Will Young leads fight against homophobic language in Wales' schools Watch

bottled
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#21
Report 5 years ago
#21
(Original post by Kiss)

I'd post the boondocks
but i think i'd get banned.
0
reply
Snagprophet
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#22
Report 5 years ago
#22
(Original post by AdamskiUK)
Oi, ya daffydill!



Jokes aside, wrong approach. You have to really reinforce it at primary school level that man + woman isn't the only biological combination. With respects to reproduction, perhaps, but hormonally... No. The only way this approach would work is essentially negative reinforcement. You have to whip it out of them by ages 11 and above. Since we've moved away from that culture, we're left with only one option.

Teach a 5 year-old that as long as people are happy and aren't infringing on the civil liberties of other people, there's no issue with their genders, creed, colour or political agenda. Of course, that's quite a difficult notion to convey to a 5 year-old, but I'm sure you can build it into painting gay, liberal, black, Muslim women with a niqab on within their art lessons every week.
I'm just wondering where it fits in. I mean, we're taught sexual reproduction, not sexual pleasure. We're taught a man produces sperm and and women produces eggs and when their powers combine it creates an embryo in the womb which grows, later, into a human being. We're not being taught sex positions for pleasure. We're not even taught anal sex between a man and a women, that's how reproductive focused it is.

Do gay people have different hormonal changes to straights? Because if so, then I guess it belongs in there because sex education should be about true facts about the human body.

If gay people don't have different hormonal changes to straights then I think this:

The only reason that straight sex is even being mentioned is because we are being taught a scientific purpose. The only scientific purpose I can think of that people are born unwilling to mate with the opposite sex is nature's way of offsetting population increases ever so slightly. Maybe there should be research into it instead of bring like 'oh it's their choice, let's leave it there' that's not how the world works and I think it would greatly help gay people if people were taught why they are gay. Is it a mutation? Is to limit population growth? Is it something else? Or are we going to just say 'well kids, some people are just gay. Now, onto why genitals change during puberty...'

I just feel there's got to be some scientific basis for it to belong in a sex education class, I mean obviously they're going to stimulate the same organs that straight people are. As I said earlier, get the scientists to work out why a baby is born gay. Is it genes? Is it personalities we're assigned? Is it the womb feminising the baby randomly? Otherwise it sounds more of a relationship thing we should be taught beforehand in the same way we're 'taught' we have a mummy and a daddy. I really have no idea what else to say.

As a footnote, in case that someone has somehow found out a way to deduce that I hate gay people and don't want them included with straight people on that basis, I do not think that and I do fully accept them as part of our society. My post is about what sex education is, which is changes to the body and their use in sexual reproduction.
0
reply
heshop
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#23
Report 5 years ago
#23
(Original post by AdamskiUK)
Please don't confuse liberals with 'liberal democrats'.

Being liberal is the antithesis of what you described. A 'liberal' has only the intent to do exactly the opposite of censor everything, and tell everybody to grow up and take a joke without dying of heartache and then progressing onto suing the offender.
I'm not confusing the two and I know what a liberal is. You're describing what a liberal should be, but most self-proclaimed liberals that I've come across are actually the most illiberal bunch around - just read The Guardian. I will admit my phrasing was a little sloppy.
0
reply
KimKallstrom
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#24
Report 5 years ago
#24
(Original post by Kiss)
"Please rate some other members before rating this member again."
0
reply
AdamskiUK
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#25
Report 5 years ago
#25
(Original post by Snagprophet)
I'm just wondering where it fits in. I mean, we're taught sexual reproduction, not sexual pleasure. We're taught a man produces sperm and and women produces eggs and when their powers combine it creates an embryo in the womb which grows, later, into a human being. We're not being taught sex positions for pleasure. We're not even taught anal sex between a man and a women, that's how reproductive focused it is.

Do gay people have different hormonal changes to straights? Because if so, then I guess it belongs in there because sex education should be about true facts about the human body.

If gay people don't have different hormonal changes to straights then I think this:

The only reason that straight sex is even being mentioned is because we are being taught a scientific purpose. The only scientific purpose I can think of that people are born unwilling to mate with the opposite sex is nature's way of offsetting population increases ever so slightly. Maybe there should be research into it instead of bring like 'oh it's their choice, let's leave it there' that's not how the world works and I think it would greatly help gay people if people were taught why they are gay. Is it a mutation? Is to limit population growth? Is it something else? Or are we going to just say 'well kids, some people are just gay. Now, onto why genitals change during puberty...'

I just feel there's got to be some scientific basis for it to belong in a sex education class, I mean obviously they're going to stimulate the same organs that straight people are. As I said earlier, get the scientists to work out why a baby is born gay. Is it genes? Is it personalities we're assigned? Is it the womb feminising the baby randomly? Otherwise it sounds more of a relationship thing we should be taught beforehand in the same way we're 'taught' we have a mummy and a daddy. I really have no idea what else to say.

As a footnote, in case that someone has somehow found out a way to deduce that I hate gay people and don't want them included with straight people on that basis, I do not think that and I do fully accept them as part of our society. My post is about what sex education is, which is changes to the body and their use in sexual reproduction.
It's mostly proven now that it's due to genetic and hormonal differences. When I say proven though, they're simply the most up-to-date and sensible hypotheses. There have been several studies pertaining to different sizes of different hormone control centres and releasers in straight and gay people, such as the hypothalamus. It's all collated on wikipedia.
0
reply
Lady Comstock
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#26
Report 5 years ago
#26
(Original post by Kiss)
That's only funny 'coz Mr Chow is doing it.
0
reply
Mad Vlad
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#27
Report 5 years ago
#27
(Original post by heshop)
As a gay guy, I find this whole debate really rather exhausting. I, and pretty much every other gay person I know, don't give a damn about people using gay as a synonym for bad or stupid so long as there is no intended malice or offense (which there usually isn't). I often use 'gay' to describe something that is frustrating me and the only people who seem to be offended are self-righteous straight liberals who want to censor the whole damn universe.
I disagree. As someone that appreciates the English vocabulary, I see no reason why anyone should need to choose the word "gay" to describe something that's bad, annoying or frustrating. There are countless synonyms for these words and the definition of "gay" has nothing to do with any of them. It might seem trivial, but the reason why people use "gay" in a colloquially pejorative manner is because of the childish notion that gay = bad, and allowing this to be perpetuated simply reinforces the link between things that are negative and homosexuality. It doesn't offend me, personally, but I don't want to silently allow the word to be redefined.
1
reply
thesabbath
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#28
Report 5 years ago
#28
(Original post by Mad Vlad)
I disagree. As someone that appreciates the English vocabulary, I see no reason why anyone should need to choose the word "gay" to describe something that's bad, annoying or frustrating. There are countless synonyms for these words and the definition of "gay" has nothing to do with any of them. It might seem trivial, but the reason why people use "gay" in a colloquially pejorative manner is because of the childish notion that gay = bad, and allowing this to be perpetuated simply reinforces the link between things that are negative and homosexuality. It doesn't offend me, personally, but I don't want to silently allow the word to be redefined.
Believing "gay = bad" is childish? They (or their public ambassadors, at any rate) are the ones who insist society's institutions must be redefined to accommodate recognition of their wanton desires (and won't shut up until they get their way); and throw temper tantrums when someone uses a word they don't like, or openly disapproves of their lifestyle choices. Moreover, for a child to be able to equate homosexuality with bad in the first place would require some pervert to have taught them what homosexuality is. Which of course is already happening thanks to the "progressives". Giving an organisation like Stonewall access to primary schools to spread their propaganda in efforts to indoctrinate young minds is child abuse.
0
reply
Ggmu!
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#29
Report 5 years ago
#29
I don't think I'll stop using the word gay. It's not like I bust out it to strangers it something.

It's just a descriptive word that just...works

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Coffinman
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#30
Report 5 years ago
#30
I'd rather scumnetmumsnet and stonewall kept their PR out of schools in fact why are they even allowed to send anything in the first place.
0
reply
Flauta
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#31
Report 5 years ago
#31
(Original post by Coffinman)
I'd rather scumnetmumsnet and stonewall kept their PR out of schools in fact why are they even allowed to send anything in the first place.
Because there's a problem with homophobia in schools. Was that even a serious question?
0
reply
FlavaFavourFruit
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 5 years ago
#32
Lol.
0
reply
Mad Vlad
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#33
Report 5 years ago
#33
(Original post by thesabbath)
Believing "gay = bad" is childish? They (or their public ambassadors, at any rate) are the ones who insist society's institutions must be redefined to accommodate recognition of their wanton desires (and won't shut up until they get their way); and throw temper tantrums when someone uses a word they don't like, or openly disapproves of their lifestyle choices. Moreover, for a child to be able to equate homosexuality with bad in the first place would require some pervert to have taught them what homosexuality is. Which of course is already happening thanks to the "progressives". Giving an organisation like Stonewall access to primary schools to spread their propaganda in efforts to indoctrinate young minds is child abuse.
[EDIT] This is an utterly disgusting attitude.

(Original post by Ggmu!)
I don't think I'll stop using the word gay. It's not like I bust out it to strangers it something.

It's just a descriptive word that just...works

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Coffinman
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#34
Report 5 years ago
#34
That posters so gay....
0
reply
Ggmu!
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#35
Report 5 years ago
#35
(Original post by Mad Vlad)
And people wonder why I have no time for religion? This is an utterly disgusting attitude.



I bow down to the superiority of your vocabulary...

Lols. I don't think heinous and hapless are in the average sentence in Essex.
0
reply
Mad Vlad
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report 5 years ago
#36
(Original post by Ggmu!)
I bow down to the superiority of your vocabulary...

Lols. I don't think heinous and hapless are in the average sentence in Essex.
I would have though "****ing ****, innit" would have sufficed.
0
reply
Ggmu!
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#37
Report 5 years ago
#37
(Original post by Mad Vlad)
I would have though "****ing ****, innit" would have sufficed.
Na mate ur a ****ing goon Yh just shut up init before my cussin gets his m8s alrite shut up m8

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Mad Vlad
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#38
Report 5 years ago
#38
(Original post by Ggmu!)
Na mate ur a ****ing goon Yh just shut up init before my cussin gets his m8s alrite shut up m8

Posted from TSR Mobile
Quite.
0
reply
thesabbath
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#39
Report 5 years ago
#39
(Original post by Mad Vlad)
And people wonder why I have no time for religion? This is an utterly disgusting attitude.
Relevance of religion to my comments?

If I wish to describe or respond to something negative or undesirable then it seems perfectly rational on occasion to use a term denigrating or ridiculing homosexuality (I actually don't bother with "gay" but all the better words or phrases would likely get me banned here) to express that. You could add a few of them to your picture, I'm sure they're in the dictionary.
0
reply
Mad Vlad
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#40
Report 5 years ago
#40
(Original post by thesabbath)
Relevance of religion to my comments?
:facepalm2: Sorry... I mistook you for another user... Ignore that.

If I wish to describe or respond to something negative or undesirable then it seems perfectly rational on occasion to use a term denigrating or ridiculing homosexuality (I actually don't bother with "gay" but all the better words or phrases would likely get me banned here) to express that. You could add a few of them to your picture, I'm sure they're in the dictionary.
Absolutely not. That's like describing something as "Black" or "Jewish" or "*******ated". These things are considered highly offensive when used in the same way as "gay" and there's absolutely no excuse for using any of these terms as a pejorative.

Your attitude towards homosexuality is abhorrent and has no place in a modern society.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Economics Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (53)
14.13%
The paper was reasonable (190)
50.67%
Not feeling great about that exam... (91)
24.27%
It was TERRIBLE (41)
10.93%

Watched Threads

View All