I have a mental image of hitler working in a preschool, leaving a trail of lego behind him like some sort of genocide fairy XDbuy teh haloz said:So this is how Nazi Germany started!
I have a mental image of hitler working in a preschool, leaving a trail of lego behind him like some sort of genocide fairy XDbuy teh haloz said:So this is how Nazi Germany started!
ZacktheWolf said:They're in -preschool-. At that age, I don't remember -caring- what was "gender-appropriate". If a girl wants to go for the legos, and a boy for the kitchen set, they're going to anyway, no matter where what's placed, or what pronouns are being used.
I'd rather see age-appropriate education about acceptance of diversity, and assurance that you don't -need- to find any stereotype, you should be happy being you, not someone else's you.
There was a fairy tale when I was little called 'The Dancing Princess' or somthing where a King tasked someone to stop his daughter sneaking out and going dancing. In the end the lad, having tricked the girl, was given the princess to marry and , it actually said this, 'Then the princess was never allowed to leave the castle again.'Sneaky Paladin said:A bit over the top yes, and I see how SOME fairy tales could reinforce stereotypes like girls are princesses to be saved men are heroes but they may have taken it to far.
And where exactly did I say don't teach about it? They are preschoolers. They don't care about homesexuals or any of that stuff yet all they care about is whether or not they get to play with their favourite toy or not. There is young and too young. Preschool is too young. Kids need to be allowed to just be kids for as long as they can be. The moment they start asking about it yes educate them but until then let them remain oblivious.ultrachicken said:Lolwut? Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something? We will never get true tolerance in our society until people are comfortable with homosexual couples from a young age. And maybe adopted children wouldn't have breakdowns when discovering that their birth parents are not the parents they know and love if adoption wasn't treated so differently from raising blood-related children.Astoria said:And they wonder why kids are acting worse and worse. They are PRESCHOOLERS! They shouldn't be taught about homesexuality and adoption or anything like that until they start asking questions about it which probably won't be for years. Let kids be kids for heavens sake!
I think the way to reach these goals is not to try and blind children so much that they don't know that "hen" is not a pronoun, however. That's just stupid.
To counter that kids learn male/female behavior from their parent of the same gender, I was raised by my Mum and never met my Dad. I'm a gruff man with a beard who likes cigars and vodka and such.conflictofinterests said:They have a basis in the entirety of the child's learning environment. A child spends much more time at home than at school, and will pick up things from around the house. Kid sees dad working on the car and mom putting on makeup? Kid's a girl, going to emulate mom, kid's a boy going to emulate dad. There MAY be valid genetic differences in preference of one activity over another between genders, but it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to extricate those from any environmental influence without a) committing atrocities in the name of science or b) ruining the experiment because humans are creatures of culture, and if raised sans culture are quite fundamentally different.Hvitedod said:Israelis tried it. Didn't work. Boys still like cars, girls still like make up. Those gender stereotypes have a basis in reality, you know.
I see I must repeat myself:Astoria said:And where exactly did I say don't teach about it? They are preschoolers. They don't care about homesexuals or any of that stuff yet all they care about is whether or not they get to play with their favourite toy or not. There is young and too young. Preschool is too young. Kids need to be allowed to just be kids for as long as they can be. The moment they start asking about it yes educate them but until then let them remain oblivious.ultrachicken said:Lolwut? Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something? We will never get true tolerance in our society until people are comfortable with homosexual couples from a young age. And maybe adopted children wouldn't have breakdowns when discovering that their birth parents are not the parents they know and love if adoption wasn't treated so differently from raising blood-related children.Astoria said:And they wonder why kids are acting worse and worse. They are PRESCHOOLERS! They shouldn't be taught about homesexuality and adoption or anything like that until they start asking questions about it which probably won't be for years. Let kids be kids for heavens sake!
I think the way to reach these goals is not to try and blind children so much that they don't know that "hen" is not a pronoun, however. That's just stupid.
Nothing negative comes from teaching kids that these things exist. How, exactly, does knowing of homosexuality and adoption hamper children's ability to be children?Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something?
Because if you teach a child about homosexuality before they know what sexuality is then you have to explain sexuality and a child does NOT need to know about sex until later in life.ultrachicken said:I see I must repeat myself:Astoria said:And where exactly did I say don't teach about it? They are preschoolers. They don't care about homesexuals or any of that stuff yet all they care about is whether or not they get to play with their favourite toy or not. There is young and too young. Preschool is too young. Kids need to be allowed to just be kids for as long as they can be. The moment they start asking about it yes educate them but until then let them remain oblivious.ultrachicken said:Lolwut? Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something? We will never get true tolerance in our society until people are comfortable with homosexual couples from a young age. And maybe adopted children wouldn't have breakdowns when discovering that their birth parents are not the parents they know and love if adoption wasn't treated so differently from raising blood-related children.Astoria said:And they wonder why kids are acting worse and worse. They are PRESCHOOLERS! They shouldn't be taught about homesexuality and adoption or anything like that until they start asking questions about it which probably won't be for years. Let kids be kids for heavens sake!
I think the way to reach these goals is not to try and blind children so much that they don't know that "hen" is not a pronoun, however. That's just stupid.Nothing negative comes from teaching kids that these things exist. How, exactly, does knowing of homosexuality and adoption hamper children's ability to be children?Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something?
I have always liked what people consider as 'male' things. I'm straight though. It is really actually very hard for me as I don't really 'fit in' anywhere. Girls thinks I'm wierd for liking computer games, comics and technology and while men treat me okay I'll never be 'one of the guys' and invited on nights out and such.conflictofinterests said:More than 2. Even talking in a purely chromosomal sense, there are people who have more than the regular number of sex chromosomes. Even talking in a purely physical sense, there are people who were born with both sets of genitalia. In a cultural sense, there are even more genders than that. There are differences with everyone, and most of the problem is in the idea that there are ONLY 2 different genders.mikespoff said:In short? It's retarded.
This is not about "democracy and equality". This is just stupid.
There are some significant differences between men and women, boys and girls, and trying to pretend otherwise is nonsense. "Equality" is great, not treating people as inferior because of gender is great, but there are still TWO DIFFERENT DAMN GENDERS!
This and I also repeat that THEY DON'T CARE. They aren't really going to listen anyway and if they do you get the problems stated above. Kids should be allowed to remain innocent and oblivious for as long as possible. I wish I could've been ignorant longer. I have nothing against homesexuals if that's what you were suggesting before. I am all for acception but teaching kids that young is not the way to do it. And how can they be accepting anyway when they are being raised in a society that is still iffy on the whole thing. Wait until they are older and can understand and form their own opinion on the matter or its going to either be a waste of time or a mistake.Jonabob87 said:Because if you teach a child about homosexuality before they know what sexuality is then you have to explain sexuality and a child does NOT need to know about sex until later in life.ultrachicken said:I see I must repeat myself:Astoria said:And where exactly did I say don't teach about it? They are preschoolers. They don't care about homesexuals or any of that stuff yet all they care about is whether or not they get to play with their favourite toy or not. There is young and too young. Preschool is too young. Kids need to be allowed to just be kids for as long as they can be. The moment they start asking about it yes educate them but until then let them remain oblivious.ultrachicken said:Lolwut? Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something? We will never get true tolerance in our society until people are comfortable with homosexual couples from a young age. And maybe adopted children wouldn't have breakdowns when discovering that their birth parents are not the parents they know and love if adoption wasn't treated so differently from raising blood-related children.Astoria said:And they wonder why kids are acting worse and worse. They are PRESCHOOLERS! They shouldn't be taught about homesexuality and adoption or anything like that until they start asking questions about it which probably won't be for years. Let kids be kids for heavens sake!
I think the way to reach these goals is not to try and blind children so much that they don't know that "hen" is not a pronoun, however. That's just stupid.Nothing negative comes from teaching kids that these things exist. How, exactly, does knowing of homosexuality and adoption hamper children's ability to be children?Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something?
I don't think that showing two people of the same gender in a situation the same as, or similar to, marriage, translates to teaching children about sex. Otherwise we'd need to hide the existence of marriage in its entirety.Jonabob87 said:Because if you teach a child about homosexuality before they know what sexuality is then you have to explain sexuality and a child does NOT need to know about sex until later in life.ultrachicken said:I see I must repeat myself:Astoria said:And where exactly did I say don't teach about it? They are preschoolers. They don't care about homesexuals or any of that stuff yet all they care about is whether or not they get to play with their favourite toy or not. There is young and too young. Preschool is too young. Kids need to be allowed to just be kids for as long as they can be. The moment they start asking about it yes educate them but until then let them remain oblivious.ultrachicken said:Lolwut? Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something? We will never get true tolerance in our society until people are comfortable with homosexual couples from a young age. And maybe adopted children wouldn't have breakdowns when discovering that their birth parents are not the parents they know and love if adoption wasn't treated so differently from raising blood-related children.Astoria said:And they wonder why kids are acting worse and worse. They are PRESCHOOLERS! They shouldn't be taught about homesexuality and adoption or anything like that until they start asking questions about it which probably won't be for years. Let kids be kids for heavens sake!
I think the way to reach these goals is not to try and blind children so much that they don't know that "hen" is not a pronoun, however. That's just stupid.Nothing negative comes from teaching kids that these things exist. How, exactly, does knowing of homosexuality and adoption hamper children's ability to be children?Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something?
It's still useful for them to have experienced such an enviornment. Intervention from an early age is important so they won't grow up thinking of this kind of diversity as freakish. If they grow up thinking that the belief becomes much harder to correct.Nickolai77 said:So, practically i don't see it working.
Admitedly it doesn't sound like they're making it clear the enviornment of the school is unusual. However there is no reason why this concept must be executed in such a way as the keep the children ignorant.TK421 said:You can't teach anything through forced ignorance.
Well, look for it no longer. The Finnish language has always had a jewel like this. "Hän" is our word for He/she, "Hänen" Him/Her, an so forth. It is totally neutral word.trollnystan said:I'm Swedish and I can honestly say I don't quite know where I stand on this. Part of me goes, "Intriguing!" Another part of me goes, "But biology!"
I suppose we'll just have to wait and see how this turns out.
PS. Even though I've always been against the use of "hen" - mostly because the people I've heard advocating it wanted to use it to the exclusion of "han/hon" - I do find the idea of a non-specific gender pronoun in singular form interesting. Hmmm...