Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

DaFish221122 t1_ix4jj0x wrote

The law literally just states that you can't talk about sexual topics (including straight stuff) for kindergarten to 3rd grade.

Why are people crying so much

−14

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix4mcum wrote

So it's illegal for a teacher to mention their spouse?

10

Physical_Stock_8636 t1_ix4p423 wrote

Why would they have to mention their spouse in class. When I was growing up, we knew nothing about our teachers. They taught school and that was it. Just teach and leave everything else at home where it belongs.

1

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix4qbfm wrote

They don't have to do anything, but it definitely shouldn't be illegal for a teacher to mention the existence of their family.

When you went to school, the female teachers didn't have different titles like Ms. or Mrs. ?

8

Physical_Stock_8636 t1_ix8a63m wrote

It was always Miss. Whether Mrs or Ms. Wouldn't have known if they were married or not when I was that young. My mom was a teacher, and most of the kids in the classes she subbed for probably didn't even know she was my mom. That's the way it should be. Just teach the subject matter.

0

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix8aksp wrote

Mrs. is the title women traditionally take when they're married. I seriously doubt you had no teachers that went by Mrs.

All of this is pointless noise. It should not be illegal for a teacher to mention that they have a spouse.

1

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix4npgl wrote

No.

−5

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix4pavf wrote

But the law says any discussions of sexuality right?

3

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix4plfv wrote

Classroom discussions or instruction. Mentioning your spouse isn't the same as instructing them on what being gay is.

0

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix4qwda wrote

But acknowledging the existence of your spouse is surely discussion right? I mean for most female teachers it's right there in their name if they're married or not.

It's a law for a problem that doesn't exist and is written so vaguely as to make the mere acknowledgement of gay people illegal.

7

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix4tcws wrote

Why would acknowledging your spouse become a discussion? You can't have conversations about normal life without making it into an instruction or in-depth discussion about your sexual orientation? Because that's what the law prohibits, not wholesome anecdotes about your home-life.

1

GamingTrend t1_ix4woz5 wrote

Because kids are curious and will ask. Have you met kids??

3

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix4x1x7 wrote

Yes, I have two. I also know that as an adult, you're supposed to sometimes say, "No." I also know as a former teacher, the job is to teach the subject, not go on a tangent about your sex life.

0

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix4ykv7 wrote

>not go on a tangent about your sex life.

Who is doing this?

5

GamingTrend t1_ix516f4 wrote

Nobody, but it didn't stop Republicans from baiting a bear trap to get rid of those they see as "other".

3

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix52eah wrote

Well, if it's nobody the law shouldn't effect anything and there's nothing to complain about.

0

GamingTrend t1_ix581o2 wrote

You serious? That's literally the dumbest take you could possibly make, and yet, here we are. Putting vague laws on the books has never done anything but harm, and you know it.

1

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix4ygsm wrote

I thought the law prohibits "discussions of sexuality". That's pretty vague.

2

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix52nho wrote

That's not vague at all. There's no need to discuss sexuality with prepubescent elementary schoolers.

1

nyarlathotep9 t1_ix55pf8 wrote

Saying whether you're a Ms. or Mrs. is a discussion of sexuality though.

1

notcaffeinefree t1_ix4n2ge wrote

This is really, at best, blunting the impact of the law and at worst, being misleading.

It's not just "sexual topics". If little Bobby asks why his friend has two moms, or why his brother's friend has a boyfriend instead of a girlfriend (or vice versa), the teacher cannot give an answer.

Kids are naturally curious. They ask a ton of questions. You are not helping them by ignoring reality or by trying to shield them from topics you don't like. They will ask questions about what they see and hear in the world. It's not harmful to answer them.

2

DaFish221122 t1_ix5fnm0 wrote

I promise you that most kids are not interested in sex. Being gay is usually something that you find out later in life and certainly not before puberty.

The law was made to prevent schools to prevent discussion of things like sexual practices and telling little girls or boys to transition. Which these things do happen and I've literally seen them with my own eyes at previous schools of mine. I was in Arizona which is a pretty moderate state

1

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix4ob6m wrote

That's not true. The law bans curriculum or classroom instruction about sexual orientation, not answering basic questions.

They just can't go into full teacher-mode about what it means or what it entails. They don't need worksheets about why Susie wants to be with Sally. The law makes it so that they have to stick to academics.

−1

notcaffeinefree t1_ix4p4c6 wrote

That's not entirely correct.

It bans "classroom instruction". The problem is that the bill doesn't define what "instruction" means.

Is the teacher "instructing" a student if they explain why a man might date another man? Without a clear answer, if you're a teacher, are you willing to risk your job to answer such a question? Is a school district going to risk lawsuits by allowing teachers to do so?

4

DoppelGangHer88 t1_ix4rapq wrote

What do you mean? Instruction already has a concrete definition: "detailed information about how something should be done or operated. Teaching; education."

The bill explicitly does not prohibit students from talking about their families or bar classroom discussions about LGBTQ history. The bill states that “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur.”

Answering a question with a direct answer is not equivalent to having a classroom discussion or instruction about the subject.

2

biscaynium t1_ix4ks42 wrote

Because there's a group of people that have to remain outraged all the time. If things were exactly as they wanted them they would no longer have any personal identity and wouldn't get attention.

−8

Murder_Ballads t1_ix4m1fa wrote

It’s a good question. We really should be asking why these people want to talk to young kids about sex so desperately.

−13

readerf52 t1_ix4mvvc wrote

And that’s the point.

It wasn’t being discussed to the very young children, but that didn’t scare people, so they had to pretend it was an issue.

There are books for young children like “My 2 Dads” that simply talks about a different family dynamic. It is not sexual. There is no push to create homosexual children or adults. It simply explains what that family feels like and how they function.

And that scares the shit out of people.

So the better question is: why? What are grown ass adults scared of families that are different?

8

Murder_Ballads t1_ix4n57m wrote

So if none of that is happening with very young children why are people so up in arms about he law? Do they just not understand what it says? It apparently seeks to prevent something that isn’t even happening, so what is the law harming, besides potentially wasting tax dollars?

−3

readerf52 t1_ix4t97n wrote

From what I’ve read, it puts a burden on teachers.

Children are curious and they aren’t stupid. Any honest question that may result in even the slightest shading of talk of “gay” could have serious repercussions for them.

This is not a subject that teachers willingly discuss with very young children; they would much rather it be discussed at home. But if it isn’t, and little Emma talks about her aunts that are married to each other, it could cause a discussion. Emma can be happy as a clam, and her family accepting and understanding, but the very topic is now forbidden. On any level.

3