Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
]
It isn't, though. CRT is advanced stuff, not grade-schooler shit. It covers the idea that systemic racism doesn't need the active participation of racists. Bigotry builds into systems both consciously and unconsciously and CRT tries to build better systems by attempting to circumvent this most human of failings.
|
You say that like you actually believe it's fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
]
It's not bellyaching if it helps build a foundation from which a new perspective is created. Knowledge of the racist past creates a desire for a brighter, more equitable future. To pretend it keeps us all in the knuckle-dragging us-versus-them mentality is childish..
|
I don't want a "equitable" future. I want a meritocracy that allows the successful and hard working to thrive. You know, the original founding principles of this nation. Not the "old world" values of blood, class and heritage define your future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
How is it deviant to teach facts? Some children have two male parental figures, otherwise known colloquially as fathers or dads. That's a literal fact, and to simply tell kids, "hey, this isn't abnormal" isn't grooming.
|
Except it literally is "abnormal" and "dievant".
deviant
dē′vē-ənt
adjective
Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.
abnormal
ăb-n?r′məl
adjective
Not typical, usual, or regular; not normal; deviant.
Even you acknowledge they are not "teaching" kids that these people exist, but ate grooming them to be "tolerant and accepting and even embracing and exploring" these life style choices. That is grooming.
Now if you wanted to do "Mental Health" awareness class and talk about depression, anxiety, autism, eating disorders, gender dysphoria and homosexuality... So that people are aware of the issues and know it's not cool to make fun of people who suffer from them... Sure. But that's not what's happening and you know that. In fact, based on your arguments, you support that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
Men have worn dresses for millennia. It's modern Western civilization and Twitter/YouTube/Fox News pundits that made it all fuckin' weird. Shit's breezy.
|
No, they have not and pulling out togas and kilts is not proof. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species of manmalia and have always had dimorphic genders in every society. It's part of your cousins the feminists cries about historic system patriarchy. The science is settled.
Also, crossdressers and drag queens are dressing as female caricatures to express their own sexual identity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
How does asking a kid how they'd like to be referred to constitute grooming? How does trying not to misgender someone as their mind is forming constitute anything other than trying not to make growing up harder than it is?
|
Literally grooming. There are only two genders and they correspond with their sexes. Anything else is an attempt to confuse those developing minds and groom them to think otherwise. Humans are dimorphic. The science is settled. Stop worshiping your Marxists Spaghetti Sky Monster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
Adults should be able to make a decision about which gender they present as.
|
Adults can do whatever they want... Include accepting the consequences of their actions...
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
You're bordering on bigotry here, which is no surprise. The entire line of thought is devoid of scientific reasoning and still comes full circle to the theological idea that being gay is a moral deviance.
|
Except you are the science denier here. I've not referenced any religion or scripture. Humans are born heterosexual and dimorphic. Anything different is a deviation of normal. Homosexuality does not further the human race as it does not promote reproduction. Gender dysmorphia does not promote personal well-being nor advancement of society.
When someone says they hear voices, do you tell them you hear them as well so they feel better?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree
You have to understand that this is a statistically invalid argument, right? Yes, some LGBTQIA+ are pedophiles, just as some straight men and straight women are pedophiles.
If you do the research, which is not hard and does not involve Facebook, you'll find that there are absolutely no peer-reviewed studies that prove LGBTQIA+ people are more likely to molest children.
|
If the research is not out there then how can you say it's statistically invalid?
Why would there be no peer-reviewed research available? Does academia not want that information out there?
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-li...cher-and-pupil
A review of recorded cases of teacher-pupil sexual interaction indicated that of the 30 instances detailed in the literature, 24 (80 percent) involved homosexual acts. It appears that teachers who practice homosexual acts are between 90 to 100 times more apt to involve themselves sexually with pupils than teachers who confine themselves to heterosexual acts.
Here's a litmus test for you.
Since you are so passionate about "teaching kids" about "inclusivity"... Should we also teach kids Sharia Law in school?