Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Where you're wrong: What people "say they are" is not right. And because society is now too cowarded to speak the truth to these fools, they are suffering in the end even more than the rest of us.

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The difference is, no real adults ever got involved in emo or punk. Being trendy and trying out things like this was strictly a kid thing for people college age or young professionals. It petered out because it had to when the kids got serious jobs. With the trans story, it's the adults in society who have actually gone mad -- and thereby supporting it -- by sanctioning this.

Plenty of adults got involved in emo and punk. Maybe not "real" adults, as you define it, but in that case, it's circular reasoning: No real adults got involved in emo and punk because any adults involved in emo and punk weren't real adults.

You sure pay a lot of attention to the ways that other people choose to live their lives. Or at least one way that other people choose to live their lives. Why?

You know exactly what I mean by this. Society in general -- with all of it's laws, policies, etc -- in no way started changing to accommodate emo and punk.

And speaking of circular reasoning, why do people of your persuasion always go back to the line about "how other people choose to live their lives." That's BS and you know it. It affects all of us, because it affects my kids in their school.

No, that's not circular reasoning. Circular reasoning basically takes the form: A is true because B is true, and B is true because A is true.

However, you're right -- your argument about real adults and emo/punk is more accurately an example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Like this:

You: No adults got involved in emo and punk.
Me: Plenty of adults got involved in emo and punk.
You: No REAL adults got involved in emo and punk.

Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Anonymous wrote:

You know exactly what I mean by this. Society in general -- with all of it's laws, policies, etc -- in no way started changing to accommodate emo and punk.

And speaking of circular reasoning, why do people of your persuasion always go back to the line about "how other people choose to live their lives." That's BS and you know it. It affects all of us, because it affects my kids in their school.

By that reasoning, everything everybody does affects all of us. And yet we don't run around trying to stop everything anybody does that we disapprove of. We categorize. For example, as follows:

1. Things that other people do, and I wish they wouldn't, but it's not important to me.
2. Things that other people do, and I wish they wouldn't, and it is important to me, but it's not my business to stop them.
3. Things that other people do, and I wish they wouldn't, and it is important to me, and it's my business to stop them.

Evidently you've decided that it's your business to force other people to be the gender that you think they are, instead of allowing them to be the gender they think they are (or think they might be). And it's important enough to you to -- well, I don't know what you're doing about it, other than posting repetitively about it on DCUM. I hope that's what you're limiting your actions to.

By the way, you were the one who ran with the emo and punk analogy. I don't think it's a good analogy. Emo and punk are things that people do. Gender is something that people are.

(If you don't want your kids to be exposed, in school, to things you disapprove of, then you have to keep them out of public school. In public school, they will inevitably and unavoidably be exposed to things you disapprove of.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The difference is, no real adults ever got involved in emo or punk. Being trendy and trying out things like this was strictly a kid thing for people college age or young professionals. It petered out because it had to when the kids got serious jobs. With the trans story, it's the adults in society who have actually gone mad -- and thereby supporting it -- by sanctioning this.

Plenty of adults got involved in emo and punk. Maybe not "real" adults, as you define it, but in that case, it's circular reasoning: No real adults got involved in emo and punk because any adults involved in emo and punk weren't real adults.

You sure pay a lot of attention to the ways that other people choose to live their lives. Or at least one way that other people choose to live their lives. Why?

You know exactly what I mean by this. Society in general -- with all of it's laws, policies, etc -- in no way started changing to accommodate emo and punk.

And speaking of circular reasoning, why do people of your persuasion always go back to the line about "how other people choose to live their lives." That's BS and you know it. It affects all of us, because it affects my kids in their school.

Anonymous wrote:

The difference is, no real adults ever got involved in emo or punk. Being trendy and trying out things like this was strictly a kid thing for people college age or young professionals. It petered out because it had to when the kids got serious jobs. With the trans story, it's the adults in society who have actually gone mad -- and thereby supporting it -- by sanctioning this.

Plenty of adults got involved in emo and punk. Maybe not "real" adults, as you define it, but in that case, it's circular reasoning: No real adults got involved in emo and punk because any adults involved in emo and punk weren't real adults.

You sure pay a lot of attention to the ways that other people choose to live their lives. Or at least one way that other people choose to live their lives. Why?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty trendy right now.

Ten years ago it was being bi sexual ( as a teen) that was edgy - now its being bi gendered or non gendered.

A very, very small percentage of teens will go on to identify as neither male nor female into adulthood. For 99% of these kids, they are just being edgy and cool.

Where are all these kids?

Maybe I misunderstand what trendy means. To me, if less than 30% of adolescents are doing it or claim to do it, it isn't a trend.

For over 20 years, I've been a parent, a secondary school teacher, and a leader in groups like GS, GOTR, etc. By my estimation, less than 5% of the kids I've encountered have been out as bisexual or gender queer. Met more kids who were gay/lesbian or trans.

I saw the same panic among parents about being pagan. Only met two Wiccan kids during that entire period.

And before that it was emo and before that punk. Trendy in the sense it is what the kids who are trying to be edgy and unique and stand out as different are doing - there is always a trend. I used to work at a large youth center that seemed to attract the kids into the trends and we would see each trend roll through - some quite quickly, others would take a few years. For a couple years, probably 50% were experimenting with sexual orientation then that faded out and it was only the rare kid, same thing with all the other trends.

+1

The difference is, no real adults ever got involved in emo or punk. Being trendy and trying out things like this was strictly a kid thing for people college age or young professionals. It petered out because it had to when the kids got serious jobs. With the trans story, it's the adults in society who have actually gone mad -- and thereby supporting it -- by sanctioning this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty trendy right now.

Ten years ago it was being bi sexual ( as a teen) that was edgy - now its being bi gendered or non gendered.

A very, very small percentage of teens will go on to identify as neither male nor female into adulthood. For 99% of these kids, they are just being edgy and cool.

Where are all these kids?

Maybe I misunderstand what trendy means. To me, if less than 30% of adolescents are doing it or claim to do it, it isn't a trend.

For over 20 years, I've been a parent, a secondary school teacher, and a leader in groups like GS, GOTR, etc. By my estimation, less than 5% of the kids I've encountered have been out as bisexual or gender queer. Met more kids who were gay/lesbian or trans.

I saw the same panic among parents about being pagan. Only met two Wiccan kids during that entire period.

And before that it was emo and before that punk. Trendy in the sense it is what the kids who are trying to be edgy and unique and stand out as different are doing - there is always a trend. I used to work at a large youth center that seemed to attract the kids into the trends and we would see each trend roll through - some quite quickly, others would take a few years. For a couple years, probably 50% were experimenting with sexual orientation then that faded out and it was only the rare kid, same thing with all the other trends.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm sorry but WTF. United Health Care is now covering gender re-assignment but doesn't effectively cover mental health. No wonder health care costs are skyrocketing.

Then it's violating the Affordable Care Act. Mental health services are essential health benefits.

Mental Health services are never covered to the appropriate level. If you can even get an appointment with anyone who takes your insurance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh no pp, that's where you're wrong. This will not end with "tolerance." We must go for full acceptance and next it will be (actually in some ways it already is) - this is what everyone needs to try.

I'm ok with full acceptance. The sooner we get there, the less time we'll spend telling teenagers that they aren't feeling the feelings they're feeling (a losing proposition if ever there was one), and the sooner our kids can focus on school work. Win-win, don't you think?

No, I don't agree. And I'm not OK with "full acceptance." I will never accept deviance and perversion of this magnitude, nor will I accept parents who go along with it. It's nothing short of child abuse.

We all feel thousands of crazy things all the time, every day. If you or I acted on every "feeling" we had, we'd probably be divorced, in jail or worse. Mature people don't run life by their feelings.

OK, then we'll all have to go on wasting lots of people's time and energy on stuff that's really none of anybody's darn business. It's regrettable, but if that's what you want to do, I can't stop you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh no pp, that's where you're wrong. This will not end with "tolerance." We must go for full acceptance and next it will be (actually in some ways it already is) - this is what everyone needs to try.

I'm ok with full acceptance. The sooner we get there, the less time we'll spend telling teenagers that they aren't feeling the feelings they're feeling (a losing proposition if ever there was one), and the sooner our kids can focus on school work. Win-win, don't you think?

No, I don't agree. And I'm not OK with "full acceptance." I will never accept deviance and perversion of this magnitude, nor will I accept parents who go along with it. It's nothing short of child abuse.

We all feel thousands of crazy things all the time, every day. If you or I acted on every "feeling" we had, we'd probably be divorced, in jail or worse. Mature people don't run life by their feelings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh no pp, that's where you're wrong. This will not end with "tolerance." We must go for full acceptance and next it will be (actually in some ways it already is) - this is what everyone needs to try.

I'm ok with full acceptance. The sooner we get there, the less time we'll spend telling teenagers that they aren't feeling the feelings they're feeling (a losing proposition if ever there was one), and the sooner our kids can focus on school work. Win-win, don't you think?

This!

I don't care what pronoun you use for yourself or name you write at the top of the paper. Just try your best, don't cheat, and don't distract others from learning.

Anonymous wrote:

I'm sorry but WTF. United Health Care is now covering gender re-assignment but doesn't effectively cover mental health. No wonder health care costs are skyrocketing.

Then it's violating the Affordable Care Act. Mental health services are essential health benefits.

Anonymous wrote:

Oh no pp, that's where you're wrong. This will not end with "tolerance." We must go for full acceptance and next it will be (actually in some ways it already is) - this is what everyone needs to try.

I'm ok with full acceptance. The sooner we get there, the less time we'll spend telling teenagers that they aren't feeling the feelings they're feeling (a losing proposition if ever there was one), and the sooner our kids can focus on school work. Win-win, don't you think?