Trans-gender Coaches for California 1st Grade Children?

Fox News Channel has just reported that a CA elementary school will begin classes for grades K-4 that teach ‘gender diversity’.  The supposed aim of this class is to help prevent bullying- specifically of those children who are homosexual or ‘tansgender’.   Bullying of gays should fall under the general bullying rules:  no bullying allowed for any reason.  It does not need additional billing in the bully department.     Parts of this class include statements such as, “It ok to paint your toenails if you are a boy,” “There is more than one way to be a girl and more than one way to be a boy,”  and “Sometimes a boy can be a girl inside and sometimes a girl can be a boy inside.”  Huh??  I thought this was determined by an X gene or a Y gene.  Whatever happened to science at school?  Social agenda has nothing to do with bullying.

This in yet another outrageous attempt of a rabid mini-minority to try and shove their desires down the rest of our throats.  To the direct detriment of our own children- you know, the other 99% of the kids at school.  If telling 5 year old boys that they might be a girl inside is not confusing, I don’t know what is.  Sexual identify is one of the most fundamental ways we define ourselves.  Telling young, impressionable children this non-sense by trusted teachers is downright dangerous for 99% of the children who receive it.  It’s hard enough raising children without teachers to confuse them about whether they are a boy or a girl.

Another outrageous example of how California is leading to way to our children’s permanent sexual confusion is when schools invite gay authors of children’s books to read them in class.  Here is an example on one such incidence where a gay author is invited to read his new book, “My Uncles Wedding” .   Don’t all the ‘uncles’ look so darling, dancing together?  Democrats are relying on the inherent trust people have always had for the teachers and for the public school system to slide these insidious teachings into the classroom.  If parents do not pay more attention to what their children are being taught, it will be to the detriment of their children.

http://www.edgechicago.com/index.php?ch=style&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=120081  My uncles wedding.

22 comments

  1. To update myself on this issue I read “Stellarcellar’s” reference: http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/swyer-syndrome. There were no surprises. 1 in 30,000 calculates to be .003% of the population. The need to teach sexual behavior in a public school system cannot be justified in my humble opinion. Personally, I would prefer not to have my children, grandchildren or great grandchildren be subjected to this bazaar curriculum.

    Also I do believe that progressives (mostly liberals) want to force their agenda down the throats of conservatives. Liberals know that he that rocks the cradle wins the game. That’s why many conservatives choose to home teach their children or utilize private schooling at great expense.

    Short Little Rebel needs to keep fighting the good fight. This is not a time for political correctness – something that I hate.

  2. I’m not real sure how my reasoning is at fault. If an author reads a book about his gay uncle’s wedding, that is HIS reality just as much as a female author’s book about being a girl is HER reality. How is his perspective of life any more about moving forward an agenda than hers. He is not telling everyone how to feel anymore than she. He is merely offering a slice of his reality. Was the book’s explicit intent to make everyone embrace same-sex marriage?

    From your statements, I don’t think that you would argue that certain feelings are reserved for each sex so why is it so troublesome to state that there are no concrete boundaries with concern to these?

    I know that you find my argument tedious, but I’m am just trying to split the same hairs as you.

    • Ok, last time. My post is not just about a book. It is about the class being taught. the book is just one part of it. if you can not see that the statements I listed (which are directly from the contested program) in my article & in my comments are completely different that a book about a woman’s feelings about being a woman, then nothing can help you.

  3. I certainly would not consider you hateful, short little rebel. Perhaps misguided, in my opinion, but not hateful. The intentions of my post are merely to offer a different perspective on the issue you raise.

    I would have to disagree with you concerning your definition of an agenda. An agenda has to do with pushing ANY ideology, not just those that challenge traditional beliefs. By traditional, I mean established beliefs, rather than conservative beliefs. This is why I believe a female author reading a book about being a girl can be considered a part of an agenda. For example, if the story depicts such a girl as adhering to traditional notions of femininity, then it works to uphold the status quo. And I do believe such a story teaches something, even if it is beyond the author’s intentions.

    Let me try and answer that basic question that you pose. And I will try, but your question is already problematic because of the assumptions it makes. It assumes that 99% is an accurate representation of a homosexual population–perhaps I’m being too technical. It also assumes that homosexual children are the only ones who might feel something other than those feelings prescribed to their sex by society. I believe that the goal of the such teaching is to create tolerance within our youth–not acceptance but tolerance. I also believe its aim is to unshackle our youth from the gender constraints that we have placed upon them.

    Again, please don’t take this as a personal attack, but see it rather as a difference of opinion.

    • Liberals love to get technical while avoiding the actual issue. the definition of the word ‘agenda’ is not essential to the point. Also the definition of the word ‘traditional’. 99% vs. 91% vs. 89% vs. 95%- com’on! Can you just stick to the issue? I hate that liberals waste so much time on nick picking while avoiding the entire issue. I don’t take it personally that liberals say I, or anyone who disagrees with them is ‘hateful’. I’m just stating a fact that demonstrates the lack of critical reasoning on the side of liberals. No need to patronize me. Again, you miss the point. A person who states how THEY feel about THEMSELVES cannot be an agenda of any sort. They are simply stating THEIR reality. There is no possibility, when doing this, that he or she implies that anyone else should/could feel that way. When someone states how EVERYONE could/should feel, they are now teaching a lesson in general human emotion. THAT is the difference with the two situations. I hope you can understand that now. It gets tedious repeating the point to people, I suspect, wish to simply not see or hear. Address THAT point, please.

      I feel the need to give an example, in case this point is still difficult to understand: If this book said, “Johnny felt different from all the other boys. He did not want to wear a cowboy hat or play baseball. He liked ballet and putting fingernail polish on with his sisters. But his classmates thought he was strange and wouldn’t play with him. Even worse, some of them called him mean names, which really hurt his feelings. Do you think this was right of the other students?” I and most parents would not have SUCH a big problem with it. It states THIS boys reality and shows bullying for no good reason. It teaches to accept those different. IF the liberal gay agenda stuck to this type of literature, not many people would disagree. But when they go as far as to TELL kindergartners that BOYS (in the general sense) can feel like girls, they cross the line. Am I now perfectly clear on my POINT? I hope so. I also hope that liberals addressing this article would address THAT point instead of patronizing, labeling, and calling ‘hate’ and ‘racist!’ in their normal knee jerk reaction.

  4. In attempting to be fair we shouldn’t really demonize and polarize the issues, “liberals always use faulty reasoning in their arguments”. Actually everyone at one time or another uses faulty reasoning.

    The reason it’s spelled out about non discrimination among gays is because most of America tacitly believes that unless it is spelled out it is OK. The 1950’s discrimination against blacks WAS acceptable even thought we had the Constitution, Bill Of Rights and the Emancipation Proclamation. So yea, it has to be spelled out. “Yea, we mean that group too.”
    A believe also that the school probably had Black History day, Women’s History day, Indian History day and a whole slew of other minority positions that were taught.

    The majority of the article/post was about recognition as human beings, not marriage. It was about sexual orientation bullying, not cohabitating legal issues and differences of the Marriage Ideal.

    In the terms of “99.9% of boys don’t have this experience”, that’s probably not right. Some of those boys while not being gay may still have a preponderance of feminine qualities, just like some of the girls are “Tomboys”. Most statistics say that about 10% of the population is totally gay and that different progressive per centages of the rest have at one time or another had bi-sexual feelings. In fact, statistics also say that only about 10% of the population are totally straight heterosexual.

    This is more demonizing and polarizing. Us versus them. Straight versus Gay. The class was about diversity. Thanks.

    • but most liberals DO tend to use faulty, slippery slope arguments to support their legal agendas! Like linking opposition directly to hate. Look at these comments. The proponents of the gay agenda all say I ‘hate’ gay people in the same way that racists hate black people. This is a blairing example of faulty reason. And it happens over and over again- almost consistently. I’m not polarizing the issue. I am stating a fact. Further, your statistics are completely ridiculous. Being homosexual vs. heterosexual is not based on ‘thoughts’ but actions. The vast, vast, vast, majority of people are heterosexual. That is the fact. All you can do is call names, assign labels and avoid the issue at hand. The majority of the proposed class was not about mere recognition. Sorry. It was teaching children about sexuality. Many parents oppose even heterosexual sex classes for elementary students- let alone the generalized sexual statements made by this transgender class in California. The resentment is not based in hate. It is based on real opposition with real concerns. Gay proponents so NOT want recognition. They want much, much, more.

    • @informationforager: you said, “In attempting to be fair we shouldn’t really demonize and polarize the issues” and then said, “This is more demonizing and polarizing. Us versus them. Straight versus Gay”. Another example of how liberals can call names but demand that names not be directed at them…..hmmmm.

    • Informationforager, are you kidding me? Where are you getting your statistics on the percentages of the population that is totally homosexual or heterosexual? The Gay and Lesbial Alliance or the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce? Claiming that 10% of the population is homosexual is a little high by most information that I have read, but saying that only 10% of the population is strictly heterosexual is completely ridiculous! Wasn’t it Gobbels who said that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will begin to believe it? I can only imagine that you must have some type of agenda, if you repeat something as obviously incorrect as that! Check your facts before you post. Preferably, post a link so that someone can see where you got your misinformation.
      And by the way, most of us realize that the word “diversity” is just the latest codeword for gays pushing their agenda. You can’t get it passed thru the democratic process, so you revert to threatening school systems to get it included in the curriculum. Pathetic.
      A Patriot

  5. Yet more disgusting examples of an agenda fully intent on obscuring all differences between genders and sowing the seed of gender confusion into as many little impressionable minds as they can. I have three daughters and I wouldn’t put up with this crap for a second. Of course, that is why I have decided to never subject my children to the tender mercies of a government school who insist on teaching the exact opposite of right and wrong, morals and values, that I teach my children at home. Instead, I send them to a school that reinforces my views, not contradicts me as a parent and the one who is in charge of their upbringing. It’s not the school’s job, but mine, to teach them morals and values, right and wrong, and whether or not they are really a “boy, trapped in a girl’s body.” What hogwash and downright child abuse to be indoctrinating into the next generation. The agenda is clear, bold, and forceful, and they’ll shove it right into the face of their captive audience whenever they get the chance. If this was really about bullying you address bullying, but it’s not, it’s about mainstreaming homosexuality under the cover of every excuse they can find that is just acceptable enough for parents to not rebel. Sad.

    • And yet, Dave, I am called hateful for objecting to this program! Name calling and emotionally charged accusations are the only responses liberals will ever give. They simply won’t answer the basic question: Why should 99% of children be taught that, in general, ‘boys can be actually girls inside’, when 99% of the boys have never had this experience? They are not reasonable people. What if we taught homosexual children, “Boys feel like boys inside and if they don’t, they are very, very different from other boys.” That would be a fact. But would they tolerate it?

      • Susan, their only defense is to demonize anyone who objects to their views as homophobic, intolerant or a racist. Information forager stated in her post that “In fact, statistics also say that only about 10% of the population are totally straight heterosexual.” Where in the world does that statistic come from? If no one who opposes them challenges their outragous and obviously incorrect statistics, they win by default. Thank you for standing up for the TRUTH!
        A Patriot

    • Dave the Sage,
      Not just sad, but pathetic. You are correct that because they realize that they cannot get their agenda passed using our democratic process, they must resort to perverting the minds of our children in the public schools. If school boards had any backbone, they would stand up to ANYONE who is attempting to influence the school curriculum. But what am I talking about, a politician with a backbone? What was I thinking!
      A Patriot

  6. Hmm. If I were to teach young students that race is merely a social construct and that people should be accepted no matter the color of their skin, would you consider it a part of a larger agenda? If I brought in a female writer who read a book about what it is like to be a girl or a woman, would that be part of a feminist agenda?

    The first thing you should realize is that gender is a social construct. In fact, society’s notion of sex–as in men vs. women–is actually a social construct. And unfortunately, your understanding of X and Y chromosomes is a bit naive. Perhaps this link will make it clear that it’s not as simple as you think: http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/swyer-syndrome

    And as for your remarks concerning the hijacking of the public school system by Democrats–by which I assume you mean liberals–I would argue that conservatives have utilized public institutions in the same manner to which you allude as a means of teaching their ideologies.

    • My comment of X vs Y gene was only a side comment- not meant to be taken scientifically. It always amazes me that liberals love to get technical over philosophical arguments. My point is simple: bullying of gays=bullying of anyone. No special attention need be given. Same with bullying over race, poverty, hygiene, looks, clothing, whatever.

      • I agree totally. Bullying is bullying, no matter wether the child is gay or straight. Why is it worse for a gay child to be bullyied than a straight child? We all realize that this entire discussion is not about bullying, it is about introducing the gay lifestyle to young children who are very impressionable. Bullying is simply the latest “tool” that they are using to introduce something that is unacceptable to the vast majority of parents. How can you be against preventing bullying?
        Hate crime legislation is another attempt to mainstream the gay lifestyle. By making crimes against gays subject to harsher penalities, they hope to tramp down any opposition to their lifestyle. Why is murder of a gay person worse than the murder of a straight person? Why is the implication accepted that if a straight person murders a gay, it’s because he was gay? And why does their sentiment only work to the advantage of gays? When have you seen hate crime legislation used to prosecute a gay person who kills a child?
        A Patriot

      • Hi Don, and here is an astounding bit of evidence: The rapes & murders of boys are almost always commited by openly homosexual men. THAT is a statistic that remains buried year after year. I have read all your comments and want to thank you 1) for your service and 2) for taking the time to visit and read my blog. I am with you about your concern for our country. But somehow, I believe the American spirit is still out there. Remember the flags after 9/11? It’s there. The media & the movie producers are all owned by six or so major companies- all privately held within a few families & groups hands. I wrote an article on it- you will be shocked. They clearly have formed a cartel to control information, t.v. shows and movies. Why?

        To perhaps demoralize us? To isolate us? To make us afraid to speak up because we believe everyone else is on board with the liberal agenda? To knuckle us under because we think everyone else is going to vote it in anyway?

        I believe this to be true. I see all kinds of nastiness on t.v., in the news, in the movies. And yet, I look around my neighborhood and can’t find anything close to it. People just act normally and go about their business.

        We need to have faith in one another. Even people who claim to be liberal are not the ‘liberal’s shown on t.v. Divide & conquer, right?

        We need to TALK to each other and find the American heart again. We need to reaffirm our basic beliefs. Most importantly, we need to end the MONEY flowing into politics and we need new legislation that will forever ban the FULL ownership of the news by so few people. After that, America will naturally rebound.

    • Also, liberals always use faulty reasoning in their arguments. Example: a female writer describing what is like FOR HER to be a girl is not and example of someone trying to change something enormous in society. Nor is it trying to teach anything. A boy reading a book that explains that BOYS (in general) can be girls is trying to ‘educate’ kids about something about general sexuality. Also, it is introducing a NEW, radical idea, completely different from hundreds of thousands of years of what has been acceptable in society. An ‘agenda’ implies that someone wishes to affect other people in some way- probably advantageous to themselves. This implies the desire to CHANGE something. Therefore, a woman telling how it is, for her, to be a woman doesn’t quality as agenda pushing. A gay man telling children that boys, in general, can be girls does qualify for agenda pushing.

Please join the conversation! All comments are monitored, so if you have a private note you wish to leave, just say so. Also, all profane or unhelpful comments will be deleted. Thank you!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s