Mad Mike
Well-known member
That's a routine conservative stance, it's not typically something conservatives focus on. Liberals and hard left politicians carry that torch.
|
|
|
What's Doug Ford's stance on indentity/gender politics and politcal correctness?
- Thread starter Ashtonator
- Start date
JTR
Well-known member
They aren't being traumatized, they're being brainwashed. When Timmy comes home and tells his parents he wants to be called Tamara, that's when you see the damage done. The "old" curriculum is ten years old. How much out of the loop am I that I didn't realize sex changed so much in the last decade.
Ashtonator
Well-known member
Ashtonator
Well-known member
I understand and i like that about conservatives. However that liberal torch has burnt down many a places which need to be rebuilt.
So im hoping Doug Ford wont just ingore al those social ruins
So what you're telling me is that Ontario teachers are encouraging transitioning from boy to girl? Somehow I doubt that. Brainwashing? Doesn't sound right either.
I don't think sex has changed in ten years, but the world pre-teens live in has changed at least somewhat in ten years. Really not that offensive to update something once every ten years.
Anyone have any insight that's not politically motivated?
Mad Mike
Well-known member
One good thing Trump has done is expose bias in media. The media has always portrayed themselves as a business of the highest integrity -- sources checked, double checked, and secret channels maintained for the public good.
Today we have a better understanding that TV and newspapers don't always tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth. We also know media are not clairvoyant or transparent and they embellish, distort and omit facts as easily as the politicians they cover. Readers and viewers are getting better at sorting the details from the bias.
An unintended consequence for media is they lost a tool frequently used to cripple politicians -- statements, minor indiscretions and mistakes they made 10 years ago roll off a politician like water off a ducks back. This lets then focus on the task at hand -- I think Ford will benefit from this, the attack adds and media dogpiling isn't as effective these days.
JTR
Well-known member
I wish that was true. But they're already talking about the rumored "hash drive-thru" like it's fact. Like really, ever tried to play street hockey in a suburb? not likely a hash drive-thru is going to fly in an opulent neighbourhood. Common sense has me calling shenanigans on that one.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
If it's important, they'll get to it. Here's hoping a conservative gov't can focus on the big and important things first. Repealing some of the Wynne's silly social changes can be done quietly when the time is right.
Liberal leaders have always found it difficult to find the line between rights and privileges. I think we're all ok with equality and equal treatment under the law, but when a minority starts driving policies that mostly serves their agenda, we have a problem.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
The issue with the curriculum is that it was foist upon the province without consultation, at the behest of a minority interest. There is always danger when a special interest begins punching above their weight, particularly when their views start getting legislated into law.
Many folks don't give a rats ***** about their kid's school curriculum -- other do. In this case, the curriculum was extended into areas that have been traditionally left to parents to teach, without consultation and without a mandate from the electorate. It's a 'nanny state' encroachment that conflicts with religious beliefs, not an issue of fairness, access or equality. They should not be a concern for the state.
Ashtonator
Well-known member
This is right on ^
Equality is a word the liberals, feminists and ... use very liberally but in practice they have no interest in equality! Im all for equality but not when your equality comes at the cost of mine. Your right shouldnt come at the cost of my right being taken away and vice versa.
Take feminism for example. They keep claiming they want equality, and they constantly (day in, day out) talk about wage gap while COMPLETELY ignoring all the other issues where men and boys are losing out. Suicide rate(4 times higher in men), rate or graduation from post secondary schools(boyd have been falling behind for decades), rate of death in the military(almost all men), rate of death on the jobs(almost all men), divorce and custody courts, homlessness (mostly men) and ....
They are only interested in propping up some groups at the cost of others.
All liberals have done is to demonize certain groups like men, white people, straight people and ... while giving all kinds of exclusive privileges to other groups.
So i completely agree, we are all for equality but true equality for everyone not only select groups,
And this is why in asked the question in this forum because these are serious issues that exist and need to be dealt with
I'm not trying to nitpick, and I certainly see your point, although I somewhat disagree that minority influence is 'always dangerous' (obvious examples include civil rights, gay marriage, and the like). I'm only trying to understand why this is even an issue. My retort here being that sex ed curriculum wasn't exactly a Wynne-government invention. I had sex ed in, I think, grade 6, back in the 80s. Sure, it didn't talk much about homosexuality or trans-whathaveyous, but these are facts that arise nowadays, so might as well update and instruct the kids on what's out there, no?
Isn't there an opt-out clause, in which those who take instruction from the invisible man in the sky, can sit out. Also, there are Catholic schools that I'm sure aren't teaching kids about gays, trans and BJs, right? (I'm assuming these are the aspects of the sex ed curriculum that people are upset about, given the TVO debate I saw featuring Ford, Mulroney, that lady, and Elliot. Please correct me if I'm wrong)
Speaking of which, why aren't we taking Catholic schools off the public teat? I'd be behind that (obviously).
This isn't actually true you know. This whole the curriculum is bad thing does need to be challenged. The far right vocal minority has sent around a lot of misinformation about the curriculum that is absolutely false. The curriculum needed to be updated because things like sexting and sex in the internet age didn't exist when the last curriculum was created. The curriculum was created by educational experts based on the needs of today's kids. I challenge anyone of who has an issue with it to actually read it and cite a problem with it. It is quite reasonable. Everyone should be on the same page when it comes to sex ed. Relying on parents only works for the parents that give a ****. Many don't. In the age of easy access to internet porn does anyone with a daughter want their child to go to school where all of the boys rely on their parents for sex ed. I don't think so. The curriculum is fine, it's a vocal minority that has a problem with it and I don't think most of them have read it given the responses they provide in the media as to why it is a problem. I have two boys in primary school and they are learning perfectly age appropriate things in health class. I've read the curriculum and I have no issues with it.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
There's a difference between human and charter rights, equality and access -- those are fair game and any group no matter how big or small should be able to level the playing field. This is none of those, it's an example of where the curriculum has been influenced in areas that create a major conflict for many. I don't have a beef with the curriculum myself, my beef is the gov't overstepping it's mandate at the behest of any interest.
Your curriculum was birds, bees and STDs -- mostly clinical. It did not cross into moral or religious territory and it served the public and personal health interests of kids. Parts of the latest current curriculum do that.
Here here!
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I don't think it's fair to say the 'far right' is spreading falsehoods, they are expressing their concerns that the curriculum oversteps the gov't mandate to educate kids.
Like you, I've read the curriculum and I have no issues with it. I am concerned when the gov't crosses certain boundaries without a mandate, that's the issue, that's what they did.
Also, a few screaming voices does not mean it's a vocal minority my friend -- just because a few stand up and yell doesn't mean the silent are onside. If you don't understand this, take a look at the Liberal polls. I know it's not just the sex ed issue, but I can assure you that's a deal breaker for many.
I can safely say that it is totally fair to say that falsehoods are being spread. I've received 3 flyers in my mailbox and I had a couple come to my door with material stating that the new curriculum was going to teach kids how to masterbate and that the kids would be expected to touch themselves while learning the words for all of the parts in primary school. It was quite ridiculous nonsense. The flyers were written in multiple languages. If someone who can't read English is given a flyer with bald face lies on it, what are they to think about what their children are being taught? They won't be able to read the actual curriculum to determine that the flyer isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
Most of the concerns went away once the curriculum came into practice and parents fears were alleviated. I really do believe that the majority of people with skin in the game (i.e. kids in school) don't have an issue with the sex-ed curriculum. It's never an issue at the pta meetings at my boys' school.
No, you are right, it's not just far right, it's the right as well .... https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...ex-ed-letter-was-a-mistake-patrick-brown.html
Mad Mike
Well-known member
You are missing the point - the issue isn't the curriculum, it's the expansion of the state 'nanny' into personal space -- without a need, mandate or consultation -- socialism at it's finest. And by the way, it's masturbate.
I'm not missing the point at all. I've already stated what a **** show it would be if kids only learned about sex ed from their parents. Some would, some wouldn't. Misinformation and falsehoods would run rampant. "my parents said this, mine say that", etc. Kids need to learn facts about sex in a standardized fashion so that everyone is on the same page. This becomes very important as kids get older. What does consent mean. If you don't know, you could go to jail.
I've also already demonstrated the need. The internet was in its infancy when the previous curriculum was created. No sexting, no free porn, no on-line perverts pretending to be other kids. All of these things kids need to learn.
There was also consultation on the new curriculum. The silent majority had no issues with it and the vocal minority was ignored as they should be.
This has to do with what's important for our kids and I don't see why Doug Ford thinks he knows better of this issue.
So grandiose statements about the nanny state, and socialism are almost as ridiculous as pointing out a single spelling mistake on a forum post. I guess that means you're out of meaningful things to say.
|
|
|
|
|