GOP endorsed school board candidates

[Anonymous]

I thought we were talking about graphic content not comic books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought we were talking about graphic content not comic books.

That is what we're talking about. What distinction are you trying to make here? That the graphic novels are not photo realistic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a troll, genuine question.

What are the GOP endorsed candidates referring to when they point out a "disturbing effort to introduce age-inappropriate sexual concepts and ideas to our youngest students" (Bartkowski)? Or when they request that schools leave "family values to the parents" (Sabio)?

I have three kids in FCPS and I am honestly unsure what this is about. I get the academics/equity/TJ/AAP references. I understand the masking and school closings issues. But what are the "age-inappropriate sexual concepts" that are being introduced... what? when? where? Is this all about the coed sex-ed in middle school?? Have I missed something huge happening in the elementary schools?

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/fairfax_county/mother-exposes-sexually-graphic-books-available-in-fcps-libraries/article_42cdbfee-220e-11ec-acfa-8f17e3ad96b6.html


https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/fcps-reinstates-pornographic-books-to-school-libraries/article_cf63abf2-53ab-11ec-affa-cbfc8074da6a.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a troll, genuine question.

What are the GOP endorsed candidates referring to when they point out a "disturbing effort to introduce age-inappropriate sexual concepts and ideas to our youngest students" (Bartkowski)? Or when they request that schools leave "family values to the parents" (Sabio)?

I have three kids in FCPS and I am honestly unsure what this is about. I get the academics/equity/TJ/AAP references. I understand the masking and school closings issues. But what are the "age-inappropriate sexual concepts" that are being introduced... what? when? where? Is this all about the coed sex-ed in middle school?? Have I missed something huge happening in the elementary schools?

Hi OP.

They are probably referring to the insistence on the part of political activists in FCPS leadership of providing very graphic novels to tweens and teens in FCPS school Libraries.

This is OP. I am not sure what is in the FCPS libraries. I'd like to see a list of what people object to-has someone compiled this list?

I will say that I have read every single novel that has been assigned to my kids in middle school and high school as well as quite a few from the recommended summer reading lists. I like to read and appreciate knowing what my kids are assigned. I am not claiming to be an expert on FCPS English departments but I probably have read more of the assigned books than most parents. The only book in the past whole bunch of years that I can imagine being at all controversial was a Sherman Alexie novel that openly talks about masturbation. (It's also a hilarious, moving, and well-written book.) Other than that, I have been told that some of the summer reading recommendations I read like The Hate U Give and Speak are banned in some parts of the country. These novels are not at all graphic and I don't understand the logic behind banning them simply because they mention difficult topics.

So, I haven't seen what these political activists have achieved. If you tell me where to look, I will go and I will read the books. But are we actually just talking about a handful of LGBTQ-themed novels on library shelves??

Compared to what I was assigned in high school many decades ago in a different state, my own FCPS students read nothing more controversial. Mostly they just read LESS.

Hi OP.

I think the republican candidates are probably objecting more broadly, to include the fairly recent revisions to the Family Life Education Curriculum; you can read the revisions here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/AYKU7H699ED9/$file/FLECAC%20Annual%20Recommendations%20Report%202017_18_051018g.pdf

But please start at the end, with the “Dissenting Opinions” section. It is remarkable, and demonstrates a significant percentage of the committee was simply ignored to push through an agenda.

I will let the FCPS document I linked speak for itself as to what that agenda was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a troll, genuine question.

What are the GOP endorsed candidates referring to when they point out a "disturbing effort to introduce age-inappropriate sexual concepts and ideas to our youngest students" (Bartkowski)? Or when they request that schools leave "family values to the parents" (Sabio)?

I have three kids in FCPS and I am honestly unsure what this is about. I get the academics/equity/TJ/AAP references. I understand the masking and school closings issues. But what are the "age-inappropriate sexual concepts" that are being introduced... what? when? where? Is this all about the coed sex-ed in middle school?? Have I missed something huge happening in the elementary schools?

Hi OP.

They are probably referring to the insistence on the part of political activists in FCPS leadership of providing very graphic novels to tweens and teens in FCPS school Libraries.

This is OP. I am not sure what is in the FCPS libraries. I'd like to see a list of what people object to-has someone compiled this list?

I will say that I have read every single novel that has been assigned to my kids in middle school and high school as well as quite a few from the recommended summer reading lists. I like to read and appreciate knowing what my kids are assigned. I am not claiming to be an expert on FCPS English departments but I probably have read more of the assigned books than most parents. The only book in the past whole bunch of years that I can imagine being at all controversial was a Sherman Alexie novel that openly talks about masturbation. (It's also a hilarious, moving, and well-written book.) Other than that, I have been told that some of the summer reading recommendations I read like The Hate U Give and Speak are banned in some parts of the country. These novels are not at all graphic and I don't understand the logic behind banning them simply because they mention difficult topics.

So, I haven't seen what these political activists have achieved. If you tell me where to look, I will go and I will read the books. But are we actually just talking about a handful of LGBTQ-themed novels on library shelves??

Compared to what I was assigned in high school many decades ago in a different state, my own FCPS students read nothing more controversial. Mostly they just read LESS.

Hi OP.

I think the republican candidates are probably objecting more broadly, to include the fairly recent revisions to the Family Life Education Curriculum; you can read the revisions here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/AYKU7H699ED9/$file/FLECAC%20Annual%20Recommendations%20Report%202017_18_051018g.pdf

But please start at the end, with the “Dissenting Opinions” section. It is remarkable, and demonstrates a significant percentage of the committee was simply ignored to push through an agenda.

I will let the FCPS document I linked speak for itself as to what that agenda was.

TY for the link!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sex ed curriculum changes over the past summer involving eliminating the concept of gender in the fle curriculum, and the push by the school board over the summer for eliminating sex segregated FLE classes starting in 5th/6th grade, in spite a huge number of students and parents (I believe close to 70-80% of *students*(!) responding to the survey that they were uncomfortable with combining boys and girls for FLE sex ed/puberty lessons.

Mixing genders is totally unnecessary.

They should mix genders, after all some kids may change genders over the course of the year.

This makes it less complicated if some of some of the girls become boys and vice versa.
(Not forgetting non-binaries and gender fluids).

This isn’t like the old days when boys stayed boys and girls stayed girls.

That all changed a few years ago. Try to keep up.

No, they should not mix genders.

Besides, a kid under the care of a doctor for gender dysporia needs very specialized sex ed instruction that should not be given in an fle elementary school setting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a troll, genuine question.

What are the GOP endorsed candidates referring to when they point out a "disturbing effort to introduce age-inappropriate sexual concepts and ideas to our youngest students" (Bartkowski)? Or when they request that schools leave "family values to the parents" (Sabio)?

I have three kids in FCPS and I am honestly unsure what this is about. I get the academics/equity/TJ/AAP references. I understand the masking and school closings issues. But what are the "age-inappropriate sexual concepts" that are being introduced... what? when? where? Is this all about the coed sex-ed in middle school?? Have I missed something huge happening in the elementary schools?

Hi OP.

They are probably referring to the insistence on the part of political activists in FCPS leadership of providing very graphic novels to tweens and teens in FCPS school Libraries.

This is OP. I am not sure what is in the FCPS libraries. I'd like to see a list of what people object to-has someone compiled this list?

I will say that I have read every single novel that has been assigned to my kids in middle school and high school as well as quite a few from the recommended summer reading lists. I like to read and appreciate knowing what my kids are assigned. I am not claiming to be an expert on FCPS English departments but I probably have read more of the assigned books than most parents. The only book in the past whole bunch of years that I can imagine being at all controversial was a Sherman Alexie novel that openly talks about masturbation. (It's also a hilarious, moving, and well-written book.) Other than that, I have been told that some of the summer reading recommendations I read like The Hate U Give and Speak are banned in some parts of the country. These novels are not at all graphic and I don't understand the logic behind banning them simply because they mention difficult topics.

So, I haven't seen what these political activists have achieved. If you tell me where to look, I will go and I will read the books. But are we actually just talking about a handful of LGBTQ-themed novels on library shelves??

Compared to what I was assigned in high school many decades ago in a different state, my own FCPS students read nothing more controversial. Mostly they just read LESS.

Hi OP.

I think the republican candidates are probably objecting more broadly, to include the fairly recent revisions to the Family Life Education Curriculum; you can read the revisions here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/AYKU7H699ED9/$file/FLECAC%20Annual%20Recommendations%20Report%202017_18_051018g.pdf

But please start at the end, with the “Dissenting Opinions” section. It is remarkable, and demonstrates a significant percentage of the committee was simply ignored to push through an agenda.

I will let the FCPS document I linked speak for itself as to what that agenda was.

Who is going to be responsible for teaching all this stuff?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a troll, genuine question.

What are the GOP endorsed candidates referring to when they point out a "disturbing effort to introduce age-inappropriate sexual concepts and ideas to our youngest students" (Bartkowski)? Or when they request that schools leave "family values to the parents" (Sabio)?

I have three kids in FCPS and I am honestly unsure what this is about. I get the academics/equity/TJ/AAP references. I understand the masking and school closings issues. But what are the "age-inappropriate sexual concepts" that are being introduced... what? when? where? Is this all about the coed sex-ed in middle school?? Have I missed something huge happening in the elementary schools?

Hi OP.

They are probably referring to the insistence on the part of political activists in FCPS leadership of providing very graphic novels to tweens and teens in FCPS school Libraries.

This is OP. I am not sure what is in the FCPS libraries. I'd like to see a list of what people object to-has someone compiled this list?

I will say that I have read every single novel that has been assigned to my kids in middle school and high school as well as quite a few from the recommended summer reading lists. I like to read and appreciate knowing what my kids are assigned. I am not claiming to be an expert on FCPS English departments but I probably have read more of the assigned books than most parents. The only book in the past whole bunch of years that I can imagine being at all controversial was a Sherman Alexie novel that openly talks about masturbation. (It's also a hilarious, moving, and well-written book.) Other than that, I have been told that some of the summer reading recommendations I read like The Hate U Give and Speak are banned in some parts of the country. These novels are not at all graphic and I don't understand the logic behind banning them simply because they mention difficult topics.

So, I haven't seen what these political activists have achieved. If you tell me where to look, I will go and I will read the books. But are we actually just talking about a handful of LGBTQ-themed novels on library shelves??

Compared to what I was assigned in high school many decades ago in a different state, my own FCPS students read nothing more controversial. Mostly they just read LESS.

Hi OP.

I think the republican candidates are probably objecting more broadly, to include the fairly recent revisions to the Family Life Education Curriculum; you can read the revisions here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/AYKU7H699ED9/$file/FLECAC%20Annual%20Recommendations%20Report%202017_18_051018g.pdf

But please start at the end, with the “Dissenting Opinions” section. It is remarkable, and demonstrates a significant percentage of the committee was simply ignored to push through an agenda.

I will let the FCPS document I linked speak for itself as to what that agenda was.

Who is going to be responsible for teaching all this stuff?

They better not foist this material off on the gen ed teachers for “advisory” lessons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a troll, genuine question.

What are the GOP endorsed candidates referring to when they point out a "disturbing effort to introduce age-inappropriate sexual concepts and ideas to our youngest students" (Bartkowski)? Or when they request that schools leave "family values to the parents" (Sabio)?

I have three kids in FCPS and I am honestly unsure what this is about. I get the academics/equity/TJ/AAP references. I understand the masking and school closings issues. But what are the "age-inappropriate sexual concepts" that are being introduced... what? when? where? Is this all about the coed sex-ed in middle school?? Have I missed something huge happening in the elementary schools?

Hi OP.

They are probably referring to the insistence on the part of political activists in FCPS leadership of providing very graphic novels to tweens and teens in FCPS school Libraries.

This is OP. I am not sure what is in the FCPS libraries. I'd like to see a list of what people object to-has someone compiled this list?

I will say that I have read every single novel that has been assigned to my kids in middle school and high school as well as quite a few from the recommended summer reading lists. I like to read and appreciate knowing what my kids are assigned. I am not claiming to be an expert on FCPS English departments but I probably have read more of the assigned books than most parents. The only book in the past whole bunch of years that I can imagine being at all controversial was a Sherman Alexie novel that openly talks about masturbation. (It's also a hilarious, moving, and well-written book.) Other than that, I have been told that some of the summer reading recommendations I read like The Hate U Give and Speak are banned in some parts of the country. These novels are not at all graphic and I don't understand the logic behind banning them simply because they mention difficult topics.

So, I haven't seen what these political activists have achieved. If you tell me where to look, I will go and I will read the books. But are we actually just talking about a handful of LGBTQ-themed novels on library shelves??

Compared to what I was assigned in high school many decades ago in a different state, my own FCPS students read nothing more controversial. Mostly they just read LESS.

Hi OP.

I think the republican candidates are probably objecting more broadly, to include the fairly recent revisions to the Family Life Education Curriculum; you can read the revisions here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/AYKU7H699ED9/$file/FLECAC%20Annual%20Recommendations%20Report%202017_18_051018g.pdf

But please start at the end, with the “Dissenting Opinions” section. It is remarkable, and demonstrates a significant percentage of the committee was simply ignored to push through an agenda.

I will let the FCPS document I linked speak for itself as to what that agenda was.

This Board also ignores recommendations from the Facilities Planning Advisory Council even when those recommendations are actually in line with their supposedly Democratic views, like supporting boundary changes to reduce segregation of poverty while improving facility efficiency. It's difficult to understand the Board's true colors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sex ed curriculum changes over the past summer involving eliminating the concept of gender in the fle curriculum, and the push by the school board over the summer for eliminating sex segregated FLE classes starting in 5th/6th grade, in spite a huge number of students and parents (I believe close to 70-80% of *students*(!) responding to the survey that they were uncomfortable with combining boys and girls for FLE sex ed/puberty lessons.

Mixing genders is totally unnecessary.

They should mix genders, after all some kids may change genders over the course of the year.

This makes it less complicated if some of some of the girls become boys and vice versa.
(Not forgetting non-binaries and gender fluids).

This isn’t like the old days when boys stayed boys and girls stayed girls.

That all changed a few years ago. Try to keep up.

No, they should not mix genders.

Besides, a kid under the care of a doctor for gender dysporia needs very specialized sex ed instruction that should not be given in an fle elementary school setting.

When my daughter went through FLE a few years back, she was fortunate to have an all-girl, safe environment to learn about FLE from a woman instructor.

Her all-girl class was a safe place for her and other girls to openly ask questions about topic like menstruation, without immature boys snickering or making stupid comments.

And periods are something a biologically male student won’t experience; sorry not sorry if you feel that’s somehow unfair.

Keep classes separate. It is not the republicans who are insisting on mixed classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The current FCPS school board does not have a single GOP, or even independent, member. They are all democrats.

The current board has repeatedly insisted FCPS schools absolutely must include certain books in FCPS libraries because of “equity” and support for LGTBQIA+ students. They insist your children must be able to see illustrations like this in the school library (except, the children’s version is not blurred out).



Would you feel comfortable showing fellatio drawings to your own children?

It’s not a dick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why not rename the threat to Dem endorsed candidates? They are the ones that kick members out and won’t discuss endorsing anyone critical of candidates they previously endorsed.

To get a Dem endorsement, you have to support all their causes, regardless of what they are. To get a GOP endorsement, the only requirement is to provide opposition (which is why the slate is mix of independents, moderates, former Dems, and rebellious Dems) In the case of FLE, most parents wouldn’t support a curriculum designed by an advocacy group that calls for minors to have unfettered access to porn, teaching masturbation techniques to 8 yr olds, and introducing anal sex in 6th grade, all in a co-Ed environment.

This is NOT what FCPS is doing.

Guess you can’t make a point without being completely misleading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current FCPS school board does not have a single GOP, or even independent, member. They are all democrats.

The current board has repeatedly insisted FCPS schools absolutely must include certain books in FCPS libraries because of “equity” and support for LGTBQIA+ students. They insist your children must be able to see illustrations like this in the school library (except, the children’s version is not blurred out).



Would you feel comfortable showing fellatio drawings to your own children?

It’s not a dick.

NP. That's your response? How incredibly typical for a Democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current FCPS school board does not have a single GOP, or even independent, member. They are all democrats.

The current board has repeatedly insisted FCPS schools absolutely must include certain books in FCPS libraries because of “equity” and support for LGTBQIA+ students. They insist your children must be able to see illustrations like this in the school library (except, the children’s version is not blurred out).



Would you feel comfortable showing fellatio drawings to your own children?

It’s not a dick.

NP. That's your response? How incredibly typical for a Democrat.

So a person sucking a strap-on is appropriate material for an 11yr old to have access to, or be tempted to review it because they saw it promoted during the American Library Association Banned Book promotion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The current FCPS school board does not have a single GOP, or even independent, member. They are all democrats.

The current board has repeatedly insisted FCPS schools absolutely must include certain books in FCPS libraries because of “equity” and support for LGTBQIA+ students. They insist your children must be able to see illustrations like this in the school library (except, the children’s version is not blurred out).



Would you feel comfortable showing fellatio drawings to your own children?

It’s not a dick.

NP. That's your response? How incredibly typical for a Democrat.

So a person sucking a strap-on is appropriate material for an 11yr old to have access to, or be tempted to review it because they saw it promoted during the American Library Association Banned Book promotion?

Why would you suck a strap on? This 41 year old is about to learn something new.