This guys in the news quite a lot recently.
This seems a bit too far. Is primary a bit too young for this ideology? Certainly “endocrine supports” for young kids seems a bit scary as the changes can be irreversible.
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/transgender-issues-should-be-part-of-primary-curriculum-says-childrens-minister-roderic-ogorman-42256827.html
Threadbans
The Orb
irishfreeview
RobbieTheRobber
A 7 year old?
What understanding do 7 year olds have about gender, sexuality or any of that stuff beyond the most rudimentary levels?
I'd simply tell them that some people are different and that some families are different. Alot of families have a mammy and daddy but some only have a mammy or a daddy, some have two mammies, some have two daddies. There is nothing wrong with this child or their parents and that they should be respected.
As they get older, go through puberty etc then more indepth discussions will likely be appropriate but for pre-pubescent kids imo they are very accepting of basic explanations. That goes back to my initial post that the message should be that every single human being, regardless of colour, creed, or any other difference should be treated with kindness and respect.
Well, I know what I'm teaching my kid (because I already had to!) But, there's so many posters here saying, "Leave it to the parents", and that apparently no one has had a problem with trans people on this thread, so I'm asking all you trans critics, what are you telling your kids in this case? I think it's a fair question to answer.
You take on your parental responsibility to educate your child on the issue in the manner you believe to be in their best interest.
You don't go and outsource the solution " go ask the teacher".
It’s your child. You teach him about family and leave other peoples kids alone.
Gender studies class: Hey kids, we are going to single out this person...they used to be a man....now they live as a woman.. see???.....see how different they aren't!?
Now class, take out your biology books....
So, put yourselves in my position.
Your 7 year old comes home, tells you there's a new kid in class, but he has 2 mammies and he's heard that one of the mammies was his daddy and is very confused. What do you teach him about that family?
To be fair, the role of faith formation has been offloaded to the state for long enough.
Young kids can and should be taught that all families are ok, but why should they be taught that someone's parent is a transwoman? As in why should this transwoman parent be singled out at all for explanation. Can they not just accept her as a parent without going into the details of her past history?
Exactly. Accept everything, question nothing or else you are a bigot.
This is such a bad faith post.
"read this thread to see how people feel about trans people"
Ive not seen a single post from anyone posting anything offensive or derogatory about trans individuals.
No, you assume that if someone is teaching a child something YOU find unacceptable, the state should intervene.
Yet you argue that people shouldn't argue against the state for teaching something THEY find inappropriate.
Can you not see the double standard?
So you think that the state should intervene and teach children the "acceptable" mantra?
Jesus
By some parents, as it's not in the hands of school, I would assume so, judging by this thread.
You're answering my question with a question, which is a bit rude.
To answer you, I think the state has duty of care to protect children. If a teacher in a classroom explains that families come in all shapes and sizes, my friend's daughter has less chance of being bullied in the future for having 2 mum's, one of which was born a man. If left to parents to explain it themselves, well, you only have to read this thread yo see how people feel about trans people and how they'll explain it to their kids.
Why can't you do it yourself as is your responsibility? Why outsource it to schools?
Are they currently being taught that it's not ok?
It's a role of parents to instill values in a child, why do you think the state should have the same duty? Why do you want to outsource the role of parents to the state?
I have 2 kids, one in junior infants and one that will be starting in JI next September. There is zero need to go into gender / identity politics in primary schools in my view. The message should be acceptance of everybody, that we are all humans, that everyone deserves to be treated with kindness and respect. Singling out trans, homosexual, travellers or what ever minority for special consideration only preaches division imo, its specifically stating that people are different and unfortunately differences do end up causing division.
My kid has a friend who has a trans mother. Why shouldn't kids be taught that this family type is ok, whilst they're in primary school?
At 41, its getting very late in the day to become a parent. I don't think he's ever spoken about wanting children in the future. Nothing wrong with that, plenty of people don't have or want children.
Ah now.
You are arguing in bad faith and extrapolating the absolute worst meaning you can possibly take from a statement.
That's not very honest.
Well if that were so, then there would be no debate. The reason some people are concerned is that there is the possibility of transgenderism specifically being explained and taught to primary school children. I am not convinced that there is any solid proof that this would have no negative effect on some children. As a previous poster said, it is not so much an issue when this is all in the realm of talk / ideas, but when, even if it is at a later stage in their teens, there is even a remote possibility of gender reassignment treatment being considered or discussed in any shape of form, then I think it is quite right to look at the whole proposal very carefully indeed.
A 41 year old gay man will never become a parent?
Well the post I replied to said pretty much exactly that
I don't need to ask him. His qualifications are freely available. I'd say parents and other adults who may be parents in the future. Roderic is neither.
Said nobody ever.
You have not "got it".
You cried off with what you perceived as an insult when you are more than happy to throw around vague and baseless insults yourself.
You keep repeating the "outrage for outrage sake", "won't someone think of the children" or your "childless middle aged men" mantra, but you've done nothing to further the discussion, you have only sidetracked it more, and then pull up others (only from the side you disagree with mind you) for not going on topic. Is that ironic? Or just silly and hypocritical?
I posted two quotes from the article which were more than enough to warrant a discussion.
Just because you didn't understand why people might have an issue, doesnt mean that nobody presented an issue, it doesn't mean it is outrage for outrage sake, it just means that you are unwilling to listen to another point of view without dismissing it as "bullsh!t" or "anti-trans".
Nothing directly to replace it.
I don’t think there is a proposal to do anything other than what you suggest in your last paragraph.
I have no need to read them back, I and many others have read what you said.
Shame on you for those posts.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/1de30a3af99564ce338f7a27f88f9656.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0ea8e70e5a44cd99b1246a07a9460706.svg)
