Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

How much discussion of human sexuality is appropriate in schools?  More specifically, how much discussion—and advocacy—for deviant/not normal sexuality is appropriate in schools?  Combine all of that with politics, and how much is appropriate?  We begin with Florida’s HB 1557, which was just signed into law by Florida governor Ron DeSantis.  The text of the bill is available here.  

Background is provided by Kylee Zempel at The Federalist:

Despite the corrupt media’s best efforts to derail Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill by dishonestly framing it as “Don’t Say Gay,” Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the bill into law on Monday [03-28-22] to the benefit of families across the state.

The media didn’t stand down, of course. Not only did they continue to give the impression that under the new law, the word ‘gay’ is off-limits, but they declined to mention whom the new law is intended to protect. That’s because don’t want you to know it’s for five-year-olds.

They also decline to mention the word “gay” does not appear in the bill, not once.  ABC News is representative of the ubiquitous lies about the intent and content of the bill:

ABC, and virtually every other D/S/C propaganda arm media outlet lied about the intent of the law, and also misled with their “in some grades” line.  Here’s the relevant text from the law:

Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.

Why would ABC and others lie about this straightforward bill?  Because they know most Americans support it if they knew its true content.  Zempel explains further:

ABC News’ verbiage is no accident. By framing a very narrow age group as ‘some grades’ — something that could just as easily be referring to kids at prom — ABC intentionally diverts attention from the fact that the kids in danger of prematurely learning about ‘tucking’ and ‘binding’ and gay sex are children who still have all their baby teeth and wear pull-ups to sleep. They’re kids who can’t get up from the dinner table until they eat five more bites of peas and who are tucked into bed and sound asleep by 8 p.m. They haven’t the faintest notions of puberty and no idea how mommy gets a baby in her belly.

credit: imed.k12.ms.us

But saying, ‘The bill bans lessons on sexual orientation or gender identity for 5-year-olds who still wet the bed and check for monsters under it,’ doesn’t serve the media’s anti-parent and pro-LGBT-all-the-time function the way ‘some grades’ and ‘don’t say gay’ do. So the public is served with left-wing media spin.

Florida’s Parental Rights in Education legislation doesn’t prevent ‘some grades’ from ‘saying gay.’ It prevents kindergarteners from consuming pornographic picture books at school and five-year-olds from being encouraged in the classroom to consider pronouns that don’t correspond with reality. More than that, it does exactly what the real name of the bill says: It preserves parents’ rights in the education of their own children.

It’s simple: supporters of the limited bill believe parents are primarily responsible for the education of their children, all facets of that education.  They believe instruction about sex has no place in the lower grades.  They also believe gay and trans grooming and indoctrination has no place in schools, ever.  Those who oppose the bill, well informed or not, believe the opposite.  They want children to be groomed and indoctrinated, alienated from their parents, their families.

I’m sure, gentle readers, you’ve probably already read as much as you need about this bill and the fake “controversy” ginned up by D/S/Cs, groomers and their supporters.  Like me, you wonder about the sanity of those determined to indoctrinate and groom children who can barely handle silverware.  You wonder about the sheer evil and stupidity of people who think they own the children of others and have a duty to warp and abuse them.  You wonder how anyone can think this sort of thing of paramount importance when our nation is falling apart and we could face WWII at any moment.

Consider now the point of view of a professional teacher, for that is what I was, in many respects what I’ve always been and what I remain.  I assure you, gentle readers, it is the point of view of all professional teachers.

There is no place for discussion of sexuality in general in schools, with a few exceptions.  Some schools provide instruction in human sexuality, which is primarily about hygiene, birth control, anatomy, reproduction, potential diseases, and ethical dating when children reach puberty.  It might be proper to discuss narrow aspects of such issues in discussing a specific work of literature, or history, and the same may be true in sociology and psychology classes, not to indoctrinate or groom, but to explain human nature and behavior in context with legitimate curricular materials.  But gay, trans, and any other kind of advocacy, indoctrination and/or grooming is a boundary violation, and in the states where it’s not a crime, it ought to be.  I suspect the empty, warped souls who want this will drive free, sane states to enact such laws where necessary.  The voluntarily observed strictures of normal society are apparently no longer adequate to the task in some places.

Kids really don’t know much about biology or human sexuality.  They’ve seen plenty of naked bodies and know about what to snicker, but that’s about it.  The rest is up to their parents, not teachers.

Boundary violations occur when a teacher crosses ethical lines, such as the line I’ve just explained.  Teachers have limited powers and responsibilities.  They are not the parents of the children entrusted to them, and absent clear evidence of child abuse or neglect, which states require them to report, may not cross the parental rights boundary.  Good teachers care about their students, they do their best to guide them, but smart teachers don’t play psychologist, or do anything beyond teaching their discipline without the knowledge and specific consent of parents.  If a child is distraught or troubled, they refer them to a counselor.  They do this because their job is to teach their discipline, and along the way, provide civic education.

Among the first things I told my high school English students at the beginning of every year–children 9-12—was we would discuss politics only as necessary to explain works of literature.  I would not impose my political beliefs on anyone, in fact, they would likely not be able to figure them out.  Nor did I care what they wrote–as long as it was responsive to the assignment–only how well they wrote it.  Their opinions would not affect their grades, so long as they were well and appropriately expressed.  The only exception was in 11th grade–American Lit.–when we discussed literature revolving around the founding of the nation, including the Declaration and Constitution.  Then, I provided a single class political primer so they could understand how those documents were being interpreted today and why.  It may surprise some to know few 11th grade students have any idea of their political leanings.  They may know mom and dad are Republicans and don’t much care for Democrats, but they have no idea what that means or why.

I also told them discussion of religion was not banned in school, nor was prayer or Bible reading.  I explained the Supreme Court never banned religion, and we would discuss religious issues, again, only as necessary to explain some of our literature.  The exception was mythology, where a more comprehensive study of Christianity, and a variety of other faiths, past and present, was necessary for understanding.  I explained they could pray or read the Bible so long as in so doing, they didn’t distract themselves or others, or otherwise disrupt the class.  No leaping up in the middle of class and asking God to smite the evil English teacher!

An earnest young man came to teach history and coach—surprise—and announced he saw teaching as his opportunity to minister to kids.  Our principal took him aside and kindly explained he could be a teacher or preacher, and the essential boundaries, but not both.  He decided to remain and teach.  Good teachers also influence by example.

I did not tell them anything about sex, because everyone in my mid-sized Texas school district understood that topic wasn’t done in school.  Kids weren’t allowed to swear aloud, and certainly never at a teacher.  We occasionally discussed such issues as they applied to human nature.  Explaining that Curley’s Wife in Of Mice And Men, really wasn’t a slut when she touched Lennie.  She was terribly lonely, abused by Curley, and women reflexively touch things and people when they’re comfortable with them.  In mythology class, we had to delve a bit more deeply upon occasion, but always in context with the literature, to explain why people of the past believed and acted as they did, how their oral traditions and literature reflected their beliefs.  The larger point is it’s always best not to judge those of the past by contemporary mores.  To do that keeps us from learning the lessons of history, and of human nature.

In our school, the adults were fully in charge, and were expected to act entirely as adults.  I told the kids I could be their friend, not their 15 year-old homey, but their fully mature and responsible adult friend.  I discussed my home life only in passing.  If the kids saw Mrs. Manor and I riding our trikes, they’d comment on that, and I would ride a trike to school the next day so they could see it.  I invited them to choir and symphony concerts in which I participated and gave them extra credit for writing comprehensive critiques, coherent criticism being part of the curriculum.  Beyond that, the kids knew little to nothing of my life, and certainly nothing of my sexual preferences.  They were always amazed when they bumped into me in a store, apparently thinking I didn’t exist outside the school building.  This is true of all professional teachers.

I did not violate any boundary because doing so was wrong and unethical, and I had no time to do anything but teach as much of my discipline as possible.  No professional teacher does.  As regular readers know, one of the things that made it easier for me to retire was the constant and relentless seizure of class time for matters having little or nothing to do with education.

This is a kindergarten teacher (right)

I see “teachers” responding to the Florida law, wailing in horror that they will no longer be able to indoctrinate their students.  No longer will they be able to tell kids all about their homosexual or lesbian partners.  No longer will they be able to groom kids, to encourage and help them to “transition,” to hide what they were doing from parents, to shape the world in their image.  I can only say such emotionally disturbed, unstable people should not be anywhere near children.  Any principal who, knowing what they’re doing, does not fire them, should be nowhere near teachers.  Any Superintendent who allows this should not be in charge, and any school board that allows it should likewise be run out of office.

I’ve been in the arts for more than a half-century.  I’ve known and liked many gay and lesbian people, including gay and lesbian teachers.  Most faculty and kids, and even parents, knew they were gay and lesbian, but those teachers respected the boundaries, and everyone was thereby able to judge them on their abilities and performance, which is as it should be.  I’ve often said I have no problem with a teacher who happens to be black, or a teacher who happens to be gay.  I have a problem with black teachers and gay teachers because that identity consumes them and compels them to try to consume others.

A variety of organizations, including Disney(?!) are vowing to sue Florida to remove the law.  We may be embarking on a decade or more of legal battles that will determine the limits of America’s culture.  Should American law be warped to not only allow, but encourage grooming and indoctrination, should it remove responsibility and authority over children from parents and give it to unaccountable school officials, Normal Americans will not abide it.

It would be wise for groomers, indoctrinators and their D/S/C supporters to consider carefully what they’re doing.  Should the law ever protect them instead of children, parents will no longer rely upon, or care about, the law.  Should that day arrive, America is doomed, and so are those who glory in the abuse of children.