Floida is investigating a teacher who showed a Disney movie with a gay character

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

That still doesn't answer why the parent felt the need to tattle on the teacher to the state board. A parent has a right to be upset in the situation you described and should be dealt with the school administration or school board. However, going to the state and demanding an investigation is extereme and is very much in line with facism.

The parent is on the school board and is an evangelical wackadoo. She's been waiting to tattle on someone since the day this law was passed.

"Rodriguez said, “as a leader in this community, I’m not going to stand by and allow this minority to infiltrate our schools … God did put me here,” she said."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/15/us/florida-teacher-disney-movie-gay/index.html

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

Banning homosexuality from being depicted in any way, shape, or form including a PG rated Disney movie, in a public school, is shutting someone down. It's just a matter of which someone you side with.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

Banning homosexuality from being depicted in any way, shape, or form including a PG rated Disney movie, in a public school, is shutting someone down. It's just a matter of which someone you side with.

That's just it. Teachers SHOULD be given boundaries about what is professionally acceptable. Teaching should not be an opportunity to explore your views, be heard, and be accepted by a captive bunch of 8 year olds. That's what a social life is for. It's totally okay to "shut down" lessons that don't adhere to expected norms.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

Banning homosexuality from being depicted in any way, shape, or form including a PG rated Disney movie, in a public school, is shutting someone down. It's just a matter of which someone you side with.

That's just it. Teachers SHOULD be given boundaries about what is professionally acceptable. Teaching should not be an opportunity to explore your views, be heard, and be accepted by a captive bunch of 8 year olds. That's what a social life is for. It's totally okay to "shut down" lessons that don't adhere to expected norms.

This is not the community deciding what is appropriate. This is empowering the most extreme fundamentalist bigot in the community to dictate what can be taught by letting one complaint blow up the careers of teachers and school administrators. No profession, no service, no organization can function if their most extreme critic is allowed to shut it down over any stupid imaginary grievance. All of the harm here has been perpetrated by the wacko bigot parent. No child was harmed by the video.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

Banning homosexuality from being depicted in any way, shape, or form including a PG rated Disney movie, in a public school, is shutting someone down. It's just a matter of which someone you side with.

That's just it. Teachers SHOULD be given boundaries about what is professionally acceptable. Teaching should not be an opportunity to explore your views, be heard, and be accepted by a captive bunch of 8 year olds. That's what a social life is for. It's totally okay to "shut down" lessons that don't adhere to expected norms.

The norm in our society now is that gay repationships are a normal part of humanity.

Interracial relationships also used to he outside the expected norms but they too are now accepted.

There was no “lesson” about gayness in this film. There was nothing to shut down.

If you are ao far outside the norms of our society that you object to your child seeing gay characters then perhaps you should isolate yourself in a like minded community like the Amish do. That’s your right. You don’t get to impose your religious views on others.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

The same argument could apply to teaching evolution at any age. We teach evolution.

And not without controversy. It is also ideological.

The rejection of evolution is ideological for sure.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

To what extent do we cater to fringe minorities at the expense of progress? Should we not show films with women working or being educated because that goes against certain ideological or religious points of view? How far down this slippery slope do we go?

A couple things. Traditionalists are not a fringe. They make up about half of our culture. And they make up an even larger portion of the migrants that are coming to the US in increasing numbers. Progressive views tend to exist largely among white, wealthy, educated people. While some progressives deviate from this stereotypes, they are not the norm. So as our culture becomes less and less white/wealthy, progressivism will wane even more.

Second. There isn't any major religion that is opposed to women working or being educated. Some religions emphasize gender roles, but there isn't a major religion that bans women working or being educated. You can find examples of fringe groups-- the Taliban, which is a government rather than a religion-- but no mainstream religion holds these views.

So. I would say you are intentionally pretending that sexual Traditionalists, who are mainstream, are the same thing as the Taliban, which are a fringe group, in order to claim that white, wealthy Americans should be able to make all decisions about education in America without any push back from minority groups.

The majority of Americans approve of gay marriage being legal. Whether or not they are “traditionalists.” I like traditions myself. Especially family traditions involving holidays. I also believe love is love and also think gay men make the best neighbors. (They really do.)

[Anonymous]

https://timcast.com/news/teacher-under-investigation-for-showing-lgbtq-themed-movie-to-5th-graders-says-parents-rights-are-gone-when-your-child-is-in-public-school/
Sorry, teacher your values are just that. Your values. Parents have every right to object when values are involved with their child. Plus, why is she even playing a movie instead of doing her job teaching?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://timcast.com/news/teacher-under-investigation-for-showing-lgbtq-themed-movie-to-5th-graders-says-parents-rights-are-gone-when-your-child-is-in-public-school/
Sorry, teacher your values are just that. Your values. Parents have every right to object when values are involved with their child. Plus, why is she even playing a movie instead of doing her job teaching?

-It was shown for kids done with standardized testing
-Parents signed a permission slip for a PG movie
-The movie is PG.
-Showing that gay people exist isn't instilling value. It's a fact of life. Should we ban trips to the zoo because kids might see animals engaging in homosexual behaviors?

[Anonymous]

Now the BOE gestapo are coming for the teacher.

https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/2023/05/17/florida-launches-inquiry-into-teacher-who-showed-disney-film/

I live in Florida - we moved here from DC almost a decade ago - and I would not move here today if we were picking a place to live anew. DeSantis is a terrifying fascist - and I am not using that word lightly - and my only hope, truly, is that last night's election in Jacksonville means that people here are tired of this and want it to stop.

[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:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

That still doesn't answer why the parent felt the need to tattle on the teacher to the state board. A parent has a right to be upset in the situation you described and should be dealt with the school administration or school board. However, going to the state and demanding an investigation is extreme and is very much in line with fascism.

It's in line with being a hysterical snitch. I think the word fascist loses meaning when everything we disagree with is suddenly exactly like Hitler.

A hysterical snitch would be the parent going to the principal or school board. The school board member who went to the state is being fascist, as she is trying to use the government to intimidate and punish a teacher for merely showing a Disney movie. The word is not losing any meaning when Florida officials are being fascist. You are being willfully obtuse here.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

Banning homosexuality from being depicted in any way, shape, or form including a PG rated Disney movie, in a public school, is shutting someone down. It's just a matter of which someone you side with.

That's just it. Teachers SHOULD be given boundaries about what is professionally acceptable. Teaching should not be an opportunity to explore your views, be heard, and be accepted by a captive bunch of 8 year olds. That's what a social life is for. It's totally okay to "shut down" lessons that don't adhere to expected norms.

The norm in our society now is that gay repationships are a normal part of humanity.

Interracial relationships also used to he outside the expected norms but they too are now accepted.

There was no “lesson” about gayness in this film. There was nothing to shut down.

If you are ao far outside the norms of our society that you object to your child seeing gay characters then perhaps you should isolate yourself in a like minded community like the Amish do. That’s your right. You don’t get to impose your religious views on others.

I agree with everything you've said here, yet it still leads me to the conclusion that showing a cartoon movie about a gay romance may be objectionable to many religious minorities, and the best way to proceed is by airing sexuality- neutral movies. If any movies are aired at all.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent I would be annoyed if a teacher showed this movie unless it were a rainy day during lunch or the last day of school or maybe even if there were a substitute. The teacher claims:

“Barbee said the movie focuses on humans' relationship to the environment, which was why she chose to show it to her class after a section on ecosystems, plants and animals.”

There are so many amazing Natgeo documentaries on Disney+ it’s ridiculous the teacher wasted time showing this movie. It is not based on a novel the students read either. She sounds like a lazy teacher. And not too bright if she works in Florida and thought no one would complain. If you go to common sense media there are a bunch of complaints from wacky parents.

+1. It's unbelievable what passes for "education" these days.

Whether or not people agree with religion, there are a lot of religious, conservative, or traditional people that don't want their kids to view materials that are counter to their values.

If you think that they are wrong and want their kids to view materials that promote lifestyles that are counter to their values, that is also an ideological position.

So rather than pit one ideological position against another, let's leave ideology out of the classroom and stop talking to elementary students about sex, full stop.

Viewing material that indicates gay people exist isn't talking about sex whatsoever you nutcase? Do you think kids with gay parents should be banned from ever mentioning their parents to other kids? Because you are implying that.

Sounds fascist.

I'm not remotely Implying that, you Marxist 1984 thought police Jr anti-sex leaguer. Get a life.

There is virtually nothing that could be shown that won't offend someone somewhere. So either we are lax overly overly strict. I err towards lax because overly strict means a cascading domino effect of fascism.

The movie was appropriate for the age group, bottom line.

BTW, I'm becoming convinced that fascism = Fnord. All reaction, no substance.

Oh.

Well here you go, Field of Dreams scene from over 30 years ago. Fascists then, fascists now. Or it was ok to use fascist then?

Ma'am, no one is going to watch your video and read your mind. Use your words.

Same sh*t different decade and people calling book (and movie) banners fascist isn't remotely new. Lazy argument to pretend it is.

I'm not calling it new. I'm calling it a fnord. Everything is now fascist-- without proof, without discussion, without any real application of rational thought. It's a statement of pure emotion now, meant to convey that something is not sanctioned by Big Brother. Can't say that kids shouldn't watch cartoons about sexual interests in school, thats fascist! We all know how much Hitler and the brownshirts couldn't stand Disney! No. I am not going to pretend this is a sensible interpretation of the facts. Lots of parents have lots of opinions about education and what their kids should be exposed to. And they aren't all fascists.

The parent who complained to the FL Dept of Ed is a facist. If they were upset their child watched the film, then complain to the school principal. Why demand an investigation over a freaking movie.

Put yourself in the shoes of a religious minority. Imagine you immigrated to this country from afar. And you want to integrate but pass on your religious values to your kid. And you think this movie makes it hard to justify your views to your kid bc it glamorizes and normalizes a lifestyles that you disagree with.

I will clarify that I am a secularist. But I have lived in a theocracy and I don't believe in using state power to coerce ideological views onto children.

Homosexuality isn't an ideological view. Therein lies the problem with your argument.

We view many sexual urges as something that may be natural, yet also must be suppressed for the sake of social good. We, as Americans, do not condone acting on any and all sexual urges, for ideological reasons. It is absolutely ideological that we have decided that it is in society's interest to make being gay permissible. And it is absolutely ideological that other cultures have not.

Many cultures view women as subordinate. Is it ideological that our society decided to give women equal rights? Should we ban anything that shows women having an opinion because it might violate someone's ideological POV? The point is, this is a slippery slope catering to extremes.

I'll play your silly game. Name a culture that believes women are nit allowed to have an opinion.

America up to 1920

It just tells me that you've never actually lived anywhere that challenged the modern American view of what it means for women to be empowered. Guess what, a lot of cultures think our treatment of women is abhorrent. It's not possible to truly understand other views if you never consider them. And maybe that's good for you, because it makes it easier to shut down parents with differing views.

Banning homosexuality from being depicted in any way, shape, or form including a PG rated Disney movie, in a public school, is shutting someone down. It's just a matter of which someone you side with.

That's just it. Teachers SHOULD be given boundaries about what is professionally acceptable. Teaching should not be an opportunity to explore your views, be heard, and be accepted by a captive bunch of 8 year olds. That's what a social life is for. It's totally okay to "shut down" lessons that don't adhere to expected norms.

The norm in our society now is that gay repationships are a normal part of humanity.

Interracial relationships also used to he outside the expected norms but they too are now accepted.

There was no “lesson” about gayness in this film. There was nothing to shut down.

If you are ao far outside the norms of our society that you object to your child seeing gay characters then perhaps you should isolate yourself in a like minded community like the Amish do. That’s your right. You don’t get to impose your religious views on others.

I agree with everything you've said here, yet it still leads me to the conclusion that showing a cartoon movie about a gay romance may be objectionable to many religious minorities, and the best way to proceed is by airing sexuality- neutral movies. If any movies are aired at all.

Please define "sexually neutral" movies please