Comments
-
@Tentastic, I suppose I can get behind that idea. Kids at that age are usually more worried about the things they think are cool like dinosaurs, fairy tails, and racecars. We don't really need to teach them about these concepts until they get to be old enough for sex ed and "the talk"
-
@Tentastic, so, I 90+% agree but I do have a question and perhaps a you and few people could share their ideas. My first crush was in 3rd grade, Diana [name redacted]. I hear a lot about kids being confused/scared/whatever when they get feelings and they may not understand or feel safe talking about. Thoughts? When was your fist crush? Would it have helped you if you could talk to a teacher to better understand; Not get a lecture about how to fuk but just talk?
-
@Canis Arktos, You can still visit a teacher or counselor, it just doesn't need to be classroom discussion. While I agree the term classroom discussion is a little vague (is it a class teaching, or any discussion in a classroom), the term limits it to "classroom". So if the discussion is outside the classroom like in a hall, in an office, outside, that's fine. You still have the opportunity to talk to a teacher or available resource.
-
@Tentastic, as a teacher I’d be a bit too scared unless my principal or Union got me that clarification in writing. (Then again, that’s why I teach high school instead of elementary) Thanks for the thoughts!
-
@Tentastic, But why specifically sexual orientation and gender? It’s suspicious that there’s no mention of banning sex-ed at those ages, almost like that’s not actually something the legislature is concerned about. On top of that gender need not be a sexual topic, any discussion about gender roles is banned by this bill. Overall, having read the bill, it’s a clear attempt to take power away from educators under the false assumption that children should be treated like the property of their parents with subtle attempts to de-normalize discussions of gender. It’s made to feel like it’s just like waiting to discuss birds n’ bees, but it’s more than that.
-
@Tentastic, Dude “the law is vague” should be more than enough to raise some red flags. Lawyer’s and politicians basically made a new language so they could be hyper-specific, anytime they opt to use vague language it’s not a mistake their hiding something. Usually bigotry.
-
@MrFabulist, I agree with part of your first comment questioning the reason why those specifically were banned and not sex ed. I am happy however that this prevents conservative teachers from saying "gays are bad" or defining gender roles as "men do this and women do this". But your argument is pulled from the opinion of a news network. Whether you like it or not, the US has parents responsible for their childrens upbringing and many times consider children the parent's property. It is in my opinion the school should not try to hide anything from the parents of the students. I would want to know if teachers are trying to say global warming is fake or challenge my rights as same sex parents. No power is taken from educators. They are there to educate children so the children can learn to make their own decisions, and by sharing what they teach with parents allow parents to learn as well.
-
@Tentastic, they know their base doesn’t read these bills. They count on headlines for fear mongering. They want their base to think they’re teaching gay sex in school. It’s classic right stragedy.
-
@Slayer9200, I agree that kids that young don’t generally need much sex ed yet, but not teaching something isn’t the same as making a particular topic illegal to discuss. Suppose you have a room full of kindergartners. If you talk about families at all (Who else has a sister or brother? What’s your mom’s favorite food? What are your parents’ jobs?) could involve mentioning that some people have two dads or two moms, especially if that’s true for one of the kids in the room. Discussing that can be considered teaching about homosexuality and can open the door to legal consequences for the teacher and the school.
-
@Tentastic, as a straight we should just start calling it the don’t say straight bill and act like everyone is being persecuted
-
@CapnVulmorg, Thank God a good argument! I agree with both of your points. Any argument saying the bill is against homosexuality can also be used against heterosexuality. So to add on to your argument, just discussing heteronormative parents could also count against the teachers. I hope the bill doesn't apply to discussions against this nature, but it's definitely something to consider.
-
@Tentastic, As someone who works with kids, they definitely need to start talking about this before 5th grade. They don't need to be educated on the sexual specifics of it, but they definitely need to have conversations about it. I hear students using almost all LGBTQ+ terms as derogatives (certainly gay and queen the most), which means they have already started to learn discriminatory and harmful behaviors about it.
-
@masonharte, Iaw has it limited up to 3rd grade, so 4th and 5th grade has it covered. I'm not sure if that's enough, but the discussion at least starts in elementary school.
-
@CapnVulmorg, I see your point, there. I was going through to comment I replied to and while I haven't read the bill, Tentastic's wording of their summary leaves it vague on what is meant by "classroom discussion". Does it refer to specifically planned lessons or general conversation? I can see how in passing it could be a gray area of a child asks a question specific to these topics out of the blue because they heard someone say something related to it and wanted to know more. I think it makes sense to be allowed to answer in the simplest terms you can without going into too much detail but then we can potentially have a problem with something asked as an aside becoming a "classroom discussion" simply because the teacher responsible fed a child's curiosity. After seeing your response to my comment I am more convinced that this bill is not something that should have been brought up. It shouldn't be the governments place to ban certain topics that some law makers deem unsuitable....
-
@Slayer9200, the teachers themselves should be able to decide what topics they feel their students are ready to handle, within reason. My mother teaches kindergarten, and while she has her hands full getting them just to sit still long enough to learn the very basics, I can't imagine she would support legislation to limit what she is allowed to teach her students especially if it's something along the lines of "well sometimes, some boys like other boys, and some girls like other girls", and I'd like to hope that educators of the grades this bill affects are more considerate of what a child can be expected to understand and handle.
-
@Tentastic, as a not a gay and not living in Florida thanks for the summary. I assumed it was something like that, but don’t care enough to look up other states weird laws that don’t affect me
-
@Tentastic, glad someone said this. The media spins up waaaay too much BS these days. Personally kids don’t need to hear about sex that young. Should be considered pedophelia to discuss it with them.
-
@Tentastic, totally agree, I just hope people remember that "heterosexual" is also an orientation, so being totally fine showing kids a heterosexual kiss but not a homosexual kiss os a double standard that implies that being straight is "normal/correct" and that being gay is "wrong" or "too mature". kids don't need to be worrying about their orientation and sex at a young age, but let's not pretend being straight is the only option beforehand.
-
@Shmay Fish, If people are upset about there being a gay kiss in a kid's movie, here's a question: why does there have to be a kiss at all?
-
@Shmay Fish, as a former kid myself, I would like to submit for consideration that kisses are yucky and i dont want em in my movies in elementary school
-
@BigJohnson86, as someone also not affected by this law currently, I want to remind you that some states have cited courts from other countries as reasons to make a law on the U.S., let alone another state.
-
@Slayer9200, The teachers SHOULD NOT get to choose what to teach the kids. The community elects school boards to set curriculum for a reason. I don’t understand why this is controversial. It’s simple, elementary schools should teach elementary topics: reading/writing, math, history, science. If a kid asks about crushes or stuff not related to class just defer to the parents. Tell the kid, “ask your mom/dad/guardian”
-
@Snarfel Burger, you are correct, I was wrong in the respect that teachers do not get to choose what is taught but rather they have some degree of freedom regarding how it is taught, and for that misunderstanding I apologize.
-
@Slayer9200, No need to apologize. I’ve removed my hasty downvote because of your cordiality.
-
@Snarfel Burger, I appreciate your understanding. Have a wonderful evening.
-
Didn't Disney get caught with covering up sexual assaults in their parks recently? I think that's a more pressing issue than a kids movie decision to whether or not have a lesbian kiss Edit: Apologies, it was a CBS article about the park's employees being involved in human trafficking/child prostitution, which isn't any better. Look up March Sadness
-
@ptitty1231, I got the impression that it was just a few people who almost coincidentally worked for Disney. Mentioning disney seemed like a click bait tactic as it didn’t seem like they were using Gaston’s bungalow as a staging ground or anything. It would be like saying “blockbuster employee murdered 7 at a local national park”. The fact they work at blockbuster doesn’t seem anything more than coincidental but I might click because “blockbuster still exists?!??!?” Did you get the same vibe when reading the article?
-
@Canis Arktos, somewhat, but after seeing number of people involved (108) as well the results of their Star Wars Space Hotel flopping and the Director/Writer of Turning Red going after a reviewer saying it was mediocre I think Disney only works by click bait now
-
@ptitty1231, Yeah it was like some low level lifegaurds at a disney pool i think. Which is kinda where you would expect a pedophile ring tbh.
-
@Canis Arktos, lmao yeah. A few pundits tried connecting it with disney not saying anything on the anti-Grooming bill in florida. Its like bruh Disneys not gonna make a statement on every pedophile that manages to squirm their way into Disneys employment.
-
@ptitty1231, I had a read, it was one pedo life guard grooming a girl (undercover cop) online. Plus 3 other employees solicitating prostitutes. The 108 is the total number of people caught by the sting, only 4 at Disney.
-
I get that it's an act of protest, and I have no problem with people engaging in homosexual relations, but putting it back in over something like this is kind of counterproductive, especially for a movie I'm going to bet is geared towards kids. I can understand if it's as an aside, but if the movie makes a big deal out of it, I'm going to find that treatment disappointing. We aren't in the theatre to have a political message displayed to us and the kids, even in a small way, we are in the theatre to see muthafúckin Buzz Lightyear! If anything, making a big deal out of it might be worse by treating it like an abnormal thing and not just an everyday day event in the life of someone who has bigger fish to fry than worrying about who's kissing who. Ok rant over. I hope this movie does well and that it is critiqued for the story and not "the message"
-
@Slayer9200, reminds me of the all the talk about Lefou being gay in the live action Beauty and the Beast five years ago. People on the left were ecstatic about there being more LGBT representation while folks on the right were saying it was inappropriate for children in the audience watching it. When we finally saw the movie all it was was just him and that one dude dancing for a couple of seconds. That was it. In the end everybody made a big deal about something that had no effect on the plot whatsoever. My guess is this or something similar is probably what’ll happen in Lightyear.
-
@Sexy Homunculus, I'm more talking about the movie itself making a big deal about it. No matter what, people on both sides of the fence are going to go absolutely batshít over whatever happens. That one moment is how it should be treated. The movie didn't make a big deal about it. It was one shot as an aside that was never examined by the characters to try and convey a message, it was more of an, "oh hey there he is" and since it was not relevant to the plot addressing it in any critical way would have been a waste of screen time. It was treated just like if he had been dancing with a female which is how it should have been. And I just double checked it, it was less than 3 seconds at the end that felt more like a quick gag than a statement of his sexuality. I guess I can see it when I pause the shot and look at his face but I still think the amount of uproar it caused was ridiculous.
-
“We’ll convert your children, happens bit by bit, quietly and subtlety and you will barely notice it. You can keep them from disco, warn about San Francisco, make ’em wear pleated pants, we don’t care. We’ll convert your children… we’ll make them tolerant and fair. Just like you’re worried, they’ll change their group of friends, you won’t approve of where they go at night. And you’ll be disgusted when they start learning things online that you kept far from their sight. We’ll convert your children – Yes we will! Reaching one and all, there’s really no escaping it, cause even grandma likes RuPaul. The world’s getting kinder, Gen Z’s gayer than Grindr. We’re coming for them. We’re coming for your children. The gay agenda is coming home. The gay agenda is here.” —SFGC
-
@Cave Dweller, san Fran gqy men's choir... hey at lest they were honest about things...
-
@phalcon , parents’ patience, tolerance, and hope that these people would find peace at some point has been weaponised against them to further an agenda. Perhaps ignoring them was a mistake?
-
@Cave Dweller, I've gotta quite involved in politics in the last bit. I've had a bit of a perspective change recently. Not sure where you are but here in Canada we have provincial legislation goverment. Our elected officials at a state/provincial level are MLAs, members legislative Assembly... I've meet with many over the last couple months... As a conservitive I want as little government involvement in my life as possible... Which generally leads to people also wanting to get involved in government as little as possible... My perspective change... If you want little government in your life you have to have your life involved in government...
-
@phalcon , you have grown wise.
-
The scene will pass so fast you won’t even have time to react to it
-
@megamanx181x, you underestimate my ability to jack off to animated porn
-
@BigJohnson86, what what what?!?
-
Okay…? Does this add or detract from the movie or is it thrown in because of current event #236?
-
OK, groomer
-
Anyone calling it a “don’t say gay” bill is either ignorant or lying. And if it’s the latter, why do you want adults to talk to 6-year-olds about sex, hm? Ya perv.
-
Anyone who thinks Pixar hasn’t always been sexual is invited to describe a mom from any movie they make
-
*removed because I forgot to hit reply*
As a gay, please read the bill that has nothing to do with saying gay but rather "prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels" This allows discussion: A. Outside of classroom in a non-education centered manner. B. In clubs C. In non-academic activities To me this is same thing as waiting until 5th grade to have the birds/bees discussion.