Law DeSantis caves and modifies book ban law

Creepy as fuck to call someone a "social prude" for not wanting children to be exposed to sexually inappropriate material.

Yes I'm absolutely a prude when it comes to children and sex.
teaching highschoolers and middleschoolers about birth control and stds is a issue? istg thats probably more applicable important than 95% of the curriculum that kids are taught in school, how is Animal Farm and derivatives going to protect you from stds and unwanted pregnancies?
 
I'm not against opt-ins. But yeah I tend to take repeated empirical data as facts, until reliable data comes out refuting it. And this has been studied since the introduction of sexual education into the school systems.

"Queer theory" should at least be basically covered anywhere there could be queer kids. They're at far greater risk of sexual impropriety even by their peers, and at far greater risk of complete dismissal by their families. Unless we are saying the only kids worthy of protection are kids we think are straight, which is something a lot of people would say if they weren't cowards who hide behind political jargon.
You take your selected empircal data as facts. The studies you take as fact could have omitted certain aspects of said programs leading to an innacurate representation of its effectiveness. Im sure you know that having studies to support a thing, means something, but to have it as a given is dishonest af. You need a critical evaluation correcting for biases and ommissions.

Queer theory should be made available for queer kids, but kids who arent shouldnt have to be subjected to that. Especially not without the consent of their parents.
 
I'm not against opt-ins. But yeah I tend to take repeated empirical data as facts, until reliable data comes out refuting it. And this has been studied since the introduction of sexual education into the school systems.

"Queer theory" should at least be basically covered anywhere there could be queer kids. They're at far greater risk of sexual impropriety even by their peers, and at far greater risk of complete dismissal by their families. Unless we are saying the only kids worthy of protection are kids we think are straight, which is something a lot of people would say if they weren't cowards who hide behind political jargon.
I am confused about "Queer Theory" and what it entails? From the sound of it, it seems unneccesary. Yes, queer people exist and thats perfectly fine, if people have a problem with queer people existing, they need to get mental help. I don't understand why any more attention should be studied on it? Yes, I agree education on contraceptives and consent is crucial but that is a universal thing.
 
Are you really this comically stupid. Do you even have kids? Do you ever speak to kids? Okay I'll go point by point despite the fact that ALL of these questions have been answered by the data itself. Because people like you require spoonfeeding to get past your automatic brain power-downs when it comes to subjects you're uncomfortable with.

- Kids are emotionally confused by molestation. Often times they allow it to continue because they fear displeasing the predator (who they often are close to before it begins), or fear of reprimand from the Family. Depicting this as a normal response can ease the self-loathing of feeling conflicted.

- Kids are sexually confused by molestation, Hell even adults are. Prison psychologists will tell you that there is a phenomenon of men in prison who get raped, get an erection during the rape because it's a physical reaction they cannot control, will then THINK they are gay. Educating kids on the difference between a physical reaction they commonly associate with a positive experience doesnt make the experience okay, is a good thing. This is why boys who have inappropriate relationships with female sexual predators will be conflicted. She made them erect, being erect is good because it feels good. But the relationship is illegal and wrong.

- Kids will be mentally confused by sexual molestation. When something that sh*tty happens to a kid they can do mental backflips to see it in a positive light and avoid processing the harm it did. I had a student whose Mother and Uncle murdered his Father, now she is doing lifen prison over it. His way of shrugging it off was to say he wasn't very close to his Father anyway. His Uncle told me he doesnt much talk to anyone about it. I suggested therapy because the Uncle had 8 other kids and he was just going around with those feelings, not processing them. A kid is likely to spend a period of time trying to mentally turn that negative experience into a positive one in their heads, as opposed to admitting the over all reality of it.

And the tone of such books over all is that the experience or the author or protagonist was a net negative. They have to seek help to make heads or tails of what happened. This encourages communication. Kids who read about someone who had a similar experience but then reached out for help dealing with it are FAR more likely to do the same. There is no scenario in which arming a kid with the ability to describe what they're going through, or what someone is doing to them, is a net negative.

And no one suggested LESS "reading, writing, 'rithmetic"...that came from your own brain. I said the idea that that's all education is and ever should be is idiotic, especially by anyone who spends any significant amount of time screeching about the vulnerabilities of the children.

Why do you keep calling it 'rithmetic'? Seems weird if you're attempting to make arithmetic seem like some sort of dumb redneck thing.

Children don't need to be exposed to the inappropriate horrors of molestation. You teach them to not allow anyone to touch your privates and to tell your parents, teachers, principal, whoever if an adult does that to you.

Conveying the message in an age appropriate manner is very easy to do and does not require having children read some guy's book about how thrilling, confusing and pleasurable his family molestation experience was.

Stop trying to conflate the two. People like you are the absolute last people I would ever want speaking on the subject to other people's children because while you think you have a virtuous outlook and you think you're helping kids, you're in fact exposing them to confusing and sexually inappropriate material.
 
teaching highschoolers and middleschoolers about birth control and stds is a issue? istg thats probably more applicable important than 95% of the curriculum that kids are taught in school, how is Animal Farm and derivatives going to protect you from stds and unwanted pregnancies?

Did I say that teaching high schoolers and middle schoolers about birth control and STDs is an issue? Go back and reread my posts and if you want to respond about what I'm talking about directly, then respond to that. Otherwise you're just attempting a strawman argument here.

There is a HUGE difference in allowing a book about some kid's recollection about performing like a porn star for his uncle and teaching kids that may be sexually active about protecting themselves from diseases and unwanted pregnancies.
 
Creepy as fuck to call someone a "social prude" for not wanting children to be exposed to sexually inappropriate material.

Yes I'm absolutely a prude when it comes to children and sex.

Again, sexually inappropriate is not easily defined, and certainly shouldn't be defined by prudes - but should clearly be carefully considered.

Some would label everything inappropriate.
 
Something about the PNW architecture just looks meh to me. Beautiful landscapes though. Lived in Seattle for a few years and I feel the same about there too.

I can't say I blame you. I wish it were really so bad here that people would stop coming, because it is so damn crowded here compared to when I was growing up. You win on that one...
Our architecture is bland and formulaic. Definitely not wrong
...Ban the Bible?
Youve got my vote.
 
You take your selected empircal data as facts. The studies you take as fact could have omitted certain aspects of said programs leading to an innacurate representation of its effectiveness. Im sure you know that having studies to support a thing, means something, but to have it as a given is dishonest af. You need a critical evaluation correcting for biases and ommissions.

Queer theory should be made available for queer kids, but kids who arent shouldnt have to be subjected to that. Especially not without the consent of their parents.

Again, no one is arguing for the information to merely be a given, that's not what I said and you know its not. You're making a contention that it's okay to selectively dismiss data if you're uncomfortable with what it says. The peer review process us specifically for critical evaluation. Data can be scrutinized, this data is not widely scrutinized by anyone in relevant fields. Its scrutinized by prudent parents and religious organizations.

I'm not against parental opt-outs, however suggesting that kids dont need to learn how to interact with kids who may be altogether different is pretty absurd. Part of the greatest relevance of institutionalized schooling IS the social interaction aspect, and there are just more openly queer kids. This is having political consequences. Forcing this perspective on Gen Z and Gen Alpha is already souring them on any idea of conservatism. No better way to pour gas on a fire of sexual revolution than to blatantly censor youth. That genie isnt going back into the bottle, regardless of how hard the far right is trying to oppress it.
 
What an evil man for not wanting 3rd grade and younger kids to be reading books depicting blowjobs and molestation.

Book ban laws weren't necessary when everyone other than pedos thought kids reading books depicting blowjobs and molestation was bad. Now that we have a large swath of the country saying that it's educational and good for them, we need politicians to overstep boundaries that never needed to be overstepped in the past in order to protect children from creeps.
Yeah, reminds me of the "dont say gay" mumbo jumbo.

Perhaps he didnt make it specific enough, for example, actually putting dont say gay in the bill. Now, it's a mess.

Doesnt change what any person that isnt retarded knew he was trying to keep pornography out of school libraries.
 
Why do you keep calling it 'rithmetic'? Seems weird if you're attempting to make arithmetic seem like some sort of dumb redneck thing.

Children don't need to be exposed to the inappropriate horrors of molestation. You teach them to not allow anyone to touch your privates and to tell your parents, teachers, principal, whoever if an adult does that to you.

Conveying the message in an age appropriate manner is very easy to do and does not require having children read some guy's book about how thrilling, confusing and pleasurable his family molestation experience was.

Stop trying to conflate the two. People like you are the absolute last people I would ever want speaking on the subject to other people's children because while you think you have a virtuous outlook and you think you're helping kids, you're in fact exposing them to confusing and sexually inappropriate material.
That’s what you teach kids in HS?
 
IMG-4361.gif

I can't believe that there were people who thought this dude had a snowball's chance in hell
 
I am confused about "Queer Theory" and what it entails? From the sound of it, it seems unneccesary. Yes, queer people exist and thats perfectly fine, if people have a problem with queer people existing, they need to get mental help. I don't understand why any more attention should be studied on it? Yes, I agree education on contraceptives and consent is crucial but that is a universal thing.

"Queer theory is a critical theory that examines and critiques society's definitions of gender and sexuality, with the goal of revealing the social and power structures at play in our everyday lives."

I dont think that needs to be taught at the elementary level, necessarily. However the first time one of my Sons asked me what racism was he was in 3rd grade. This is because they're aware of what Black History Month and MLK Day are. The fear-mongering about anything with the word "theory" in it comes from the same outrage that has always existed with teaching of History in school. Reactionaries demand American exceptionalism, and that nothing makes their kids feel bad about being American, or more specifically white American, and now let's throw in straight, just for kicks.

And yet I'm sure we can ALL remember knowing at least one queer kid and that they may have been treated differently than everyone else. That the system itself interacted with them differently than everyone else (they were not taken as seriously). This is really more to do with intersectionality (which has ALWAYS at least been touched upon in US schools), but got lumped in with all the "theory" boogeyman hysteria. If there are kids calling each other "gay" as a social slur (common even in elementary school) then they can be taught why they even begin to think that's at all negative, unless the person opposing this wants it to remain negative, I dont see a logical objection.
 
Again, no one is arguing for the information to merely be a given, that's not what I said and you know its not. You're making a contention that it's okay to selectively dismiss data if you're uncomfortable with what it says. The peer review process us specifically for critical evaluation. Data can be scrutinized, this data is not widely scrutinized by anyone in relevant fields. Its scrutinized by prudent parents and religious organizations.

I'm not against parental opt-outs, however suggesting that kids dont need to learn how to interact with kids who may be altogether different is pretty absurd. Part of the greatest relevance of institutionalized schooling IS the social interaction aspect, and there are just more openly queer kids. This is having political consequences. Forcing this perspective on Gen Z and Gen Alpha is already souring them on any idea of conservatism. No better way to pour gas on a fire of sexual revolution than to blatantly censor youth. That genie isnt going back into the bottle, regardless of how hard the far right is trying to oppress it.
Im not sure I am making that contention, im saying a critical evaluation is good! A peer review is not infallible, and isnt as useful for the type of evaluation that would be warranted than a meta analaysis or a more systemic review might be.

Also im not saying kids dont need to learn how to interact with other kids, however different they may be. Its kind of interesting that from your perspective those queer kids are so different that they need to be highlighted infront of the class and essentially humiliated infront of their peers, who may not even see them as different as your suggesting they are.

But I get where you are coming from. I just dont agree that forcing queer theory on kids that arent queer so that they become more understanding, is the only way for kids to get along with eachother. Nor do I think its justifiable to do so without parents expressed consent.
 
Why do you keep calling it 'rithmetic'? Seems weird if you're attempting to make arithmetic seem like some sort of dumb redneck thing.

Children don't need to be exposed to the inappropriate horrors of molestation. You teach them to not allow anyone to touch your privates and to tell your parents, teachers, principal, whoever if an adult does that to you.

Conveying the message in an age appropriate manner is very easy to do and does not require having children read some guy's book about how thrilling, confusing and pleasurable his family molestation experience was.

Stop trying to conflate the two. People like you are the absolute last people I would ever want speaking on the subject to other people's children because while you think you have a virtuous outlook and you think you're helping kids, you're in fact exposing them to confusing and sexually inappropriate material.

Holy sh*t you really ARE that comically stupid.

Prudence doesnt stop sexual molestation, nor does modesty. A child is just not going to let an adult touch their private parts?? Lolz

You are woefully unaware of power dynamics, and I sincerely hope you're not in charge of anyone's kids. I have to take courses on this stuff to maintain my Coach's license as well as pass a background check. Kids dont just talk when they've been molested, and the best way to teach them to is to relate to them, allow them to describe and divulge their experience, and create a trusting environment where they feel comfortable first even talking about it. And second giving details.

There is nothing simple about this subject, and to even try to suggest some vague nonsense like "age appropriation" of material being simple is comically misguided and nothing more than a feelings argument. And your feelings, not the kids'.
 
Im not sure I am making that contention, im saying a critical evaluation is good! A peer review is not infallible, and isnt as useful for the type of evaluation that would be warranted than a meta analaysis or a more systemic review might be.

Also im not saying kids dont need to learn how to interact with other kids, however different they may be. Its kind of interesting that from your perspective those queer kids are so different that they need to be highlighted infront of the class and essentially humiliated infront of their peers, who may not even see them as different as your suggesting they are.

But I get where you are coming from. I just dont agree that forcing queer theory on kids that arent queer so that they become more understanding, is the only way for kids to get along with eachother. Nor do I think its justifiable to do so without parents expressed consent.

I dont think we are that far apart. You are expressing concerns that I would consider valid ones that lean conservative, but dont resist the impending societal change. I dont think teaching intersectionality of queer existence requires outing kids in the student body. It can be done without singling people out. Its actually less of a problem than race, because its impossible not to notice the black kids in a room. It also just may give kids who do readily accept their queer peers an idea as to why their parents might have mixed reactions. But then again the reactionary groups also expressly detest the idea that kids might learn that their parents' views are silly at best, and harmful at worst.

I dont agree with forcing queer theory, necessarily, which is why I agree with opt-outs.
 
I can't believe that there were people who thought this dude had a snowball's chance in hell
When he first started gaining some traction with the conservatives I thought maybe he had a shot. Just being young and popular at the moment made me think he could beat the geezers. Once I learned more about him his chances in my mind faded. No charisma and lots of culture war politics.

The white boots were the beginning of the end for him.

FeSt2reaYAAuSSh.jpg:large
 
Is this a diary entry or do you have a source that says this was in a school library?

Seriously though this has no place in schools if true. Gay incest between underage boys, 🤮. What kind of mutant writes this shit?
 
No, RDS wouldn't have cabinet of his family member and unqualified clowns like Scaramucci or Bannon.



If he put friends into places of power while he was a governor, why wouldn't he do the same thing as president?

When he first started gaining some traction with the conservatives I thought maybe he had a shot. Just being young and popular at the moment made me think he could beat the geezers. Once I learned more about him his chances in my mind faded. No charisma and lots of culture war politics.

The white boots were the beginning of the end for him.

FeSt2reaYAAuSSh.jpg:large
FeUVvPTXoAAbe-4.jpg
 
Back
Top