Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4hd5z wrote

I don't care who agrees or disagrees with this but here goes... If you feel threatened by not being able to talk about anal sex and gender non-conformity to a 6 year old, you are by definition a groomer. Sexualizing children is deplorable in every way, shape, or form. The fact that someone has to defend this point is troubling. I don't care what you do in the bedroom but when it comes to kids this is unacceptable and is the parent's responsibility to have these conversations. Parents are not going to stand down and take this any longer. It's been true in FL as well as many, many other states. It would also be great if this sub talked more about music and less about this type of garbage.

−38

Throwaway-account-23 t1_ix4icuc wrote

Hey, nutjob, you made up that entire scenario in your mind and then got yourself mad about it.

Nobody does that, congrats on being a fucking moron and 100% lapping up the GOPs market tested talking points to get you to vote against your own best interests.

14

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4j67q wrote

Nice edit after you posted too. Amateur

−13

Throwaway-account-23 t1_ix4kg7u wrote

OMG NOBODY CAN EDIT A POST

Fuck off psycho.

Move to Alabama or Florida or wherever nobody with a high school diploma lives.

8

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4lar0 wrote

You really need to just look up the word so you can understand it. Here you go Einstein...

ad ho·mi·nem

/ˌad ˈhämənəm/

adjective

(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

"vicious ad hominem attacks"

adverb

in a way that is directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

"these points come from some of our best information sources, who realize they'll be attacked ad hominem"

in a way that relates to or is associated with a particular person.

"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"

You get angry and attack me personally instead of the argument because you have no argument. Do you want me to look up the definition of psycho and explain that too? Now fuck off before you embarrass yourself more.

−1

The_Powers t1_ix4lbec wrote

Literally no-one does that you weirdo, that's not at all the context being talked about and it says more about you than anything else.

12

Murder_Ballads t1_ix4m7ue wrote

If literally no-one is doing it then the law shouldn’t be a problem.

−6

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4lond wrote

That's what the law prevents and I support that law. If that is weird to you, then that tells me all I need to know. That's weird bud.

−13

The_Powers t1_ix4nlss wrote

What's the weather like on your planet?

4

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4rl4p wrote

Normal

0

The_Powers t1_ix4rx3m wrote

If only your grip on reality was as well.

Pretty funny that your one word reply speaks volumes about your politics. Anyone who screeches about how such and such is 'not normal' and bases their world view on the maintenance of their 'normal' always seems to vote the same way. I don't even have to say which way cos you, I and anyone else reading this knows exactly what I mean.

Funny that.

4

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4txxs wrote

Get mad. I don't get af. Like I said in my OP. I don't care who agrees or disagrees. All you can do is call names which does what? Nothing... Later tater

−2

The_Powers t1_ix4v64o wrote

Get mad? I'm taking the piss out of you, you utter clown shoe. Ain't nobody 'calling names' (until the clown shoe comment but if the make up and colourful wig fits, right?) and anyway, what are you, 7 years old talking like that? Run go tell teacher why don't you? Jeeeeezus, so many adult babies.

"I don't get af" - Not surprised, lol.

2

Mattbl t1_ix4nkvm wrote

Can you provide sources where someone was trying to talk to a 6-year-old class about anal sex? I saw a story about a trans woman trying to explain to her class what her being trans meant because they were questioning her about it but I haven't seen anything about anal sex discussions.

There's an extreme difference between talking to children about gender identity and sex acts. They are not even close to one in the same. It's also very dubious equating discussions about gender identity to "non-conformity." You're painting it as "straight normal, gay abnormal." Personally, I don't want a kid to be told they're "not conforming" if they don't identify as cis. We've been doing that for decades and look how many mental health issues it's caused in the LGBTQ+ community.

It's also a total strawman to call anyone who opposes this bill or wants to discuss it further a "groomer," like you do in another comment. It basically feels like you're using that as a defense-mechanism and don't actually have any justifiable reason for supporting this other than fear that your kid is going to somehow turn gay by being exposed to gay people in the real world. No one that's debating this wants young kids to be sexually preyed on, stop parroting that bullshit because it makes you look ignorant.

There's a reason this is called the "don't say gay bill." The right hides behind vague wording and Ron innocently says things like, "where does it say that?" But we all know it's a fear of change and anything that you don't deem status quo. There's very, very few (if any) examples of a gay/trans teacher sexually grooming young children. If you think a gay or trans person wanting children to know they exist rather than having to hide their identity is "grooming," you have an extreme misunderstanding of the context. Believing that is why you got told you're lapping up GOP talking points in another reply.

7

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4rfou wrote

You make A LOT of assumptions about me, my background, and my statement. You don't know me. This is how dialogue becomes undistinguishable from the get go so nothing is accomplished. Lots of word salad that ends up being pointless along with misformation based on nothing. You have so many incorrect points you are basing on what? This is the one of the famous reddit psychoanalysis sessions based on a few sentences which is complete garbage. Here is my point in case it wasn't clear enough from my original post.... This subject is not up to the teachers, districts, or anyone else other than the parents from the ages of 3rd grade and below... Period. Not up for debate. This is wrong. Older kids like say middle school age... No problem. These elementary school aged kids are trying to tie their shoes and looking forward to recess not contemplating an out of control sexualized agenda.

3

Hawkson2020 t1_ix4i3vs wrote

That’s uhhh. Not what anyone except strawmen are doing.

4

Rabblerowsers t1_ix4i073 wrote

Agreed, it's sad how the media exploded over this and made it appear like an anti-gay agenda when in reality it's just preventing sex talk from happening in class from kindergarten to grade 3. As someone raised by lesbians, myself, as well as my parents, are horrified at how sexual the LGBTQ movement is/has become, like being hyper sexual and gross is part of the identity or something...

−9

AnimalMother76 t1_ix4kohq wrote

Thanks for your pov! I know people in the gay community that feel the same way as well. It's like the LGBTQ movement has become more of a cult than anything else. Crazy days we live in...

4