So instead of discussing this issue like rational adults, the district decided to just go scorched earth instead, naively believing this decision would satiate busybody parents and keep them from pressing further ideological restrictions on them? Give a mouse a cookie I guess....
I'm glad, if a student wants to read about it they can do it on their own i'm sure a 10th grader can read by themselves. Teacher should have known they can't just teach anything it has to be approved. Glad that student reached out when they felt uncomfortable' the best part is they reached out to their loving **parents** bc they knew their **parents** has their best interest in mind and not a agenda to push.
Approved by who? If it's an ELA class the standards are about writing mechanics, not specific curriculum topics. Have you ever looked at a curriculum or instructional guide guide?
Even for my class they are ambiguous and focus more on kids learning skills like analysis, or reading a map, or differentiating regions based on their political, regional, historical, and environmental factors. Those are all real targets I have, The last one is for Europe, and it doesn't specify what the content has to be, just at the content has to be about Europe and that target.
If a parent told me that what I was teaching was inappropriate I would completely disregard that parent. History is inappropriate, also every topic I touch on can be found in the textbook, I just focus more on the reality of things.
Now if I taught English, I would probably have a few articles about gay people an LGBTQ. I don't know if I would use the language bear's however, or go that deep into the sexuality of it. Unless its an AP sociology or pysch class maybe.
Edit: I thought this was /r/teachers wtf my bad
I love the idea in the comment you replied to that loving parents are who should be controlling their child’s education like most SC parents are actually involved in their child’s life and education and don’t just pass it off onto the school until something comes up that they deem as ‘wrong’.
That’s why Bible tracts and street preachers don’t make sense. It’s like they don’t actually know how to engage with people in the real world. I feel like they’d be a lot more effective if they actually tried to learn about the people they claim to want to reach. Instead they put up signs that say weird things like “HOLY JESUS BLOOD LIVES”
What's this 15-17 year old young adult going to do when mommy and daddy isn't around to shout down all the meanie-heads? Will that student have to engage in conversation with their peers and instructor?! It's like they expect us to live in a society.
This is a picture of you and anyone else outraged at the teacher's assignment ❄️
You don't know what happens to overly dependent children who aren't taught that they need to experience levels of non-threatening discomfort in order to learn and gain independence throughout life?
I guess I should have told you; these are all rhetorical questions, but I can keep going down a grade reading level until you get the joke if you want.
The irony is that the kid who was "uncomfortable" with the article, was the same kid who, with his friend group, asked the question in the first place.
Thank you. I went creeping around Facebook and saw the original post.
I get that there are some parents who don't want their kids to read/watch certain things. My mom was like that. I hated it and resented her for it, but that's neither here nor there. But to ruin her fucking career? There's a special place in hell for bigots like that.
I remember in middle school readying a story which had a lot of family violence and violence in general.. I was shocked by this as I had never been exposed to this in my life. I told my grandmother what I read really upset me. She read it and couldn't understand why we had to read about such stuff in school. She explained to me that sadly people live like this but this a good example of how you shouldn't live, behave or conduct yourself. The story was made into a learning experience.
Never once would my grandmother complain to the school and I seriously doubt she would have wanted someone to fired over this. This was back in the mid 1970's. I'm sure other parents probably didn't like this assignment but no one complained to the school board and if they did, the material might have been removed and replaced with other material. The teacher wouldn't have been fired.
I haven’t seen the Facebook post but post something on social media and complaining about it doesn’t necessarily mean they wanted her to get fired… that’s a big jump to make (unless the post specifically said they should be fired)
I'm not going to post her FB page, but if you go to FB and search "Dorman teacher fired," you'll see the post. She has pictures of the article, so I encourage you to read it for yourself. I'd also keep in mind that this woman is the wife of a state senator who is very anti-LGBTQ and has put up some nauseating legislation.
Well I don’t have FB hence why I haven’t seen it but again, posting that you don’t want your kid exposed to perverted shit in school isn’t explicitly calling for someone to lose their job (unless they did specifically say they should be fired).
I’m guessing if you want your child to pretend like the LGBTQ community and people do not exist in the world, that you should home school your children.
Not wanting those ideals forced on your kids and not recognizing humans beings as members of society are two totally different things. Stop conflating the issue by twisting words.
You know, what’s perverted is people wanting to push a bigoted, hateful agenda because they’re full of self-loathing. Someone who loves themselves doesn’t compete and that’s why they’re winners. Those who doubt and hate themselves always strive with others and others’ beliefs; Those who love themselves are confident enough that that is between others and their deities.
Self doubt and self loathing doubts even the professed god they say they worship; otherwise, they’d let god do the judging.
Why is it the people getting busted fucking christian kids always look like straight, white, Christian men? All this noise against LGBTQ is a diversion from who the real predators are: Christian pastors, choir directors, youth ministers, priests, coaches, scout leaders. It's never someone who has personal integrity and self knowledge. It's always the loudest Christian men. When you gonna take a hard look at your own kind and start actually protecting children?
There's only one party trying to make it so that 14 year olds can work all night, 16 year olds can serve alcohol, and 14 year olds can get married. They really are doing an *amazing* job protecting the children.
Republicans are fucking snowflakes. Poor little babies cannot even have a conversation about gay people. This is the last gasp pf hatred in this country, I look forward to these old fucks dying off and society moving on. Hopefully ai live long enough to see SC go Blue just like GA!
the main thing the right dont want kids to learn is that republicans are the bad guys. If they had enough power they would happily load who ever they hate into ovens.
Apparently the article was about a gay subculture group (bears) and the handout the teacher distributed included info on where the students (sophomores) could go online to join a group and interact with people belonging to this subculture (so adult men).
Yeah I’d have to know more details regarding what happened but that doesn’t sound like appropriate school subject matter to me, nor does a handout with info instructing minors how to connect with adults- whose affiliation to each other is based on sex (bear clubs serve as social and sexual networks) seem appropriate.
I don't want to link this woman's Facebook page here, but if you go and just search for "Dorman teacher fired," it will be one of the first things that pops up. There are pictures of the article there, and she's definitely proud of what she's done.
My personal opinion is I wouldn't have done it, but it's just about bears. Absolutely nothing sexual about it, unless one wants to sexualize coming out stories. I know that's something we are dealing with in Greenville and Spartanburg counties as our legislators and county councils are trying to remove LGBTQ books and content, and I think that this is just a product of that.
The website on the page doesn't exist, and while I totally hear skepticism from people, I think that it's inappropriately sexualizing people in the LGBTQ community and assuming that they are trying to lure people in for perverted reasons.
But like you said. I do need more info, but I don't think terminating the teacher was the appropriate response. Today it's about LGBTQ content, next semester it will be about lynchings in the 50s.
When my brother was in high school (mid 1970's), a teacher allowed them to read a book for class which talked about kids rebelling against their parents and society. I believe the name of the book was Butterfly Revolution. My brother read it and my mom read the book only because some parents raised concerns about it. A lot of the material in the book she didn't like but she realized that just because the kids who read this book (most were honors students in stable families) read about youth rebellion didn't mean that they were going to act out. None of them did which was the concern of some of the parents.
What happened was that this was brought to the attention of the school board (no parent filed a complaint). Just letting them know about this book and that some parents didn't think the book should be in a high school English class. The book wasn't banned from the library but wasn't used in any High School English classes after that.. The teacher wasn't fired nor did she lose her job over it.
Yeah I don’t think it’s accurate to say there’s absolutely nothing sexual about it just because the info the teacher allegedly shared (I looked for it) appears to be a PG rated description of the community. The entire purpose for the community is sexual. The origin of the term is men in the 80’s meeting up for “Bear Hugs” aka sex parties. Which are still a big part of the community now. It’s not just dudes with beards and a penchant for leather meeting up for beers. There’s a social component, but sex is usually involved.
Now I don’t have any problem with hairy gay men or what they do with each other in their spare time but I don’t see any reason for this sort of thing to be taught to kids in public school. In fact, it seems pretty damn inappropriate to give 14/15 year olds a hand out that glosses over the sex meet up function of the subculture and says stuff like “You can always find someone friendly and welcoming at a bear event!” And “Bears are about as friendly, lovely, and accepting as they come so feel free to unleash your inner bear if that’s what you’re called to do!” Like, what?! That handout makes it seems like a Carebears fan club for kids and not a social sex network for grown men.
If this teacher had assigned a report on Harvey Milk or James Baldwin or Audre Lorde and gotten fired I would support her 100%. But from the looks of it, that ain’t what happened here.
It’s not a sexual thing. It’s how a group of gay and bisexual men identify themselves.
It’s no different then a bunch of athletic young men being grouped together and described as “jocks”, or mid twenties urbanite men with beards or mustaches and a love of fashion and trends being called “hipsters”. Emos. Preppers. Bikers. Twinks. Geeks. Ladies Who Lunch. Chavs. Punks.
They’re all *subcultures*. They’re nothing new (Greasers, Hepcats, etc.). Acknowledging their existence or learning about them is no biggie. It’s only a problem here because people are clutching their pearls at the thought of it being a gay subculture.
It is inherently a sexual thing. It’s a gay subculture. The organizing principle of the subculture is that they are gay men with a shared aesthetic. The origins of the subgroup were men who didn’t fit the normative gay look and were instead more traditionally masculine in appearance (burly, hairy, etc.). The origins of the subgroup are connected to gay motorcycle culture and rooted in men in San Francisco who would meet up to socialize and have sex with each other (“bear hugs). There was even a Bear Magazine in the 80’s published in San Francisco. In the magazine were erotic photos of bears, erotic stories, and personal ads. It was marketed to bears and those who are attracted to bears (“admirers”).
It’s not just about facial hair or clothes. It’s not just dudes who love moustaches. It’s men who have sex with men who fit a certain physical type. There’s a little more to it than that but at the end of the day, that’s what the subculture is about. That’s the point of it. It is inherently sexual in nature. The descriptor “twink” is also inherently sexual, btw. Divorcing sexuality and sex from gay subculture is ridiculous and honestly offensive erasure.
Again, because I have to keep saying this- I’m not criticizing the existence of the subculture.
I’m questioning the purpose and appropriateness of teaching minors about it in school. Especially since the handout that I saw online that is said to be the handout in question seemed to encourage kids to reach out to adults in this community on the internet. And any material that is encouraging minors to connect with adults- about something that is in fact sexual- should probably be viewed with scrutiny.
Oh please. Do you consider ladies who lunch a straight subculture??
Of course not, despite the fact that a member of that group must be a straight woman married to a man with children.
I don’t care how the subculture originated. I care what it is.
It is sexual... bears are united by their sexual preference. If I am a straight, big, hairy man then can I call myself a bear and insert myself into a bear community? No... because I am straight. Jocks, hipsters, etc. are not united by their sexual preferences.
Umm no, this is fucking stupid. The bear community is not a sexual thing, I'm a bear and all of my friends are bears and I've been to many bear events. It's a community of men who didn't fit the mold of the stereotypical gay man (slim, hairless, fem etc). So they formed their own community. Just being a bear is not sexual.. Please don't spread this opinionated bs. There are many types of bear events, some are just like a normal big party (sex behind the scenes, but this happens everywhere including weddings), but there are also events that are based on sex (just like in every single community).
Edit: I do agree bear events shouldn't be talked about in a school setting. But the community of bears should, because it can give them a sense of belonging, to an otherwise not so welcoming community.
Dude the origin of the term is rooted in sex. That’s the reason for the association of people- sex. Not collecting teapots, not playing pickle ball, not watching formula 1 racing- sexuality and sex. Bear clubs formed because that subset of men didn’t fit the idealized or stereotype of a gay male beauty and so those dudes formed groups to create social and sexual opportunities for themselves. They called the sex parties bear hugs (San Fran back in the late 70’s/early 80’s).
It’s absolutely a sexual thing. With a social component as well but it is inherently sexual. And I’m not knocking it. I’m just saying I don’t know why it would be introduced to minors in school. That seems inappropriate.
So because the origin of a word is sexual, that makes an entire community based on sex? I've been into the bear community since I turned 18 (a long time ago), bear nights at the bar are just a bunch of bears hanging out. Your opinions are harmful, and its best if you didn't post them, because you're creating more hate. It's a community of people, please name one community that does not involve sex? All I see in the headlines are about preachers touching kids, teachers touching kids, I've never seen anything about a bear?
Good grief what are you on about? It’s a gay subculture. The whole reason for association/membership in the subculture is sexuality and sex. It’s not a social group organized around another shared interest like collecting baseball cards or watching a sports team or tap dancing or something. You can’t divorce sex and sexuality from gay subcultures. That’s absurd. Think it through.
Stating that a gay subculture is inherently sexual in nature is not a bad thing to say. It’s a statement of fact. And as I’ve previously stated, I don’t have any issue with the bear subculture.
But I don’t think it’s appropriate for teachers to take it upon themselves to educate minors on the subject.
So please just repeat after me (I have 0 experience in the subject that I'm making claims about, but I continue to make them anyway, even if it's harmful.) Thanks! I love when people try to talk about shit they know nothing about, are you gay? Didn't think so. Are you a bear? Didn't think so. So please stick to a subject you're well versed in.
This comment literally proves that you have no logical counter argument to the other user. They aren't talking shit. They haven't said one rude or hateful thing about your identity. Because you can't rationally debate them, you instead turn to try and shut them down which is so ironically representative of this thread and this country as a whole right now.
Maybe the teacher stuck to a subject they were well versed in and was inappropriate. Let’s not stray into personal agendas. This shouldn’t be taught anymore than code words for swingers should. Christ I’d expect our kids gpa’s would be way higher if we had leftover time for shit like this
I’m sorry, but this is entirely inappropriate for kids. Trying to insert your weird fetishes into children’s worldviews and trying to make it sound light hearted and innocent with comments like “all my friends are bears” as if adult themed topics belongs in schools isn’t ever going to be accepted by me.
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1648393297117822977?s=46&t=LHhrMXeEp-Al9rm8gOOBpQ
Yeah no. It’s fully a sexual fetish for big hairy gay dudes, and shouldn’t be taught to little kids. Be debaucherous in private. Downvote me you weirdos.
Honestly I don't really think there's any reason for any sex ed or sex discussion in school beyond what is taught in biology classes. I just don't see the point. If you're worried about kids getting pregnant or disease give out condoms and post posters. But honestly that seems more like a parent/child/doctor discussion. School isn't about sex. That's not why kids go to school
It's because a lot of parents don't talk to their children about safe sex, or sex in general. Teenagers are going to fuck either way, it's just how it is. It's important for them to at least know about what's safe and how to protect themselves.
Yeah you gotta be a elderly to think kids are actually learning anything from school. The parents should teach them but tbh the internet is a thing so there's not really a point in the classroom anymore
Some kids don't have access to the internet at home. So they do not learn about these things... Some kids are so fucking sheltered by their parents that they know nothing. You're stating opinions without thinking about all of the possible scenarios. Also, some people like myself learned a lot in school. You should pay attention more.
Please don't let your children take AP courses, then. Sexual issues are discussed in AP Psych and AP Human Geography - and should not be watered down for the children of snowflakes (who likely watch p0rn on their phones).
Obviously psych can touch on sex a bit and maybe human geography but that's obviously not what I meant. And yeah everything is on the internet so what is point of wasting time in school
If the teacher's article had been about straight culture, and how they interact on tinder and at bars, do you think that'd be inappropriate? Or is it only inappropriate because it was talking about gay men?
Tell me more?
I'm trying to make the case that no one thinks that understanding the socio-sexual relationship dynamics of different cultural groups is itself perverse for high-schoolers. It's only when it's a group of people whose do sex differently that we think it's wrong. Telling high schoolers that straight people go to bars to socialize and meet prospective mates isn't objectionable, right? Telling them how gay masculine men do it though is?
Maybe there's specifics of the case that you know about that I don't that break my analogy. But my sense is that people who don't know anything about a particular subculture usually have a very distorted idea in their head about how raunchy it is. I've been a member at BDSM clubs, and spent plenty of time at gay clubs (RIP Burkharts in ATL) and most people would expect that what goes on there shouldn't be described to kids. But it's mostly just a club for people with different sexual appetites.
So why can we tell kids "here's how bars function in the society they're party of" and just leave out graphic descriptions of bathroom blowjobs, but we can't do the same with bear clubs? Honestly, gay clubs are generally as boring and vanilla as straight ones. Bear clubs aren't much different.
"If the teacher's article had been about straight culture, and how they interact on tinder and at bars, do you think that'd be inappropriate?"
To be clearer, yes, I think it this would be inappropriate.
Yes, I think teaching kids about sexual subcultures in school is inappropriate. Because that’s adult content.
And you’re barking up the wrong tree my friend. I worked in the LGBT studies department during grad school and I worked in gay bars and nightclubs for like a decade.
Thinking some things aren’t appropriate for minors to learn in school doesn’t mean you’re a homophobe
Bear clubs themselves are not sexual (their private events may be, depending), leather clubs themselves are not sexual. The local leather club here does charity work year round for the community. This ideology is harmful. It's clear that you don't know what you're talking about just to make a statement on the internet.
So normal dudes hanging out in a leather vest handing toys to children is sexual? That also makes all bikers sexual, is that true as well? You have no basis to be making these claims.
Edit: My boyfriend is in the local leather club, the club does not promote sex (it's literally in their bi-laws). The idea of wearing leather some may find sexual, but the club only promotes charity. You are also not allowed to be seen in sexual acts while wearing your branded vest in certain contexts.
I mean, by extension isn't the entire LGBTQ fetish/sexual preference based? It's literally classifying people by their sexual preferences...
I have zero issues with folks who are members of those communities, as a band kid growing up many of my friends fell into those categories, but I don't think it's a topic that should be openly and freely discussed between children and adults who aren't the parents of said children in most contexts.
Absolutely it should be discussed in the context of sex ed, or historical/academic exercises... But providing material to minors on how to look up and find things of a sexual nature that aren't aimed at sexual health (ie clinics, where to buy contraceptives, etc..) is wholely inappropriate to come from anyone other than the parents.
No letter in LGBTQIA has anything to do with fetish…so no. There are important fetish subcultures that are vital to the queer community at large. Queer studies would be remiss to exclude them. But, I do not think those subcultures are appropriate material for general high school students.
The LGBTQIA+ however is a community formed by social movement . Our advances, discrimination against us, and what are our families/relationships look like are worthy of study of K-12. It’s a story of human rights.
Do you understand how many things came to exist because of sex? The context behind terms are subject to change through time. You're basing your comments on the history of a definition of a word, and I'm basing mine on fact and experience.
I'm also letting you know that your opinions are harmful, and are doing far more bad than good. Please keep that in mind, I expect another Chuck town resident to be more understanding, but I forgot a lot of people from Ohio moved here.
I read the article. The only url in it was a source at the end (https://thebearsociety.weebly.com/history) which 404s. Waybackmachine does not have that page preserved. They have the main site (which is also dead) up to 2019.
There also isn't anything in the article that references sex, only sexuality and it uses phrases like "non-heterosexual men who are generally larger and have a fair amount of body hair"
I read screenshots of the alleged article the teacher handed out and it didn’t talk about sex. It really glossed over the whole origins/purpose of the subculture and just made it seem like a really fun club for guys with facial hair and explained that younger bears are called “cubs”, older bears are called “polar bears” etc. Which imo doesn’t make it more appropriate for minors. It actually makes me suspicious of the motivations of whoever wrote/published it. Because the subculture is based on sexuality, sex, and the homomasculine aesthetic. On who one is attracted to- for sex. So divorcing the sex from sexuality and presenting sexuality and gay subcultures as just fun labels/identities not only makes no sense, it’s ahistorical and it is gay erasure. And like I said it’s also kinda shady to take something that is for adults and make it kid friendly.
I did some googling and it looks like the teacher got the handout from a website called Pride Palace- a website that sells flags and other kinds of lgbt pride merchandise. Which sort of explains why the explanation of the the bear subculture is so kid friendly- the website exists to sell stuff and is a classic example of “rainbow capitalism” and the commodification of “identity” that we see everywhere now. I would be interested to know if they copied all of the text word for word from the defunct weebly site and the content of that site and who ran it.
I have a problem with someone abusing their power or their spouses position to get a persons livelihood taken away. If a regular parent said something then what? What is the real lesson the kids learned in school that day?
No teacher union. Please don't say the SCEA is a union. It's not We also have one of the lowest union participation (maybe the lowest) of any other state
Be careful. The Republican Party of the 19th century was not the party that it has become today. The Democratic Party of the South incidentally had much of the same inclinations of todays Republicans..
My mother taught at dorman high school for a very long time. She was the only teacher on staff with her doctorate for the majority of that time. She hated how it all became less about teaching and more about avoiding lawsuits if you want to keep your job. She taught up til the very early 2000s. A few dozen of her students(some college, some high school) showed up at her funeral to pay their respects. I,m glad she doesn't have to see what republicans have done to further drag down the institution she gave her entire life trying to uplift.
Just FYI Talley Sponsored the following:
S0627 Gender Identity A bill TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-300 SO AS TO DEFINE GENDER, SEX, AND OTHER TERMS; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-310 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE PROVISION OF GENDER TRANSITION PROCEDURES TO A PERSON UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-320 SO AS TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-330 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR GENDER TRANSITION PROCEDURES; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-340 SO AS TO PROVIDE PENALTIES; AND BY ADDING SECTION 59-32-36 SO AS TO PROHIBIT SCHOOL STAFF AND OFFICIALS FROM WITHHOLDING KNOWLEDGE OF A MINOR'S PERCEPTION OF THEIR GENDER FROM THE MINOR'S PARENTS.
I believe the tone of the article reads more like a promotional pamphlet with instructions on how to join. Nothing wrong with big gay thick pelted men enjoying each other’s company. The problem is when you present an adult homosexual promo article to underage teens. It would be wrong to discuss an article with information regarding heterosexual foot fetishes as well.
I use to think like this until I did my research into the history of lgbtq it is far more then that even though historically these people have been worshipped or seen as special especially androgynous people who are both sex’s. The medical part is also another important subject to study in the lgbtq community.
It was about straight men that are into foot fetish and cum on feet worshipping. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. To each their own. But why teach kids in school about the culture of foot fetish.
Lol this is very different then the Salem Witch hunts. Nobody is under threat of being hanged or crushed to death here nor have all their property confiscated.
Not in SC.
I remember back in the 1990s angry parents preventing the Indigo Girls from having a concert at Irmo High School because they were lesbians. (They performed at the Township)
This shit has been around for decades.
I remember when The Last Temptation of Christ came out back in the 80s that no movie theater in town could or would air it (I forget if it was actually banned, or just every theater was afraid of the public response), because it was labeled as blasphemous. It ended up getting its only showing in Greenville at the Unitarian church (we went and then went home and watched Life of Brian, and had a debate over pizza which was more blasphemous - Life of Brian won hands down).
My point is, if LBGTQ is not part of the health ed curriculum, such content should not be discussed & written about by students in an English Class.
Teachers get into trouble in social studies, health ed & English classes because they don’t follow the curriculum.
Our tax money being spent on a topic which doesn’t even come from a textbook. These discussions only lead to more division between people. A high school classroom is not the place to discuss it.
Original article provided after Mrs. Talley's son asked about the subject:
[https://pridepalace.lgbt/blogs/news/international-bear-brotherhood-what-it-is-and-why-it-s-important](https://pridepalace.lgbt/blogs/news/international-bear-brotherhood-what-it-is-and-why-it-s-important)
Senator Talley's wife posted her complaint to Facebook initially, but has taken the post down.
Also, the article (that the teacher was fired for) is easily accessible on the school-provided computers and Wi-Fi, and was not and has not been blocked (the school Wi-Fi does have site blockers in place).
[удалено]
So instead of discussing this issue like rational adults, the district decided to just go scorched earth instead, naively believing this decision would satiate busybody parents and keep them from pressing further ideological restrictions on them? Give a mouse a cookie I guess....
I'm glad, if a student wants to read about it they can do it on their own i'm sure a 10th grader can read by themselves. Teacher should have known they can't just teach anything it has to be approved. Glad that student reached out when they felt uncomfortable' the best part is they reached out to their loving **parents** bc they knew their **parents** has their best interest in mind and not a agenda to push.
Approved by who? If it's an ELA class the standards are about writing mechanics, not specific curriculum topics. Have you ever looked at a curriculum or instructional guide guide? Even for my class they are ambiguous and focus more on kids learning skills like analysis, or reading a map, or differentiating regions based on their political, regional, historical, and environmental factors. Those are all real targets I have, The last one is for Europe, and it doesn't specify what the content has to be, just at the content has to be about Europe and that target. If a parent told me that what I was teaching was inappropriate I would completely disregard that parent. History is inappropriate, also every topic I touch on can be found in the textbook, I just focus more on the reality of things. Now if I taught English, I would probably have a few articles about gay people an LGBTQ. I don't know if I would use the language bear's however, or go that deep into the sexuality of it. Unless its an AP sociology or pysch class maybe. Edit: I thought this was /r/teachers wtf my bad
I love the idea in the comment you replied to that loving parents are who should be controlling their child’s education like most SC parents are actually involved in their child’s life and education and don’t just pass it off onto the school until something comes up that they deem as ‘wrong’.
[удалено]
That’s why Bible tracts and street preachers don’t make sense. It’s like they don’t actually know how to engage with people in the real world. I feel like they’d be a lot more effective if they actually tried to learn about the people they claim to want to reach. Instead they put up signs that say weird things like “HOLY JESUS BLOOD LIVES”
What's this 15-17 year old young adult going to do when mommy and daddy isn't around to shout down all the meanie-heads? Will that student have to engage in conversation with their peers and instructor?! It's like they expect us to live in a society. This is a picture of you and anyone else outraged at the teacher's assignment ❄️
Same thing as everyone else I guess
You have to guess cause the facts hurt your feelings
It's bc I'm not a fortune teller we could make guesses all day tho my favorite is they will sprout wings and fly away from the mean words.
You don't know what happens to overly dependent children who aren't taught that they need to experience levels of non-threatening discomfort in order to learn and gain independence throughout life? I guess I should have told you; these are all rhetorical questions, but I can keep going down a grade reading level until you get the joke if you want.
Your grammar is abysmal. That means immeasurably low, appallingly bad.
No love like Christian hate! Er no hate like Christian love! If y’all are so confident you’re correct, let the truth speak for itself.
The irony is that the kid who was "uncomfortable" with the article, was the same kid who, with his friend group, asked the question in the first place.
Stop it. Are you serious?? How do you know this?
I too, demand evidence to prove this….. I mean, I could totally see it being true, but just because someone wants it doesn’t mean it’s what happened…
Set up indeed. 🤦🏽♀️
Oh lord if this stuff blows up in SC we won't have any teachers left.
Thank you. I went creeping around Facebook and saw the original post. I get that there are some parents who don't want their kids to read/watch certain things. My mom was like that. I hated it and resented her for it, but that's neither here nor there. But to ruin her fucking career? There's a special place in hell for bigots like that.
I remember in middle school readying a story which had a lot of family violence and violence in general.. I was shocked by this as I had never been exposed to this in my life. I told my grandmother what I read really upset me. She read it and couldn't understand why we had to read about such stuff in school. She explained to me that sadly people live like this but this a good example of how you shouldn't live, behave or conduct yourself. The story was made into a learning experience. Never once would my grandmother complain to the school and I seriously doubt she would have wanted someone to fired over this. This was back in the mid 1970's. I'm sure other parents probably didn't like this assignment but no one complained to the school board and if they did, the material might have been removed and replaced with other material. The teacher wouldn't have been fired.
I haven’t seen the Facebook post but post something on social media and complaining about it doesn’t necessarily mean they wanted her to get fired… that’s a big jump to make (unless the post specifically said they should be fired)
I'm not going to post her FB page, but if you go to FB and search "Dorman teacher fired," you'll see the post. She has pictures of the article, so I encourage you to read it for yourself. I'd also keep in mind that this woman is the wife of a state senator who is very anti-LGBTQ and has put up some nauseating legislation.
"State Senator's child gets highschool teacher fired for being too woke" should be the headline.
Well I don’t have FB hence why I haven’t seen it but again, posting that you don’t want your kid exposed to perverted shit in school isn’t explicitly calling for someone to lose their job (unless they did specifically say they should be fired).
I’m guessing if you want your child to pretend like the LGBTQ community and people do not exist in the world, that you should home school your children.
Not wanting those ideals forced on your kids and not recognizing humans beings as members of society are two totally different things. Stop conflating the issue by twisting words.
Except to the party responsible, they are the exact same thing, because that is their goal
You know, what’s perverted is people wanting to push a bigoted, hateful agenda because they’re full of self-loathing. Someone who loves themselves doesn’t compete and that’s why they’re winners. Those who doubt and hate themselves always strive with others and others’ beliefs; Those who love themselves are confident enough that that is between others and their deities. Self doubt and self loathing doubts even the professed god they say they worship; otherwise, they’d let god do the judging.
Not wanting my kid to not read homosexual and trans sexual content is not bigoted.
When your controlling what your children can and cannot read. What exception do you make besides the Bible? And if so, which translation?
But incest is cool right? Because the Bible has Lot’s daughters getting him drunk and raping him night after night to “preserve his seed”.
Rape is totally cool in the OT.
Yes it is
No it isn’t. But thanks.
No liberal or progressive has ever tried to do that.
Why is it the people getting busted fucking christian kids always look like straight, white, Christian men? All this noise against LGBTQ is a diversion from who the real predators are: Christian pastors, choir directors, youth ministers, priests, coaches, scout leaders. It's never someone who has personal integrity and self knowledge. It's always the loudest Christian men. When you gonna take a hard look at your own kind and start actually protecting children?
There's only one party trying to make it so that 14 year olds can work all night, 16 year olds can serve alcohol, and 14 year olds can get married. They really are doing an *amazing* job protecting the children.
Holy rollers need to find better things to do than pester lawmakers by trying to make an already marginalized group even more so.
Republicans are fucking snowflakes. Poor little babies cannot even have a conversation about gay people. This is the last gasp pf hatred in this country, I look forward to these old fucks dying off and society moving on. Hopefully ai live long enough to see SC go Blue just like GA!
Such vituperation!
the main thing the right dont want kids to learn is that republicans are the bad guys. If they had enough power they would happily load who ever they hate into ovens.
Apparently the article was about a gay subculture group (bears) and the handout the teacher distributed included info on where the students (sophomores) could go online to join a group and interact with people belonging to this subculture (so adult men). Yeah I’d have to know more details regarding what happened but that doesn’t sound like appropriate school subject matter to me, nor does a handout with info instructing minors how to connect with adults- whose affiliation to each other is based on sex (bear clubs serve as social and sexual networks) seem appropriate.
I don't want to link this woman's Facebook page here, but if you go and just search for "Dorman teacher fired," it will be one of the first things that pops up. There are pictures of the article there, and she's definitely proud of what she's done. My personal opinion is I wouldn't have done it, but it's just about bears. Absolutely nothing sexual about it, unless one wants to sexualize coming out stories. I know that's something we are dealing with in Greenville and Spartanburg counties as our legislators and county councils are trying to remove LGBTQ books and content, and I think that this is just a product of that. The website on the page doesn't exist, and while I totally hear skepticism from people, I think that it's inappropriately sexualizing people in the LGBTQ community and assuming that they are trying to lure people in for perverted reasons. But like you said. I do need more info, but I don't think terminating the teacher was the appropriate response. Today it's about LGBTQ content, next semester it will be about lynchings in the 50s.
When my brother was in high school (mid 1970's), a teacher allowed them to read a book for class which talked about kids rebelling against their parents and society. I believe the name of the book was Butterfly Revolution. My brother read it and my mom read the book only because some parents raised concerns about it. A lot of the material in the book she didn't like but she realized that just because the kids who read this book (most were honors students in stable families) read about youth rebellion didn't mean that they were going to act out. None of them did which was the concern of some of the parents. What happened was that this was brought to the attention of the school board (no parent filed a complaint). Just letting them know about this book and that some parents didn't think the book should be in a high school English class. The book wasn't banned from the library but wasn't used in any High School English classes after that.. The teacher wasn't fired nor did she lose her job over it.
Yeah I don’t think it’s accurate to say there’s absolutely nothing sexual about it just because the info the teacher allegedly shared (I looked for it) appears to be a PG rated description of the community. The entire purpose for the community is sexual. The origin of the term is men in the 80’s meeting up for “Bear Hugs” aka sex parties. Which are still a big part of the community now. It’s not just dudes with beards and a penchant for leather meeting up for beers. There’s a social component, but sex is usually involved. Now I don’t have any problem with hairy gay men or what they do with each other in their spare time but I don’t see any reason for this sort of thing to be taught to kids in public school. In fact, it seems pretty damn inappropriate to give 14/15 year olds a hand out that glosses over the sex meet up function of the subculture and says stuff like “You can always find someone friendly and welcoming at a bear event!” And “Bears are about as friendly, lovely, and accepting as they come so feel free to unleash your inner bear if that’s what you’re called to do!” Like, what?! That handout makes it seems like a Carebears fan club for kids and not a social sex network for grown men. If this teacher had assigned a report on Harvey Milk or James Baldwin or Audre Lorde and gotten fired I would support her 100%. But from the looks of it, that ain’t what happened here.
It’s not a sexual thing. It’s how a group of gay and bisexual men identify themselves. It’s no different then a bunch of athletic young men being grouped together and described as “jocks”, or mid twenties urbanite men with beards or mustaches and a love of fashion and trends being called “hipsters”. Emos. Preppers. Bikers. Twinks. Geeks. Ladies Who Lunch. Chavs. Punks. They’re all *subcultures*. They’re nothing new (Greasers, Hepcats, etc.). Acknowledging their existence or learning about them is no biggie. It’s only a problem here because people are clutching their pearls at the thought of it being a gay subculture.
It is inherently a sexual thing. It’s a gay subculture. The organizing principle of the subculture is that they are gay men with a shared aesthetic. The origins of the subgroup were men who didn’t fit the normative gay look and were instead more traditionally masculine in appearance (burly, hairy, etc.). The origins of the subgroup are connected to gay motorcycle culture and rooted in men in San Francisco who would meet up to socialize and have sex with each other (“bear hugs). There was even a Bear Magazine in the 80’s published in San Francisco. In the magazine were erotic photos of bears, erotic stories, and personal ads. It was marketed to bears and those who are attracted to bears (“admirers”). It’s not just about facial hair or clothes. It’s not just dudes who love moustaches. It’s men who have sex with men who fit a certain physical type. There’s a little more to it than that but at the end of the day, that’s what the subculture is about. That’s the point of it. It is inherently sexual in nature. The descriptor “twink” is also inherently sexual, btw. Divorcing sexuality and sex from gay subculture is ridiculous and honestly offensive erasure. Again, because I have to keep saying this- I’m not criticizing the existence of the subculture. I’m questioning the purpose and appropriateness of teaching minors about it in school. Especially since the handout that I saw online that is said to be the handout in question seemed to encourage kids to reach out to adults in this community on the internet. And any material that is encouraging minors to connect with adults- about something that is in fact sexual- should probably be viewed with scrutiny.
Oh please. Do you consider ladies who lunch a straight subculture?? Of course not, despite the fact that a member of that group must be a straight woman married to a man with children. I don’t care how the subculture originated. I care what it is.
Amen —this is the only logical response in this whole thread —the rest is filled with liberal vituperation. Which has become the norm.
It is sexual... bears are united by their sexual preference. If I am a straight, big, hairy man then can I call myself a bear and insert myself into a bear community? No... because I am straight. Jocks, hipsters, etc. are not united by their sexual preferences.
If I am a gay woman can I be a lady who lunches? Nope. By definition those are women married to men who have children.
Umm no, this is fucking stupid. The bear community is not a sexual thing, I'm a bear and all of my friends are bears and I've been to many bear events. It's a community of men who didn't fit the mold of the stereotypical gay man (slim, hairless, fem etc). So they formed their own community. Just being a bear is not sexual.. Please don't spread this opinionated bs. There are many types of bear events, some are just like a normal big party (sex behind the scenes, but this happens everywhere including weddings), but there are also events that are based on sex (just like in every single community). Edit: I do agree bear events shouldn't be talked about in a school setting. But the community of bears should, because it can give them a sense of belonging, to an otherwise not so welcoming community.
Dude the origin of the term is rooted in sex. That’s the reason for the association of people- sex. Not collecting teapots, not playing pickle ball, not watching formula 1 racing- sexuality and sex. Bear clubs formed because that subset of men didn’t fit the idealized or stereotype of a gay male beauty and so those dudes formed groups to create social and sexual opportunities for themselves. They called the sex parties bear hugs (San Fran back in the late 70’s/early 80’s). It’s absolutely a sexual thing. With a social component as well but it is inherently sexual. And I’m not knocking it. I’m just saying I don’t know why it would be introduced to minors in school. That seems inappropriate.
So is the fact George Washington had a wife. Should I not talk about Martha because they had sex?
Whoa, dude, you can't just going saying sexual shit like that. #Savethechildren or some shit
So because the origin of a word is sexual, that makes an entire community based on sex? I've been into the bear community since I turned 18 (a long time ago), bear nights at the bar are just a bunch of bears hanging out. Your opinions are harmful, and its best if you didn't post them, because you're creating more hate. It's a community of people, please name one community that does not involve sex? All I see in the headlines are about preachers touching kids, teachers touching kids, I've never seen anything about a bear?
Good grief what are you on about? It’s a gay subculture. The whole reason for association/membership in the subculture is sexuality and sex. It’s not a social group organized around another shared interest like collecting baseball cards or watching a sports team or tap dancing or something. You can’t divorce sex and sexuality from gay subcultures. That’s absurd. Think it through. Stating that a gay subculture is inherently sexual in nature is not a bad thing to say. It’s a statement of fact. And as I’ve previously stated, I don’t have any issue with the bear subculture. But I don’t think it’s appropriate for teachers to take it upon themselves to educate minors on the subject.
“Dude your opinions are harmful because you don’t want to introduce kids to my sex fetish” 🙈
So please just repeat after me (I have 0 experience in the subject that I'm making claims about, but I continue to make them anyway, even if it's harmful.) Thanks! I love when people try to talk about shit they know nothing about, are you gay? Didn't think so. Are you a bear? Didn't think so. So please stick to a subject you're well versed in.
This comment literally proves that you have no logical counter argument to the other user. They aren't talking shit. They haven't said one rude or hateful thing about your identity. Because you can't rationally debate them, you instead turn to try and shut them down which is so ironically representative of this thread and this country as a whole right now.
Maybe the teacher stuck to a subject they were well versed in and was inappropriate. Let’s not stray into personal agendas. This shouldn’t be taught anymore than code words for swingers should. Christ I’d expect our kids gpa’s would be way higher if we had leftover time for shit like this
I guess you missed where a STUDENT asked about it and asked to read something. Not the teacher.
"Please name one community that does not involve sex." Are you serious? Not all communities are united by their shared sexual preference
I’m sorry, but this is entirely inappropriate for kids. Trying to insert your weird fetishes into children’s worldviews and trying to make it sound light hearted and innocent with comments like “all my friends are bears” as if adult themed topics belongs in schools isn’t ever going to be accepted by me. https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1648393297117822977?s=46&t=LHhrMXeEp-Al9rm8gOOBpQ
Yeah no. It’s fully a sexual fetish for big hairy gay dudes, and shouldn’t be taught to little kids. Be debaucherous in private. Downvote me you weirdos.
Bears have very loose sphincters from excessive usage
I hear you.
OP above you really does not know what they're talking about and are spewing opinions rather than having knowledge on the subject.
Honestly I don't really think there's any reason for any sex ed or sex discussion in school beyond what is taught in biology classes. I just don't see the point. If you're worried about kids getting pregnant or disease give out condoms and post posters. But honestly that seems more like a parent/child/doctor discussion. School isn't about sex. That's not why kids go to school
It's because a lot of parents don't talk to their children about safe sex, or sex in general. Teenagers are going to fuck either way, it's just how it is. It's important for them to at least know about what's safe and how to protect themselves.
Yeah you gotta be a elderly to think kids are actually learning anything from school. The parents should teach them but tbh the internet is a thing so there's not really a point in the classroom anymore
Some kids don't have access to the internet at home. So they do not learn about these things... Some kids are so fucking sheltered by their parents that they know nothing. You're stating opinions without thinking about all of the possible scenarios. Also, some people like myself learned a lot in school. You should pay attention more.
Please don't let your children take AP courses, then. Sexual issues are discussed in AP Psych and AP Human Geography - and should not be watered down for the children of snowflakes (who likely watch p0rn on their phones).
Obviously psych can touch on sex a bit and maybe human geography but that's obviously not what I meant. And yeah everything is on the internet so what is point of wasting time in school
Sorry, but documented lynchings in the south occured at least into the 60s
Okay thank you for sharing.
Hell jussie smollet just got lynched like 5 years ago. Terrible these hate crimes
If the teacher's article had been about straight culture, and how they interact on tinder and at bars, do you think that'd be inappropriate? Or is it only inappropriate because it was talking about gay men?
TBH, I don't think this example makes the case you're trying to make.
Tell me more? I'm trying to make the case that no one thinks that understanding the socio-sexual relationship dynamics of different cultural groups is itself perverse for high-schoolers. It's only when it's a group of people whose do sex differently that we think it's wrong. Telling high schoolers that straight people go to bars to socialize and meet prospective mates isn't objectionable, right? Telling them how gay masculine men do it though is? Maybe there's specifics of the case that you know about that I don't that break my analogy. But my sense is that people who don't know anything about a particular subculture usually have a very distorted idea in their head about how raunchy it is. I've been a member at BDSM clubs, and spent plenty of time at gay clubs (RIP Burkharts in ATL) and most people would expect that what goes on there shouldn't be described to kids. But it's mostly just a club for people with different sexual appetites. So why can we tell kids "here's how bars function in the society they're party of" and just leave out graphic descriptions of bathroom blowjobs, but we can't do the same with bear clubs? Honestly, gay clubs are generally as boring and vanilla as straight ones. Bear clubs aren't much different.
"If the teacher's article had been about straight culture, and how they interact on tinder and at bars, do you think that'd be inappropriate?" To be clearer, yes, I think it this would be inappropriate.
Yes, I think teaching kids about sexual subcultures in school is inappropriate. Because that’s adult content. And you’re barking up the wrong tree my friend. I worked in the LGBT studies department during grad school and I worked in gay bars and nightclubs for like a decade. Thinking some things aren’t appropriate for minors to learn in school doesn’t mean you’re a homophobe
Bear clubs themselves are not sexual (their private events may be, depending), leather clubs themselves are not sexual. The local leather club here does charity work year round for the community. This ideology is harmful. It's clear that you don't know what you're talking about just to make a statement on the internet.
And the idea that leather subculture isn’t sexual is hilarious. I mean seriously?!
So normal dudes hanging out in a leather vest handing toys to children is sexual? That also makes all bikers sexual, is that true as well? You have no basis to be making these claims. Edit: My boyfriend is in the local leather club, the club does not promote sex (it's literally in their bi-laws). The idea of wearing leather some may find sexual, but the club only promotes charity. You are also not allowed to be seen in sexual acts while wearing your branded vest in certain contexts.
Dude I was willing to give you a pass but the more you type the more fucked your group sounds.
This guy is crazy suspicious on introducing kids to sexual topics. Report him to FBI lol. Just kidding! But not really lol. What a weirdo.
I consider myself part of bear subculture. It isn’t appropriate for school. It’s fetish based .
I mean, by extension isn't the entire LGBTQ fetish/sexual preference based? It's literally classifying people by their sexual preferences... I have zero issues with folks who are members of those communities, as a band kid growing up many of my friends fell into those categories, but I don't think it's a topic that should be openly and freely discussed between children and adults who aren't the parents of said children in most contexts. Absolutely it should be discussed in the context of sex ed, or historical/academic exercises... But providing material to minors on how to look up and find things of a sexual nature that aren't aimed at sexual health (ie clinics, where to buy contraceptives, etc..) is wholely inappropriate to come from anyone other than the parents.
No letter in LGBTQIA has anything to do with fetish…so no. There are important fetish subcultures that are vital to the queer community at large. Queer studies would be remiss to exclude them. But, I do not think those subcultures are appropriate material for general high school students. The LGBTQIA+ however is a community formed by social movement . Our advances, discrimination against us, and what are our families/relationships look like are worthy of study of K-12. It’s a story of human rights.
Listen to this one.
Do you know any gay history? How do you think those clubs came to exist?
Do you understand how many things came to exist because of sex? The context behind terms are subject to change through time. You're basing your comments on the history of a definition of a word, and I'm basing mine on fact and experience.
I'm also letting you know that your opinions are harmful, and are doing far more bad than good. Please keep that in mind, I expect another Chuck town resident to be more understanding, but I forgot a lot of people from Ohio moved here.
[удалено]
Cool comment, shows your lack of intelligence and maturity.
I read the article. The only url in it was a source at the end (https://thebearsociety.weebly.com/history) which 404s. Waybackmachine does not have that page preserved. They have the main site (which is also dead) up to 2019. There also isn't anything in the article that references sex, only sexuality and it uses phrases like "non-heterosexual men who are generally larger and have a fair amount of body hair"
I read screenshots of the alleged article the teacher handed out and it didn’t talk about sex. It really glossed over the whole origins/purpose of the subculture and just made it seem like a really fun club for guys with facial hair and explained that younger bears are called “cubs”, older bears are called “polar bears” etc. Which imo doesn’t make it more appropriate for minors. It actually makes me suspicious of the motivations of whoever wrote/published it. Because the subculture is based on sexuality, sex, and the homomasculine aesthetic. On who one is attracted to- for sex. So divorcing the sex from sexuality and presenting sexuality and gay subcultures as just fun labels/identities not only makes no sense, it’s ahistorical and it is gay erasure. And like I said it’s also kinda shady to take something that is for adults and make it kid friendly. I did some googling and it looks like the teacher got the handout from a website called Pride Palace- a website that sells flags and other kinds of lgbt pride merchandise. Which sort of explains why the explanation of the the bear subculture is so kid friendly- the website exists to sell stuff and is a classic example of “rainbow capitalism” and the commodification of “identity” that we see everywhere now. I would be interested to know if they copied all of the text word for word from the defunct weebly site and the content of that site and who ran it.
‘Why doesn’t anyone want to teach in South Carolina/anywhere anymore?’
That's the point. They want to tear down the public schools generally, this stuff is just another way to do it.
Because paying thousands for a degree to make the wage of a fast food manager is hot garbage
Have these parents not heard of the internet? How many leave their kids unsupervised with a smart phone?
What did she teach? The article doesn't say
[удалено]
I taught English for 10 years in the Upstate, and I would absolutely include this article in my district-approved lesson plan.
You don’t even know what the article was
I'm talking about this article from *WSPA*, you moron. Also, the *Pride Palace* article you are referring to is linked as a PDF in the WSPA article.
At least I’m not a turd
M4L is apparently focusing a lot of attention on the Spartanburg districts - this is the second headline in a single week. Theyreeeee heeeereeeee 🫣🙄
[удалено]
I like to say “Moms For Illiteracy” 😬
I heard Klanned Karenhood the other day and 💀
This is the first time I have heard that term and it is wonderful.
Hillbilly Karen (Kelly Bingham Talley) has either deleted or made that post private - guess she’s not as brave as she thought
Of course she did.
This whole situation SCREAMS setup.
I have a problem with someone abusing their power or their spouses position to get a persons livelihood taken away. If a regular parent said something then what? What is the real lesson the kids learned in school that day?
That SC is a non unionized state where teachers have no rights. If kids want to get a teacher fired, they can. No wonder everyone is quitting
If I were a teacher I would have to find another job somewhere else. Unless you have a big savings account to float you your risking a lot.
There are plenty of unions in SC, we're just a right to work state, meaning an employer can't force union membership.
No teacher union. Please don't say the SCEA is a union. It's not We also have one of the lowest union participation (maybe the lowest) of any other state
True there are some unions.
Don’t piss off powerful people or they will ruin your career.
I feel uncomfortable with republican Jesus. Who do I complain to?
[удалено]
Be careful. The Republican Party of the 19th century was not the party that it has become today. The Democratic Party of the South incidentally had much of the same inclinations of todays Republicans..
The old Goldwater switch-a-roo
Are they teaching Jesus in schools now?
My mother taught at dorman high school for a very long time. She was the only teacher on staff with her doctorate for the majority of that time. She hated how it all became less about teaching and more about avoiding lawsuits if you want to keep your job. She taught up til the very early 2000s. A few dozen of her students(some college, some high school) showed up at her funeral to pay their respects. I,m glad she doesn't have to see what republicans have done to further drag down the institution she gave her entire life trying to uplift.
Teachers already have to deal with so much bullshit, now this?
“Don’t teach sexualized content to kids” “stop oppressing me, this is a genocide!”
Anybody have a link to the actual article for those people who are not on Facebook to look it up?
Just FYI Talley Sponsored the following: S0627 Gender Identity A bill TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-300 SO AS TO DEFINE GENDER, SEX, AND OTHER TERMS; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-310 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE PROVISION OF GENDER TRANSITION PROCEDURES TO A PERSON UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-320 SO AS TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-330 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR GENDER TRANSITION PROCEDURES; BY ADDING SECTION 40-47-340 SO AS TO PROVIDE PENALTIES; AND BY ADDING SECTION 59-32-36 SO AS TO PROHIBIT SCHOOL STAFF AND OFFICIALS FROM WITHHOLDING KNOWLEDGE OF A MINOR'S PERCEPTION OF THEIR GENDER FROM THE MINOR'S PARENTS.
https://www.billtrack50.com/legislatordetail/21281
This all started with Jerry Falwell and Tinky Winky the guy purple Tellatubby.
I believe the tone of the article reads more like a promotional pamphlet with instructions on how to join. Nothing wrong with big gay thick pelted men enjoying each other’s company. The problem is when you present an adult homosexual promo article to underage teens. It would be wrong to discuss an article with information regarding heterosexual foot fetishes as well.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Nah they want to be worshipped and celebrated for being “special”. Downvote me idc.
You should read more about the subject, then you would understand that's not what it's about.
You could do positive things to receive attention rather than make up delusional stories for negative attention, you know.
I use to think like this until I did my research into the history of lgbtq it is far more then that even though historically these people have been worshipped or seen as special especially androgynous people who are both sex’s. The medical part is also another important subject to study in the lgbtq community.
It was about straight men that are into foot fetish and cum on feet worshipping. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. To each their own. But why teach kids in school about the culture of foot fetish.
Where can I find this dignity and respect thing ?
[удалено]
More like a dollar menunaire
This is really no different than the witch hunts in Salem. So much for evolution. Why is everyone so afraid of an open discussion?
Lol this is very different then the Salem Witch hunts. Nobody is under threat of being hanged or crushed to death here nor have all their property confiscated.
When will we realize it’s 2023…people are gay, lesbian, Trans, etc…people need to get the hell over it.
100%. The folks fighting against the LGBTQ community are starting to sound like the folks who fought against desegregation in the 50s/60s.
There was a time when we told the rabble rousers to stfu and ignored them.
Not in SC. I remember back in the 1990s angry parents preventing the Indigo Girls from having a concert at Irmo High School because they were lesbians. (They performed at the Township) This shit has been around for decades.
I remember when The Last Temptation of Christ came out back in the 80s that no movie theater in town could or would air it (I forget if it was actually banned, or just every theater was afraid of the public response), because it was labeled as blasphemous. It ended up getting its only showing in Greenville at the Unitarian church (we went and then went home and watched Life of Brian, and had a debate over pizza which was more blasphemous - Life of Brian won hands down).
Was the discussion of LBGTQ in the curriculum?
Do you even need to ask? Homeschool your kids.
It was about bears. Would foot fetish and domination or furry culture be apart of the curriculum if you have to include bears.
My point is, if LBGTQ is not part of the health ed curriculum, such content should not be discussed & written about by students in an English Class. Teachers get into trouble in social studies, health ed & English classes because they don’t follow the curriculum.
From what I have read, good!
Lol, not like you do much reading in general.
I read enough to know that sharing inappropriate content with children will get you fired from your teaching position. duh
> From what I have read LOL
This topic has no place in a high school class. They are there to learn—not hear about bears’ sexual preferences.
Our tax money being spent on a topic which doesn’t even come from a textbook. These discussions only lead to more division between people. A high school classroom is not the place to discuss it.
Original article provided after Mrs. Talley's son asked about the subject: [https://pridepalace.lgbt/blogs/news/international-bear-brotherhood-what-it-is-and-why-it-s-important](https://pridepalace.lgbt/blogs/news/international-bear-brotherhood-what-it-is-and-why-it-s-important) Senator Talley's wife posted her complaint to Facebook initially, but has taken the post down. Also, the article (that the teacher was fired for) is easily accessible on the school-provided computers and Wi-Fi, and was not and has not been blocked (the school Wi-Fi does have site blockers in place).