Four-year-olds will get gay fairytales at school

Originally posted by Sanitys Last Day
Maybe they should have fairy tales depicting true Satanism in a light that isn't negative. I am not saying the gay stories are right or wrong, but if they want people to be exposed to certain things then why not go all out? Let the kid make their own choice if they want to worship the devil or not.

I quote this because it made me laugh hard

I want to add that this doesnt have to be made a homosexual vs. heterosexual issue. Instead its an issue of WHAT to show children by which age.

Are children especially open to indoctrination at the age of 4?

Do they care about sex at that age?

Does it make any difference which way couples are shown in those early books?

Does including gays into fairy tales mean we have to change the known fairy tales into gay ones or will new ones be written?

Does this mean other activist-groups will start coming up and asking to be included into the mind of a 4 year old?

I imagine greenpeace, satanists, UFOlogists, chinese...and anyone else for that matter, wanting to book advertising space in the latest fairy-tale-book editions.

[edit on 5-11-2007 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by blobby
The way i see it is, its wrong to even teach this stuff at any age till maybe 16 plus when the child can figure out which way in life they want to go, as for 4 years old OMG...

though youre problem with that is that by that time, people may have drummed into their children that "gay is wrong and disgusting" or they won't know why they are feeling a certain way towards the same sex.
so you should therfor think sex education should also be saved 'till everyone is 16?, which would make the information useless, as most start periods etc at 12.
we teach people about same sex romances, why not gay?...
i know ive already made a comment, but i feel i needed to, as the "OMG" remark got me quite peeved.

Gay....Fairy........Tales?

Doesn't anyone see the redundancy there?


In all seriousness. If my kid comes home and starts asking about anything sexual related in 4th grade, I am heading down to that school and letting them know what I think about them. What the hell gives any school .. any right to teach my kids about homosexuality? Stick to reading, riting and rithmatic. The 3 R's.

When they are older they can begin to learn about sex, but even then......keep the homosexuality stuff out of the classroom. Here in NY we had a case hit the courts a few years ago due to this. Since the teacher thought teaching homosexuality was ok, he also went into (graphicly) anal sex and S&M. He felt it was his right and duty to expose the kids to cr*p like this because he knew parents would not.

LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE......

reply to post by traderonwallst


so it's ok to let a teacher tell kids about a prince saving a princess who falls in love with him, but a prince saving a prince who falls in love with him is somehow corrupting the kids?

i think that this is a pretty dumm topic to talk about, honestly, why do you people care...why dont you on your own "sexual orientation"....and why dont u people get real friends and not cyber space friends, this is probaly the worst topic to talk about

reply to post by Bhadhidar


Sexual orientation can totally change(unless I'm just a special case because the aliens want me to breed someday).

Homosexuality should not be encouraged or modeled to 4 year old children for any reason at all. If they turn out gay, fine. But don't you think that you're just going to confuse a lot of little kids who have no idea what sex, love, or intimacy is by trying to describe what an abnormal sexual preference is? God forbid that you describe it as "a boy is gay if he doesn't like girls" because all the boys think girls are icky at that age! And if you make a point to emphasize that it's alright to be gay and that you're proud and brave to be gay, well, that can cause problems to impressionable little kids as well.

There's just no way that you can win when it comes to describing sexual matters to little kids, especially when it's a small, abnormal sexuality that has a lot of politics attached to it.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by traderonwallst

 

so it's ok to let a teacher tell kids about a prince saving a princess who falls in love with him, but a prince saving a prince who falls in love with him is somehow corrupting the kids?

Yes. 4 year olds can wait until some time after puberty when they start to experience sexual thoughts before they need to start wrapping their heads around sexuality, especially if it's an abnormal sexuality.

Having a prince and a princess fall in love and marry isn't going to screw with kids' heads because they know that men and women fall in love, marry, and at some point in the future for reasons as of yet unknown to children the man and woman have children. There's nothing new, shocking, uncomfortable, or even overtly sexual or political that needs to be taught about that because children already know that it's normal for men and women to fall in love, for the man to look out for the woman, and for the man and woman couple to marry.
But there is no way in heck that a kid is going to understand sexuality in general, let alone the subtleties of an alternative, small minority sexuality.

Four years old is a bit too young for this, IMO. But then, I don't believe you can "educate" someone into being gay or straight.

It's what they are, not what they're taught.

How is teaching children that being tolerant of gays, and that gays are just like straight people, a bad thing? What is wrong with children reading fairytales involving gay couples or characters? How is it worse than one involving straight couples or characters? Gay people are not different than you or I. If you wish for your child to dislike gay people or be intolerant then fine, but unless this shows an adverse affect on children I see no harm in it. So you should get to decide when your children learn that gay people exist and how to feel about gay people? News flash your children are not in a bubble, they will find out things and decide how they feel about them on their own eventually, why if this stuff in the classroom is age appropriate do you think it conflicts with your parenting? That line of reasoning would mean reality itself conflicts with your parenting, reality is not going to magically go poof when it comes to your children because of your own version of it. There are plenty of things to worry about that are going on with your children that are of more importance and worth the whining.

reply to post by Epinephrine


Having a prince and a princess fall in love and marry isn't going to screw with kids' heads

I'd like you to show me evidence of gay fairy tales "screwing with kids heads"?

You give children very little credit, I haven't met a five year old who doesn't know at least that there are some kids who have two daddies or that his brother's male "friend" is just like his sister's male "friend".

It is absolutely disgusting.


That's all I have to say about that!

reply to post by Epinephrine


Homosexuality should not be encouraged

Where does it say they are encouraging “homosexuality”? They are encouraging knowledge and tolerance and I’d like to see how any research has proven that has an adverse affect on children.

Sexual orientation can totally change

The best medical health boards that are aligned with thousands of psychiatrist that have done decades of studies would disagree. Go to the APA web site and you’ll find how the possibility that one can change their sexuality has been debunked countless times. And it has been found over and over again that to be a happy, fully functioning adult you must accept your sexuality. I’m not going to tell you what you are, but I’m shocked at your claims and would like to know what unbiased, non religiously tied studies or research you have seen that would bring you to such a conclusion?

sexual preference

An orientation is not a preference.

"a boy is gay if he doesn't like girls" because all the boys think girls are icky at that age!

Um, and what warped child development classes have you been taking, may I ask?

And if you make a point to emphasize that it's alright to be gay and that you're proud and brave to be gay, well, that can cause problems to impressionable little kids as well.

There is nothing wrong with being gay, saying it proudly, and I’d like to see what research shows such a thing would have an adverse affect on children?

describing sexual matters

Where did the OP say sexual matters would be described? Telling a story with two princes is no more sexual than one with a prince and princess.

If any child ask why the princeses are together you don't have to say "they're gay they have sex together". A simple "because some boys fall in love with boys" would do.
\

[edit on 30-9-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

My 6 year old nephew came home from school yesterday and asked his mum what gay means. She tried to say it just means happy,but he said "no,it means more than that,when a man kisses another man" Kind of stopped my sister in her tracks

Basicly,kids will learn from their mates at school,and that's always a few years infront of what the teachers tell them.

If this scheme can stop young people killing themselves because of bullying over their sexuality,then kudos.

This is sick and WRONG..... teaching kids about gay relationships is absolutely disgusting....

^^^^
I hate people like that...(But it got you to read my post didn't it )

Sure fine, no homosexual fairytales in school... I can see your reasons; lets not do them. but then lets remove all the heterosexual fairytales as well. They are absolutely no different.

fairytales do not go out shouting "LOOK THESE PEOPLE ARE STRAIGHT" so why do you think they will go out shouting "LOOK THIS MAN IS GAY" . Chances are you will not notice the difference until the man gives the other man a peck on the face. (And lets be honest in cartoons the only way to tell the women from the men is lipstick/hair and clothing anyway).

All it will do is teach children two moral values instead of one. You don't have to like it...and if your child decides they don't like it then fair enough; remove them from the class. But why should you decide whether a NATURAL thing is right for your child to know about or not?

I have heard no-where that they will be teaching people about homosexuals...simply showing that a man can love a man and a woman lcan love a woman. Jeez, there are more important things going on right now than people who actually love eachother and arn't spurting out dozens of kids they can't care for but are actually looking after children who have nowhere else to go.

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage


Religious-based attempts to change sexuality fail, obviously. What about people who have advanced neurological and hormonal awareness and control and way too much time on their hands? You mean to tell me that nobody has ever tried to get people to change neurological states and conditions by teaching people to consciously recognize their current hormone levels and relative brain arousal? Until the attempts to change sexuality focus on biological awareness instead of religion, there will be no evidence.

As much as you might want to say that it is natural, where is your evidence? There is no reason to believe that any differences in the neurology are the cause of homosexuality anymore than there is reason to believe that individuals with bigger hippocampuses opt to become taxi drivers. And since we know that the hippocampus grows larger in taxi drivers over time on the job based on studies of brain scans, should we not believe that the abnormalities in homosexuals are the result of their behavior and the way that they use their brains and not the reason for their behavior?

What evidence is there really for the claim that homosexuality is natural, anyway? Isn't it all wishful thinking and rash interpretations of brain scans that show biological differences but not biological causation?

reply to post by Epinephrine


Until the attempts to change sexuality focus on biological awareness instead of religion, there will be no evidence.

Thanks for admitting there is absolutely no solid evidence on your side of this argument. Amusing you still try to argue it.

As much as you might want to say that it is natural, where is your evidence?

There is mountains of research that often refers to hundreds of species that naturally partake in homosexual relationships. Homosexuality has existed and had several names since the dawn of time, despite ever changing environments and several different species. The word “natural” refers to what is innate in human and other species behavior. Homosexuality fits that bill to a T.

Isn't it all wishful thinking and rash interpretations of brain scans that show biological differences but not biological causation?

Seeing as how I’ve stated there is clear evidence and you have yet to counter that with anything other than to tell me you have zilch I’m curious as to who is having wishful thinking in this argument? Do you believe several species and every single past society was somehow unnaturally influenced into homosexuality since the dawn of time?

reply to post by Epinephrine


I’m also still waiting for you to support the claims you’ve made about this specific school topic; those that have to do with sex, homosexuality, and your warped understanding of child development.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by Epinephrine

 

There is mountains of research that often refers to hundreds of species that naturally partake in homosexual relationships. Homosexuality has existed and had several names since the dawn of time, despite ever changing environments and several different species. The word “natural” refers to what is innate in human and other species behavior. Homosexuality fits that bill to a T.

Out of curiosity, how many of those animals are truly "homosexual"? It sounds like most, if not all, of the mammals that display instances of homosexual behavior are really bisexual. Inherent and natural bisexuality I can agree with, but homosexual as a limiting and lifelong sexual orientation that cannot be changed is completely bogus in my book, as well as the junk science "gay gene" theory that is actively promoted.

I have no problem with children being taught about bisexuality if they reach an appropriate age in part because I think that there is enough information available to prove that bisexuality is an inherent part of mammals and that humans have the capacity for both sexual perceptions and behaviors. My problem is with homosexuality, which teaches that sexual behavior cannot be changed no matter what, and which seems to lead to shallow relationships, impulsive behavior, and emotional problems. I also feel that there is way to much political pressure being used by homosexuals to silence their critics, regardless of whether the criticism is legitimate or valid.

I would much rather a child grew up straight than homosexual for behavioral and hormonal reasons(the bodily changes in homosexuals can lead to disturbing "womanly" traits in homosexual males and manly traits in women, which I find disagreeable) and as such I think that they should be shielded from potential triggers of homosexuality until they've developed enough mentally to consciously control the two sexual states.

Besides, gays bug the hell out of me because they don't like bisexuals. They don't believe in us, like we're the toothfairy or something. We're the monkey wrench in their political machine and they're resorting to trying to disprove bisexuality.

Edit: Regarding you request for proof of changes in sexuality, let's not forget about "situational sexualities" that change or go away depending on environmental situations.

[edit on 2-10-2008 by Epinephrine]

[edit on 2-10-2008 by Epinephrine]

reply to post by Epinephrine


completely bogus in my book

Why do you assume anyone cares about your book? Reality is not constrained by your own belief system, it freely continues despite what you think while admitting you have no evidence to back up your claims. Again I’ll ask what do you have that contradicts decades of research done all over the world?

My problem is with homosexuality

Yes, but you have yet to prove how this is an actual problem; this is just your own reasoning.

I would much rather a child grew up straight than homosexual for behavioral and hormonal reasons(the bodily changes in homosexuals can lead to disturbing "womanly" traits in homosexual males and manly traits in women, which I find disagreeable) and as such I think that they should be shielded from potential triggers of homosexuality until they've developed enough mentally to consciously control the two sexual states.

Again what proof and research do you have to support any of your claims? Especially the ones that claim homosexuality can be triggered by nurture and that being aware with a tolerant understanding of homosexuality has an adverse affect on children.

Besides, gays bug the hell out of me because they don't like bisexuals.

I’m bisexual and I’ve been welcomed into every major homosexual group I support on the west coast with open arms. Please support these claims that they are working against and do not believe in bisexuality.

Regarding you request for proof of changes in sexuality, let's not forget about "situational sexualities" that change or go away depending on environmental situations.

How may I ask does this trump your ability to prove or produce evidence for one of your claims, you’ve made over a dozen by the way, incase you forgot.


[edit on 2-10-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]