LBGT Person offends school board. Is ejected from meeting.

[seymourflops]

Here's Bill Maher's take on parents input on school curriculum:

"Real Time" host Bill Maher had a tense exchange about critical race theory in schools on Friday night's show with guest Michael Eric Dyson, a Vanderbilt University professor.

Maher kicked off the show's panel discussion by addressing how "Democrats got their a-- kicked" in Tuesday's elections, particularly in Virginia where the issue of education dominated the gubernatorial race won by Republican Glenn Youngkin.

Dyson argued that parents were "spooked" by CRT even though "none of them can define it" and suggested that they were outraged only because Black history was now being "centered" in the school curriculum.

"But I find that a disingenuous argument because I don't think that is what people are objecting to," the host reacted. "They are not objecting to Black history being taught. There are other things going on in the schools."

BILL MAHER WARNS VIRGINIA DEMS: ‘MCAULIFFE COULD LOSE ELECTION OVER SCHOOLS ISSUE BECAUSE ’PARENTS VOTE'

"Like what?" Dyson asked.

"Like separating children by race," Maher responded, "and describing them either as oppressed or oppressor. I mean, there are children coming home who feel traumatized by this. That's what parents are objecting to."

Bill Maher, liberal professor clash on CRT in schools: It's 'disingenuous' to say parents oppose Black history

“Real Time” host Bill Maher had a tense exchange with Vanderbuilt University Professor Michael Eric Dyson about critical race theory in schools.

www.foxnews.com

The classic trick of misstating the position of someone with whom you disagree and then arguing against the misstatement seems even more egregious when done to concerned parents. It is working. I have heard teachers state as a fact that some parents do not want history to be taught.

Do I know what Critical Race Theory is? I've seen more than one definition of it. To clear that up, maybe some proponent of CRT being taught in schools can give us the one and only definition that all agree on and no one would say different?

If they cannot, then claiming that we "don't even know what it means," is a silly argument since no one does.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

@Nomad4Ever I appreciate you posting that. I waded through as much as I could and I have several comments to make about it

No problem. I felt like at this point the only option was to actually read the damn thing, instead of reading news articles about it.

I'm saying different things because another poster presented new information that led me to change my mind.

Are you talking about me?

This may shock some of you since that is so rare on a political message board. If you have a weak heart, read no further.

I still believe that books for school children do not need to speak so explicitly.

I would again like to point out the average age of virginity loss is 17 in the US. With 20% of 14 year olds supposedly having had some kind of sexual experience. It seems like 13-14 is a good age to make material like this available to kids who are interested.

I also believe the author hoped the book would be noticed and that the notice would generate profitable publicity. It seems to be working as two of us at least have waded through the ad heavy online version. Ka-ching, indeed.

You are probably correct to some degree, but a lot of leftists feel that we should be more open about sex and nudity. In Europe, this book probably wouldn't have been noticed at all.

Nudity and sexuality in European advertising - YLF

Warning: the full version of this post contains images that might not be suitable for your work environment. There is uncensored nudity in European advertising

youlookfab.com

They almost certainly would not have identified as gay, the male on male fellatio was seen as play, not sex in any romantic sense. I would guess this is the child porn reference, not the part with the topless pre-teen who literally had two ink dots for "breasts."

That's a good point. I think you are right.

I don't call that child porn. I think a pedophile would get more out of an Underoos ad than that picture.

Agreed. I think the child porn claim is fearmongering.

The only place I have ever seen a person suck on a strap on is in lesbian BDSM porn or porn featuring a dominatrix and a submissive male sucking the strap on. So, I associate that act with submission.

Ok. So, this is really the only part of your response I strongly disagree with. I think, and I'm making an assumption here that might be very incorrect about you, that this is a generational thing. I'm 23 and in college lots of people were pretty open about using dildos or strap-ons. It was not uncommon during drinking nights for people to get dildos thrown at them because it was funny. Its my understanding that for FtM people, strap-on use is pretty common. Sex toy use in general is...just not considered shocking or exclusively limited to fetish porn for a lot of younger people.

Yes, it is in imagination, but it is shown. I'm not shocked by that, who could be?

I'm sure plenty of people were shocked by that. Not everyone is as chill as you

This book could fairly be called, "Retro-Hippie Parents are the Worst!" Seriously, they are so into nature that the mom doesn't inform her daughter about her upcoming menstruation cycles and just let her find out the hard way?

Keep in mind, the book is based on the authors own experiences.

The disgusting descriptions and depictions of the biological female's mishaps with her fluid seemed almost designed to dispel young men's attraction to girls.

I believe this part was included to help others who's parents may not have been the best, and let them know how to deal with what the author dealt with.

Anyway, this book does not belong in a public school library in my opinion, but it isn't hugely over the line. Dial back a few parts and I'd be fine with it. If it was publicly discussed and the consensus was to include it, I wouldn't bitch about it.

I agree that the book is close enough to the line it warrants discussion within a community. I do think moving it up to 16+ would pretty much remove any arguments I can think of regarding it. At 17 you can join the military and literally kill people. I think at 16 you can see a few sexually explicate scenes.