MCPS elementary school principals signed an internal memo expressing concerns about LGBTQ curriculum last November

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a European centrist (meaning, more to the left than most US Democrats), but I find this entire "inclusion" push surprisingly useless in MCPS. Why can't we stick to a general message that just because someone looks different, it's not a reason for bullying or teasing? That slurs such as "gay" or "homo" are never appropriate? Why can't schools focus on teaching academics, instead of wasting everyone's time with assemblies and feel-good sessions, like my kids keep having in their middle and high schools? At this point, they identify the wellbeing blocks on the calendar and tell me those are the days they'd rather finish their homework at home. It never crossed their mind to be mean to LGBTQ+ kids (or Jews, or African-Americans, or anyone else). They don't like to be hit over the head with it regularly.

This is exactly it. If you teach the right VALUES everything else falls into place!!! We have always supported LBGHQ community but have really been repelled by the push to impose trans acceptance and incorrect pronouns on children. Children have a right to freedom of expression and their own beliefs!!! For example if a girl wants to say I am a boy, OK child you do you! If another kid wants to say Sorry I have eyes and I can see you are not a boy, well shoot people that kid is right! What MCPS doing is sick and wrong and every time I hang out with school groups parents are discussing this with real sadness and concern. These books are gross and ineffective. Stop!

No, we won't stop.

You realize some of us just listen and humor you. This isn't ok for 5 year olds. Why do you have to push your agenda onto others and why can't you be respectful of others beliefs. There are plenty of books to teach families look different and yet, none of those are in MCPS schools - different religion, adoption/foster care/kinship care, mixed race families, etc.

MCPS needs to keep out of politics and advocacy group agendas and get back to teaching kids the basics and allow parents to teach that stuff at home. No wonder our kids are failing in math and english. They aren't being taught the basics as advocates like yourself feel it's more important to indoctrinate our kids with your beliefs and no one else's believes or concerns matter to people like you.

There are lots of issues in MCPS in terms of hate and racism and yet, MCPS does nothing for those groups - Muslim, Jews, Asians and many others.

You're so ignorant, it's actually just sad. There is absolutely NOTHING political about existing as a trans person on planet earth. It's people like you who have turned it into something political. No one is indoctrinating anyone, but I'm glad you're brainwashed enough by the media who are pushing fear mongering bs on small minds like your own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

It's a man who dresses up for fun in fancy clothes, like princess costumes.

There, now you don't have to be afraid of "Pride Puppy" anymore! Hooray!

But why does a 5 yr old need to learn that at 5? It's ridiculous. Drag queens try to be sexual. They usually dress in very provocative clothing, and some of them look downright scary with that makeup.

This exactly. Would you also bring your 5 year old to watch an actual woman do a similar performance? That would happen in a strip club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teaching kids that some kids, like peppa, have two moms instead of a mom and a dad is hardly "indoctrinating" lol. No more so than when you see two het people walking down the street holding hands. Learning that people EXIST isnt shoving it down anyones throat.

Except that's not what they are teaching that different families look different and there are better books to teach that that he ones they choose.

When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. I do not agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum randomly chosen by you, a random person commenting anonymously on an internet message board.

Cool, cool. Just so we are clear, if you lived in Florida, you would just go along with the Florida board of education's slavery as a jobs program, because that is what has been chosen by the public school system, right?

I'm the PP you're responding to. If I lived in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school. In fact, I wouldn't live in Florida, because if I did live in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school.

Just answer the question; yes or no. Would you decide that if they school boards decides it is ok, it must be! No push back or questioning, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

It's a man who dresses up for fun in fancy clothes, like princess costumes.

There, now you don't have to be afraid of "Pride Puppy" anymore! Hooray!

This is okay so long as you add “often the men make fun of women when they are doing the dress-up and it’s not very nice.”

These are you issues. It's not hard to explain "drag queen" or "drag king" to a five-year-old. It's much harder, unfortunately, to solve the problems caused by people who define "liberty" as "my freedom to choose what your child can read."

If I ever find myself on the same side of an issue as people who use that definition of liberty, I'm going to immediately do a whole lot of self-examination. I would advise the MoCo CAIR people to do the same, if they asked me, which they haven't.

If you can’t see the overt misogyny in making fun of women’s physical appearances that they cannot change and specifically their secondary sexual characteristics, that’s a you problem.

Maybe you are okay with performers who mock people in wheelchairs too, idk. But I’m not okay with people who make performance art out of the bodies of other people.

Drag queens arent mocking women..they are celebrating them. Nice try at attempting to play the feminist card to get people on your side when you are just absolutely incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teaching kids that some kids, like peppa, have two moms instead of a mom and a dad is hardly "indoctrinating" lol. No more so than when you see two het people walking down the street holding hands. Learning that people EXIST isnt shoving it down anyones throat.

Except that's not what they are teaching that different families look different and there are better books to teach that that he ones they choose.

When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. I do not agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum randomly chosen by you, a random person commenting anonymously on an internet message board.

Cool, cool. Just so we are clear, if you lived in Florida, you would just go along with the Florida board of education's slavery as a jobs program, because that is what has been chosen by the public school system, right?

I'm the PP you're responding to. If I lived in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school. In fact, I wouldn't live in Florida, because if I did live in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school.

Just answer the question; yes or no. Would you decide that if they school boards decides it is ok, it must be! No push back or questioning, right?

Dude. I answered the question. When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. If I lived in Florida and sent my kid to public school, I would be agreeing for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school in Florida. But I would not want my kid taught according to this curriculum in Florida, and so therefore, if I lived in Florida, I would not send my child to public school - or, more fundamentally, I would not live in Florida.

Similarly, when you send your kid to MCPS, you agree for your kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by MCPS. Don't like the MCPS curriculum? Don't send your kid to MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

It's a man who dresses up for fun in fancy clothes, like princess costumes.

There, now you don't have to be afraid of "Pride Puppy" anymore! Hooray!

This is okay so long as you add “often the men make fun of women when they are doing the dress-up and it’s not very nice.”

These are you issues. It's not hard to explain "drag queen" or "drag king" to a five-year-old. It's much harder, unfortunately, to solve the problems caused by people who define "liberty" as "my freedom to choose what your child can read."

If I ever find myself on the same side of an issue as people who use that definition of liberty, I'm going to immediately do a whole lot of self-examination. I would advise the MoCo CAIR people to do the same, if they asked me, which they haven't.

If you can’t see the overt misogyny in making fun of women’s physical appearances that they cannot change and specifically their secondary sexual characteristics, that’s a you problem.

Maybe you are okay with performers who mock people in wheelchairs too, idk. But I’m not okay with people who make performance art out of the bodies of other people.

I've read and re-read and re-read this sentence, and it still doesn't make sense. Drag performers are making performance art out of their own bodies, not other people's.

Np, I'll make this easy for you.
Are you ok with black face as dress up? Donning a human's immutable physical characteristics for fun and laughs?
If you are, then drag is your jam.
If you are not, well there is your answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

It's a man who dresses up for fun in fancy clothes, like princess costumes.

There, now you don't have to be afraid of "Pride Puppy" anymore! Hooray!

But why does a 5 yr old need to learn that at 5? It's ridiculous. Drag queens try to be sexual. They usually dress in very provocative clothing, and some of them look downright scary with that makeup.

This exactly. Would you also bring your 5 year old to watch an actual woman do a similar performance? That would happen in a strip club.

Anybody who thinks drag performers strip has absolutely no clue about drag performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

A drag queen is when a man does dress up for fun.. he might wear sparkly make up and glitter and wear a wig and then sometimes he tells jokes or sings songs for adults. And sometimes he’ll read a book to kids. It’s just for fun.
That’s literally what I said to my 4yo when we say a drag Queen at a restaurant in Rehoboth.

And, that's fine for when you go to the restaurant but for those of us not doing that, why does a four year old need to know?

Are we limiting the public school curriculum to a need-to-know basis, now?

Because age of child actually dictates A NEED TO KNOW. That is why porn is illegal for minors.

Huh. Do adults NEED TO KNOW about porn?

Ah, that you don't understand the difference in maturity between a prepubescent child and an adult makes all the sense in the world.
Bet you can't define a woman either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

It's a man who dresses up for fun in fancy clothes, like princess costumes.

There, now you don't have to be afraid of "Pride Puppy" anymore! Hooray!

This is okay so long as you add “often the men make fun of women when they are doing the dress-up and it’s not very nice.”

These are you issues. It's not hard to explain "drag queen" or "drag king" to a five-year-old. It's much harder, unfortunately, to solve the problems caused by people who define "liberty" as "my freedom to choose what your child can read."

If I ever find myself on the same side of an issue as people who use that definition of liberty, I'm going to immediately do a whole lot of self-examination. I would advise the MoCo CAIR people to do the same, if they asked me, which they haven't.

If you can’t see the overt misogyny in making fun of women’s physical appearances that they cannot change and specifically their secondary sexual characteristics, that’s a you problem.

Maybe you are okay with performers who mock people in wheelchairs too, idk. But I’m not okay with people who make performance art out of the bodies of other people.

I've read and re-read and re-read this sentence, and it still doesn't make sense. Drag performers are making performance art out of their own bodies, not other people's.

Np, I'll make this easy for you.
Are you ok with black face as dress up? Donning a human's immutable physical characteristics for fun and laughs?
If you are, then drag is your jam.
If you are not, well there is your answer.

??????? Drag performers are not wearing real human body parts from other people. What a very odd idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teaching kids that some kids, like peppa, have two moms instead of a mom and a dad is hardly "indoctrinating" lol. No more so than when you see two het people walking down the street holding hands. Learning that people EXIST isnt shoving it down anyones throat.

Except that's not what they are teaching that different families look different and there are better books to teach that that he ones they choose.

When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. I do not agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum randomly chosen by you, a random person commenting anonymously on an internet message board.

Cool, cool. Just so we are clear, if you lived in Florida, you would just go along with the Florida board of education's slavery as a jobs program, because that is what has been chosen by the public school system, right?

I'm the PP you're responding to. If I lived in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school. In fact, I wouldn't live in Florida, because if I did live in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school.

Just answer the question; yes or no. Would you decide that if they school boards decides it is ok, it must be! No push back or questioning, right?

Dude. I answered the question. When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. If I lived in Florida and sent my kid to public school, I would be agreeing for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school in Florida. But I would not want my kid taught according to this curriculum in Florida, and so therefore, if I lived in Florida, I would not send my child to public school - or, more fundamentally, I would not live in Florida.

Similarly, when you send your kid to MCPS, you agree for your kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by MCPS. Don't like the MCPS curriculum? Don't send your kid to MCPS.

Why are drag queens so important to you that you think four year olds need to know about them? Why do you think that’s age appropriate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tomorrow there will be a press conference.

Interestingly, there was a reply to the tweet from the MCPS LGBTQ account claiming the memo is already available publicly and they shared an image. But very quickly after that, they deleted the tweet.

Here's the press release. https://www.cair.com/press_releases/cair-to-release-internal-memo-to-maryland-school-district-showing-principals-raised-numerous-objections-to-new-curriculum/

From the press release:

Elementary school principals wrote that a classroom guide was “dismissive of religious beliefs” because it instructed teachers to push back on students who expressed religious objections to certain sexual relationships.

Principals expressed concern that the classroom discussion guide instructed teachers to make a “shaming comment to a child” and to tell students they should not express their belief that someone cannot change their sex.

Principals also wrote that content in some of the books was inappropriate, specifically noting language in a book meant for Pre-K students that would teach students how to identify a “drag queen.”

The elementary school principals raised various other concerns about the school district’s conduct and stances, writing:

“Beginning [when] the materials arrived in schools this summer without clear communication, the communication around the materials and messaging has been wrought with confusion.”
“Numerous concerns have been raised by principals, teachers, and community members that the content of the books does not align with the stated messages. There are concerns that the plot of some of the books center around sexual orientation and gender identity. There are concerns that some of the books are not appropriate for the intended age group, or in one case, not appropriate at all for young students.”
“…it has been communicated that MCPS is not teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity as stand alone concepts in elementary school. However, several of the books and supporting documents seemingly contradict this message.
“…given the sensitive nature of the materials, there needs to be a more robust, inclusive, public-facing process that includes deliberate attempts to include administrators, teachers, and parents as stakeholders. It is especially important to include communities that represent various perspectives across Montgomery County.
“Some teachers have shared their discomfort about the content, the terminology, and the appropriateness of the books developmentally as well as from a sexual education perspective. For example, family life isn’t taught until fifth grade, but a second grade book uses terminology such as cisgender or transgender.”
“MCPS has stated publicly that there is no option to opt-out, with the rationale that MCPS is simply providing books about inclusion of LGBTQ+ characters and inclusivity. However, due to the concerns shared earlier about the plot and nature of the books, this creates a significant concern by some parents about ‘indoctrination’ or ‘hidden agendas.’ “

The memo is a public document already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

A drag queen is when a man does dress up for fun.. he might wear sparkly make up and glitter and wear a wig and then sometimes he tells jokes or sings songs for adults. And sometimes he’ll read a book to kids. It’s just for fun.
That’s literally what I said to my 4yo when we say a drag Queen at a restaurant in Rehoboth.

And, that's fine for when you go to the restaurant but for those of us not doing that, why does a four year old need to know?

Are we limiting the public school curriculum to a need-to-know basis, now?

Because age of child actually dictates A NEED TO KNOW. That is why porn is illegal for minors.

Huh. Do adults NEED TO KNOW about porn?

Ah, that you don't understand the difference in maturity between a prepubescent child and an adult makes all the sense in the world.
Bet you can't define a woman either.

And there, exactly, is the trap the Montgomery County CAIR people have gotten themselves into. These are the people the Montgomery County CAIR people are on the same side as. The "bet you can't define a woman" Fox News/Christian-nationalist people. Who, at minimum, do not have a good history of support for Muslims in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teaching kids that some kids, like peppa, have two moms instead of a mom and a dad is hardly "indoctrinating" lol. No more so than when you see two het people walking down the street holding hands. Learning that people EXIST isnt shoving it down anyones throat.

Except that's not what they are teaching that different families look different and there are better books to teach that that he ones they choose.

When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. I do not agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum randomly chosen by you, a random person commenting anonymously on an internet message board.

Cool, cool. Just so we are clear, if you lived in Florida, you would just go along with the Florida board of education's slavery as a jobs program, because that is what has been chosen by the public school system, right?

I'm the PP you're responding to. If I lived in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school. In fact, I wouldn't live in Florida, because if I did live in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school.

Just answer the question; yes or no. Would you decide that if they school boards decides it is ok, it must be! No push back or questioning, right?

Dude. I answered the question. When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. If I lived in Florida and sent my kid to public school, I would be agreeing for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school in Florida. But I would not want my kid taught according to this curriculum in Florida, and so therefore, if I lived in Florida, I would not send my child to public school - or, more fundamentally, I would not live in Florida.

Similarly, when you send your kid to MCPS, you agree for your kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by MCPS. Don't like the MCPS curriculum? Don't send your kid to MCPS.

Not a dude, but at least you are consistent. And incredibly out of touch and entitled. What about people that cannot afford private school?
Their kids should just learn lies because their parents aren't rich?
Or maybe they do the stand up thing and fight for what is right instead of turning a blind eye.
I know what I would do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way MCPS published curriculum with instructions to “make a shaming comment” to a child. Either someone internal to the school put their own spin into instructions, or the principals are reframing.

Regardless of how these religious groups try to spin this, MCPS isn’t trying to indoctrinate elementary kids regarding LGBTQ topics. They are trying to give them context about the other kids sitting next to them in the classroom, because they sure aren’t learning about it at home.

Like it or not, in public school in MCPS there will be children of every possible diversity in the classrooms, including children who are transgender and who have family members in the LGBTQ community.

Is a preK kid sitting next to a drag queen? Why are three and four year olds being taught about drag queens?

As per the current trend, if the preK kid says that zhey are a drag queen then we affirm it, so it is quite possible that some of them are.

Except that’s not true, but I’m sure you know that.
One or two books featuring a drag Queen will not make your kid a drag Queen…

True, but I don’t want to have to explain what a drag queen is. How do you even begin? It’s a man that dresses like a girl, except dresses aren’t just for girls because gender doesn’t exist. We adults can’t figure it out so how can we explain it to a child.

It's a man who dresses up for fun in fancy clothes, like princess costumes.

There, now you don't have to be afraid of "Pride Puppy" anymore! Hooray!

This is okay so long as you add “often the men make fun of women when they are doing the dress-up and it’s not very nice.”

These are you issues. It's not hard to explain "drag queen" or "drag king" to a five-year-old. It's much harder, unfortunately, to solve the problems caused by people who define "liberty" as "my freedom to choose what your child can read."

If I ever find myself on the same side of an issue as people who use that definition of liberty, I'm going to immediately do a whole lot of self-examination. I would advise the MoCo CAIR people to do the same, if they asked me, which they haven't.

If you can’t see the overt misogyny in making fun of women’s physical appearances that they cannot change and specifically their secondary sexual characteristics, that’s a you problem.

Maybe you are okay with performers who mock people in wheelchairs too, idk. But I’m not okay with people who make performance art out of the bodies of other people.

Drag queens arent mocking women..they are celebrating them. Nice try at attempting to play the feminist card to get people on your side when you are just absolutely incorrect.

Tell us you have never been to a drag show without telling us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teaching kids that some kids, like peppa, have two moms instead of a mom and a dad is hardly "indoctrinating" lol. No more so than when you see two het people walking down the street holding hands. Learning that people EXIST isnt shoving it down anyones throat.

Except that's not what they are teaching that different families look different and there are better books to teach that that he ones they choose.

When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. I do not agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum randomly chosen by you, a random person commenting anonymously on an internet message board.

Cool, cool. Just so we are clear, if you lived in Florida, you would just go along with the Florida board of education's slavery as a jobs program, because that is what has been chosen by the public school system, right?

I'm the PP you're responding to. If I lived in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school. In fact, I wouldn't live in Florida, because if I did live in Florida, I wouldn't send my child to public school.

Just answer the question; yes or no. Would you decide that if they school boards decides it is ok, it must be! No push back or questioning, right?

Dude. I answered the question. When I send my kid to public school, I agree for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school. If I lived in Florida and sent my kid to public school, I would be agreeing for my kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by the public school in Florida. But I would not want my kid taught according to this curriculum in Florida, and so therefore, if I lived in Florida, I would not send my child to public school - or, more fundamentally, I would not live in Florida.

Similarly, when you send your kid to MCPS, you agree for your kid to be taught according to the curriculum duly chosen by MCPS. Don't like the MCPS curriculum? Don't send your kid to MCPS.

Why are drag queens so important to you that you think four year olds need to know about them? Why do you think that’s age appropriate?

Why are you so afraid of four-year-olds reading an alphabet book with very many drawings, including a drawing of a drag queen? Why do you think that's age-inappropriate? What harm do you think will be done, and to whom? Why do you think your belief that it's age-inappropriate supersedes the belief of many others (including MCPS) that it's fine?