Topic: Mother Forcing Chemical Castration & Gender Reassignment of 6 Year Old Boy In TX - page 2. (Read 1385 times)

More moving goal posts. Now you are moving from what I said, home schooling, to private schools, and now Catholic schools. As usual you argue the points you wish were being discussed, not the ones actually being discussed. Even if the topic was Catholic schools, your personal experience is what is known as "anecdotal information" and is not statistically relevant. You can teach a workshop on underwater lesbian basket weaving, it doesn't make it truthful or useful. You claim state schools are the pinnacle of science and are less bias, but here you are demonstrating you clearly work your own political ideologies and dogmas into your "teaching", things which have nothing whatsoever to do with science, and consist of Marxism masquerading as science.

More actual on topic subject matter: https://www.bitchute.com/video/hDpZPwkDvJVs/

In chemistry, we have "rules" and teach young students the rules only to reveal that most of these rules have exceptions later.  Generalizations are valuable when you aren' talking to someone who's main intent is to twist your words into something out of context and derail the disucssion.  Did you really believe I was claiming every single private school?   I was lucky enough to have someone tell me about hyperbole.

Yes I have evidence and spoke of mission statements already.  I've been through the catholic school system and spent a few years coaching and teaching in it.  Religious schools, teach their religious values. period. Thats the whole point of their existence.  Its in every mission statement.  Everything is through that lens.

I'm not saying public schools can't be biased.  Everything has bias.  Public schools usually just represent the bias of the community they are in with a slight shift accounting for all of the right-leaning teachers who don't believe in government-run education.    You can still expect a public school in Topeka Kansas to have a far right bias.  In fact, I met the high school Biology teacher of the children of Phelps family. She talked about how teaching science there was huge struggle but she wanted to do it.  They won't be able to fire her as easily for trying to teach evolution as a private school would.

 For the last six years, I've been to NAIS, POCC, and NSTA national conferences, visited 182 private schools, and spoken with thousands of teachers and administrators.  I know what their schools are about because we discussed the successes/barriers/struggles their schools are having with implementing many of the topics I've discussed here with you and know you consider extreme.

-increasing counseling
-providing breakfast and lunch to all students
-incorporating non judeo-christian holidays and teachings
-converting to non gendered bathrooms
-gender studies
-more diverse representation in faculty and administration
-more diverse student bodies
-what if i say the wrong thing
-emotional well-being
-giving students freedom to organize (womens, gun control, and climate change walkouts)
-how to avoid being targeted by right-wing media


workshops I gave:
-how to teach sex in biology (xy isn't always male)
-sustainability in school buildings (reduce carbon and ecological footprint)
-teaching climate change within every topic instead of as a standalone

I think the larger point is it doesn't fucking matter and there should not be a coordinated effort to influence children one way or the other at such a young age because they haven't bothered to explore the situation themselves yet. "Get them while they are young" is a saying because children are malleable and easily influenced, and that is why the Postmodernist Deconstructivist Critical Theorist Marxists such as yourselves target such young children, because they are to young to have figured any of it out for themselves yet. All you are saying here is if the gender fluid/trans/non-binary/attack helicopters don't get to have the identity they want then no one can have an identity. This is at the core of why Critical Theory is so toxic. It uses the logic that equality is brought by denying others their rights and justifying it by acting in the name of some so called victim class.


Every private school eh? You are a teacher and no one ever told you all inclusive statements are generally wrong? Furthermore you have no evidence of this, this is just a list of assumptions on your part. You seem to be under the impression that state run or public schools are without bias. Generally I find those who claim to be the most unbiased usually are desperately attempting to hide it. The state and public schools most certainly do have bias, you just think that is A-OK because they align with your own. That is not the same as being unbiased, which frankly is not possible. Some how your bias is more appropriate that the bias of others in your mind. Some one like me would make you look incompetent in your own classroom by knowing more about the subject matter than you as a teacher. I have done it before. You have no business "educating" anyone, except for maybe being a living example of the failures of Marxism.

Of course you would frame the ability to have open debate as something to be punished, but that is how public and state schools operate isn't it? Punishing those who disagree with the state narrative is something to be proud of in your eyes. Public schools reduce extremism? I guess that's why there is so much violence at them right? I am sure you think it is the fault of guns, and not the fact that it is designed to be a human meat grinder beating out any sense of individuality, critical thought, or free thinking from young minds. The fact that you are in a position to indoctrinate others is terrifying.

Some people happen to be gender fluid... In this case, they believe the child may be "gender expansive." I think it would be grave error to chemically and physically alter such a person. Also, the child may not be transgendered at all, but "questioning." For individuals who are pansexual, gender fluid, "gender expansive." etc etc, 6 may very well indeed be too young to figure out something that is rather complicated.

You seem to be conflating gender assignments with sexual preferences.  Gender and sexual preference are not the same thing.  I think this is why you are saying 6 is too young and it is too young to be discussing sexual preferences.  

If 6 was too young for gender, we would need to stop assigning gender to children at all.  One thing we know for sure, is that the parents assigning gender at these "gender revels" before the child has even been born is definitely too early.  It just happens to work most of the time because most people are cisgender (i think its 95%).


Every private school is evidence for what he is saying.  I teach at a school where my philosophy aligns and parents seek out our school because of that. "creating global thinkers" is a big part of our mission and we don't have flags in our classrooms.

   Teachers at private schools have a responsibility to teach the values of the school's mission and every mission is biased. Unbiased would be to teach the kids about abortion and concentration camps and let them decide for themselves what is right and wrong but most schools will teach it with a certain bias like "killing babies is wrong" or "telling women what to do with their bodies is wrong" and "putting a group of people in concentration camps is wrong" or "there are consequences for your actions" .

Many private school missions even have politicized language in them.  Look for words like "equality" "global" "diversity" vs "individual" "successful" "productive" and you can pick up on the code.  Then you also have religious rules.  A teacher who is not teaching in accordance with religious rules at a religious school can be fired.  Someone like you would not make long at my school even if he was teaching something like computer science that, in theory, has nothing to do with political views but in a public school, you would be protected.  That is why public schools reduce extremism.  They provide more balance.

You never cease to be entertaining. If you will notice you didn't actually respond to any of my points, you just pointed out I disagree with you in the form of straw manning and speaking for me followed by some ad hominem attacks. Gender theory is not based on genetics, it is based on "Critical Theory" and Marxism. Just because I don't think social constructs are 100% of what determines certain factors of human behavior doesn't mean I deny it exists or is needed.

"You're denying the difference between nature vs nurture debate (what behavior are linked to biology, what behavior is linked to environment and education, this one is not settled) and the environment vs self importance debate (our existence is more determined by our environment or our own characteristics, this debate is settled since the 20th)."

I can only assume through this poorly constructed verbiage you are trying to make an argument for collectivism over individualism. This debate is by no means settled either. I suspect you are simply confusing your self with similar arguments, but somewhat unrelated context to the original debate of gender being a social construct or a matter of genetics (nature vs nurture). I would assume this unless you are arguing genetic differences between men and women don't exist "because Communism".

I didn't deny anything about the article, I pointed out that the subject matter is inherently subjective and anecdotal. All you are doing is pointing out the obvious, creating another straw man, and speaking for me.

You are off topic on this homeschooling rant anyway, you asked how I thought best to limit extremism and I replied. Your assumptions about "religion spreading like wildefire" are based on nothing and not as much of a big deal as you think it is anyway. I might also point out just because a lot of home schooled kids have religious parents doesn't mean home schooling makes people more religious. Furthermore, who the fuck do you think you are demanding that parents submit their children to the state for indoctrination anyway? If they want to raise their children religious that is their business. People raising their children to be religious is horrible to you but mutilating the genitals of children and chemically castrating them is fine?

Ok I'm tired.

You're denying the problems of home schooling.
You're denying the reality of gender theory (which is just based on genetics you know, not really a science I guess).
You're denying the necessity and existence of social construct.
You're denying the difference between nature vs nurture debate (what behavior are linked to biology, what behavior is linked to environment and education, this one is not settled) and the environment vs self importance debate (our existence is more determined by our environment or our own characteristics, this debate is settled since the 20th).
You're denying the FACT that the article YOU presented is 80% testimonials, the lamest possible argument, or more precisely you're denying it's important.
You're denying the self indoctriment of individuals and families.

You're a moron. I can't discuss with you simply because you don't present facts, you present vague impressions like "This is why home schooling is important, because no one will care for your own children more than you do" which is not only wrong but also evade the little bit of social mixety importance.

In your ideal home schooling system, religion will spread like wildefire and what and who you are will be based ONLY on who your parents are. Beautiful.

You're too stupid or too fanatic to even think about the weaknesses of your opinions.

I didn't say you said that, I said that. I asked you to give examples of what you think is an unbiased news source since you are operating under the impression those are a thing. Tell me, in an article almost completely about peoples feelings and beliefs as a subject matter, what kind of hard observable facts would you like to see come to bear on this situation? Perhaps you want a peer reviewed study on this single child's life?

Every home schooled person I have ever met is LIGHTYEARS more intelligent than anyone who I have met educated in public schools. Some of them lack socialization skills, but that can be corrected over time, where as the indoctrination of public schooling tends to be a permanent impediment. So your opinion is parents educating their own children is extremist? I never said get rid of government, I said get rid of The Department of Education, the federal branch of the educational system. States and localities should be making these choices, and most importantly the parents, not Washington D.C. The public school system is already being used to spread extremism to OTHER PEOPLE'S children. Most parents actually care about their children and would never do this to their own, but many don't care enough to stop it from being done to the children of others. This is why home schooling is important, because no one will care for your own children more than you do, and certainly the state and its workers wont.

Again, you are letting your ignorance of your own arguments and ideologies shine through.

"Because gender theory is perfectly correct and when the teacher says "boys and girls aren't real" she's not wrong as gender are a social construct."

Here you are, arguing that gender is a social construct, excluding any biological component to gender identity. For like the fifth time, this is based upon the "nurture" argument in the "nature vs nurture" debate. Biology is nature, social constructs are nurture, hence you are in fact concluding that the debate has been decided regardless if you care to admit it or not. Your jibbering about "action and result" is meaningless. These are all long standing debates in psychology and sociology going back THOUSANDS of years. I promise you The Angry Frenchineer and his little red book of Communisms hasn't solved the riddle.

Never said that. Only that your sources are heavily biased as this article is. It relies mainly on testimonials and personnal feelings. Very few facts. Only people saying "yeah she loved school", "the teacher diddn't care about hte well being of the child".
Not factual at all.
Home schooling is the dumbest shit I've ever heard. It's horrible, innefficient and just transfer your own biases directly to children. Try home schooling or talk to someone who has suffer home schooling before saying shit like this.

How the hell would getting the government out of educational system help with limiting extremism? Getting rid of government would somehow magically makes so teachers no longer have political and societal opinions somehow?

It would only creates officialy biased schools. You would get religious school, liberal schools, anarchist schools etc... You would probably end with much MORE extremism because it would be isolated and organized ones.

Would you care to explain shit you say or you're just here to say "government bad, orange man good"?
Your question makes no sense and isn't related to anything I've said. There are biological differences between each individuals so of course I couldn't ever say something as stupid as "there are no biological differences between genders". You really love strawmen don't you?
Have never made this claim. You're the one making me say this. Because you can't make the difference between action and result. Behaviour and social situation. Cultural factors and biological factors. Because you're dumb as a rock ^^

I don't know, as a member of the LGBTQ community, I have much difficulty understanding the "T" part. I can only offer my experience. I pretty much knew my sexual preference by age 11. But at age 6??? I don't recall having the foggiest notion. I do recall that I was an effeminate child. However, if my parents had misconstrued it and went through these drastic measures to reassign my gender, I would have despised them for it. However, that is just my case.
From what I read so far in this case, it appears the child may be "gender expansive." Whatever that means. I'm not certain taking steps to force the child to be a "girl" is the called for action here.

Six years old is a little too young for that. You never truly know the reasons for the child "wanting" this. It could simply be that they truly want it, OR it could be very bad parents forcing the child to say that they want it. 6 years old is just too young.

I would love to see this unbiased news source you claim exists. That would be amazing. How to limit extremism in teaching? Get the federal government out of the educational system. Close The Department of Education. Home school your children. Are you honestly arguing there is zero biological component to gender differences? Here you are again making claims that the "nature vs nurture" debate has been concluded...

Though the article is as biased as usual when you give a link, it contains something interesting. Yeah I call that biased when an article use 80% of testimony and 20% of facts.


The one interesting thing is: how to limit extremism in teaching? Because gender theory is perfectly correct and when the teacher says "boys and girls aren't real" she's not wrong as gender are a social construct. But should it be taught in such strong and violent way? The teacher is obviously taking this subject at heart and it impacts her teaching.

That would be the same with a racist teacher in a colonial history class or very religious teacher talking about civilization evolutions. How do you ensure that the personal beliefs of a teacher don't impact the school, or at least not to the point of harming children?


I don't have an answer to this problem.

Yeah, because mutilating and chemically castrating children is "science".

Don't you just hate when schools try to teach Science to little kids instead of dogma?

 
     If by america, you mean United States of America, you are mistaken. The school is Canada. I'm not certain about this particular curriculum though. It's like teaching that there is no such thing as electrical charge because neutrons exist.  If a 6 year old biological female wants to identify as a girl, let her.

This absolutely absurd. I don't even know what to type. In India they forcefully marry kids at a young age to cousins etc and now this in america. OMG

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/ontario-family-files-human-rights-complaint-after-six-year-old-girl-upset-by-gender-theory-in-school/

really sick
for about a week ago in brazil 2 lesbians have castrated their son secretly, and when they realised, that he is not becoming a girl, after a half a year they murdered him

What am I trying to sound too smart about? What did I fuck up? You aren't answering any of my questions. I don't think I am smarter than everyone else and think everyone else is dumb. I just don't talk out of my ass or debate things I don't already know well, or submit to willful knobs just because they repeat themselves over and over again, so I could see how you might get that impression. Are you sure you aren't just describing yourself? Teach me oh secret king, what did I fuck up that you got so much pwnage on me with? If it is so obvious why are you having so much trouble just saying it?