Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Take a look at this thread on twitter (i.e. don't just read the first post). Apparently this is now part of the compulsory curriculum for kinder to grade two in British Columbia.
Does the left need to do more or less of this? It seems very ill-liberal to me, but I would be interested in people's reactions.
Edit - I've not verified its authenticity so there is still the chance it's BS.
Interesting that I took away something quite different from that thread. My interpretation was that the poster was taking issue with the notion that a boy wanting to wear a dress should automatically be categorised as somebody who truly identifies as a girl, as opposed to somebody who thought it might be fun/interesting to wear a dress. In other words, if a boy wears a dress, that's it, she's passed the gender dysphoria diagnostic test, she a she now and from here on we should only tolerate views that endorse that perspective and not question those views ever.Some of this is clearly garbage, she says "One lesson is about a boy who likes dresses. Ergo the lesson is on how boy is *actually* a girl, not about how boys, too, can like dresses" when the question itself clearly shows that this person identifies as a girl. And the book itself explicitly states this, as can be seen in a review linked further down:
View attachment 870901
So a lot of what this woman is saying is poorly disguised BS. She complains that "Our children deserve better than 1950s sex stereotypes" when she is the one trying to shoehorn that stereotype into a story that isn't about that.
On the separate subject of whether gender and sexuality should be taught to children, my response is, of course it should. God forbid we teach tolerance, respect and understanding between people to children. For those who say they're too young to learn this, I strongly disagree. Parents routinely expect their children to conform to gender stereotypes and impose heterosexual norms on them (for example, family members saying "he's going to be such a ladykiller when he grows up" or "she's going to make all the boys jealous"). So I have no sympathy for such an argument.
Your country is not going to produce much cannon fodder if it lets little boys play with dolls
The story description made it very clear that Bailey is not simply a boy who wants to wear a dress, but mentally a girl, born into the wrong body. So your interpretation is not relevant to the story.Interesting that I took away something quite different from that thread. My interpretation was that the poster was taking issue with the notion that a boy wanting to wear a dress should automatically be categorised as somebody who truly identifies as a girl, as opposed to somebody who thought it might be fun/interesting to wear a dress.
No, that's for the child to decide. Authority figures should encourage him to express himself and his identity fully and listen to how he perceives himself to be.Do you think a kinder-aged boy who wants to play with Barbies should be questioned about whether he truly feels like a boy?
What specifically led you to that conclusion?I'd be surprised if you did, but it looks like that's what's being insisted on here.
There's her explicitly saying she had an issue with the teaching of gender identity to children. On top of that, this woman refers to herself as a TERF, meaning a feminist who does not believe transgender identities are valid. JK Rowling is a good example of a TERF. Many social progressives (possibly a majority but I can't be sure) consider TERFs to be intolerant bigots who serve the interests of social conservatives.On the separate issue you mention in your last para, was there something in the tweets that made you think the author was opposed to teaching tolerance? I didn't spot it but I'm curious as to what you saw in there prompted you to write that paragraph.
Two very good points from one of my favourite commentators in the social media cesspit.
The best thing Biden can do is continue to distance himself from the 'Defund the police' protesters.
In Australian context Defund The Police is not a smart message to show off to battlers in low socioeconomic areas who are most affected by crime. All well and good to get behind it.....if you are a university student or a well off person (e.g. like some FTA TV commentators) who doesn't feel significant strain with meeting living expenses.
You mean the greens?A new party needs to be created that attracts outspoken fat/lesbian women and the bearded beta dudes. ALP should be attracting the secular working class and more intelligent individuals not the deadbeats of society
Don't forget the massive swings against Bolsonaro in Brazil.So, since this thread was created, we've seen the election of the centre-left (and I use that term loosely) in the US and Germany, and its re-election in Queensland, Western Australia, Aotearoa and Canada. Although we had 50 pages of argument about culture wars, in reality it had nothing to do with that, and everything to do with looking more competent than the main conservative opponent. In the short-term, that seems to be their path to success.
I disagree - culture wards keep a good percentage of voters voting against their own interestsYeah, most people in the real world don't give a fu** about the culture wars. Those that believe otherwise need to spend more time outside.
I disagree - culture wards keep a good percentage of voters voting against their own interests
I know plenty of blue collar arse hanging out of their pants types who vite coalition because they dont like brown people and lgtbiq folk.Maybe. It looks that way in America, but there aren't nearly as many prominent, prevalent YouTube voices and the like in the Australian woke v anti-woke arena of shallow bullshit.
I know plenty of blue collar arse hanging out of their pants types who vite coalition because they dont like brown people and lgtbiq folk.
literally lambs voting for wolves.
As they have a souvlaki/ vindaloo/ uncle billy’s at 2 am after a night on the lash‘Preserving our British/Aussie way of life from excessive immigration’ when the culture they are referring to has literally evolved from what immigrants brought.
celtic and Aussie indigenous culture excepted, but that’s not what these people think they Are ‘preserving’
I'll count that when the election arrives and Lula kicks his arse by double digits.Don't forget the massive swings against Bolsonaro in Brazil.
What percentage, do you reckon? In any case, it's not a majority of voters. The point of this thread isn't to focus on those people because they'll probably never vote Labor, it's to focus on how Labor can win the swinging voters back to their side.I disagree - culture wards keep a good percentage of voters voting against their own interests
The point being they were labor rusted ons before the culture wars.I'll count that when the election arrives and Lula kicks his arse by double digits.
What percentage, do you reckon? In any case, it's not a majority of voters. The point of this thread isn't to focus on those people because they'll probably never vote Labor, it's to focus on how Labor can win the swinging voters back to their side.