Sign in to follow this  
carlimac

Educating our children on gender fluidity. Now what?

Recommended Posts

This just happens to be the school district our kids will be in next year. We're planning to sign a lease on Monday. Now what do we do?  Would you reconsider and find a different school district?  There is still time to do this but I fear it will spread to surrounding districts pretty quickly. 

 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/05/15/call-it-gender-fluidity-schools-to-teach-kids-there-s-no-such-thing-as-boys-or-girls.html?intcmp=latestnews

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually this program will probably spread, as you say. Maybe not while your children are still in grade school, but as there's a chance, moving to a different area might not be a guarantee of anything. I would recommend homeschooling, but if that's not for you, plan on fighting the programs and lessons in whatever ways you can. Most of all, I would prepare to increase your teaching of correct principles at home and increase the encouragement of your children to be open about what they are hearing at school. Ultimately that is what matters most, because whether these messages are coming from entertainment, school, friends, or other influences.. they will eventually have to be faced by your children. And it hopefully might turn into many opportunities for them to bear testimony and stand for truth. Not an ideal situation by any means, but at least there are powerful lessons to be learned from what may (and probably will) come. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think changing schools is the best option.

 

Sure, I don't like it either, but it could be a good time to teach your children about the church's stance vs the world's stance on gender, among other things - like how this 'gender fluidity' concept isn't scientific. Let them opt out if they want, but if you switch schools they will have to make new friends, and it can be hard to in middle school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we're seeing the same thing happening in psychotherapy. I get around it by teaching my clients about solipsism and contextualism. In other words, they can believe they are whatever they want to believe they are, but they are going to have to reconcile those beliefs with both of what I teach them: something that simply can't be done.

 

It's unethical for me to engage in conversion therapy. It is not unethical for me to teach true concepts about human nature, reality, and existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LiterateParakeet

Carilmac, I would make this a serious matter of prayer and fasting.  While homeschooling is an option, it's also a huge responsibility.  I say this as a homeschooler.  :)  I love homeschooling, but it is quite a commitment.  And even if they are homeschooled, they will still hear about these issues from their peers.  Homeschooling isn't a bubble (and shouldn't attempt to be.)  That said, it is normal that kids would be influenced by, and desire to please those they spend the most time with....and if they spend most of their waking hours at school . . .

 

I remember hearing once that the reason Sodom and Gomorrah, and the people of Noah's time were destroyed was because they had become so wicked that there was no chance for the children to be raised in a righteous manner and choose righteousness.  Times like we live in now make me wonder if we are closer to the Second Coming than we realize...but then I have been thinking that for years, so what do I know?  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there should be an opt-out option for opposed parents. For myself, I think this course is a great way of bringing awareness to kids and teaching that there are different lifestyles out there, whether or not we agree, and that everyone should be treated as human beings. I know when I was in private school (British system) we were exposed to a handful of religions, as a course, and I was at the time LDS. Even though my family didn't agree with certain teachings or gospels, it made me aware of the different lifestyles and faiths others follow. For that I'm grateful to have a better understanding despite not subscribing to any faith. I'm definitely atheist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think changing schools is the best option.

 

Sure, I don't like it either, but it could be a good time to teach your children about the church's stance vs the world's stance on gender, among other things - like how this 'gender fluidity' concept isn't scientific. Let them opt out if they want, but if you switch schools they will have to make new friends, and it can be hard to in middle school.

They are changing schools because we are moving there from Idaho in a month. Wherever they go will be new. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there should be an opt-out option for opposed parents. For myself, I think this course is a great way of bringing awareness to kids and teaching that there are different lifestyles out there, whether or not we agree, and that everyone should be treated as human beings. I know when I was in private school (British system) we were exposed to a handful of religions, as a course, and I was at the time LDS. Even though my family didn't agree with certain teachings or gospels, it made me aware of the different lifestyles and faiths others follow. For that I'm grateful to have a better understanding despite not subscribing to any faith. I'm definitely atheist.

 

When I was 13 I took it for granted that everything I learned in school was true, fact, proven.  If we have since learned that certain scientific principles have morphed or new ways of solving math problems have been invented, that didn't have much impact on my core belief system. I didn't even hear about Darwinism until college. That whole ideology was left alone because there was still respect for peoples religious beliefs at the time..  I, too learned about s variety of religions because I had friends who went to different churches. A course in Judaism or Catholicism wasn't entirely necessary. We did touch on it in history and social studies and that was enough to put those differences in perspective.  Nothing I learned in Jr. High conflicted with my religious beliefs which at that time were tender budding sprouts that could easily have been stomped on.

 

Most of my kids are grown and haven't had to deal too much with situations like this. But now this whole thing about gender fluidity crops up. It's not scientific. It hits hard right at the core, the root system of who these kids think they are. They are so impressionable at this age. My 12 yr old daughter's most frequent request in house hunting was to find a good climbing tree in the yard. For about 3 years she's been a typical tomboy who is now starting to act more feminine. These changes have nothing to do with her actual gender changing. Simply her preferences of how to play and expend her energy have changed. She would NOT wear pink or have anything to do with that color for years. Now her younger sister has picked up on that sentiment, too. Neither one of them have gone slightly boy on us.  To teach kids that is to teach a lie. And a pretty stupid one. 

 

I think teaching tolerance is very important!  But there is a better way to go about it than introducing this garbage into the curriculum. All they need to do is simply teach kids to be respectful. Not try to validate every changing whim these kids have as a fluctuation in their actual gender. I see this as being potentially very harmful for far more kids than it might help. Talk about messing with tender minds!  Ugh!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in depth discussion of such issues should be left to college level courses, where hopefully childhood gender identity developmental phases have been passed through, and where hopefully a rigorous scientific methodology can be used to describe the varying degrees of sexual normative behavior, disorders, and other such psychological topics. My experience is that elementary school would be unable to provide this, and that most high schools might be qualified enough to include a page or so in a general health class bringing basic awareness.

 

I would hope if a school decides to teach about such topics they are willing to pull it into a unifying context of all human sexuality, which seems strongly in the realm of college courses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there should be an opt-out option for opposed parents. For myself, I think this course is a great way of bringing awareness to kids and teaching that there are different lifestyles out there, whether or not we agree, and that everyone should be treated as human beings. I know when I was in private school (British system) we were exposed to a handful of religions, as a course, and I was at the time LDS. Even though my family didn't agree with certain teachings or gospels, it made me aware of the different lifestyles and faiths others follow. For that I'm grateful to have a better understanding despite not subscribing to any faith. I'm definitely atheist.

I appreciate these thoughts, Bini.

But, speaking Merely from my own educational philosophy as an educator where school curriculum should consist of science and study - based core (yes, I'm a 3-rs kind of teacher), I can't get behind the idea of neglecting such core to teach popular social philosophy with no evidence and intolerance has nothing to do with it. Public school shouldn't be the place. Religion study as you had is at least a study of facts of culture. This program isn't. They even admit they have no material to create a curriculum. I appreciate your desire for teaching an open-mind, but when evidence-less lessons are accepted, they can bite anyone in the rear eventually.

Edited by Backroads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I toss this out for consideration.  At age 13, roughly 33% of girls are confused about what their sexual identity is.  Go figure, that many probably have not concluded puberty.  Consider also the cultural pressures to accept and empathize, along with the confusion about love vs. like vs. attraction.  Then there is the possibility that many who feel they are "different" are being steered towards the possibility that this differentness is due to sexual identity.  BTW, by 18 97% of females confidently identify as heterosexual.

 

It dawns on me that the correct answer to those surveys--especially when they are school-issued--is, "None of your business.  It is inappropriate to ask minors this question."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hate when I'm right:

 

"Born that way" has gotten a lot of mileage for those who have been trying to get legal protection for homosexual behavior; but once they've outlawed marriage discrimination and commercial discrimination--look for them to start demonizing private discrimination.  The "consensus" will shift away from the idea as homosexuality as an inborn, genetic, immutable trait.  Rather, it will become common wisdom that sexual orientation is actually highly flexible and that experimentation with gay sex--even by self-described "straight" adolescents and young adults--is actually a normal, healthy, and perhaps even necessary part of the sexual maturation process.

 

But--never fear.  I'm sure the curriculum will be chock-full of warnings about how experimentation with different forms of sexuality is unproductive and even damaging; and I'm similarly confident that those gay-rights advocates who have decried religions that tried to lead their youths towards a particular sexual orientation will be keeping a weather eye on the school district to make sure that these impressionable youths don't get any sort of impression that might result in their becoming "confused" or feeling "rejected".

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apply strong pressure for some sort of an opt out option for religious reasons. Let them know you will pull your kids from school and encourage others to do the same. Remind them that Federal funding will decrease as their enrollment numbers decrease.

Go with a charter school or home school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion is based on faith not evidence.

"Faith is the evidence of things hoped for..."

But that's just me being cute.

A world religions class doesn't preach. It teaches about what the religion believes and does--and whether or not you share those beliefs is beside the point. We have evidence people believe these things. Hence a scholarly perspective. The opt-out option is neither here nor there, I'm saying a school shouldn't be taking up health class time to teach something without real facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bini, since you have declared yourself an aetheist your posts come across as angrier and more hostile than before. I miss the old Bini. But then I'm not a regular so I guess my take on it doesn't matter that much.

Hmm. I haven't really noticed that at all. But then, this thread isn't really about Bini anyways. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. I haven't really noticed that at all. But then, this thread isn't really about Bini anyways. ;)

 

Sorry bout that. Back on topic. I looked up the agenda for the next school board meeting this Thursday. They are asking for parental input on the topic and don't plan to start teaching this officially till next school year. It will be interesting to see what becomes of it if parents are really as angry as stated.  (This was an opinion piece by Todd Starnes who I have to admit isn't my favorite and seems to push the emotional aspect without fact backing him up sometimes.)   I think I heard that this same school board implemented gender identity bathroom privilege at the risk of losing federal $$. I also noticed on their website that they face a $100 million shortfall for the next year. So I wonder if there is any pressure being put on them by politicians to start this program. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LiterateParakeet

Religion is based on faith not evidence.

Precisely the point...it's not allowed in the school for that reason. Why is one allowed and not the other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine, and again, there should be an opt-out for those opposed because as it stands (seemingly) it is what it is.

The next question is, opt out into what? Sitting in the library for a semester? I still see it as a waste of fact-based learning time. If they must do this program, could they provide two class track options?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next question is, opt out into what? Sitting in the library for a semester? I still see it as a waste of fact-based learning time. If they must do this program, could they provide two class track options?

 

I doubt that, actually.

 

To implement an entirely separate health class is going to cost money. And you're right, sitting out on the class isn't a feasible option. So no opting out.

 

I agree it's a silly program with no proper basis in science or even culture (and I don't find culture the right focus for a health class). The students that will be helped/made more comfortable by this is going to be a miniscule number.

 

Bring up the lack of facts at the next meeting and demand to see a core outline ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are changing schools because we are moving there from Idaho in a month. Wherever they go will be new. 

Wow . . .my sincere condolences.  I lived in DC for over 6 years. I know that area and Fairfax very well. Good luck; many good LDS people live there (2nd highest number east of the Mississippi) but it is a den full of vipers and thieves.

 

I moved away from that place, because

a) while many good people are there, the whole area is corrupt,

b) people there have no clue what the rest of the country is like-they live in their own bubble. 

c) It is expensive as all getout. A normal house that costs 150-200k in the rest of the country costs 500-600k at least

d) Due to the cost of living, I quickly realized that even though I made more than the median salary in DC, in order to afford anything decent both I and my wife would have to work or I would have to suffer with a 1.5 hour commute for my life and I wasn't willing to compromise on either (especially with small kids). 

 

Most people have no clue as to exactly how expensive it is and how bad the commutes are until after they have moved there . . . . it is really bad.  You almost couldn't pay me enough money to live there (I'd need a good 200k+ to even think about it!)

 

Unless you are in the military, military posts get a housing allowance for DC which ends up being 3-4k/month; which IMO is ridiculous and only drives up the costs further . . . but if I were in the military stationed there it wouldn't be so bad.

Edited by yjacket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine, and again, there should be an opt-out for those opposed because as it stands (seemingly) it is what it is.

 

Just to demonstrate how aged I am, I remember when parents had to opt-in for the controversial stuff.  Just sayin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this