[1] My kids' primary school: first names all 'round - teachers and students. The principal: yes, we've got all the usual problems here, but we think that respect is earned; it's not about the name we use.

[2] separately (not at my kids' school) beginning to suspect that 'cool' (first names...) male teachers may be more at risk of 'dating' students.

52% of Republicans voted against the “speak out” bill which makes NDAs that silence victims of sexual assault invalid.
Consider that. 52% of Republicans want civil NDAs to cover criminal sexual assault, want to silence victims of sex assault. Want to punish them if they report the crimes.
Once again, proving to be the party of Death, Destruction, and DEBAUCHERY.

The one spearheading the opposition is Jim Jordan, who covered up for Richard Strauss who molested over 177 members of the Ohio wrestling team while working with Jim Jordan who was told repeatedly by many students about the abuse but he remained silent and helped cover it up after the fact. Basically he’s the male Gisselle Maxwell, someone who procured victims for and covered for serial child abusers. Big surprise an abuser, child groomer, and pedophile protector wants to silence victims.

Just, the audacity. fuck.

let me be as clear and direct as I can be: I have no interest in the personal sexual lives or private decisions of people i'm not married to.

@bobknight33 Do you want the United States of America to make decisions about what gender an individual can be or has to be?

Let us say that a human being has XX Male Syndrome https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/46xx-testicular-difference-of-sex-development/ where the person would present as male although have XX chromosomes, have a penis and testicals that are non functional sexually, and will NOT grow facial hair but WILL grow breasts.

Which bathroom should the person use? You want to answer don't you? See? that's the difference between you and me. I don't fucking care where this person takes a shit just as long as it's not on my front porch.


YOU, meanwhile, for someone tossing around accusations of "groomer" (grooming is defined how again? ohhh right you do things so that the child does what YOU want kind of like training a dog i imagine)
YOU seem to have a lot to say about what they do and dont do sexually. What they do or don't do with their genitals. What in the fuck kind of person spends their time dictating what children can do with their genitals or not and wants to tell them where to shit and what drinking fountain to use "HEYYY that's a water fountain for non-queers only!"


What
the
fuck

is your problem?


HOW in your mind can YOU be the one strongly opinionated on what these kids do or dont do and you go out of your way to advocate for that and support politicians who think alike

How can THAT be,, AND you are accusing the people who are disinterested in the insanely personal and private decisions of gender and sexuality, the people who don't care about that stuff and want to leave it to the individuals, but you

YOUUUU want to tell them what bathroom to use and which sports teams they cna play on and which hospitals they can get care at and if they can receive care as a person who is transgendered YOU (the one wanting to make decisions about kids genitals via your elected officials, YOU) YOU are calling someone else a groomer.


FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU


You groom animals because you want X behavior to happen, and you don't want Y behavior to happen.


YOU, are doing the thing, where you're doing stuff... that leads to the modification of behavior. Do you understand that?

Yes. Kids are capable of understanding these concepts at very young ages if you’re just honest with them and don’t dance around facts. It’s the lies, obfuscation, misdirection, and misinformation that makes them confused and prone to stupid permanent decisions and unhealthy/unsafe experimentation.
Just say no was an abject failure. Same with abstinence only sex education. Every attempt to hide the facts from kids ends with kids finding out the hard way.
What’s more, it’s often painfully obvious when a child born with male genitalia has a female brain, and vice versa, and stopping or delaying puberty is a reversible way to make their transition as adults much more successful and less invasive. There’s no legitimate reason to oppose that type of reversible treatment when everyone involved agrees it’s called for.

No. Ignorance ALWAYS does more harm than good….as do palatable lies.

Keeping kids ignorant leads to dangerously ignorant adults….something you know about.
More knowledge is always better and leads to informed, well considered decisions.
More ignorance is always worse and always leads to kids making uninformed decisions, often horrible decisions.

But the GOP says “to keep ‘em dumb, get ‘em young.”

The idea that informing curious children that their sex can be altered (with years of difficult, very expensive treatments and eventually painful risky surgeries after years of long term psychological counseling and doctor consultations) is “grooming” them, is convincing them to alter their sex, is moronic and says WAY more about those that claim it than they understand.
Did you want to change your sex from the first time you heard it was possible? Is that why right wingers say they think that? It’s the only logical conclusion.


Sad you are still incapable of addressing the traitor Ashley Babbitt who fucked around with police and found out. That says volumes.

A Republican candidate running for a seat in Oklahoma's state House once said it is "totally just" to kill gay people in comments that have resurfaced amid his campaign. Bad Republican, right? Bohbert and Greene agree….most Trumpists do. Also bad Republicans, right? This was based on their extremist religion, but they don’t want to stone people who eat shellfish, wear blended fabrics, or work (or have work done) on the sabbath (whichever sabbath they decide is the right one) which it also prescribes.

Comey Barrett belongs to a cult whose #1 teaching is “women must be subservient to men and defer to them at all times”. A fact she actively hid. Hardly qualifications for a top judge, essentially making her a thoughtless second vote for the male “conservatives” with no ability to judge on her own? That’s bad, right?

Courts determined Barr obstructed justice to shield Trump from 10 legitimate obstruction charges….so both are bad Republicans, right? Shouldn’t hold office, right? No? Then I guess you were lying again when you said “ When you post a bad Republican , I agree”.

I would also point out, every time you try to point to “my side” being wrong, you get your information from propaganda outlets that constantly lie to you or less trustworthy internet trolls, making you a fool when you repeat their lies….but instead of being mad at them you get bent at those telling you facts.
FYI, I ignore most opinion and stick to fact…verifiable fact. You only listen to opinion…the right wing media (it’s not news) feeds you nothing else….and it’s invariably feigned opinion based on misrepresentation of the facts. I can never accept claims you present that “my side is so wrong” because every time I investigate your accusations I find them based in lies and biased opinion and absolutely nothing more….like the election fraud fraud, pure fantasy…like BLM being responsible for Jan 6, pure fantasy. Like the Republicans being the “law and order” party, pure fantasy. (Turned on law enforcement 100% when they started being arrested for the failed coup, now wanting to completely defund all Federal law enforcement and erase espionage laws just to protect Donny from the crimes you know he committed.)

It’s possible this is about to become a non issue, thanks to Dominion. Most right wing propaganda networks slandered and libeled Dominion, and can’t afford $1.6 billion. Even Fox is going to change its tune, becoming much more careful about their baseless claims, while OAN and Newsmax, already relegated to the internet for the most part, will disappear. 😂

Pretty ridiculous for YOU to complain, especially to ME, about what facts are. You wouldn’t know a fact if it indicted you. I work hard to ignore opinion and find the underlying facts. You could set up a poll on who’s more trustworthy if you don’t want to take my word for it….but no voting with your sock puppets.

PS- I’m STILL WAITING to hear exactly what the charges against Clinton coming this week (4 years ago) are going to be. Whenever you make outrageously idiotic claims and are pressed, you ghost. I asked you that question for weeks, over and over and over, you had no response, only attempts to change the subject and ignore your own claim. That’s typical of you, far from an isolated incident it’s your MO.

Leftist gender bending bullshit books like The Diary of Anne Frank and the Bible?!? 😂

I’m surprised…I didn’t know the right had decided Christianity was just for leftists and abandoned it, like they did facts, reason, honesty, sanity, etc…although it’s outrageously idiotic to think Jesus wasn’t a supreme leftist, so in a way I’m shocked it took this long. Also, Christianity talks mad shit about the ochre hoaxer, your messiah, calling near 100% of his behavior “evil”, like adultery, bearing false witness, coveting, stealing, putting money ahead of god..pretty much every deadly sin and commandment if you believe he murdered Epstein to silence him (oh the stories he could have told about tangerine Palpatine).


You’re going to be left with nothing but Pepe the frog fairy tales about alpha male white men you wish you could be, no math, no English, no history, definitely no art, civics, science, philosophy…... 🤦‍♂️

Person,
Woman,
Man,
Camera,
Prison

You really are a silly little toddler, aren’t you? Reading comprehension is clearly not a strong suit.
I read 6 articles YESTERDAY, not ever. I know, that sounds impossible at your reading level. You read what, press releases from Elon (but only the positive ones), internet videos from other Tesla fan boys whose channels are dedicated to supporting Tesla, and that’s it?

If you followed it, why do you get literally EVERYTHING wrong when you give statistics or even stated plans for the business? Why do you think a 32% drop is only 20%? Why do you think a 10% cut in employees and hiring freeze is a massive expansion? Why do you think an under 2% market share makes Tesla a competitor with trillion dollar well established companies? Why do you think right before a 1/3 drop in value is “the best time ever to buy, go all in”. Why do you think a stock above 100PE is a good buy? Why do you think the 1/3 drop is 100% due to Biden’s politics over the last 18 months (despite the massive gains it saw under Biden from the 800s to 1200s)? Why do you still say it’s a great time to buy despite Biden having 2 1/2 years left in his FIRST term, so what you claim is bringing Tesla down isn’t going to change? If you really follow Tesla, or if you really believe what you write, it only makes you look more delusional for the conclusions you reach based on the same information I’m reading.

No heart, no heartbeat. Yep. Just like that, where you claim a heart that doesn’t exist beats. You are a service tech at best, a barely literate pinball repairman with an ignorant opinion, not a doctor.

https://www.livescience.com/65501-fetal-heartbeat-at-6-weeks-explained.html

You just can’t stop with the delusions, can you. Bob, did you hit your head? You keep misremembering things over and over and over and over, but you are just certain you remember everything correctly.

It’s true…I did read some (probably near 50 by now) scientific articles (not religious propaganda), talked to dozens of doctors I knew personally (not random unlicensed techs with zero medical training, none required), took advanced biology and anatomy and organic chemistry classes where I got A’s in science consistently (you did not).
What did you read to decide there’s a heartbeat 6-10 weeks before a heart forms? Oh…nothing, you listened to some anti choice liar who said it and maybe a few device techs (without medical training) and you like the idea because it helps strip rights from women, who like everyone that’s not a white male Trumpist, you hate.

Really?! You try to ridicule me for talking to doctors, going to school, and reading, and think you know all about prenatal biology because you talked to some ultrasound device techs without any medical training or licensing who misinterpret a twitch as a “heartbeat” despite there being no heart….not that a heart makes an embryo a functioning human anyway, which IMO should be the deciding factor….if it can survive outside the womb, it’s a viable human, if not, it isn’t…no matter what, it has no right to force another human to be an incubator any more than an ANTIFA diabetic has the right to force you to hand over your kidney.
REALLY!?

A heart that doesn’t exist can’t beat.

Please eliminate all the delusional "alpha male" snowflakes. The world will turns into a much more livable, sustainable place. I'm all for it!

Sweet zombie Jesus, compared to the side effects of getting covid, the risk with vaccination is statistically zero.
Permanent heart, lung, blood vessel, kidney, eye, and/or brain damage, and death just for starters.

The occurrence rate of side effects is almost certainly orders of magnitude larger with the disease….but admittedly I can’t find trustworthy numbers for either.

Specifically for Myocarditis …. 37 “reported cases” after 82 million vaccinations, vs 450 cases per 1 million infections….
“Myocarditis (or pericarditis or myopericarditis) from primary COVID19 infection occurred at a rate as high as 450 per million in young males. Young males infected with the virus are up 6 times more likely to develop myocarditis as those who have received the vaccine”.- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34341797/

They are real women, no matter how you wish otherwise.
Are men that take testosterone supplements not real males? Same for women taking estrogen, not real females? Women who’ve had a hysterectomy? Men who had penectomies or testicular removal?
Is this a “real woman” who should compete against women? https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/31662608/boxer-patricio-manuel-transgender-pioneer-looking-next-fight

What expertise in the fields of gender vs sex vs sexual orientation do you boast to contradict the actual experts with careers in those subjects?
A:None, you’re an alleged maintenance/service tech with embarrassing language skills, and apparently a total lack of scientific knowledge.

Where’s your evidence of that “disadvantage “? Where are the rest of the 2% of athletes that are top of their sport and trans? You make the claim, prove it (one example does not prove anything). Guess you failed math too.

That could be true if your loopy idea that men are pretending to be women to get an advantage in sports were in any way true, but it’s pure unadulterated nonsense.
Trans women must go through years of hormone therapy; supplements, hormone blockers, sometimes even surgery to be able to compete. In many leagues they must never go through male puberty. They cannot, as you clearly think is the norm, just put on a woman’s swimsuit and compete with women, then whip their dicks out after competition and go back to being macho men. Your insistence on keeping your head firmly encased in your lower intestine, in the dark, listening to yourself echo through your own fart chamber is what lets you believe such utterly ridiculous nonsense.

I think it’s abundantly clear to everyone which of us lives in an echo chamber of lies and nonsense and which of us thinks for themselves, and equally clear which prefers the light of knowledge and fact and which sticks to their dark cave of ignorance and misinformed opinion.

Er mer gerd…. ROTFLMFAHS!!! Mr cranial rectosis projects so freaking hard, yo.

Teacher here. It's made-up-nonsense. I don't give a shit what gender or sexual orientation a kid is and im CERTAINLY not going to try to convince anyone to change anything about themselves.

That said, I'm going to acknowledge that gay/trans people exist in authorship and literature as it arises. You can't read someone like Whitman (Leaves of Grass, arguably America's greatest poet) and not come across references to sexuality either implicit or explicit. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45472/i-sing-the-body-electric

It becomes relevant in passages like this:

5
This is the female form,
A divine nimbus exhales from it from head to foot,
It attracts with fierce undeniable attraction,
I am drawn by its breath as if I were no more than a helpless vapor, all falls aside but myself and it,
Books, art, religion, time, the visible and solid earth, and what was expected of heaven or fear’d of hell, are now consumed,
Mad filaments, ungovernable shoots play out of it, the response likewise ungovernable,
Hair, bosom, hips, bend of legs, negligent falling hands all diffused, mine too diffused,
Ebb stung by the flow and flow stung by the ebb, love-flesh swelling and deliciously aching,
Limitless limpid jets of love hot and enormous, quivering jelly of love, white-blow and delirious juice,
Bridegroom night of love working surely and softly into the prostrate dawn,
Undulating into the willing and yielding day,
Lost in the cleave of the clasping and sweet-flesh’d day.

----------------------------------
Maybe a conversation like:

"'Love flesh swelling' like he's in love with some woman and they...he...?"

"Probably not, he didn't have any serious female relationships as far as I am aware."

"But the title is 'The female form'"

"Well, it's possible, but it's not likely the case that he was talking about himself being in love with a woman. This poem is in the text but he wrote many other pieces about he-himself falling into and out of love with various men and we have letters documenting those relationships with his male significant others. Although, I'm not sure what to call them because gay marriage would have been illegal at the time. He's likely writing the poem in a way where he appreciates the female form and sees men who are drawn to it like the way I appreciate watching bees act obsessively driven to the middle of flowers. I like watching Bees in action, but that doesn't mean I'm going all pollen crazy, still I appreciate it for what it is."
-------------------

This is an example of how discussion of sexuality would come up in my classroom as I imagine it. Note how I'm not trying to convince the kid I'm talking to to turn gay like it's a big game of rainbow-red-rover or something. Nevertheless, knowing the author's sexual preference in this instance informs our understanding of the piece.


My own personal theory?
The people railing against things like this are the same shitheads that can't be bothered to read ANYTHING and instead giggle and guffaw at "hurhurhurhur he hadd'a boner" where I get to live an early stage of Idocracy.

Also, I agree that the "funky stuff" shouldn't be just avoided altogether. For goodness sake, just let teachers have the difficult conversation that everyone is avoiding. Reminds me of when Peggy Hill was struggling to say "Penis" when she was assigned sex ed.

Right, then you go on to argue that they have good reason to exclude these people. Pretty much negated your first statement….or indicates that you agree with denying them rights, but not with using that as a political wedge (on either side?), possibly because it paints those denying others rights as evil assholes that would deny rights over ignorant and false equivalencies. Hard to tell since you won’t answer any questions.

If you believe that, why have you spent an entire day trying to get me to admit women couldn’t ever compete fairly with trans women? Because you have done exactly that.

Your position, that genetic male athletes are always better athletes than genetic women athletes …and trans women are the same as genetic males…is exactly the false and ignorant position and argument used to deny trans people their rights to participate. It’s just like you were using the old trope that black people aren’t actually humans so often used to deny them rights and opportunities….then claiming that just because you argue that doesn’t mean you think they should be denied opportunities. WHAT?!

Finally you admit males aren’t always better athletes. If genetic women can be better, there’s no reason to deny trans women their rights at all. Ms Macho Man is hyperbole, not reality. Men can’t put on a dress and claim trans status.

Pointing to two athletes that are excelling as proof that trans women will crush genetic women if allowed to compete together, to say trans women always have advantages, is also a red herring. That’s the “evidence” anti trans people use to prove that they can’t fairly compete. You may not have done that exactly, but you seem to use the same positions people who do say that use to imply it.

Really? And describe again those standards of fairness….because what I read was a ridiculous conflation between allowing trans people to compete and removing any gender separation….you pretended that’s the same thing.

Yes, because pretending trans women are the same as athletic men is hateful, malicious, and denying trans women’s rights to exist as women.

When I hear/read someone trying to give excuses for denying trans people their rights, I see a villian. How could you not?

Discussion? LMFAHS!!
Excuse me….when did you answer ANY of MY questions? You decry being called a villain, but in what way did you explain how your position isn’t dehumanizing, dismissive, and aimed at denying one group of people their right to participate in public events based on assumption and ignorance? Absolutely none. You moaned that I didn’t answer one of your questions the way you expected….but cannot answer any of mine. Try it, you might learn something.

ONE LAST TIME…HOW DO YOU EXCUSE DENYING TRANS PEOPLE THEIR RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLICLY FUNDED SPORTS? If you don’t support that, you have certainly hidden that fact with all your arguments supporting doing that, so you might want to ANSWER THE QUESTION…..unless you just love to argue, then we’re done.

If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?

@newtboy,

On average you can agree…

I never said anything against any given pro/competitive female athlete probably beating out plenty of biologically male folks.

I was only pointing to advantages between equally gifted/talented and trained people.

To that point, can you agree that most standing olympic records as currently separated into mens and womens records, indicate that the historical separation based on XX and XY certainly appears to show an advantage. Would you be able to agree following from that, the existence of distinct mens and womens records is because without it, women would be “unfairly” left almost entirely unrepresented in every sprint distance, every lifting record and most other records.

For instance, the Olympic qualifying standard for the mens 100m was 10.05s, while the standing Olympic womens record time for 100m is 10.49s. AKA in absence of a separate competition for biologically female athletes, even the standing Olympic record holding female wouldn’t pass the bar to qualify to compete in the Olympics.

That is the advantage I am stating exists, and matters and I am asking if you acknowledge that distinction existing as a result of biology or not?

@newtboy

“What genitalia you have has no bearing on your performance in sports”

I’m gonna try once to understand this. Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?

If our disagreement is that fundamental there isn’t much sense to further discussion as we are viewing two entirely disjointed versions of reality.