Posted on 04/17/2003 10:32:53 AM PDT by Remedy
It hasn't been easy teaching children about homosexuality in the Newton schools because many parents are not happy with the plan, a social worker told the attendees at one of the Fistgate sessions held this year at Tufts University.
"I work in the Newton public schools, and a lot of times it can be a very reactionary group, and it has not been easy at all," said Laura Perkins, who is a social worker in the schools.
Her session at Fistgate 2003 was about introducing six-year-olds to homosexual concepts. She shared books and sample lesson plans. The session was titled, "Developing Lessons that Help Young Students Understand Human Differences."
"What I do is to go into classrooms and teach kids about respect for human differences and to teach social skills lessons," she said, adding, "I have been asked to train new teachers in how to do some of these lessons. The new teachers are being trained to do this."
Several participants were from Brookline's public schools, including two first-grade co-teachers from the Devotion School and a 3rd-through-5th grade learning center teacher.
"It seems like the climate at the [Devotion] School is much more open than a lot of schools," commented Perkins, who then lamented the obstacles she faces in Newton.
She asked group members what teaching methods they currently use in their classrooms. One of the Devotion School teachers replied that she already does "a lot of stuff about similarities and differences . . . sort of getting [the children] to broaden their definition of what's smart or what's good or what's acceptable. And we talk a lot about teasing, and a lot about rules that people think there are, but that really aren't there. Like, people think there's a rule that boys can't like pink or wear pink or like to do certain things. That rule really doesn't exist, but people behave as if they do. So in this class, there isn't a rule, and we're not going to pretend that there's a rule."
Perkins said that children, who have language-based learning disabilities or who are mentally retarded, tend to think in such literal terms that they "really sometimes do have trouble grasping these ideas" that "a family can have two moms or two dads. So, sometimes it takes working with the parents as well to help them to talk to their children about it, so that they're hearing it in different places." Get In Front of Parents Early On
Perkins recommended educators take a pro-active lead in setting ground rules with parents during the first open house of the school year:
"It's good just to state it right at open house. Talk about the kind of climate that you're trying to create in the classroom. Let parents know that you're going to be intervening if there's any teasing or name-calling, and that occasionally kids do use terms like 'retarded' or 'gay' as insults, and you will intervene and have a discussion about that if that happens."
Should parents want to know what a teacher is going to say in that situation, Perkins advised, "I would at that point tell them that I would define those words for the kids, and they're going to want to know how you define it.
"So the definition that I give to parents of an elementary school person, and this is what I use for the kids, is I say to kids that someone who is gay is someone, is a man who would be in a loving or romantic relationship with another man rather than a woman, and a lesbian is a woman who would be in a loving or a romantic relationship [with another woman], which she isn't necessarily in a relationship, but that is who she'd be in a relationship with."
Perkins conceded that she does not use the term "sexual orientation" with kids because, "It's too charged for the parents. I think if it's charged for the kids, it's really charged for the parents."
She actually does explain the difference between friendship and romance to children: "And parents will say to me, 'They're little kids, how do they know about romantic? What does that mean?' And I'll say, 'Well, I actually do explain that to kids.' You know, I say, 'Does that mean that if you're friends with a boy who's friends with a boy, does that mean he's gay?' And they'll say 'No.' And I'll say, 'That's right, it's different, that's a friendship. I'm not talking about friendship. I'm talking about moms and dads who've fallen in love, and then they want to live together and raise a family.'"
One method Perkins uses to explain the difference between friendship and romance to small children is fairy tales: "Again, with learning disabilities, you're dealing with sometimes kids who think very literally, so I'll say things like, 'In Cinderella, the story of Cinderella, the relationship between the Prince and Cinderella. . . that's a romantic relationship, or Sleeping Beauty and the prince.' And they get [that]. That seems to help them grasp that idea that it's not a friendship; it's a different concept."
When asked by one participant if she has ever had negative reactions from parents, Perkins agreed she has, and illustrated the ostracism some children face when their parents refuse to let them be indoctrinated: "I've had parents who've been kind about it and great about it, and I've had parents who've asked that their child be removed from any lesson in which we're going to deal with that.
"In fact, there's one parent who's asked that his child not have anything to do with me, so that child has had to be removed. I do social skills lessons in grades one and three, and that child had to be removed every time I came to do that in the classroom. We found something else for her to do, like go to the library and water the plants. I felt so bad. She was one of the kids who loved the lessons the most."
Perkins added, "There are always parents whose religion actually says that it [homosexuality] is a sin. I don't want to disrespect anyone's religion, and I'll tell parents that, but we do want every child to feel safe and comfortable in the school.
"If kids are getting teased and harassed, they're not going to be able to work. They're not going to be able to concentrate on their learning. So this is actually for the protection of people's learning so that they're able to learn best. So it really does go along with the goals of education, that every child has the right to be comfortable."
Perkins passed out several children's books for class participants to examine. She called Families are Different a "wonderful book" for kindergarten and first graders. However, "It does not show gay and lesbian families, so what I'll do is, I'll read the kids the book, then ask them if there are any kinds of families that are not represented. I actually have kids who have lesbian parents who do not say that their family wasn't represented, which is troubling to me. I question, are they getting the idea that I'm asking, or are they ashamed or are they uncomfortable? So then I'll sit and talk about families with two moms and two dads."
Good books for introducing the concept of "allies" include Oliver Button is a Sissy for first graders and Teammates, a story about African American baseball player Jackie Robinson, for third graders.
"When a child is being laughed at," said Perkins, "it's important to stop the class and say, 'Is there anybody who's going to be this child's ally? Something is going on; someone needs help. Who is going to show their support by being an ally?'
"I've had a whole class practically dissolve in laughter in front of me because I used the word 'gay'. And when that happens you have a choice: Should you stop or should you just go on and ignore the issues or stop and discuss it? And I stop and discuss it and ask them why they're laughing. And they'll really try to avoid the subject, but then usually someone will spill the beans, and then I'll go into the definition, and why it's hurtful to laugh about it."
Another resource Perkins recommends for first graders is Zinnia and Dot, a "conflict resolution" story about two mother hens who fight over a single egg after a weasel steals the others in their nests. When the chick hatches, the hens realize that it does not matter who originally laid the egg. The story reads, "Never before was a baby chick so loved, growing up with not one, but two mother hens." When Perkins finishes reading the story, she asks children, "Does this look like a happy family?" When the kids answer "Yes," Perkins explains, "This story is about a hen family, but in some human families there are two moms or two dads."
Perkins admitted that My Two Uncles, the story of a girl who does not understand the conflict her grandfather has with his gay son (the girl's uncle) and his male sex partner, may be too sophisticated for first and second graders because of its explicit definitions of "gay" and "lesbian," but "I have great discussions in third grade with kids about it." She noted that one of her former principals asked her not to use the book because of parents' negative reactions.
Chicken Sunday, for grades 3 through 5, talks about the Holocaust and shows a drawing of a man with a concentration camp tattoo on his arm. Perkins said she uses the story to talk to children about groups of people who were persecuted in Germany during World War II, "and that one of the groups was gays and lesbians, and I'll define it for them, and [talk] about how it seems like all that persecution was about fear of differences and about not understanding people who are different, and that is one of the reasons we are emphasizing understanding differences."
Perkins, who identified herself as "straight" during the session, concluded, "I think it's more the parents who should go to a psychiatrist to become comfortable with who their child is."
mad-gay (or whatever the initials stand for but that is an apt description) has no interest in discussing the homo agenda at all. His intention is to change the subject.
Shalom.
I understand what you're saying, but if it were me, I'd record the conversation. Documentation is the key to eventually defeating the homosexual agenda in the public schools.
No it's not. You don't debate. As I know you more I'm not sure you have the capacity. You twist and dodge, intentionally misinterpreting what was said so you can avoid the debate. And it's obvious why. If I had to defend your sick lifestyle I would avoid debate too.
Shalom.
Why was it answered? Do you support the fact that it was answered? Do you think it should have been answered? Do you think any comment about the inherent dangers (let alone the perverted mentality that would engage in such behavior) should have been made?
It's good to see you actually talking about the subject.
Shalom.
More evidence of a twisted mind. I have never seen mad-gay add anything of value to a thinking person.
Shalom.
I wonder if any of these educational perversion tomes point out that the same thing takes place in Castro's Cuba?
Ooops, sorry conflict of liberal icons.
Let me set up a hypothetical:
Police are giving a presentation on avoiding gangs to a group of H.S. students. Someone who is anti-police (and who has secretly brought a tape-recorder into the session for the purpose of creating this trouble) asks an officer, "Exactly what is meant by an execution-style death?" The officer then sets up a demonstration of the details of an execution-style death so that all the students will know how it is done.
Is this appropriate?
The answer isn't "No," it is "Hell NO!"
Why not? Isn't information better than ignorance?
Perhaps, but without context this information is not better than ignorance. And the context is that murder is wrong, has always been wrong, will always be wrong. If you feel that you must demonstrate you should go out of your way to let the children know that the behavior you are about to demonstrate should never be imitated by them, either real or imagined. But, in fact, the correct answer is, "You don't need to know that, until you become a police officer who is investigating crimes."
This is where we are with the "fistgate" question. The correct answer is, "It is enough that you know that there are some who engage in it. It is a perverted behavior which is dangerous and you need never fully understand it. If you feel you should know more about it, I encourage you to ask your parents. It is not something I will discuss."
That is a forthright answer which conveys the important information, that fisting is dangerous and perverted. Nobody has a "right" to know any more about it than that.
Shalom.
Not only EL WRONGO but completely stupid and beside the point.
Alcoholism and a hot temper are currently believed to be genetic (with real support for the belief, not just loud adherents which is all homoerotic attraction has, but I digress). They are treatable and are required to be treated.
Normal - what's that? Is that what everybody does? If so, thinking is abnormal and should never be done because almost nobody thinks any more (or the queers would still be in the closet - but I'm digressing again). Is it what someone likes to do without anyone having to encourage them? Most like to take what they want without paying for it. Some like to roll around in human fecal material. Are those normal and beyond cure?
What really happened was that 1) the APA was intensly lobbied to delist homoerotic attraction as a mental disorder by the (gasp) homoerotically inclined who didn't like being called mentally disturbed and 2) the APA (who are actually homophobic) decided to say that, if you are happy with your mental disorder, then it must not be a disorder and therefore you aren't mentally disturbed. The logic of this is so stupid that it hardly bears comment (except that people don't think any more - but I've already run down that rabbit trail). The real questions, which the queers will not answer, are these:
Instead they want to talk about whether 16-year-olds are kids (yes) or whether they have a right to know what fisting is (no) or whether it is worse to record some sicko trying to twist a child's mind than it is for the sicko to try to twist the child's mind (no).
Shalom.
I believe the point of this thread is that folk of your ilk are taking the ABNORMAL and trying (very hard) to make it the NORM.
That is morally bankrupt!
If a behavior is considered by the majority of of the members of a community to be unacceptable, dangerous or morally wrong, then that behavior is regarded as deviant.
For the record (for anyone reading this who did not read your original post) this is a line with which you disagree.
Based on this definition, abolition was deviant. It was considered by the members of most of the nation to be unacceptable when first proposed. It was definately dangerous as history has shown, and most in the community considered it morally wrong.
The fact that it was morally right shouldn't matter to today's idiots.
Shalom.
Bump! Needs to be repeated.
The homosexual agenda in the public schools must be stopped. GLSEN must be booted out of the public schools, especially the elementary schools.
If I went to a Republican political caucus and addressed the group with a speech on how the Republican Party should add a platform plank to make the U.S. into a Constitutional Monarchy the correct answer would be, "Thanks for your speech."
This is not because nobody could rebut, but because nobody would have to. The stupidity of the speech would be so obvious to all that there would be no reason to give it the satisfaction of a reply.
Unfortunately, there are far too many people who accept the argument that queers are just like straights except that they're queer so leave them be. I suspect it's because the public schools long ago stopped teaching kids how to think, but that's must my opinion. Whatever, the fact that idiots post pro-gay stuff on FR doesn't bother me, it's the fact that so many people buy it that you have to waste time rebutting.
You will never change the minds of the homo-apologists on this board. They have far too much to loose. But you may influence some fence sitters who should know better than to listen to them, but don't.
Shalom.
ROTFLMAO!!!
You should be PROUD!
Actually, you should have sued the scumbag. That's harrassment with intent to seduce a 13 year old. You could have kept the scumbag away from other kids forever.
Maybe you still can.
Shalom.
I would too. And if it were against the law for me to record the conversation, then I would consider civil disobedience.
The queer agenda must be stopped. It may require some personal sacrifice on the part of those who want to stop it.
Shalom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.