Jump to content


Gold Donor
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Leftfield

Profile Information

  • Location
    Appleton, WI
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,417 profile views

Leftfield's Achievements


Mentor (12/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter

Recent Badges



  1. The whole point I was making was that people know who they are attracted to far earlier than you admit. You can dance around it all you want, but I knew in 1st grade that I liked girls. Sure, some realize it later, but in my experience most people, whether gay or straight, know well before 3rd grade. I'm sure not every person knows what they're talking about, but then again, I'm just arguing for letting them acknowledge reality and not treat the child as abnormal. I agree that if the child hasn't spoken to their parents about it, the teacher/faculty member should first advise the child to do so. If the child doesn't, there may be a very good reason they feel that way. Do you think there shouldn't be a policy that says it should be kept from the parents if there is a reasonable fear that they parents may be abusive toward that child? I'd have to see the specific policies you seem to be referring to. Only reason it's not like that in the real world is because of people like you. In some cases I agree the conversion is abuse, certainly if it's done very young. However, there are also knee-jerk reactionists out there who jump all over a parent just because they let their son wear a dress to school because that's what he wants to do, and say the parents are pushing their "agenda" on the child. As for the second part, that depends on the person. I can guarantee there are plenty who would praise the people who verbally or physically abuse their child for not being what they think they should (never out loud, of course). I'm asking what you think. The whole point of the thread was schools removing books that made any mention of LGBTQ. How would you have reacted had your child told you they were gay or trans? Would you have told them you supported them without reservation, or would you have pointed out how it's a sin in the Bible, and they were choosing a shameful lifestyle?
  2. You....compare that to actually being attracted to someone? Sure I liked some friends more than others. Didn't change the fact I never wanted any boys to "go" with me. Are you saying that when you liked one of your friends more than others, you were attracted to them? Maybe you're not obtuse. Perhaps you're bi-sexual? Of course they could have, for better or for worse. The mistake you make is believing that the majority who teach it are evil and trying to hide it instead of being a good person trying to help. I don't deny things like this happen. I deny they happen often, and I'd be willing to bet they happen far less often than the number of kids who are bullied, persecuted, or otherwise harmed because certain adults feel fit to decide that they shouldn't have access to information that might help them and others understand what they're going through. As with anything, you're going to have your bad actors with their own agenda (from either side of the issue) that cause harm to a child, whether they mean to or not, and certainly action against those people should be taken when they overstep their bounds. That doesn't mean you remove the ability to deal with the issue completely. You continue to show your bias on this when you use terms like "adult intervention" instead of things like "adult guidance." Intervention suggests a person actively working to push their way in to the situation (which may be your intent), whereas guidance comes when a child approaches with questions, or something comes up because of bullying/teasing/etc. The whole point, since you continue to miss it, is that these children shouldn't feel like they should have to "come out." They should be comfortable being who they are, and not have to "decide" to tell everyone. If you take away every mention of them in school, how do you think that makes them feel? And what if those parents treat that child like the one I told you about a few weeks ago? You know, the one whose dad threatened to kill him because he's trans? He hasn't killed him yet, but he did hit him last week, according to what he told a mutual friend of my daughter. Do you think that there are more parents that would do this to their children, or more that would push them towards a gender transition at too young an age? I am all for parents being made aware of what's going on with their child, but that should not include leaving no avenue for that child to be who they are just because their parent can't accept it. Would this include a book about a family with two mothers or two fathers?
  3. You are really showing your ignorance and fear of this. Stop being obtuse about the word crush. You know full well what I'm talking about. There are plenty of boys I liked, but I never "liked" any of them. You're throwing confusion in there where none exists, except perhaps for kids who "like" both boys and girls. What a load of crap. Not a single gay person I've talked to ever claimed they were gay because someone told them they were. Even if it were to happen, do you really think the kid wouldn't eventually figure it out? One more time: SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND IDENTITY ARE NOT DECISIONS!!!! That clear enough? Any point you try to make gets swallowed by your obvious fear and lack of understanding on this issue. Everyone here has agreed that you don't teach sex education in K-3, but you keep conflating it with orientation and identity. No, not everything involved with that needs to be part of the curriculum at K-3, either, but it's irresponsible to remove the ability for a teacher to at least be able to address the issue if it comes up, and you don't remove books simply because they represent people you don't agree with.
  4. Well, by sending them to school, you've at least admitted that learning the core subjects is what's best for the child. Parents depend on schools for that, at least, so I think it's disingenuous to claim schools have nothing to do with what's best for children. You're also neglecting kids for which the school library may be their only means of getting a book. Not every child can afford to buy books. They may not have access to a public library - as you know, libraries aren't nearly as ubiquitous as they once were. As homer mentioned, kids know pretty early if they're homosexual. Of the gay people I've discussed it with, everyone developed their first crushes in early elementary school, just like the vast majority of heterosexual people. Is there some reason there shouldn't be material in the library that tells them homosexuality is a perfectly normal part of life? I'm not saying there need to be books getting into the lurid details of sexual relationships, particularly at younger ages, but that's not what they're talking about in Texas. They're talking about removing anything mentioning LGBTQ at all.
  5. Wish I could take credit for this, but I read it this morning. How effective a society will be in dealing with a pandemic can largely be determined by the answers to two questions: 1. How dense is the population? 2. How dense is the population?
  6. Fauci banned them? Plenty of them were allowed the "light of day." They were just shown to be wrong. The vast majority of the scientific community, particularly those who are actually in the field (as opposed to, say, a dentist), were in agreement with how things were handled. This included pretty much every developed nation in the world. I'm sure when the minority weren't listened to, those that subscribed to them felt they were "quashed." Lol....I listen to the people whose entire careers are based on infectious diseases and public health and you say I "bought into" it. You really are delusional. Yep.
  7. Well, the first step in getting better is admitting you have a problem. Congrats - you're on your way! Fauci has power over the media? I do remember conspiracy theories. If by "quashed" you mean "explained how they were wrong," then yeah, I remember that, too. I'll wait.
  8. Holy f*** are you fixated on that guy. You're single handedly making FDS a thing.
  9. News flash: men are able to "righteously" have sex with women for free, yet female prostitution exists.
  10. Well, somebody has to do it. You used the term in the post I responded to, but you're asking me to give you the definition? Thanks for proving the above... ...again.... ...aaaaaaand again.
  11. How long did black people have to wait for the Civil Rights Act? You think any marginalized minority should have to wait that long for their inherent rights? Great! I'll run right out and get my RPG and carry it around town, since it's obvious the 2nd Amendment is absolute! As an aside, since the fact it's not absolute has been pointed out ad nauseum, you might want to consider pulling your head out of your ass about it. Once again, please show me where the Constitution addresses assault rifles. You claim Congress wasn't thinking about gender/sex for the Civil Rights Act, but apparently believe they were thinking about assault rifles more than a century before they existed. My point was your belittling of the coalition by calling it "LBGTQwoeoao," like you used to do quite a bit. Seemed like you had dropped that, but I guess when you get rankled about it you return to form.
  • Create New...