"Non Binary" Teacher CAUGHT GROOMING Class In Front of Parents!

a reply to: quintessentone

I have an issue with defining what types of people wore clothes not of their own sex.

Actors or more broadly, entertainers, historically speaking.

Thats what your source said. Did you read it or did you rely on wiki for cognitive bias?

a reply to: Hecate666

So what do you want?

I know exactly what they want.

They want the same thing they have wanted since the beginnings of time, the thing the KKK wanted, the thing the slave traders of old wanted, the thing the Jim Crow laws of yore tried to enforce... they want rid of anyone who doesn't look, act, walk, talk, and think like them. Period.

Think about it... what do normal people do when they find out their kids are being groomed? They try to take them out of that environment. But school is necessary and private schools are expensive. So the poor kids are the real victims here, because they are the ones who can't escape the indoctrination. Those who have a way to escape it can and will do so. The result? An entire generation of young adults who are so confused they will wind up being incarcerated or getting themselves all dead in a shootout, assuming they don't commit suicide first (either voluntarily or involuntarily via drug overdoses or something like that). Only those with means will survive, and those in power can decide who that is via economic pressure.

That's exactly what this is about: hatred of others for not being the same.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

I have an issue with defining what types of people wore clothes not of their own sex.

Actors or more broadly, entertainers, historically speaking.

Thats what your source said. Did you read it or did you rely on wiki for cognitive bias?

I read it but did you read further than that, to the early frontier days?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

Nope. Sex doesn't belong in ANY class with kids as young as those, not in any way shape or form.

If you cannot see that, then you are a groomer yourself, which makes you supportive of pedos.

So, Sex Ed typically started just before puberty to teach those changes that will soon happen and was biological based. No agendas, no sex tricks, no binary anything. The problem we see today is that teachers feel they need to imprint their own beliefs and viewpoints on kids. We didn't know anything about teachers before, but today these young teachers need to explain their whole personal life and their personal beliefs with their classes, and to a level we call grooming. Telling kids what lube works best on a butt plug is what I would call a very personal subject and even if the teacher is wearing one all day to stay ready for whatever the kids don't need that information.

Around 12+ we start to talk about safe sex etc, but once again it is on a generic bases and not some fringe teacher's opinion. Not sure what happened to all that.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

I have an issue with defining what types of people wore clothes not of their own sex.

Actors or more broadly, entertainers, historically speaking.

Thats what your source said. Did you read it or did you rely on wiki for cognitive bias?

I read it but did you read further than that, to the early frontier days?

No, why would I care about hearsay and conjecture?

a reply to: quintessentone

Does it matter today? At all?

Assume there's this biological male named "John." John is an adult. One day, John decides he wants to act like a woman and cross-dress. Well, if John does a good enough job with his cross-dressing, calls himself "Joan," gets a job as Joan, and even uses the women's bathroom, who is going to even know? I don't go around grabbing other people's private parts, and I'd likely knock the holy snot out of anyone who did that to me (good-looking ladies excluded; yes, I'm a "dirty old man")!

If I am in the men's rest room and someone comes in, walks to the stall, closes the door, then proceeds to do what they came in to do, I am not going to stand there at the urinal and think, "I wonder if that was really a lady?" No, I'm gonna do what I need to do and get out.

The only time I am going to get upset over it is if someone is flamboyant about it, shoving their perversion in my face, and especially when they start trying to teach it to children! But that's exactly what has been happening, and exactly what is happening in this video. Someone is not satisfied with who they are, and they want to make others into them too! Someone who is comfortable with who they are is not going to do that. So why would anyone want others to be as screwed up as they are instead of wanting to get their own heads screwed on straight?

Because they would rather the whole planet be as miserable as they are rather than fix their own problems. And that is a big problem.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

I have an issue with defining what types of people wore clothes not of their own sex.

Actors or more broadly, entertainers, historically speaking.

Thats what your source said. Did you read it or did you rely on wiki for cognitive bias?

I read it but did you read further than that, to the early frontier days?

No, why would I care about hearsay and conjecture?

OK, brick wall. I'll move on now.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Kids that age may know there's a difference, but that does not mean they understand the difference. For example, you have heard of a "brain scan" but you obviously don't understand anything about them.

TheRedneck

The reality is until puberty there are few differences and boys and girls don't really care much one way or the other. Watching my kids grow up girls many times were the better in sports as we see most sports before puberty as unisex. Once puberty hits all bets are off, but kids are now young adults with a more developed brain. I read to good number of times that kids do not fully develop reasoning skills until about 8 years old. This is why pain and bad are much more associated in "that is bad because my butt hurts if I do it". After 8 you can now reason good and bad at a much higher level of understanding without a swat to the butt to demonstrate bad. Pulling kids before that age into adult situations and adult discussions has the same effect in kids having low reasoning skills to really understand. This is also why many of these anti grooming laws are focused on 4th grade and below.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Think about it... what do normal people do when they find out their kids are being groomed? They try to take them out of that environment. But school is necessary and private schools are expensive. So the poor kids are the real victims here, because they are the ones who can't escape the indoctrination. Those who have a way to escape it can and will do so. The result? An entire generation of young adults who are so confused they will wind up being incarcerated or getting themselves all dead in a shootout, assuming they don't commit suicide first (either voluntarily or involuntarily via drug overdoses or something like that). Only those with means will survive, and those in power can decide who that is via economic pressure.

That's exactly what this is about: hatred of others for not being the same.

TheRedneck

We can also take this to the next level of college. A friend of mine owns a brewery that he basically got because his kid wanted to brew beer and was good. He then sent his son to become a master brewer at UC Davis, a very far left college, but a top place to really learn the craft. My friend is moderate left his who life, but when his kid finished college, he had changed so much that after 1 year working in the brewery, he basically saw his dad as some far-right Nazi type compared to him and disappeared basically off the face of the earth. His dad today has no clue where he is, or what he does other than he thinks he is deep in ANTIFA type group in Portland. Something pretty drastic happened in college.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The reality is until puberty there are few differences and boys and girls don't really care much one way or the other.

That's pretty much what I was trying to say. Thanks for putting it in better words.

There are personality differences. My daughter was all girl until around age 7 or 8, then she turned tomboy. Around age 16 she changed back to all girl. I let her run with it; she knew what she was and she wasn't a boy. She just liked some "boyish" things. Hell, at one point she could mix mortar better than some professional adults!

I actually think part of that was her emulating me. She always was a "Daddy's girl."

My son, now, he was "all boy" the whole way through...

TheRedneck

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

I have an issue with defining what types of people wore clothes not of their own sex.

Actors or more broadly, entertainers, historically speaking.

Thats what your source said. Did you read it or did you rely on wiki for cognitive bias?

I read it but did you read further than that, to the early frontier days?

No, why would I care about hearsay and conjecture?

OK, brick wall. I'll move on now.

Of your own design.


Your source.....member?

originally posted by: TheRedneck

If I am in the men's rest room and someone comes in, walks to the stall, closes the door, then proceeds to do what they came in to do, I am not going to stand there at the urinal and think, "I wonder if that was really a lady?" No, I'm gonna do what I need to do and get out.

So back in 1998 I'm in Japan at Yokota AB and there was a guy who retired there as a Chief E9 26 years in service. A year or so after retiring I guess he got a job there and one day he is in the locker room with a bra on and long hair now. We are talking a high testosterone military situation, and, in the end, no one gave it 2 seconds of thought and just moved on not really caring what he did or not do. He never pushed anything, and no one pushed back or cared and that was 25 years ago.

It was around and no one cared, but no one pushed it as an agenda either.

a reply to: Xtrozero

That's the problem in a nutshell: the push to "normalize" something by making everyone a participant.

Got a guy I know who I grew up with. We were pretty tight for a while, then lost touch with each bother for several years. Don't ask me why, but he decided to come out of the closet that he was gay. I didn't care, and told him as much. But then he started flaunting it, constantly talking about being gay and going on and on about who he had been with and what they had done. I kept telling him I didn't want to hear all that, but he didn't care. Nothing mattered to him except being gay.

He wound up losing his family, much of his inheritance, and becoming an outcast... not because he was gay, but because he was obnoxious about it.

I tutored alongside a girl in college; we were the two most advanced math tutors so we got to know each other. She was kinda "tomboyish" but I didn't know she was gay until she one day confided in me that she had gotten married... to a girl. She was upset that I wouldn't want to have anything to do with her; it didn't matter to me. She was still the same girl I had known for a few years. She wasn't obnoxious; she was just doing her own thing. We remained friends and really, got even closer after that.

Now, that is just simple gay folk, but the example stands: it's not about someone "doing their own thing"; it's about that someone doing their own thing without trying to force it on me. That's true equality.

TheRedneck

a reply to: infolurker

There is no such thing as non-binary.

There are boys and there are girls.

We've gone 100,000 years of men and women and all of a sudden, gender is an option?

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

I have an issue with defining what types of people wore clothes not of their own sex.

Actors or more broadly, entertainers, historically speaking.

Thats what your source said. Did you read it or did you rely on wiki for cognitive bias?

I read it but did you read further than that, to the early frontier days?

No, why would I care about hearsay and conjecture?

OK, brick wall. I'll move on now.

Of your own design.


Your source.....member?

My source, right, but semantics with cross-dressing. We still would have to interview the people arrested mid-1800s to find out why they are cross-dressing, in drag, etc. We can't answer the why.

a reply to: Lucidparadox

I just watched it. One of the kids was first to bring up non-binary. Another kid said "they" all before the teacher even said anything.

Theyre just going over definitions of things like they would do in any other class.

That's what it appears to me too, just defining or explaining to the children what non-binary is because it was stated that one of the children asked the question. Maybe the child heard the parents talking about the teacher as being non-binary and that's why the child asked the teacher what it is.

If a child asks a question about anything pertaining to this world and depending on their level of understanding and age (sex ed. in school determines curriculum) shouldn't the teacher answer? Gender identify is not about sex, it's about gender.

a reply to: quintessentone

You can see at the beginning that the puppet "Nash" is introduced explicitly as non binary. If she had instead said "what can you tell me about this puppet" they would have said he's a boy puppet. What she did was give them the answer before the question. What is that technique called again? 🤔

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Now, that is just simple gay folk, but the example stands: it's not about someone "doing their own thing"; it's about that someone doing their own thing without trying to force it on me. That's true equality.

TheRedneck

My wife and I spent 2 weeks roomed with a gay couple in Hawaii, oh the horrors... don't care, I had 3 people cooking for me, it was great...lol Theirs AND our sexuality never came into the conversations, so what they did in their bedroom and what we did in ours was not a part of our relationship as friends. I'm with you in when people flaunt things in front of me, I don't like it. It is not just a gay thing either, a good friend at one time loved to cheat on his wife. Love it, loved to talk about it and I just didn't want to hear it... same principal.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: quintessentone

You can see at the beginning that the puppet "Nash" is introduced explicitly as non binary. If she had instead said "what can you tell me about this puppet" they would have said he's a boy puppet. What she did was give them the answer before the question. What is that technique called again? 🤔

It was stated that the teacher was explaining what non-binary was because a child asked the question. Is this not true?

That is wrong, thanks for playing

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: quintessentone

You can see at the beginning that the puppet "Nash" is introduced explicitly as non binary. If she had instead said "what can you tell me about this puppet" they would have said he's a boy puppet. What she did was give them the answer before the question. What is that technique called again? 🤔

It was stated that she was explaining what non-binary was because a child asked the question. Is this not true?