FLE Committee

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was so disappointed in the 4th grade FLE - it was one lesson and my kid got nothing about of it. They didn't even learn about the opposite sex.

In 4th grade it’s more important to learn about their cycle then boys’ body parts,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was so disappointed in the 4th grade FLE - it was one lesson and my kid got nothing about of it. They didn't even learn about the opposite sex.

In 4th grade it’s more important to learn about their cycle then boys’ body parts,

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, apparently, they have tabled the decision to combine genders until the Fall. Maybe, until after the elections?

Reid said that we don't always do what the majority "wants" because we want every one to be "safe."

Why is it "safer" to combine genders for FLE. Parents don't want it, students don't want it, teachers don't want it.

Who does want it? The School Board, Dr. Reid, and the FLE committee composed of Democrat progressive activists. I can only think of one reason why.

Reid sucks.

You suck.

Do you have an education degree? Or have you worked in higher levels of ed policy? I already know the answer to that. Unless you do, then zip it.

Yes as a matter of fact I do. Worked as a teacher for FCPS for nearly 10 years. And taught FLE. So stfu.

[Anonymous]

Do you have an education degree? Or have you worked in higher levels of ed policy? I already know the answer to that. Unless you do, then zip it.

You mean like SB member Melanie Meren who worked for the Department of Education? The woman who thinks that eating at "hibachi restaurants" is an example of her support for the Asian community?

I was also a teacher. I have higher degrees. Here is a little secret: those who work at "higher levels of ed policy" are frequently out of touch with the real world of education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, apparently, they have tabled the decision to combine genders until the Fall. Maybe, until after the elections?

Reid said that we don't always do what the majority "wants" because we want every one to be "safe."

Why is it "safer" to combine genders for FLE. Parents don't want it, students don't want it, teachers don't want it.

Who does want it? The School Board, Dr. Reid, and the FLE committee composed of Democrat progressive activists. I can only think of one reason why.

Actually most of the school board seemed against it and had concerns regarding the fact that most people voted on survey they don’t want it.

The committee wants to disregard the survey. it appears that Frisch and Reid also want to disregard it. After all, Reid said that we don't have to do what the majority wants. We need to keep students safe--according to her.

What is safe about combining genders for sex education? Who is this keeping safe? Instead of combining genders, why don't they let those who are uncomfortable with going with their biological gender for instruction opt out?

After all, if they are going through puberty blockers or surgery, they don't really need to learn about periods or birth control. Those are pretty exclusive to biological sex. But, that would be common sense.

You wrote so eloquently what we are all thinking. I also want to add that all of this "stuff" is anti-girl and that is who it hurts the most. We are losing our women and girl only spaces to boys and men. It's wrong and goes against basic women's rights that our foremothers fought so hard for.

No, it’s expanding in their work to include all women.

Wake up. Republicans are actually taking away basic women’s rights all over the country.

The subject of this thread is FLE. The focus of this discussion is sex education and how it is taught.

Please give one good reason to combine sexes for this education. And, let's call out the elephant in the room. This is being pushed by the SB because of the trans kids. So, in "keeping trans kids safe" we are going to make biological girls--many who are already uncomfortable with the topic--share the room and education with biological males. This is wrong.

I understand that it makes no sense for the trans girls to go with the biological girls because the physical needs are different. And, the same for the trans boys to go with the biological boys.

Since trans girls and trans boys are not intending to go forward with the bodies they were born with--what is the point of sex education for them? If they are taking puberty blockers, it would seem that none of this education is needed.

Let them opt out.
I would assume they have already had more education about the functions of their own bodies than most children.

#1 - I was responding to the prior comments.

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, apparently, they have tabled the decision to combine genders until the Fall. Maybe, until after the elections?

Reid said that we don't always do what the majority "wants" because we want every one to be "safe."

Why is it "safer" to combine genders for FLE. Parents don't want it, students don't want it, teachers don't want it.

Who does want it? The School Board, Dr. Reid, and the FLE committee composed of Democrat progressive activists. I can only think of one reason why.

Reid sucks.

They question the results of the survey because "anyone" could have answered it--according to Frisch. Interesting that he thinks that people all over the US are answering FCPS survey questions and that is a problem. However, it is okay to accept huge campaign donations from California for him.

Meanwhile, the focus groups--which were from FCPS and included students were strongly against combining genders.

That’s true.

RWNJs have a habit of spamming polls/surveys. All it takes is one of those “parents defending ed” political operatives to tweet about it and then all of those open school nut jobs will complete the survey, skewing the results.

Now, explain how the "focus groups" were spammed. Also, while you are at it, please explain why they developed a survey if they did not intend to use it.
You also might analyze the members of the FLE committee. Hint: they are not an example of typical Fairfax county parents.

I was responding to the comment about the survey. It's was poorly constructed and RWNJs were able to manipulate it.

[Anonymous]

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

It's old-timey to think that (a) this would be the first time she's hearing about it and (b) that it's anything to feel embarrassed about. Making it a taboo subject perpetuates the unnecessary uncomfortableness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

It's old-timey to think that (a) this would be the first time she's hearing about it and (b) that it's anything to feel embarrassed about. Making it a taboo subject perpetuates the unnecessary uncomfortableness.

Separating the sexes for instruction does not mean it is "taboo." It is only common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, apparently, they have tabled the decision to combine genders until the Fall. Maybe, until after the elections?

Reid said that we don't always do what the majority "wants" because we want every one to be "safe."

Why is it "safer" to combine genders for FLE. Parents don't want it, students don't want it, teachers don't want it.

Who does want it? The School Board, Dr. Reid, and the FLE committee composed of Democrat progressive activists. I can only think of one reason why.

Reid sucks.

They question the results of the survey because "anyone" could have answered it--according to Frisch. Interesting that he thinks that people all over the US are answering FCPS survey questions and that is a problem. However, it is okay to accept huge campaign donations from California for him.

Meanwhile, the focus groups--which were from FCPS and included students were strongly against combining genders.

That’s true.

RWNJs have a habit of spamming polls/surveys. All it takes is one of those “parents defending ed” political operatives to tweet about it and then all of those open school nut jobs will complete the survey, skewing the results.

Now, explain how the "focus groups" were spammed. Also, while you are at it, please explain why they developed a survey if they did not intend to use it.
You also might analyze the members of the FLE committee. Hint: they are not an example of typical Fairfax county parents.

I was responding to the comment about the survey. It's was poorly constructed and RWNJs were able to manipulate it.

Then, please explain why the survey was sent out. Who constructed it? You don't like the results so you blame the survey. I would say that the some on the SB and the committee are the ones "manipulating" it--by claiming it is not valid. And, as stated earlier, the Focus groupsopinions supported the survey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, apparently, they have tabled the decision to combine genders until the Fall. Maybe, until after the elections?

Reid said that we don't always do what the majority "wants" because we want every one to be "safe."

Why is it "safer" to combine genders for FLE. Parents don't want it, students don't want it, teachers don't want it.

Who does want it? The School Board, Dr. Reid, and the FLE committee composed of Democrat progressive activists. I can only think of one reason why.

Reid sucks.

They question the results of the survey because "anyone" could have answered it--according to Frisch. Interesting that he thinks that people all over the US are answering FCPS survey questions and that is a problem. However, it is okay to accept huge campaign donations from California for him.

Meanwhile, the focus groups--which were from FCPS and included students were strongly against combining genders.

That’s true.

RWNJs have a habit of spamming polls/surveys. All it takes is one of those “parents defending ed” political operatives to tweet about it and then all of those open school nut jobs will complete the survey, skewing the results.

Now, explain how the "focus groups" were spammed. Also, while you are at it, please explain why they developed a survey if they did not intend to use it.
You also might analyze the members of the FLE committee. Hint: they are not an example of typical Fairfax county parents.

I was responding to the comment about the survey. It's was poorly constructed and RWNJs were able to manipulate it.

Then, please explain why the survey was sent out. Who constructed it? You don't like the results so you blame the survey. I would say that the some on the SB and the committee are the ones "manipulating" it--by claiming it is not valid. And, as stated earlier, the Focus groupsopinions supported the survey.

I have no idea. I’m not on the SB.

It was a poorly designed survey and the results aren’t meaningful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

It's old-timey to think that (a) this would be the first time she's hearing about it and (b) that it's anything to feel embarrassed about. Making it a taboo subject perpetuates the unnecessary uncomfortableness.

Separating the sexes for instruction does not mean it is "taboo." It is only common sense.

It absolutely perpetuates the “taboo” by separating by gender. It’s part of the oppressive legacy of misogyny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

It's old-timey to think that (a) this would be the first time she's hearing about it and (b) that it's anything to feel embarrassed about. Making it a taboo subject perpetuates the unnecessary uncomfortableness.

Separating the sexes for instruction does not mean it is "taboo." It is only common sense.

It absolutely perpetuates the “taboo” by separating by gender. It’s part of the oppressive legacy of misogyny.

I don't think you understand the meaning of misogyny.. To me, as a woman, forcing girls to share space with boys on such a personal level is the very definition of misogyny. It serves no purpose. No one has yet explained why they want to do this--except Dr. Reid, who said it is to "keep students safe."
This is the very opposite of keeping kids safe. It is exposing them to discomfort on what is a very emotional issue to most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

It's old-timey to think that (a) this would be the first time she's hearing about it and (b) that it's anything to feel embarrassed about. Making it a taboo subject perpetuates the unnecessary uncomfortableness.

Separating the sexes for instruction does not mean it is "taboo." It is only common sense.

It absolutely perpetuates the “taboo” by separating by gender. It’s part of the oppressive legacy of misogyny.

I don't think you understand the meaning of misogyny.. To me, as a woman, forcing girls to share space with boys on such a personal level is the very definition of misogyny. It serves no purpose. No one has yet explained why they want to do this--except Dr. Reid, who said it is to "keep students safe."
This is the very opposite of keeping kids safe. It is exposing them to discomfort on what is a very emotional issue to most.

Misogyny is making girls feel like they have to hide their very normal bodily functions.

Parents are causing the discomfort by treating it like a taboo subject.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

#2 - I don't feel that strongly about combining genders. I know that some prudish families have old-timey feelings about biology and gender though so they aren't comfortable and would prefer perpetuate those feelings and constructs.

I don't think it is considered "old timey feelings" as a young girl who is told that she is going to bleed every month and how she needs to handle it. You may be comfortable with it--but most young girls need to be encouraged and helped through this. Sharing the room with boys is one more factor to make them uncomfortable.

It's old-timey to think that (a) this would be the first time she's hearing about it and (b) that it's anything to feel embarrassed about. Making it a taboo subject perpetuates the unnecessary uncomfortableness.

Separating the sexes for instruction does not mean it is "taboo." It is only common sense.

It absolutely perpetuates the “taboo” by separating by gender. It’s part of the oppressive legacy of misogyny.

I don't think you understand the meaning of misogyny.. To me, as a woman, forcing girls to share space with boys on such a personal level is the very definition of misogyny. It serves no purpose. No one has yet explained why they want to do this--except Dr. Reid, who said it is to "keep students safe."
This is the very opposite of keeping kids safe. It is exposing them to discomfort on what is a very emotional issue to most.

Misogyny is making girls feel like they have to hide their very normal bodily functions.

Parents are causing the discomfort by treating it like a taboo subject.

Out of step opinion.