Anonymous wrote:This article expands on what is at stake with the proposed FLE changes:

https://fairfaxschoolsmonitor.com/the-transgender-agenda-at-fcps-whats-next/

Worth watching video beginning at 1:13:00 through 1:17:27:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co9fdU0jHwo

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This article expands on what is at stake with the proposed FLE changes:

https://fairfaxschoolsmonitor.com/the-transgender-agenda-at-fcps-whats-next/

Worth watching video beginning at 1:13:00 through 1:17:27:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co9fdU0jHwo

Oh goody. Let's read a Republican blog on the evils of sex education. How old is this guy anyway?

The author of this article is not much older than Robert Rigby Jr., or Karl Frisch. The only difference is that as a father, he has gained experience and wisdom; therefore he is advocating for the safety of all children, whereas Rigby and Frisch are pushing their own personal agenda on other people’s children. Talk about the evils of sex education in FCPS!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There isn’t an upcoming vote. They’ve decided to keep genders separate for next year thankfully.

It looks like they are combining genders for family life education in the pilot program.

The low income ESOL families have some of the most traditional families.

This is a twrrible idea.

If fcps is going to combine boys and girls for sex ed, it needs to be in the wealthiest bluest communities in northern Virginia, not the poor immigrant communities.

Pilot it in the wealthy neighborhoods with the greatest percentage of democrat votes. I am sure those neighborhoods will be thrilled to have boys and hirls together for 5th-8th grade sex ed.

OMG boys and girls learning about boobies together and boy parts. OMG OMG OMG OMG
OMB boys and girls learning how to talk to each other about sex omg omg omg

Kids are smarter than parents.

This is a juvenile comment. In a survey last year, parents said they didn't want their kids learning about these things with the opposite sex. It seems weird that fcps would start a pilot program doing just that. Your immature scrutiny is misplaced. We should be asking the school board why they're starting this program and not making fun of parents for their questions and concerns.

DP
I’m not going to make fun. I agree, there’s no purpose for that. I don’t really see what’s wrong with same gender classes for FLE. The topics are natural science. Perhaps we should work to move past the “hush hush”, secretive air that surrounds such topics.

You are in the minority. More than 80% of fcps parents objected in last year's survey. I have a daughter in elementary school. She would be very embarrassed to learn about these things with boys and would not ask any questions. Most children I know are that way. The insistence from our district leadership on the shared space for instruction is strange. It is unpopular so it seems that instead of voting on it, school board members are starting it in a back-door way through this "pilot program." And why? That is cagey and not at all transparent.

This is false. No one knows who filled out the survey from last year and there was plenty of evidence ce that it was spammed by put of towners.

You can hypothesize as much as you want about outsiders spamming the survey, but, please, explain how students’ and staff’s accounts were able to be spammed without FCPS knowing it, or doing anything afterwards. A security breach of that sort should have been addressed immediately and reported to the community. The only one who claims that happened was Karl Frisch. It must be because he is used to doing that. Furthermore, Superintendent Reid’s only response was that the majority doesn’t get to rule. The response of these two individuals who make decisions for the rest of us tells us everything we need to know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This article expands on what is at stake with the proposed FLE changes:

https://fairfaxschoolsmonitor.com/the-transgender-agenda-at-fcps-whats-next/

Worth watching video beginning at 1:13:00 through 1:17:27:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co9fdU0jHwo

Oh goody. Let's read a Republican blog on the evils of sex education. How old is this guy anyway?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There isn’t an upcoming vote. They’ve decided to keep genders separate for next year thankfully.

It looks like they are combining genders for family life education in the pilot program.

The low income ESOL families have some of the most traditional families.

This is a twrrible idea.

If fcps is going to combine boys and girls for sex ed, it needs to be in the wealthiest bluest communities in northern Virginia, not the poor immigrant communities.

Pilot it in the wealthy neighborhoods with the greatest percentage of democrat votes. I am sure those neighborhoods will be thrilled to have boys and hirls together for 5th-8th grade sex ed.

OMG boys and girls learning about boobies together and boy parts. OMG OMG OMG OMG
OMB boys and girls learning how to talk to each other about sex omg omg omg

Kids are smarter than parents.

This is a juvenile comment. In a survey last year, parents said they didn't want their kids learning about these things with the opposite sex. It seems weird that fcps would start a pilot program doing just that. Your immature scrutiny is misplaced. We should be asking the school board why they're starting this program and not making fun of parents for their questions and concerns.

DP
I’m not going to make fun. I agree, there’s no purpose for that. I don’t really see what’s wrong with same gender classes for FLE. The topics are natural science. Perhaps we should work to move past the “hush hush”, secretive air that surrounds such topics.

You are in the minority. More than 80% of fcps parents objected in last year's survey. I have a daughter in elementary school. She would be very embarrassed to learn about these things with boys and would not ask any questions. Most children I know are that way. The insistence from our district leadership on the shared space for instruction is strange. It is unpopular so it seems that instead of voting on it, school board members are starting it in a back-door way through this "pilot program." And why? That is cagey and not at all transparent.

This is false. No one knows who filled out the survey from last year and there was plenty of evidence ce that it was spammed by put of towners.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US

You realize most parents do talk to their kids about sex and reproduction at an age appropriate time, right? They do so by speaking to them with the facts of biology, and according to their own boundaries for each child. They rarely outsource this to third parties, such as the school system. They also speak with them with the facts, and that’s why they end up making the right choices. Of course, once you have children of your own you’ll understand that.

On the contrary, the proposed FCPS changes to the FLE program will confuse some children in that it will teach them that men have periods and can get pregnant.

That is not what the lessons will teach. You are misinformed, which is not too shocking based on your post.

FCPS has already replaced the definition of women and men with terminology created by radical gender ideology: person assigned (arbitrarily) as female or male at birth, and has been using it for a couple of years already. Parents just haven’t been paying attention.

Therefore, how can anyone ascertain that FCPS will be teaching unequivocally to kids what a woman is? They obviously won’t because their definition of a woman is based on feelings, and not in facts. Therefore, according to their ideology, if a woman identifies as a man - and ends up getting pregnant - it fits FCPS agenda to teach that men can have periods and get pregnant.

I second you in that misinformation (and ignorance) can be shocking.

Anonymous wrote:This article expands on what is at stake with the proposed FLE changes:

https://fairfaxschoolsmonitor.com/the-transgender-agenda-at-fcps-whats-next/

Worth watching video beginning at 1:13:00 through 1:17:27:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co9fdU0jHwo

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which schools specifically are piloting the FLE changes?

That is a good question. It seems like FCPS leaders and their close friends are trolling this thread. Care to comment?

Comment on what? I want to know which schools are piloting the program. Do you know? My question was clear.

I agree with you. I'd like to know the same thing. I get the sense that people making these decisions are trolling this thread. They should reveal themselves and inform us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There isn’t an upcoming vote. They’ve decided to keep genders separate for next year thankfully.

It looks like they are combining genders for family life education in the pilot program.

The low income ESOL families have some of the most traditional families.

This is a twrrible idea.

If fcps is going to combine boys and girls for sex ed, it needs to be in the wealthiest bluest communities in northern Virginia, not the poor immigrant communities.

Pilot it in the wealthy neighborhoods with the greatest percentage of democrat votes. I am sure those neighborhoods will be thrilled to have boys and hirls together for 5th-8th grade sex ed.

OMG boys and girls learning about boobies together and boy parts. OMG OMG OMG OMG
OMB boys and girls learning how to talk to each other about sex omg omg omg

Kids are smarter than parents.

This is a juvenile comment. In a survey last year, parents said they didn't want their kids learning about these things with the opposite sex. It seems weird that fcps would start a pilot program doing just that. Your immature scrutiny is misplaced. We should be asking the school board why they're starting this program and not making fun of parents for their questions and concerns.

DP
I’m not going to make fun. I agree, there’s no purpose for that. I don’t really see what’s wrong with same gender classes for FLE. The topics are natural science. Perhaps we should work to move past the “hush hush”, secretive air that surrounds such topics.

You are in the minority. More than 80% of fcps parents objected in last year's survey. I have a daughter in elementary school. She would be very embarrassed to learn about these things with boys and would not ask any questions. Most children I know are that way. The insistence from our district leadership on the shared space for instruction is strange. It is unpopular so it seems that instead of voting on it, school board members are starting it in a back-door way through this "pilot program." And why? That is cagey and not at all transparent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US

You realize most parents do talk to their kids about sex and reproduction at an age appropriate time, right? They do so by speaking to them with the facts of biology, and according to their own boundaries for each child. They rarely outsource this to third parties, such as the school system. They also speak with them with the facts, and that’s why they end up making the right choices. Of course, once you have children of your own you’ll understand that.

On the contrary, the proposed FCPS changes to the FLE program will confuse some children in that it will teach them that men have periods and can get pregnant.

That is not what the lessons will teach. You are misinformed, which is not too shocking based on your post.

FCPS has already replaced the definition of women and men with terminology created by radical gender ideology: person assigned (arbitrarily) as female or male at birth, and has been using it for a couple of years already. Parents just haven’t been paying attention.

Therefore, how can anyone ascertain that FCPS will be teaching unequivocally to kids what a woman is? They obviously won’t because their definition of a woman is based on feelings, and not in facts. Therefore, according to their ideology, if a woman identifies as a man - and ends up getting pregnant - it fits FCPS agenda to teach that men can have periods and get pregnant.

I second you in that misinformation (and ignorance) can be shocking.

They have not replaced the definition of women and men. They discuss male and female reproductive systems, reproduction, etc. They also talk about sexual identity and how that may change for some people over time. In the curriculum, it says that if a student has a question an out their own sexual identity, they should talk to a parent, doctor or trusted clergy. To be sure, if a person who identifies as a male has a uterus, they can get pregnant. How are you going to explain that to your child if you don’t teach them about sexual identity?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US

You realize most parents do talk to their kids about sex and reproduction at an age appropriate time, right? They do so by speaking to them with the facts of biology, and according to their own boundaries for each child. They rarely outsource this to third parties, such as the school system. They also speak with them with the facts, and that’s why they end up making the right choices. Of course, once you have children of your own you’ll understand that.

On the contrary, the proposed FCPS changes to the FLE program will confuse some children in that it will teach them that men have periods and can get pregnant.

That is not what the lessons will teach. You are misinformed, which is not too shocking based on your post.

FCPS has already replaced the definition of women and men with terminology created by radical gender ideology: person assigned (arbitrarily) as female or male at birth, and has been using it for a couple of years already. Parents just haven’t been paying attention.

Therefore, how can anyone ascertain that FCPS will be teaching unequivocally to kids what a woman is? They obviously won’t because their definition of a woman is based on feelings, and not in facts. Therefore, according to their ideology, if a woman identifies as a man - and ends up getting pregnant - it fits FCPS agenda to teach that men can have periods and get pregnant.

I second you in that misinformation (and ignorance) can be shocking.

They have not replaced the definition of women and men. They discuss male and female reproductive systems, reproduction, etc. They also talk about sexual identity and how that may change for some people over time. In the curriculum, it says that if a student has a question an out their own sexual identity, they should talk to a parent, doctor or trusted clergy. To be sure, if a person who identifies as a male has a uterus, they can get pregnant. How are you going to explain that to your child if you don’t teach them about sexual identity?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US

You realize most parents do talk to their kids about sex and reproduction at an age appropriate time, right? They do so by speaking to them with the facts of biology, and according to their own boundaries for each child. They rarely outsource this to third parties, such as the school system. They also speak with them with the facts, and that’s why they end up making the right choices. Of course, once you have children of your own you’ll understand that.

On the contrary, the proposed FCPS changes to the FLE program will confuse some children in that it will teach them that men have periods and can get pregnant.

That is not what the lessons will teach. You are misinformed, which is not too shocking based on your post.

FCPS has already replaced the definition of women and men with terminology created by radical gender ideology: person assigned (arbitrarily) as female or male at birth, and has been using it for a couple of years already. Parents just haven’t been paying attention.

Therefore, how can anyone ascertain that FCPS will be teaching unequivocally to kids what a woman is? They obviously won’t because their definition of a woman is based on feelings, and not in facts. Therefore, according to their ideology, if a woman identifies as a man - and ends up getting pregnant - it fits FCPS agenda to teach that men can have periods and get pregnant.

I second you in that misinformation (and ignorance) can be shocking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US

You realize most parents do talk to their kids about sex and reproduction at an age appropriate time, right? They do so by speaking to them with the facts of biology, and according to their own boundaries for each child. They rarely outsource this to third parties, such as the school system. They also speak with them with the facts, and that’s why they end up making the right choices. Of course, once you have children of your own you’ll understand that.

On the contrary, the proposed FCPS changes to the FLE program will confuse some children in that it will teach them that men have periods and can get pregnant.

That is not what the lessons will teach. You are misinformed, which is not too shocking based on your post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US

You realize most parents do talk to their kids about sex and reproduction at an age appropriate time, right? They do so by speaking to them with the facts of biology, and according to their own boundaries for each child. They rarely outsource this to third parties, such as the school system. They also speak with them with the facts, and that’s why they end up making the right choices. Of course, once you have children of your own you’ll understand that.

On the contrary, the proposed FCPS changes to the FLE program will confuse some children in that it will teach them that men have periods and can get pregnant.

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is ridiculous

If you don’t like family life curriculum put your kid in a religious private and shut up.

You want your kid to get pregnant early have at it.

No you will not stop the rest of US