-making-children-aggressive/

Edited July 15, 2019 by davey_83

[coldel]

10 hours ago, davey_83 said:

I disagree, some information can either be a good or bad influence. To prove point the below link is a clear example of a bad influence. Also with the LGBT community, they'll have to teach kids part of the lifestyle and not depression or the suicide rate. At what age do you teach self harm? If it's was only a very small minority that sadly choose this route, then it's not the norm and not a true reflection of the demographic. 

 

Who chooses what's the right amount of trans information to teach children? If your child asks is there any bad points to the pride community? Errrr no, no bad points. 

 

If a child asks their parent or carer why does Tim at school have two dads? It's a conversation that doesn't need to be more than a few minutes long. How is same sex relationships a lesson for a 5yr old? 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/04/fortnite-warning-schools-tell-parents-game-making-children-aggressive/

 

Clearly you cannot teach children everything, it has to be selective and relevant. What makes you think teachers will need to teach depression and suicide? I am sure if you cut the population by say economic region depression and suicide increases, I don't see depression and suicide having to be taught in economic regions where it's most prevalent. Its probably the same for race, cut that a certain way and certain groups have higher levels, so whats the issue here? All groups of every cut of society do good and bad things.

 

Anyway that is a distraction and a side issue that isn't part of the debate, what is being taught to primary school children is to understand relationships i.e. how families are constructed and that all are equal. I have no problem with those conversations instead of being the old fashioned route of 'heres mummy and daddy' to being more understanding that not every kid in the class has a mummy and daddy, it's fundamentally unfair to ignore children in that way just because they are in the minority. There are materials being prepared such as visuals which show more than your traditional combo of happy daddy, mummy, and 2.2 children. Previously there was nothing, teachers were struggling to consistently address the questions coming from pupils, often doing more harm than good, the government has decided to put in place a consistent set of guidelines that are fair on everyone. I don't see this as a bad thing, this is not a conspiracy to brainwash children.

Edited July 16, 2019 by coldel

[davey_83]

Do you have any evidence that 4 and 5 yr children have been asking about same sex couples? Again that question IF asked primarily will be to parents, which takes all of 2 minutes to answer - I truly don't understand how just  2 minute explanation is classroom worthy? 

[coldel]

I certainly have anecdotal evidence as previously said my sons best friend, since he started school at 4, has two mummy's. I would certainly imagine any other child with similar circumstances will be asking the same questions all over the country - why does my best friend not have a daddy, that's a question I personally was asked.

 

As far as I read it what will happen at primary school level is that instead of children being completely unaware that these relationships exist as a family, it will be more inclusive in how families are taught in class i.e. visuals etc. when doing family teaching will be representative i.e. it wont just be mummy+daddy+2.2 children, in the same way that all the visuals are not just of white people, as to properly represent what the reality is. 

[GranTurismoEra]

I was about to watch the BBC Panorama Documentary on this topic and the protests yesterday and got distracted. Might watch it tonight

 

In Turkey there was a guy who was with a group of girls in our huge entourage. He came up to me and a mate and said you guys never came to say hi, I know why. Its because im Gay I know. I said its nothing to do with that. But made us feel @*!# for it. like we were discriminatory. Ah well. I guess we should start accepting and liking everything and everybody so we dont offend. 

[coldel]

5 minutes ago, GranTurismoEra said:

I was about to watch the BBC Panorama Documentary on this topic and the protests yesterday and got distracted. Might watch it tonight

 

In Turkey there was a guy who was with a group of girls in our huge entourage. He came up to me and a mate and said you guys never came to say hi, I know why. Its because im Gay I know. I said its nothing to do with that. But made us feel @*!# for it. like we were discriminatory. Ah well. I guess we should start accepting and liking everything and everybody so we dont offend. 

Just because one person who is gay acts like a idiot why is that an issue? What of the other hundreds of gay people you have probably encountered in your lifetime who haven't been idiots? What of all the non-gay people that have been idiots? Unfortunately the world is full of idiots, you just have to be the bigger guy and walk away, but that shouldn't be a behaviour altering incident, unless you want it to be?

[davey_83]

In order to roll out this change for teaching, surely it's warranted by a large amount of data or evidence to confirm its needed?  I hear what you are saying but to warrant a lesson must clearly be able to present the need - with facts? Present these and clearly there is a need and not guesswork, that it'll fill the gap unable to currently do so by parents. 

 

Do we collectively agree with Trans women in sports? 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2019 by davey_83

[coldel]

41 minutes ago, davey_83 said:

In order to roll out this change for teaching, surely it's warranted by a large amount of data or evidence to confirm its needed?  I hear what you are saying but to warrant a lesson must clearly be able to present the need - with facts? Present these and clearly there is a need and not guesswork, that it'll fill the gap unable to currently do so by parents. 

 

Do we collectively agree with Trans women in sports? 

 

 

The first place is to go to the stonewall site and click the research pages - they commission YouGov to do their research, an independent research agency. Yes you could argue it might be biased if they are commissioning it but they do outline the methodology, large sample sizes, and its run by an independent agency which gives it's recommendations. The 2014 Teachers Report would be a good starter for ten, a stack of stats in there that show teachers concerns, the situations they are in, the lack of support. It's very prevalent and has been proven with evidence for some years.

 

We haven't seen the actual implementation of this yet, but I would be surprised if its like what people who are against it are thinking, we need to give teachers more credit than the basic idea that it will be 'LGBT lesson today everyone, boys dress in pink girls in blue!'- read the research recommendations, it might be an eye opener.

Edited July 16, 2019 by coldel

[coldel]

The funny thing is that this is part of a wider change to teaching this year, yet the media focuses on this specific thing to generate hate around it. The wider change is covering many facets that are now part of children's lives that the current curriculum is so old and out of date that it ignores.

 

Health teaching will now focus on many things such as mental health, how to look after yourself, recognise when your friend might be in trouble or to sensible self care such as being outdoors, spending time with friends, being social, getting enough sleep etc. Clearly excessive time on electronic devices can become unhealthy, the dangers of posting online and how that might impact children further down the line (some adults celebrities could learn from this too!). 

[sipar69]

The phrase ”ignorance is bliss” was invented for some of the posts on here!  

[davey_83]

Agreed, for me anything in the media that generates hate was the desired outcome. 

 

Had a look and couldn't find any data to support same sex relationships needs to be made a class for 5yr olds. Obviously it's out there but not made easy to find.  If you have a link to the study to which is shows parents are coming up short on answering such questions. Any to validate the roll out to confirm its needed, a link please. 

 

Do we collectively agree with Trans women in sports? 

[coldel]

Its in the data, teachers are not equipped at primary and secondary school to deal with LGBT style questions from children this is called out time and again across multiple studies, primary age covers 4 and above. And as above, they are not making a special class, this idea needs to go away as its fabrication at this stage, they are making teaching inclusive and consistent. Not sure if people feel threatened as a parent that people feel that they cannot answer this question for children, but big percentages in the data show teachers need support and a consistent framework to educate children - if kids were being educated at home sufficiently, nearly 100% of teachers wouldnt have said they have had to deal with questions around LGBT issues, unless of course you ignore that evidence. 

 

There is also evidence in the reports that show that early adopter schools that have adopted LGBT learning as part of family education have reduced LGBT bullying by over 50% - these are real numbers, not anecdotes, real data based on implementation.  

 

As Stu hinted to, you can either hide from it and have it dealt with in an inconsistent way/hope that all parents have a fair view on it, which as we know is not going to be true as homophobia/religious rejection/poor understanding is a thing. When educating children we can give schools the framework to work around it an educate children when discussing relationships in primary schools / sexual relationships in secondary schools. Personally I am for the latter that being informed in the right way, a consistent way, around the modern world, is best for children. 

 

I also get that people are never going to agree on this, so kinda think I will leave it there now  

[davey_83]

36 minutes ago, coldel said:

 

There is also evidence in the reports that show that early adopter schools that have adopted LGBT learning as part of family education have reduced LGBT bullying by over 50% - these are real numbers, not anecdotes, real data based on implementation.  

Got a link to the data, 3rd time asking apologies to do so. 

 

We can give schools the framework? 

 

Take it you work in the public sector, mind me asking you background towards the info? 

 

Happy to leave it there also if you don't wish to reply, I've yet to see a debate of such which provides a conclusion outcome - post truth ay. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by davey_83

[Ekona]

Common f*cking sense should dictate some of what you teach kids. That definitely includes being accepting of others regardless of what gender they might identify as, and it definitely doesn’t f*cking include teaching them the world is flat. 

 

I think that pretty much covers it, in my usual subtle way. 

[Stutopia]

On 15/07/2019 at 23:24, davey_83 said:

I disagree, some information can either be a good or bad influence.

Please elaborate on the bad influences of gender.

[GranTurismoEra]

Unfortunately no matter the data presented or evidence for its need for inclusion into the education system. Certain people especially religious people will never accept it. So ignorance if thats what its called will remain. Alternatively they can always take their kids out of school or move countries. They'll either have to allow their kids to learn the hard way or provide home tutoring or move. 

 

Looks like kids and parents dont have a choice in this matter. It was nice being in school and not having to learn this as part of the curriculum. We know it exists as an adult now I mind my own business. So studying it may or may not change peoples opinions on the topic.

[coldel]

13 hours ago, davey_83 said:

Got a link to the data, 3rd time asking apologies to do so. 

 

We can give schools the framework? 

 

Take it you work in the public sector, mind me asking you background towards the info? 

 

Happy to leave it there also if you don't wish to reply, I've yet to see a debate of such which provides a conclusion outcome - post truth ay. 

When you provide a link to the data showing that teaching children about true family relationships is confusing and damaging to them, I will do the work for you and pull out the data from the reports...

 

...I suspect the best outcome is to end the debate here and see what is actually implemented this September. If we see five year olds running around suddenly confused that they now have to consider their friends might not have a traditional old fashioned mummy and daddy scenario whilst they are still learning up to their times tables, reading, writing, religion, science, art, multiple sports, foreign languages, crafts, history, space so on and so forth, I will gladly stand corrected that it was far too much for them to take in and should have stuck to the aforementioned simple stuff 

 

Personally I am interested to see how this pans out for my son as he is at a CoE school - clearly not anywhere on a level with other highly religious schools which push a selected religion onto children as there are children of other faiths/non faiths like myself there, but will be interested to see whats implemented.

Edited July 17, 2019 by coldel