“Rick” summer reading

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

If you’re so feeble and weak minded that you’d automatically switch to the party that doesn’t believe in basic human rights for women because your 7th grader had to read a book you don’t like, then you have some severe critical thinking problems.

Not the PP, and certainly never going to vote (R). But as someone with a GNC child, I'd actually strongly prefer that MCPS not go out looking for trouble here. This book and assignment, with its rainbow slideshow and its mandatory assignment to write about your gender identity, seems tailor-made to wind up on Fox News. So, great, MCPS is morally and ethically correct, but that doesn't actually protect my kid when a pissed off rando shows up at my child's middle school looking to take out "groomers."

So, no, there's nothing wrong with this assignment. Except that the people who came up with it are not the same people who it is going to endanger.

I know it's sad the GOP blocks any common sense gun reforms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

If you’re so feeble and weak minded that you’d automatically switch to the party that doesn’t believe in basic human rights for women because your 7th grader had to read a book you don’t like, then you have some severe critical thinking problems.

Not the PP, and certainly never going to vote (R). But as someone with a GNC child, I'd actually strongly prefer that MCPS not go out looking for trouble here. This book and assignment, with its rainbow slideshow and its mandatory assignment to write about your gender identity, seems tailor-made to wind up on Fox News. So, great, MCPS is morally and ethically correct, but that doesn't actually protect my kid when a pissed off rando shows up at my child's middle school looking to take out "groomers."

So, no, there's nothing wrong with this assignment. Except that the people who came up with it are not the same people who it is going to endanger.

I know it's sad the GOP blocks any common sense gun reforms.

That’s a complete non sequitur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

Doesn’t matter. They have won and they have complete control. It’s not like people are going to suddenly vote for the opposition because of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

If you’re so feeble and weak minded that you’d automatically switch to the party that doesn’t believe in basic human rights for women because your 7th grader had to read a book you don’t like, then you have some severe critical thinking problems.

Not the PP, and certainly never going to vote (R). But as someone with a GNC child, I'd actually strongly prefer that MCPS not go out looking for trouble here. This book and assignment, with its rainbow slideshow and its mandatory assignment to write about your gender identity, seems tailor-made to wind up on Fox News. So, great, MCPS is morally and ethically correct, but that doesn't actually protect my kid when a pissed off rando shows up at my child's middle school looking to take out "groomers."

So, no, there's nothing wrong with this assignment. Except that the people who came up with it are not the same people who it is going to endanger.

There is no assignment to write about your gender identity.

There is an assignment to fill out a map with the ways you identify. It suggests "hobbies", "family relationships" etc . . . I asked my middle schooler to fill it out, out of curiosity, and he wrote "Larlo's brother" and a few other words that made his gender obvious, but most of what we wrote was things like "point guard" and "swimmer".

There is an assignment to talk to your parents or someone else you trust about gender identity, but not about YOUR gender identity.

The people who came up with the assignment are teachers. They are the people who will be throwing themselves in front of bullets if some "rando" shows up. Given how many teachers have died in school shootings it's pretty clear that teachers are endangered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

If you’re so feeble and weak minded that you’d automatically switch to the party that doesn’t believe in basic human rights for women because your 7th grader had to read a book you don’t like, then you have some severe critical thinking problems.

Not the PP, and certainly never going to vote (R). But as someone with a GNC child, I'd actually strongly prefer that MCPS not go out looking for trouble here. This book and assignment, with its rainbow slideshow and its mandatory assignment to write about your gender identity, seems tailor-made to wind up on Fox News. So, great, MCPS is morally and ethically correct, but that doesn't actually protect my kid when a pissed off rando shows up at my child's middle school looking to take out "groomers."

So, no, there's nothing wrong with this assignment. Except that the people who came up with it are not the same people who it is going to endanger.

There is no assignment to write about your gender identity.

There is an assignment to fill out a map with the ways you identify. It suggests "hobbies", "family relationships" etc . . . I asked my middle schooler to fill it out, out of curiosity, and he wrote "Larlo's brother" and a few other words that made his gender obvious, but most of what we wrote was things like "point guard" and "swimmer".

There is an assignment to talk to your parents or someone else you trust about gender identity, but not about YOUR gender identity.

The people who came up with the assignment are teachers. They are the people who will be throwing themselves in front of bullets if some "rando" shows up. Given how many teachers have died in school shootings it's pretty clear that teachers are endangered.

Oh brother!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

If you’re so feeble and weak minded that you’d automatically switch to the party that doesn’t believe in basic human rights for women because your 7th grader had to read a book you don’t like, then you have some severe critical thinking problems.

Not the PP, and certainly never going to vote (R). But as someone with a GNC child, I'd actually strongly prefer that MCPS not go out looking for trouble here. This book and assignment, with its rainbow slideshow and its mandatory assignment to write about your gender identity, seems tailor-made to wind up on Fox News. So, great, MCPS is morally and ethically correct, but that doesn't actually protect my kid when a pissed off rando shows up at my child's middle school looking to take out "groomers."

So, no, there's nothing wrong with this assignment. Except that the people who came up with it are not the same people who it is going to endanger.

There is no assignment to write about your gender identity.

There is an assignment to fill out a map with the ways you identify. It suggests "hobbies", "family relationships" etc . . . I asked my middle schooler to fill it out, out of curiosity, and he wrote "Larlo's brother" and a few other words that made his gender obvious, but most of what we wrote was things like "point guard" and "swimmer".

There is an assignment to talk to your parents or someone else you trust about gender identity, but not about YOUR gender identity.

The people who came up with the assignment are teachers. They are the people who will be throwing themselves in front of bullets if some "rando" shows up. Given how many teachers have died in school shootings it's pretty clear that teachers are endangered.

This thread has clearly run its course. Pull the plug.

Oh brother!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is MoCo pushing a book about sexuality for 5th graders going into 6th grade. I’m not having my kid read this book, and I find it extremely concerning that MoCo is pushing this. What is middle school going to be like? Are you not cool if you aren’t LGBT or gasp not yet sexual as a pre teen? What are other parents doing to complain.

Knowing your sexual preference doesnt make you a sexual person....Are you stuck in the 1400s?

Kids who aren't interested in sex yet in 5th grade are unlikely to know their sexual preference, despite all unscientific assurances to the contrary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is MoCo pushing a book about sexuality for 5th graders going into 6th grade. I’m not having my kid read this book, and I find it extremely concerning that MoCo is pushing this. What is middle school going to be like? Are you not cool if you aren’t LGBT or gasp not yet sexual as a pre teen? What are other parents doing to complain.

Knowing your sexual preference doesnt make you a sexual person....Are you stuck in the 1400s?

Kids who aren't interested in sex yet in 5th grade are unlikely to know their sexual preference, despite all unscientific assurances to the contrary.

OK. And? They are likely to know some friends have same-sex parents, and more don't. They see people partnered up in movies in various ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I'm not right-wing. I'm liberal (although apparently I can't call myself liberal unless I'm onboard with MCPS English curriculum). I am against watered down BS books our kids are being asked to read specifically because they are about a certain subject. If you're going to teach English, then teach English. If you want to talk about cultural norms or sexual preference, then do it in the appropriate classes. Or at the very least come up with some books that are actually worth reading for reasons other than an agenda.

I love it when the right-wing CATO posters claim to be liberals. You know they're desperate whenever that happens.

I'm not a right-wing, sweaty-palmed CATO poster. I'm a real liberal. Guess what -- those on the right, those slightly on the left of right and now those squarely on the left are being turned off by your agenda. You're leaving a smaller and smaller sliver of people on your side.

If you’re so feeble and weak minded that you’d automatically switch to the party that doesn’t believe in basic human rights for women because your 7th grader had to read a book you don’t like, then you have some severe critical thinking problems.

Wow, I'm biting my tongue to keep from coming back at you with the same nasty mean spirited attitude you are displaying, but I'll try to explain it to you civilly -- you attitude brought us Donald Trump.

I think you clearly articulated the PPP point. If this one issue, a seventh grade book make you vote for someone or a party that is completely against your interest and actual values, then you’re not thinking critically. And you shouldn’t then complain when idiots are allowed to run government, abuse tax payer funds, and try to ruin democracy.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s definitely a book about sexuality and identity and very much political. I have no problem with it being available in the library but definitely an odd choice for a school to recommend to a rising 6th grader.

https://thenerddaily.com/readwithpride-rick-alex-gino/

I am a moderate Democrat and very supportive and accepting of my LGBTQ friends and family. However, I don’t want my kids thinking they should be questioning their gender or sexual identity at an age where it has never crossed their mind. Rather than simply acknowledge and accept that some people are born different, these exercises make it seem that everyone should question their identity and have a label. They make it sound like a lifestyle choice vs a characteristic that the person was born with and can’t change.
I think it’s weird that a book is written about being asexual in middle school. Hello!!! The kid hasn’t gone through puberty yet. He doesn’t have to be interested in boys or girls. He is perfectly normal. Why does this require a label or an identity group????? THIS is the stuff that allows conservatives to win elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The social warriors are strong in this thread!

And they will never let go of their anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.

Keep willfully ignoring every argument made on this thread. Keep telling yourself the other side has no real argument and is only anti-LGBTQ, even though posters keep saying that is NOT their issue.

Keep it up. You will lose.

Nobody is making any arguments beyond a vague “it’s wrong.” No one will explain what exactly they are afraid will happen. People raise these bogeymen of supposedly inappropriate reading questions or class discussions, and then conveniently disappear when asked to provide more information to explain why it was inappropriate.

Here’s a clue - when your position requires withholding relevant information so it can’t be challenged, your position is probably wrong.

Have you even read the thread? I've posted several times and so have others. What a waste of time since you don't actually want reasons.

Seriously. We have given many specific reasons. No one here has taken issue with the LGBTQ piece. I would still think the book and topic were too mature if the character were heterosexual and exploring heteronormative feelings and the school wanted my 11 year old to submit charts to the new English teacher labeling his gender identity and sexuality. Is nothing personal and private for adolescents and their families?

No, you haven’t. You’ve just said it’s wrong and should only be taught at home, with no explanation of what specific things are being taught in the classroom or what harm may come from what schools are teaching. People have asked for details about the supposedly objectionable reading questions and been ignored. People have asked for an explanation of a poster’s story about a supposedly inappropriate “how we met story” and been ignored. People asked the poster to explain what she was referring to when she said her kid’s school was teaching inappropriate values about relationships and were ignored. Whenever you people are pressed for specific on the harmful things that are supposedly happening in schools, you dodge, deflect and attack, because you know you can’t answer the question in a way that supports your position. We all see through you.

From the Cultural Warrior 101 playbook.

Asking you to support your arguments is a “Cultural Warrior 101 playbook”? To rational people, it’s just called critical thinking.

So if someone has an opinion that is different from yours, it only counts if they support their feelings to your liking and specifications? People are allowed to have different opinions from you without justifying them to you. Who anointed you arbiter of whether someone’s argument is supported enough?

If you want someone to come around to your opinion, then yes, you have to provide support for it. If you want your opinion to be given consideration when setting school curriculum, yes, you have to provide support for it. Otherwise your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s just noise.

I’m not here to persuade you or convince you of anything. The whole point if this post was that the OP did not feel the summer reading book/assignment was appropriate. Many people agreed with her. Others felt strongly the assignment was fine/important/awesome/what have you. I don’t think either side was going to change the minds of the others.

Okay, so there really wasn’t a point to this thread, it’s just the right-wing outrage machine in action again.

I know you want to believe that we are right wing supporters of that slate. I can’t speak for anyone but myself but I’ve never voted R, have been to 3 same-sex weddings in the last 5 years of dear friends, have enthusiastically gone to Pride parades, and am a lifelong theater person! I’m allowed to think an assignment is developmentally inappropriate without being accused of things that are blatantly untrue.

What is exactly developmentally inappropriate about the assignment? Is your 11yr old incapable of rationale thought and consideration? Are they not able to learn about others and develop tolerance? Are they not capable of starting to gain independence and confidence in their own values?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s definitely a book about sexuality and identity and very much political. I have no problem with it being available in the library but definitely an odd choice for a school to recommend to a rising 6th grader.

https://thenerddaily.com/readwithpride-rick-alex-gino/

I am a moderate Democrat and very supportive and accepting of my LGBTQ friends and family. However, I don’t want my kids thinking they should be questioning their gender or sexual identity at an age where it has never crossed their mind. Rather than simply acknowledge and accept that some people are born different, these exercises make it seem that everyone should question their identity and have a label. They make it sound like a lifestyle choice vs a characteristic that the person was born with and can’t change.
I think it’s weird that a book is written about being asexual in middle school. Hello!!! The kid hasn’t gone through puberty yet. He doesn’t have to be interested in boys or girls. He is perfectly normal. Why does this require a label or an identity group????? THIS is the stuff that allows conservatives to win elections.

+1 to all of this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s definitely a book about sexuality and identity and very much political. I have no problem with it being available in the library but definitely an odd choice for a school to recommend to a rising 6th grader.

https://thenerddaily.com/readwithpride-rick-alex-gino/

I am a moderate Democrat and very supportive and accepting of my LGBTQ friends and family. However, I don’t want my kids thinking they should be questioning their gender or sexual identity at an age where it has never crossed their mind. Rather than simply acknowledge and accept that some people are born different, these exercises make it seem that everyone should question their identity and have a label. They make it sound like a lifestyle choice vs a characteristic that the person was born with and can’t change.
I think it’s weird that a book is written about being asexual in middle school. Hello!!! The kid hasn’t gone through puberty yet. He doesn’t have to be interested in boys or girls. He is perfectly normal. Why does this require a label or an identity group????? THIS is the stuff that allows conservatives to win elections.

+1 to all of this

+2 well articulated

[Anonymous]

oh look the book-burning book banning crowd is out in force.

if your kid is not capable of cognitive reading by 5th grade you all have bigger problems.

Idiots every single one of you that think this is a book that should not be read. it is a book they should read and you should do your dam job and discuss it with them. Why?? Because a good parent would take the time to do that.

America now Russia or North Korea you pick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:oh look the book-burning book banning crowd is out in force.

if your kid is not capable of cognitive reading by 5th grade you all have bigger problems.

Idiots every single one of you that think this is a book that should not be read. it is a book they should read and you should do your dam job and discuss it with them. Why?? Because a good parent would take the time to do that.

America now Russia or North Korea you pick.

Wow. You sound like a calm, thoughtful and reasonable individual.