5 year old upsets homosexuals, thought police called in

Scroll to see replies

It's not the content of any academic syllabus that I know of, nor is it in the law, that children shouldn't pour paint on each others' drawings. But schools should teach them not to, because it's wrong. This isn't a case of sinister 'education' to mean brainwashing or something. :smile:

Because its rude; it's primary school stuff really. There's a difference between politeness and morals. A school should try to steer away from teaching the latter in my opinion, but should always instill politeness in its students.

Reply 61

brightonlad89

What a misleading thread title.

So, essentially a kid has been using a homophobic word and their school, very responsibly so, decided to get in external help with how to stem these type of inappropriate behaviours in their pupils to prevent further cases of bullying.

Absolutely no different to schools bringing in organisations for other types of training sessions; drugs, strangers etc.

What's the problem?

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 62

simon_g

Original post by thesabbath

that the gay rights group should not be allowed to impose its views on young children.

neither should catholics (or protestants, or muslims etc)

Original post by brightonlad89

What a misleading thread title.
So, essentially a kid has been using a homophobic word and their school, very responsibly so, decided to get in external help with how to stem these type of inappropriate behaviours in their pupils to prevent further cases of bullying.
Absolutely no different to schools bringing in police for other types of training sessions; drugs, strangers etc.
What's the problem?

you are right! school should have called SWAT team in!
little homophobic scum should be happy to be alive after that! I hope they have broken all his crayons and decapitated his teddy "as an example"!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 63

Hopple

Original post by mmmpie

I knew when I was six, although it's beside the point. The word was once a euphemism, and now is an identity; it needn't be a slur.

If you were to argue for this level of intervention for any namecalling, whilst I would think you were excessive, at least you'd be consistent. For five year olds, 'gay' is just another name they call someone/something who/which they dislike for whatever reason. There's no way a child (or anyone else using the meaning of 'gay' that is synonymous with 'bad', for that matter) is comparing the object of their criticism to two people of the same sex being attracted to each other. It's completely different to seeing someone who finds their own sex attractive and criticising them on that basis.

Reply 64

Jam'

What is "gay propaganda"? Stonewall are imposing the idea that bullying, with a focus on homophobic bullying, is wrong. They're not encouraging kids to be gay - whatever that would mean.

Reply 65

ANARCHY__

Original post by thesabbath

you're advocating the indoctrination of five year olds with homosexual propaganda because one of them used a word as a slur which they don't understand can have multiple, more adult meanings. just think about that for a moment.

they patently are not hating on "gays" because they don't know what sexual perversion is at that age.
it is sickening to the core that teachers at the school can be so politically correct that they will pander to a lobby group like stonewall which opportunistically seizes any such situation to spread its filth.

if homos don't like the hijacking of the word "gay" as a byword for something that is unpleasant, they should consider how older adults feel who once used it to refer to a lively carefree innocence.

omg just shutup man. you try and be like edgy and cool on every damn thread i swear.

Reply 66

tufc

Original post by mmmpie

An incident made school management aware of the issue of homophobia, as a result school management invited an organisation which does a lot of work on this issue to train teachers in how to deal with it.

The objection to this is..?

The objection is that Stonewall as an organisation are not impartial. Young children should be taught how to think, not what to think.

Reply 67

scottajmusgrove

Original post by tufc

Young children should be taught how to think, not what to think.

Reply 68

Thriftworks

This is a rare occasion, I agree with you on this.

However whilst I think there is an issue, we have to be careful to avoid championing authoritarian legislation in response to this issue.

i believe people have the right to be homophobic as much as we have the right to disagree with them.

Reply 69

Thriftworks

You could bring in broad legislation in the public sector issuing punishment for homophobic comments etc. They have similar laws in Sweden apparently however not exactly like those I've described.

I agree government intervention does often back fire and lead to a worse social outcome.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 70

Thriftworks

But who doesn't know that already.

Instead we need behavioral and cultural change not through education but through advertisement campaigns etc.

However at this moment in time there are better uses for government money, In my opinion.

Reply 71

Thriftworks

- It would cost allot, there would be an oppurtunity cost of taking kids out of normal lessons into more PSHE lessions. Also extra teaching staff, resources on the issue e.g informational texbooks

-Yes but we've been trying education for a while now, it's expensive and one policy can only do so much.

- The 'media' i'll assume you are talking about the producers, e.g the editors of the sun. These people do not decide what goes into the newspapers, the buyers do. We can't have cultural change without first making it unacceptable within the majority of society.

- In my opinion the best way of tackling the issue would be some government adverts. But this would be expensive aswel so to conclude the issue is not great enough to warrant anything being done about it due to the opportunity cost of acting upon it.

Reply 72

Thriftworks

Adverts have been stressful in raising awareness in the past. Also we haven't tried adverts for this issue yet, education has been tried and has been sucessful but not enough ground has been made, more of the same is madness.

Reply 73

Thriftworks

What would you cut 15mins from during PSHE lessons? You still haven't answered this, PSHE lessons don't have unlimited time.

Reply 74

thesabbath

Findings and crossover seems obvious to me: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2315483/How-anti-racism-lesson-INCREASE-pupil-intolerance-They-cause-animosity-cultures.html

Reply 75

thesabbath

Original post by ANARCHY__

omg just shutup man. you try and be like edgy and cool on every damn thread i swear.

since my opinions seem to be in such a minority around here shouldn't you be like giving me extra rights or something?

Reply 76

Oschene23

Original post by dbmag9

(a) Let's suppose the school has 500 pupils. By conservative estimates that means 25 or so who eventually come out as queer. Let's also suppose, since you think it's fine for one kid to use 'gay' as an insult, that this is widespread. That makes 25 children (plus the ones with queer relatives or family friends) who have to spend their formative years, and then later look back on their formative years, surrounded by people taking their identity and using it as an insult. Given how schools are supposed to be raising children, it seems pretty off-base to attack a school for helping create an environment that doesn't reject its own pupils.

Absolute rubbish. First of all I think the 'conservative' estimates you and others like to give are often completely over-inflated, anyone who actually spends any time in the real world knows that 5% of our population isn't gay. Its probably more like 1% but noone can prove it anyway so its irrelevant

Don't put words into my mouth as well, I don't think its fine for child to use gay as an insult , the child should have been disciplined in the standard way for a child of 5 years of age. What they shouldn't have done is brought in an organisation just for that sole reason for kids that young, its simply inappropriate like giving 5 year olds sex education is, especially Stonewall a charity who if you look at their Wikipedia page to start have been in a string of controversies.

Reply 77

Oschene23

Original post by thesabbath

since my opinions seem to be in such a minority around here shouldn't you be like giving me extra rights or something?

^haha top sarcasm. Ledge.

Reply 78

Hopple

No. All that's going on is them disliking a person/thing and using a word that is synonymous with 'bad' to express that. They're not thinking "Oh, that reminds me of when a man is attracted to a man or a woman is attracted to a woman, and that is bad so I'll use it as an insult."

Reply 79

mmmpie

Original post by Oschene23

The government uses the estimate of 6-8%, based on a meta-analysis commissioned when the Equality Act was being drafted. It seems a reasonable estimate based on my experience.

What they did was bring in an organization to brief teachers on how to address specific issues. Where did you get the idea that this has anything to do with sex education?

Original post by Hopple

It's excessive to have teachers say "don't say that, it's not nice" and be prepared to explain why? No wonder discipline is such a problem in schools.

Original post by tufc