New FLE program survey live

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Exactly what - be specific - is the point of having drag performers read to and confusing young children? We'll wait.

What's the issue with them? Specifically and other than you don't like men dressed as women.
Because, I'm far more concerned with hetero men, dressing as men, around my daughter than I am some drag queen. Whether they are reading stories or not.

NP here. I have no problem with men dressing however they like. Drag queens are men (a privileged class) dressed in a satirical, sexualized, over-the-top caricature of women. The sexualized aspects of Drag performances are what make them inappropriate for children.

At one point, society agreed that children should not be exposed to adult sexuality. It's sad that we no longer have that common understanding.

Meh. I guess if you keep your kid locked at home, sure. But, the reality is that kids are exposed to sexuality, real and satirical all the time. You can argue if that is good or not but it is not likely to change. And, the fact you're singling out this and not a host of other things . . . not impressed with this argument.


My straight a, good kid by any standard, totally normal, not sexually active . . . whatever barometer the morality police want to apply . . . would not bat an eye at a drag queen reading her a story. Your revulsion at it is yours, not your kid. Now, if the queens are reading porn to the kids . . . . maybe you'd have a point.

Why would you think this is the only thing on which I'm pushing back? I also don't let my kids watch the Super Bowl halftime show. Or other events that are overly sexualized for young kids. I recognize that I'm out of touch with the prevailing culture of "oh, this is just how the world is, so I might as well give up and go along" but that's my choice as a parent. I talk to my kids about their bodies, the differences between male and female bodies, sexuality, etc., but I can't imagine why I would want to deliberately increase their exposure. I think it's super weird that so many parents think it's okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Exactly what - be specific - is the point of having drag performers read to and confusing young children? We'll wait.

What's the issue with them? Specifically and other than you don't like men dressed as women.
Because, I'm far more concerned with hetero men, dressing as men, around my daughter than I am some drag queen. Whether they are reading stories or not.

NP here. I have no problem with men dressing however they like. Drag queens are men (a privileged class) dressed in a satirical, sexualized, over-the-top caricature of women. The sexualized aspects of Drag performances are what make them inappropriate for children.

At one point, society agreed that children should not be exposed to adult sexuality. It's sad that we no longer have that common understanding.

Meh. I guess if you keep your kid locked at home, sure. But, the reality is that kids are exposed to sexuality, real and satirical all the time. You can argue if that is good or not but it is not likely to change. And, the fact you're singling out this and not a host of other things . . . not impressed with this argument.


My straight a, good kid by any standard, totally normal, not sexually active . . . whatever barometer the morality police want to apply . . . would not bat an eye at a drag queen reading her a story. Your revulsion at it is yours, not your kid. Now, if the queens are reading porn to the kids . . . . maybe you'd have a point.

Why would you think this is the only thing on which I'm pushing back? I also don't let my kids watch the Super Bowl halftime show. Or other events that are overly sexualized for young kids. I recognize that I'm out of touch with the prevailing culture of "oh, this is just how the world is, so I might as well give up and go along" but that's my choice as a parent. I talk to my kids about their bodies, the differences between male and female bodies, sexuality, etc., but I can't imagine why I would want to deliberately increase their exposure. I think it's super weird that so many parents think it's okay.

+1 I’m with you! We don’t let our kids watch the Super Bowl halftime show either! We also are careful with shows and movies. It’s so disgusting what’s out there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree that there is nothing shameful about puberty and development. It is a part of life and kids need to learn what's going on with their bodies. But I think it's unrealistic to try to teach these topics in co-ed classes. Whether we like it or not, kids in the 4-6th grades are immature and don't have the emotional intelligence to handle these sorts of lessons in a rational way, like they might do with fractions or long division. Kids are shaped by their families, their peers and what they see on TV/movies/online and unfortunately, that means that they are unlikely to have the maturity to handle the lessons together.

Just my 2 cents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

Sure, it will be okay. But it will be more embarrassing and less useful than if the sexes were separated. Why do we have to make things harder for our kids, about things like this, just to prove a point (to whom?)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

Sure, it will be okay. But it will be more embarrassing and less useful than if the sexes were separated. Why do we have to make things harder for our kids, about things like this, just to prove a point (to whom?)?

To accommodate the trans folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

Sure, it will be okay. But it will be more embarrassing and less useful than if the sexes were separated. Why do we have to make things harder for our kids, about things like this, just to prove a point (to whom?)?

Who says it will be harder or less useful? I know my story is anecdotal, but we were a bunch of catholic school kids and handled mixed puberty lessons just fine.
4-6th graders aren't raising a lot of hands, anyway.
I think we are making a lot of assumptions about how kids will react, many of them erroneous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

Sure, it will be okay. But it will be more embarrassing and less useful than if the sexes were separated. Why do we have to make things harder for our kids, about things like this, just to prove a point (to whom?)?

Who says it will be harder or less useful? I know my story is anecdotal, but we were a bunch of catholic school kids and handled mixed puberty lessons just fine.
4-6th graders aren't raising a lot of hands, anyway.
I think we are making a lot of assumptions about how kids will react, many of them erroneous.

Several teachers have posted. I am not ignoring their posts; maybe you missed them on this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

Sure, it will be okay. But it will be more embarrassing and less useful than if the sexes were separated. Why do we have to make things harder for our kids, about things like this, just to prove a point (to whom?)?

To accommodate the trans folks.

Stop using these kids as political battering rams. It is really only small part of the proposed change.
For example, here is one argument:
"When educators separate classes by gender to teach specific topics, an unintended consequence reinforces the idea that there are ‘women’s issues’ or ‘men’s issues.’

Students benefit from learning about the experiences of all genders because it equips them with an understanding of other people’s bodies, which reduces stigma and builds empathy.

When youth were asked to describe what kind of space sex ed class should be like, a common thread was an environment where everyone is encouraged to learn beyond their own experiences."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love FLE to be taught co-ed and yes, I do have a daughter. Separating gives the illusion that there is something shameful or worth hiding about puberty and development. Teaching everyone together means everyone gets the same information and it's presented just like the math, science or language arts is.

I agree. I think it will be oaky. A million years ago in the 80s, we had to do our health classes together from grades 3-8. This was in large part because we are a small parachil school with 10 kids per class and not enough staff or time to separate. I mean, it has been more than 30 years, but I don't remember being particularly scarred, and I was certainly more knowledgable than my 9th and 10th grade peers when I switched to public: for the first time in that district, boys and girls were together, and boy were they all surprised about what went on with each other's bodies.

Sure, it will be okay. But it will be more embarrassing and less useful than if the sexes were separated. Why do we have to make things harder for our kids, about things like this, just to prove a point (to whom?)?

Who says it will be harder or less useful? I know my story is anecdotal, but we were a bunch of catholic school kids and handled mixed puberty lessons just fine.
4-6th graders aren't raising a lot of hands, anyway.
I think we are making a lot of assumptions about how kids will react, many of them erroneous.

Several teachers have posted. I am not ignoring their posts; maybe you missed them on this thread?

They have posted based on the experience that they have...not on what they don't know. And we don't know their biases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Neither are burlesque performers.

But neither group is appropriate for children.

Many drag performers are speaking out against pushing drag on children as it opens the door to predators taking advantage of well intended ignorance of those organizing these events.

+1
Here is a comment from one drag queen who does not participate in these event:

Drag Queen Kitty Demure, agrees that these events are not appropriate for children. “They are there for an agenda. They’re not there to read ‘Alice in Wonderland’ and just leave,” she said during an interview. “They’re there to talk about gender, being different and the whole lifestyle homosexuality, trans issues educating these kids on these issues. You’re not even supposed to take your kid that age to a Rated R movie. These are not topics that are meant for a child’s mind, they don’t even know what they want for dinner. How do they know anything about gender, sex, and sexuality?"

“I have absolutely no idea why you would want that to influence your child. Would you want a stripper or a porn star to influence your child? It makes no sense at all,” Demure said in a video address to heterosexual women posted on her Instagram page. “A drag queen performs in a nightclub for adults. There is a lot of filth that goes on, a lot of sexual stuff that goes on and backstage there’s a lot of nudity, sex and drugs. So, I don’t think that this an avenue that you want your child to explore. getting them involved in drag is extremely, extremely irresponsible on your part and I understand that you might want to look like you’re with it, that you’re cool, that you’re woke, that you’re not a Nazi, that you’re not a homophobe. Honestly you’re not doing the gay community any favors, in fact you’re hurting us. We already have a reputation of being pedophiles and perverts and deviants. We don’t need you to bring your children around so you keep your kids at home or you take them to Disneyland or take them to Chuck E. Cheese.”

What the heck? A drag queen mentioning transgender people? Drag queens are typically cisgender gay men. With very rare exceptions, they are not transgender and don't normally speak about trans issues.

No one cares. This is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Exactly what - be specific - is the point of having drag performers read to and confusing young children? We'll wait.

What's the issue with them? Specifically and other than you don't like men dressed as women.
Because, I'm far more concerned with hetero men, dressing as men, around my daughter than I am some drag queen. Whether they are reading stories or not.

You haven’t answered the question posed to you first. We’ll wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Exactly what - be specific - is the point of having drag performers read to and confusing young children? We'll wait.

What's the issue with them? Specifically and other than you don't like men dressed as women.
Because, I'm far more concerned with hetero men, dressing as men, around my daughter than I am some drag queen. Whether they are reading stories or not.

NP here. I have no problem with men dressing however they like. Drag queens are men (a privileged class) dressed in a satirical, sexualized, over-the-top caricature of women. The sexualized aspects of Drag performances are what make them inappropriate for children.

At one point, society agreed that children should not be exposed to adult sexuality. It's sad that we no longer have that common understanding.

+ a million. I actually think the vast majority of people feel exactly like that. It’s always the odd, fringe, far-left people who feel they must take things into inappropriate territory. I will never understand why they have this compulsion to expose children to sexual situations/material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Exactly what - be specific - is the point of having drag performers read to and confusing young children? We'll wait.

What's the issue with them? Specifically and other than you don't like men dressed as women.
Because, I'm far more concerned with hetero men, dressing as men, around my daughter than I am some drag queen. Whether they are reading stories or not.

NP here. I have no problem with men dressing however they like. Drag queens are men (a privileged class) dressed in a satirical, sexualized, over-the-top caricature of women. The sexualized aspects of Drag performances are what make them inappropriate for children.

At one point, society agreed that children should not be exposed to adult sexuality. It's sad that we no longer have that common understanding.

Meh. I guess if you keep your kid locked at home, sure. But, the reality is that kids are exposed to sexuality, real and satirical all the time. You can argue if that is good or not but it is not likely to change. And, the fact you're singling out this and not a host of other things . . . not impressed with this argument.


My straight a, good kid by any standard, totally normal, not sexually active . . . whatever barometer the morality police want to apply . . . would not bat an eye at a drag queen reading her a story. Your revulsion at it is yours, not your kid. Now, if the queens are reading porn to the kids . . . . maybe you'd have a point.

So then your kid is clearly not a small child who is easily confused and in fact, upset by seeing grown men dressed as women and telling them their stuffed animal dog is actually a cat. Your kid is not at issue here.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only “unchristian” thing that happened with Drag story hour is the hateful response like viewed in the story above. Drag performance, drag performers, are neither predators or child groomers. You’re actually thinking of straight men.

Exactly what - be specific - is the point of having drag performers read to and confusing young children? We'll wait.

What's the issue with them? Specifically and other than you don't like men dressed as women.
Because, I'm far more concerned with hetero men, dressing as men, around my daughter than I am some drag queen. Whether they are reading stories or not.

NP here. I have no problem with men dressing however they like. Drag queens are men (a privileged class) dressed in a satirical, sexualized, over-the-top caricature of women. The sexualized aspects of Drag performances are what make them inappropriate for children.

At one point, society agreed that children should not be exposed to adult sexuality. It's sad that we no longer have that common understanding.

Meh. I guess if you keep your kid locked at home, sure. But, the reality is that kids are exposed to sexuality, real and satirical all the time. You can argue if that is good or not but it is not likely to change. And, the fact you're singling out this and not a host of other things . . . not impressed with this argument.


My straight a, good kid by any standard, totally normal, not sexually active . . . whatever barometer the morality police want to apply . . . would not bat an eye at a drag queen reading her a story. Your revulsion at it is yours, not your kid. Now, if the queens are reading porn to the kids . . . . maybe you'd have a point.

Why would you think this is the only thing on which I'm pushing back? I also don't let my kids watch the Super Bowl halftime show. Or other events that are overly sexualized for young kids. I recognize that I'm out of touch with the prevailing culture of "oh, this is just how the world is, so I might as well give up and go along" but that's my choice as a parent. I talk to my kids about their bodies, the differences between male and female bodies, sexuality, etc., but I can't imagine why I would want to deliberately increase their exposure. I think it's super weird that so many parents think it's okay.

THIS. The halftime show is something else. I remember all the posts here shaming parents for not letting their children watch twerking women and incredibly sexualized, inappropriate dancing. Some of these parents really are “super weird,” and they appear to be proud of it.