New "don't say gay" bill in Florida

[Elixir]

But they don't need to do that

Naked assertion.
IME, the Catholic schools ARE more concerned with the parents’ ability to pay exorbitant tuition than with the kids’ academic performance.

Then perhaps you are less familiar with the Catholic schools than I am?

Do you recognize that possibility?
Tom

Sure Tom. Not only possible, but very probable in fact.
I also entertain the possibility that "Catholic Schools" are less of a monolith than they used to be.
We still get fliers from the Catholic school my wife attended in the 60s/early 70s, begging for money ... doesn't appear that much has changed there. In fact there are even a couple of staff that are still there from that era - they must be like, a hundred! I sure as hell wouldn't mess with them.
But back to your assertion... why don't Catholic schools need to cherry pick their students in order to attain a higher measurable level of academic performance than say, the public school on the other side of the tracks?
I can think of several factors, and all of them are kinds of mechanisms that do the cherry picking for them - starting with what you say; the parents. Then there's their locations, their alumni lists, the colleges and universities that solicit their students... the list goes on. But in the end, it's still cherry picking their student body, even if they don't have to do the hands-on dirty work of rejecting the undesirables.

 

[TomC]

I'd rather lose the Catholic bashing derail.

Notice, I didn't ask nicely.
Tom

 

[marc]

Of course they can cherry pick enrollment. But they don't need to do that. Parents who don't much care about their children's education have to work two or three jobs to keep a roof over their head don't bother going to the fuss and have time for participation or money for the expense of private education.

I'd rather lose the Catholic bashing derail.
I'm asking nicely.
Tom

I'm not bashing Catholics at all. This can apply to any private or charter school, religiously inclined or not.

 

[Gospel]

Desantis is doing a great job turning genuine concerns over the vague partition of the law that doesn't pertain to Kindergarteners into this;

View attachment 38000

He knows Disney workers (AKA the LGBTQ segment of Disney Customers/Employees) aren't against the Kindergarten part of the law but are against the vague ass part of the law that reaches beyond Kindergarten. Every time he's asked about said concerns he brings up Kindergarteners. Like no shit sherlock, I'm ok with that part of it, its the other crap in there that leaves way too much open for interpretation. But he and his voters are used to making up their own interpretations (looking at my wife's bible right now), so they see no cause for alarm.

Edit:: Typos & Q.

Unsurprising that some Disney workers are mad they can’t sexualize children.

Disney World employees child predator sting operation

Three Walt Disney World employees, a registered nurse and two military veterans were among 17 suspects arrested in an undercover sting targeting suspected child predators in Central Florida, according to reports.

www.ajc.com

Four Disney employees arrested in Florida human trafficking, child predator sting

The campaign, called Operation March Sadness 2, led to the arrests of 108 people, the Polk County Sheriff's Office said.

www.nbcnews.com

Two Disney employees among 17 arrested in child pornography sting in Florida

"Each one of these arrests has removed a predator from our streets, and the internet," Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said in a statement.

www.nbcnews.com

So instead of recognizing that the bill doesn't only cover K-8 (which I'm ok with it covering K-8), you'd rather join the rest of the delusional citizens of the earth in denial that it also (ever so vaguely) addresses grades beyond K-8.

 

[prideandfall]

Could you give the non-groomer, non-pedophile, explanation as to why you need to talk to K-3 kids about their sexuality?

because sexuality is completely benign, to the point of being slightly tedious, if you don't inflate it in this disgusting bloat of obsessive prudishness.
it's something we all do, and it's fine... shrouding it in this air of repressed mystery for the first 15 years of a person's life and then telling them to figure it out for themselves, and then blaming them for STDs or pregnancies that happen, is the height of stupidity.

we should be showing porn to 5 year olds in school and then just going "so, this is fucking. it's not a big deal. you'll all be doing it some day" before moving on to how to write in cursive for the afternoon.

And keep this from their parents?

because their parents are literally, physically, retarded and should have things kept from them.
i don't know what in the fuck is up with the american obsession with the idea that being too stupid to not shit out a bowl full of crotch fruit somehow means you're entitled to be responsible for the existence and well being of another human being, but it's utterly ridiculous and should stop immediately.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This bill is just another example of conservative narcissism and authoritarianism masquerading as "parental rights". This isn't just stupid, it is downright harmful.

Could you give the non-groomer, non-pedophile, explanation as to why you need to talk to K-3 kids about their sexuality? And keep this from their parents?

1) It's about not accepting homosexual parents--school had better not interfere with demonizing them!

2) It's better to start sex ed a bit before it's needed--thus sexuality should be touched on before puberty. You don't need much detail at that point, but the law doesn't allow anything at all. They would prefer what happened to someone I knew long ago: Home alone, knew absolutely nothing about menstruation when she got her first period. Ended up calling an ambulance because that's what you should do with uncontrollable bleeding. (This was long, long before the era of cell phones, she had no way to reach her parents.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Modern parents seem to commonly expect the school system to parent their children, and then have the audacity to complain bitterly when the teachers don't parent the children the way the parents want them to parent.

Do they? Or do parents expect schools to teach reading, writing, etc., and leave values to the parents. When (some) teachers try to break the bond between parent and child, parents rightly get upset.

No. Some parents get upset when the teachers try to break the indoctrination. Truth from teachers doesn't cause harm except to those who don't want their kids to know the truth.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Teachers don't need permission from parents to do their job. They work for the school board. Let me ask you something, do you believe that a student is more likely to succeed with or without parent participation?

Are you asking me this?

I think that the main reason Catholic and other private schools out perform the public schools so much is due to having more engaged and invested parents. Parental participation is crucial.
Tom

You misspelled cherry picking their enrollment.

The two are not incompatible. Yes, they cherry pick those who are in a position to learn. That's due to a combination of factors.

This is a good thing--grouping students by ability results in more overall learning. It's just pretty much politically unacceptable to do it in the public system.

 

[Ford]

And his dodging the real issue works. Just yesterday I asked my wife her opinion on the Mickey Mouse war (yeah I called it that) & she said " I agree with Disantis. If Disney prides itself on being a kid-friendly organization they shouldn't be against banning sex talks with babies". her words exactly.

I got into a similar discussion with a former co-worker. He started with the same talking point as everyone in favor..."did you even read the bill?" Then of course, he insisted that it was designed to keep k-3 kids from being taught how to have sex. Apparently, "Timmy has two dads" = full on gay porn. Who knew? Tommy has a mom and a dad? Fine. Tammy has two moms? "Shield your eyes, kids!"

I even laid out a scenario where it would backfire (similar to that teacher's letter that's been circulating) and he doubled down. No teaching about orientation, gender, roles. Nothing. Then he said " Again, orientation is not the issue."

I gave up not long after that.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Teachers don't need permission from parents to do their job. They work for the school board. Let me ask you something, do you believe that a student is more likely to succeed with or without parent participation?

Are you asking me this?

I think that the main reason Catholic and other private schools out perform the public schools so much is due to having more engaged and invested parents. Parental participation is crucial.
Tom

You misspelled cherry picking their enrollment.

I didn't misspell anything.

Of course they can cherry pick enrollment.

Well, there you have it. Why do private schools do better? They get to pick the kids that go there.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Teachers don't need permission from parents to do their job. They work for the school board. Let me ask you something, do you believe that a student is more likely to succeed with or without parent participation?

Are you asking me this?

I think that the main reason Catholic and other private schools out perform the public schools so much is due to having more engaged and invested parents. Parental participation is crucial.
Tom

You misspelled cherry picking their enrollment.

The two are not incompatible.

Certainly one is much more important.

Yes, they cherry pick those who are in a position to learn.

You mean "smarter".

That's due to a combination of factors.

Like general born with intelligence.

This is a good thing--grouping students by ability results in more overall learning. It's just pretty much politically unacceptable to do it in the public system.

What are you on about. Students have been separated in public schools often. High School includes different levels, accels, APs for classes, separating the smart from the not as smart. It is just that the average grade is brought down because the public school is provided the gift of having to teach the not as smart, where as private schools get to weed those kids out, while also helping to drop local public school scores by enacting a bit of public school brain drain (taking the smarter kids).

 

[laughing dog]

This bill is just another example of conservative narcissism and authoritarianism masquerading as "parental rights". This isn't just stupid, it is downright harmful.

Could you give the non-groomer, non-pedophile, explanation as to why you need to talk to K-3 kids about their sexuality? And keep this from their I have no need to talk to anyone about their sexuality.

Simply put, it is about education and making a child feel comfortable in their world. Anyone who has raised children understands that even young children can be very perceptive and curious about the world around them. They can ask lots of embarrassing (to an adult) questions as they wonder about their social environment. Anyone who has had children in school understands that children will sometimes ask teachers questions that they are either uncomfortable to ask their parents or afraid to ask their parents. I would not want to hamper a teacher's ability and responsibility to help a child learn about the world or themselves.

For example, if one of my children had asked a question of a teacher about sexuality in first grade, I would have wanted the teacher to feel like she/he could have appropriately responded without the fear that some bigot or fucktard would find out and raise hell.

 

[Jarhyn]

This bill is just another example of conservative narcissism and authoritarianism masquerading as "parental rights". This isn't just stupid, it is downright harmful.

Could you give the non-groomer, non-pedophile, explanation as to why you need to talk to K-3 kids about their sexuality? And keep this from their I have no need to talk to anyone about their sexuality.

Simply put, it is about education and making a child feel comfortable in their world. Anyone who has raised children understands that even young children can be very perceptive and curious about the world around them. They can ask lots of embarrassing (to an adult) questions as they wonder about their social environment. Anyone who has had children in school understands that children will sometimes ask teachers questions that they are either uncomfortable to ask their parents or afraid to ask their parents. I would not want to hamper a teacher's ability and responsibility to help a child learn about the world or themselves.

For example, if one of my children had asked a question of a teacher about sexuality in first grade, I would have wanted the teacher to feel like she/he could have appropriately responded without the fear that some bigot or fucktard would find out and raise hell.

So, I'm 100% on board with this view.

Unfortunately, on the bigot and fucktard side of the universe, they see us as bigots and fucktards for not supporting their bigoted fucktardedness.

In some ways we are bigoted against bigoted fucktards and that's pretty much the only appropriate direction to turn that in the first place, and being so doesn't make us fucktards for saying "no".

It is not intolerant to fail to tolerate intolerance because intolerance does not ask for tolerance in the first place. It cannot do so in good faith.

Maybe evil triumphs sometimes because good is "dumb", but good will always exist to challenge and generally win because what evil considers "dumb" is smart enough to recognize the evil in the first place.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

These people are about protecting the children in some QAnon-esque perverted sort of way, in which they are imagining a threat to protect the children from.

Of all the things children have to deal with, from threats of hunger, lack of access to information, dealing with the social world of the Internet... why do some seem to ignore the real problems and make up imaginary ones, and fight angrily at School Board meetings over them? CRT, trans- and gay- coddling phobia, and the like.

 

[TSwizzle]

Could you give the non-groomer, non-pedophile, explanation as to why you need to talk to K-3 kids about their sexuality? And keep this from their parents?

The proponents' enthusiasm for getting this stuff into schools and everywhere else they can think of is well creepy. Really, it's akin to proselytizing a religion.

 

[ZiprHead]

I agree. The proponents of the "Don't Say Gay" Bill are creepy.

 

[TomC]

A big part of the problem here is the wildly varying degrees of awareness and sophistication of people in that age group. "Age appropriate" is a really complicated subject when dealing with 12 y/o people. This has become more acute in the age of the internet.

I can well imagine a relatively sophisticated student asking a cheeky question of her gay teacher. A question to which any answer from the teacher will cause the student next to her, who kinda believes that her mother is a virgin, to freak out. Then the less worldly student runs home after school and gives her parents a garbled version of what actually happened. Parents who already think that gay teachers are a danger to the children.

Much hilarity ensues.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

Desantis is doing a great job turning genuine concerns over the vague partition of the law that doesn't pertain to Kindergarteners into this;

View attachment 38000

He knows Disney workers (AKA the LGBTQ segment of Disney Customers/Employees) aren't against the Kindergarten part of the law but are against the vague ass part of the law that reaches beyond Kindergarten. Every time he's asked about said concerns he brings up Kindergarteners. Like no shit sherlock, I'm ok with that part of it, its the other crap in there that leaves way too much open for interpretation. But he and his voters are used to making up their own interpretations (looking at my wife's bible right now), so they see no cause for alarm.

Edit:: Typos & Q.

Unsurprising that some Disney workers are mad they can’t sexualize children.

Disney World employees child predator sting operation

Three Walt Disney World employees, a registered nurse and two military veterans were among 17 suspects arrested in an undercover sting targeting suspected child predators in Central Florida, according to reports.

www.ajc.com

Four Disney employees arrested in Florida human trafficking, child predator sting

The campaign, called Operation March Sadness 2, led to the arrests of 108 people, the Polk County Sheriff's Office said.

www.nbcnews.com

Two Disney employees among 17 arrested in child pornography sting in Florida

"Each one of these arrests has removed a predator from our streets, and the internet," Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said in a statement.

www.nbcnews.com

Former Tampa police officer arrested on 100 counts of child porn possession

Paul Mumford, 61, was arrested Wednesday afternoon, Chief Mary O’Connor said in a news conference.

www.tampabay.com

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/south-dakota/articles/2022-02-18/2-sioux-falls-officers-charged-in-child-pornography-cases

Ex-Long Beach police officer admits distributing child pornography

Anthony Mark Brown came under investigation in May 2020 when Long Beach Police received an anonymous tip regarding a possible crime against a child.

www.latimes.com

Former Police Officer And Calvert Resident Sentenced To 3 Years For Child Porn Possession - The BayNet

The video files included a series of known victims of child abuse identified through NCMEC.

thebaynet.com

Boston police officer arraigned on 15 felony counts in child pornography case - The Boston Globe

Officer Joe Martinez was arraigned in Dedham District Court Friday on five counts each of possession of child pornography, posing a child in the nude, and photographing intimate parts of a child, according to court records.

www.bostonglobe.com

I'll tell you what my point is if you tell me yours first.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A big part of the problem here is the wildly varying degrees of awareness and sophistication of people in that age group. "Age appropriate" is a really complicated subject when dealing with 12 y/o people. This has become more acute in the age of the internet.

I can well imagine a relatively sophisticated student asking a cheeky question of her gay teacher. A question to which any answer from the teacher will cause the student next to her, who kinda believes that her mother is a virgin, to freak out. Then the less worldly student runs home after school and gives her parents a garbled version of what actually happened. Parents who already think that gay teachers are a danger to the children.

Much hilarity ensues.
Tom

We are talking about curriculum and a teacher's ability to be able to assist a student asking for help... not show and tell.

 

[TomC]

We are talking about curriculum and a teacher's ability to be able to help a student

Oh.
Sorry.
I thought we were talking about Florida law.
Tom