Biggest Gay Lobby Group in America Urges Schools to Ban Words ‘Boy’ and ‘Girl’

a reply to: GENERAL EYES

I didn't say anything about fashion. Wear whatever you want. Doesn't change your gender, what you ARE.

a reply to: Bone75

No such ban exists there either.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: ketsuko
Well this is your made up situation, guess you should have the answer.

One that I am sure happens everyday.

Who is talking about punishing kids besides you?

If the labels get banned from schools, then the assumption would be that they are off limits. Does that mean that they would then be off limits for just teachers or for students too? Does that mean the schools would then be in the business of social engineering children not to self-identify for their gender identity?

Just because you don't want to think along all the possible implications of a thing doesn't mean that others don't go there.

Okay, this is trying to make the world an easier, happier and more equal place for a very very small percentage of children. It isn't PC madness run amok, the left taking over, the NWO or the LBGTQ+ global agenda or push for a genderless society.

The fact is though there are transgender kids and segregation by boy or girl can be confusing, painful and embarrassing. Imagine we separate children by race? All the white kids line up in one line and all the Hispanic, black, Asian and Native American line up in another?

As someone with extremely gender atypical behavior and as a gender dysphoric child back in the dark ages before something like this was even considered, I have many school memories of uncomfortably and awkwardly being separated into groups or lined up by sex.

It isn't as silly as it sounds this is only trying to promote equality and erase classifications or categories that divide us as human beings. That's not such a bad thing.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Gryphon66

Why yes, yes I do.

That would be a person who possesses reproductive organs of an indeterminate nature. Mixed chromosons that identify neither male nor female.

Do I get a cookie?

Have as many as you want.

So, as you understand what intersex is, do you know the frequency in the population at large?

Here, I'll help: Frequency of Intersex

We should just absolutely ignore the facts about these people's existence then?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Really? Crap, there goes my IPO.

Is this the "Purple Penguin" argument again?

Didn't we already do that?

a reply to: EKron

Yes, there are kids who identify in other ways, so why take away all identity? I thought we were supposed to make it safe for them to identify NOT make the world a place where no one can.

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: Gryphon66

Really? Crap, there goes my IPO.

How so?

Were you starting up a comedy club or something?

Just as well, I think.

Its hypersensitivity gone a bit mad.

If you are born male and raised as male, you get a blue book. If you dont like it, then buy or if available change it to a pink, red, orange purple whatever book. Its your book. Its just a book. Settle down.

We are only a few decades into making the general public aware that gay people, transgender and anything else not straight girl or boy exist. Lets not crap on thousands of years of tradition okay.

originally posted by: EKron
It isn't as silly as it sounds this is only trying to promote equality and erase classifications or categories that divide us as human beings. That's not such a bad thing.

Then why are there so many labels for the Alternative community? Sorry for the word but there are so many I don't want to leave anyone out. But the label that most, including the community, identify with is about promoting equality? I don't see it.

a reply to: EKron

HRC has made the suggestion that other ways of "grouping" kids together be used rather than always dividing into boys and girls.

Believe me, maybe not in elementary school but a few years into middle school, they're going to figure out the differences on their own.

But, of course, this is another jumping off point for wailing and gnashing of teeth over nothing.

Ain't free speech grand?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Bone75

No such ban exists there either.

Kentucky bans prison chaplains who preach homosexuality is a sin

a reply to: Gryphon66

My guess, without looking at your link, is fairly rare. Though perhaps a growing number due to outside influences from the environment. I'll look later to see if my surmise is correct.

Ignore? No. Why would I? I address large groups of kids as "Hey, kids, shut the hell up." That's about as all inclusive as it gets. Kids, I don't care whether they're boy, girls, or mix of both/neither. They're kids. How much more inclusive could I be?

I address an individual by their name, or form of their name (which ever they prefer...), or sir, miss (whichever they may prefer in that case, too)

I treat people, unless forced otherwise by their behaviour, as I would wish to be treated. I'm not going to do otherwise.

originally posted by: Biigs
Its hypersensitivity gone a bit mad.

If you are born male and raised as male, you get a blue book. If you dont like it, then buy or if available change it to a pink, red, orange purple whatever book. Its your book. Its just a book. Settle down.

We are only a few decades into making the general public aware that gay people, transgender and anything else not straight girl or boy exist. Lets not crap on thousands of years of tradition okay.

Do you think as we culturally begin to understand how "people are" better we should make non-invasive changes like the HRC suggested though?

Is there any possibility that the relationships between males and females might develop more strongly and more healthily if each were to see that being a boy or being a girl (or, unthinkably, being "something else") is great and acceptable, all the same?

I can't see what's wrong with this on any realistic level.

a reply to: intrepid

Seems to me, and I submit I could be wrong not being omniscient, that any title/label is meant to separate. Not bring together...

a reply to: Gryphon66

That was, quite obviously, a completely tongue-in-cheek comment. My lobotomy business isn't profitable enough yet to go public.

a reply to: seagull

That sounds great, and in my experience, you're rather a rare bird.

I fail to see how demonstrating that there's more than one way to "group" people (kids) is going to harm them in any way.

What am I missing? Why would something like this sponsor all the hew and cry that mysterious forces are trying to do away with gender identities?

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: Gryphon66

That was, quite obviously, a completely tongue-in-cheek comment. My lobotomy business isn't profitable enough yet to go public.

From the looks of society at large, I'd say you're wasting your time in the long run; brains are already scrambled.

The HRC's suggestion is not as outlandish or extreme as it's being made out to be.

I think we should assign numbers for gender, gender identity, sexual preference.

So someone could be a 3, 5, 6 and use the bathrooms for 3,5,6.

But if a 1, 2, 5 tried to use the bathroom, they'd have to use the 8, 9, 7 or the 3, 2, 9.

But not the 1, 7, 4.

That would be gross.