SPHE Teacher's Interview - What Happens in the Classroom... - Mod Note Added to OP PLEASE READ

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122839794#Comment_122839794

It's not a sexuality though it's an absence of it.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122839803#Comment_122839803

The medical experts seem to disagree with you.

But really, you're fussing over semantics, when the key point is that the world isn't as binary as you'd want it to be.

TheValeyard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122839853#Comment_122839853

Does not matter if you're right or wrong, whenever I hear that word I'm just going to think of Plants.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122839800#Comment_122839800

To be bisexual means to be attracted to more than one gender.

The fact that you believe there are only two genders (or that gender fluidity doesn't exist?) is irrelevant.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122839882#Comment_122839882

You’re after making me think of one of my favourite songs from Grease 2. Should totally be on the curriculum 😁

https://youtu.be/Wcpc0uX3nZQ?si=WOmuPE0XdiFw_qZT

1982… Christ I’m old 😖

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122839946#Comment_122839946

Gender Fluidity is just a character trait,which is fine but it's not based on observable reality nor are any of the genders other than male or female.

You can't tell if someone is astral gender unless you ask them if they are

You can tell if someone is male or female by observation or testing if necessary

That's why male and female are real genders and the other ones are not.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840085#Comment_122840085

You're clearly another who doesn't grasp that gender and biological sex are not the same, and are separate from each other.

Hopefully the new SPHE course will prevent future generations from failing to understand this.

Packrat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840123#Comment_122840123

Never was my current signature more true...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840237#Comment_122840237

As I can't see signatures, I can't comment.

Packrat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840277#Comment_122840277

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”

There you go. No need to comment though as I'm not getting into a back and forth on this issue, just stating an opinion.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840289#Comment_122840289

At most I'd say your signature amounts to a limited knowledge on George Orwell. The evidence of my eyes and ears is that transgender people aren't new, it's just historically that they were mocked. Wouldn't have been that long ago where we'd have far more objections to SPHE classes mentioning gay people btw.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840289#Comment_122840289

Ah, I see. Another skeptic. Well, that's okay.

I'm not interested in getting into a back and forth with you on what your opinions are either.

I am interested in the education of young adults, though, and that is what this thread relates too.

Have a nice evening. :)

Packrat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840330#Comment_122840330

Let me tell you a little story from my past: Many many years ago I was an apprentice carpenter on a big site and one day an ignoramus of a qualified lad was reading some red top at teatime about Rebecca Talon. His synopsis was as follows "Some oul queer that got himself converted" I took issue with this on the basis that a close family member of mine is gay as follows "It's not the same thing you ignorant basterd" Obviously it being an early 90s building site, fisticuffs followed and whilst I held my own, ultimately I was fired for hitting a qualified man who would have been much more valued for his work output. I LOST MY ENTIRE APPRENTICESHIP OVER THAT. I never qualified but went on to employ hundreds of better chippies than that rough clown.

I was well aware at 19 or 20 that there's Trans people. I was well aware of the difference between Trans and Gay. I'm also aware that believing oneself to be born in the wrong body is varnishingly rare.

Ive spend the last 5 years fighting against CC hegemony in my local school where my children go.

I'm about the last person who wants to go back to the past.

BUT:

I HATE indoctrination. Of any kind.

Replacing one with another makes you no better than the pr*ck standing across from an abortion clinic with giant photos of fetuses.

That's all that's going on here - replacing one fairy story with another equally false and ludicrous one.

Now. That's my final word on the matter.

I know the difference between gender (behaviour, expression) and biological sex. Heterosexual people are attracted to those of the opposite sex, gay people are attracted to those of their own sex (hence the term same-sex relationship), bisexual people are attracted to both. But it's not gender - e.g. heterosexual men usually don't fancy gender non conforming/feminine men (feminine denoting gender), they fancy women. That this is considered bigotry is actually bonkers.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840466#Comment_122840466

Mentioning that trans people exist as part of an SPHE curriculum isn't a fairy story. It's preparing kids for life.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840558#Comment_122840558

Gender is personality, stereotypes, behaviour, expresssion - that is great, vive le differences …!! Be whatever makes you happy. But no one should be under any pressure to believe what you believe.

The issue comes when someone believes they are another gender and it is treated like they are another biological sex - which is impossible (women's sports, female only safe spaces etc) - that is where the problems lie.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122840558#Comment_122840558

That this is considered bigotry is actually bonkers.

It is bonkers, because all you’re referring to there are the attempted classification of humans into particular groups*, whereas it’s what those classifications actually mean for people can amount to or support bigotry. That’s the whole idea of the SPHE / RSE curriculum is to teach children to respect themselves and others as whole persons, and not just the sum of their constituent parts, or how humans are classified simply according to biology.

The idea being that it is to discourage children from viewing people merely as sex objects (and I mean that in the biological, psychological and sociological sense, because people don’t normally carry DNA testing kits on their person), and to encourage them to view themselves, and other people, as a whole person, and to develop healthy habits for themselves and healthy relationships with other people, as opposed to deciding the standard by which they shall treat other people is whether or not they would be willing to have sex with them, and to treat that person accordingly, based upon their own prejudices and preconceived beliefs about other people based upon particular characteristics.

*I could get down in the weeds, but I don’t want to:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androphilia_and_gynephilia

I'm responding to the claim that people are attracted to gender. Barely anyone is attracted to someone based on their gender (a set of behaviours). Gay men don't usually date gender non conforming women. Heterosexual men don't usually date gender non conforming men. None of this contains any sentiment stating we shouldn't respect gender non conforming people/trans people just for who they are (obviously we should) but biology can't just be waved away.

Ashbourne hoop

I'll never understand why such a small cohort of people appear to enrage so many others. Most people probably don't know any transgender/non binary adults. If as part of the SPHE curriculum kids are made aware that these people exist and they can be respectful to them, then surely that's a good thing?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122842193#Comment_122842193

Barely anyone is attracted to someone based on their gender (a set of behaviours).

Well that’s definitely not true, even if anyone were to accept the idea that gender refers to a set of behaviours (also known as stereotypes based on sex), because people either find a set of behaviours makes a person more or less attractive based on their own preconceived ideas about how other people are supposed to behave. It’s what makes people of either sex more or less attractive than other people of the same sex who exhibit behaviour that is not commonly associated with people of that sex, be they of either the male or female sex.

That’s not hand-waving away biology, it’s recognising that biology has it’s proper and appropriate context, in a biology class, or in academia, and that context is distinct from a sociological context which is how people interact with each other in society.

Are there any heterosexual men here who would date a transwoman/gender non conforming man? Any gay men here who would date a transman/gender non conforming woman? Seeing as it's "gender" that we can be attracted to, not biological sex. Obviously we can be attracted to all kinds of people (nobody is saying it just boils down to biological sex - a common strawman) but if we're hetero, we are attracted to those of the opposite sex; gay - same sex attraction.

And who is saying we shouldn't tell people trans people exist or shouldn't be respected? That's just a non sequitur.

suvigirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122842470#Comment_122842470

What about those attracted to those that have not fully transitioned? You know some female parts, some male parts, how do you describe them?

Also people attracted to non binary, for example my friends daughter is engaged to a non binary person, you wouldn't know their biological sex by looking at them at all.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122842470#Comment_122842470

Here? I’ve no idea, but if it weren’t limited to just the posters here, well there’s definitely a few who are open about it, and many more who prefer to be on the ‘down-low’, I believe is the common term. There was an attempt to popularise the term ‘same-gender loving’ among black people in the US as the more common terms were viewed as ‘Eurocentric’, but that never really caught on:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same_gender_loving

I think I could be forgiven for reading your earlier post as suggesting that attraction does just boil down to biological sex which is why I was making the the point about people not carrying DNA kits on their person, and the point about the purpose of the curriculum in an education setting, as opposed to encouraging children to view people merely as sex objects. I’m not a Feminist, but I understand at least where they’re coming from on that point.

taxAHcruel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122842193#Comment_122842193

Interestingly enough, there are actually enough people of the type you describe that words to describe them exist.

For example, the words Gynosexuality/Gynesexuality describe someone who is attracted to "femininity" in and of itself. Meaning that regardless of their own biological sex or gender identity - they can be attracted to perceived femininity in others regardless of their biological sex or gender identity too. My mind is blanking on the masculine equivalent word. I might look it up later. I hate knee jerk going to google for every brain fart or failure :)

Which to go back on topic makes me consider the question some users on the thread have raised about whether it is "reasonable to mention the existence of transgender people" given that "they exist". And given the number of groups of people that exist in our world who are not mentioned on such a course - I would say that that alone is not reasonable at all therefore. If mere existence is enough to warrant mention then how many groups would we have to include?

In fact I do think mentioning Transgender people on the course is reasonable. I just do not think this thread's repetition of the fact that "Transgender people exist" is that relevant argument to support that. It's a bad argument for a good conclusion I feel.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122842470#Comment_122842470

To be honest I have never had time for the "Would you date someone who" kind of question. Like would you date someone significantly taller/shorter. Employed/unemployed. Fat/Thin. And so on.

The question itself is nonsensical to me. The reason being that I personally am attracted to an entire package. And much like finding a pleasing audio on a bank of equaliser "levels" - you can move the levels down on some knobs and up on others and find a new balance that you find equally appealing.

So I would not rule in OR out any single attribute. I simply have no idea if a biological male presenting socially as female exists that I would fall in romantic and sexual love with. It is entirely possible. In fact there is a character I vaguely found physically hot in D.C. television shows who I did not realise at first was biologically male. Especially given I am deeply attracted to Lisa Hannigan hehee and this character also looks vaguely like her too.

On the thread's topic of education and language and so on though I always find it interesting how few people actually know what words like "heterosexual" and "homosexual" and "bisexual" actually mean.

On at least two threads on this forum I have had some back and forth discussions about it with people who ended up getting remarkably irate. And despite me citing both multiple dictionaries and multiple other authoritative sources - and them citing precisely zero of their own at any point in the discussion - they refused to believe my use of those words was linguistically valid. Apparently I was wrong "Just cos" doncha know :) Though I got deep laughter out of them accusing me of "redefining words to suit myself" when in fact I was the only one basing anything on actual cited and presented definitions.

But it is possible for example for someone to be in a relationship with someone of the same sex, long term, and still be entirely correct and valid were they to linguistically inform people they are heterosexual. Two women could be attracted to men and only men their entire life until they meet each other and fall for each other and enter into a long term relationship with each other. And demands that they identify as bisexual or otherwise they are being dishonest or erroneous - be entirely unwarranted. Calling themselves heterosexual before, after, or while in that relationship is entirely linguistically valid. No matter how much this annoys anyone on an Irish Discussion Forum :)

Irish Aris

Mod note:

One last kind reminder that the topic of the thread is the SPHE curriculum.

Also a kind reminder of the mod note/warning on the OP, of which some of the latest posts contravene. I will review in more detail later and may delete posts that drag the thread off topic.

Any such posts after this warning and you can expect a ban.

Thank you and wishing you all a great weekend.

Hamsterchops

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122841941#Comment_122841941

Unless of course you don't believe in Trans-ideology (like most parents) hence the massive backlash against the new crop of SPHE indoctrination books which should be banned, or at least amended to exclude the ideological beliefs.

Remember folks, as humans there are two genders, two sexes. Boys cannot transition into girls and girls cannot become boys, also, just to say so called "nonbinary" doesn't even exist, as it too is totally made up (for we are a binary species). Teaching kids they can be nonbinary is teaching them total gibberish.

Finally, just catching up with proceedings, "misgendering" is a very dangerous concept, for it teaches children to ignore & override their natural instinct and visual awareness to state that the boy they are talking to MUST be called a girl (she/her) even though he is obviously still a boy !!

A safeguarding issue as well as being untrue, and this stuff is taught to kids !!

The SPHE saga continues and will even play a part in the upcoming election, whereby you can except Norna Foley to be out on her ear for promoting this (fast going out of fashion) ideology.

Once the new US administration gets going you will see the dominoes fall across the pond before the ripples are felt here too and the ideology slowly dies off into obscurity . . .

Then the kids have to be de-indoctrimated & detransitioned.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122851064#Comment_122851064

By 'massive backlash' you mean a Gript article being shared by mostly bot accounts online?

The problem for you is that trans people exist, and non-binary people exist, so including these in SPHE is simply preparing kids for the world around them.

Hamsterchops

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122851077#Comment_122851077

Forget Gript and just think for yourself, (think outside the Trans mindset bubble) and it will dawn on you that human nature & human biology beats any ideology hands down. Kids should be taught facts.

suvigirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122851064#Comment_122851064

Unless of course you don't believe in Trans-ideology (like most parents) 

Firstly, you don't speak for most parents. Particularly not those related to trans kids.

Secondly, the law states differently.

So, it doesn't matter whether you 'believe' or not. It's the law. They exist. And there is no problem with teaching kids about all different types of people and teaching them to respect those people.

If anything proved that these classes are needed it's the posters like this on here!

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122851064#Comment_122851064

Once again, claiming to represent the view of most parents is nonsense. The Trump administration did plenty of nonsense last time around as well including targeting trans people, it didn't result in the Irish government following suit.