Teaching about Gender

Well, the State obviously. The state does not promote a religion or set course content for religion in the classroom - the patrons of the individual school do. Pretty obvious, I would have thought....?

None of the above - I don't need to in order to have an opinion. I did used to work with kids as a teaching assistant and I have been a step-parent, but I'm not that that makes any difference. So we can nip this little cop-out in the bud early.

Same with parents being the fundamental educators: that doesn't absolve them of actually educating. if they opt out, they have to make alternative arrangments or teach the kids themselves (generally speaking) - the State still has overview and still decides what the kids are taught. And if the State puts this on the curriculum, then the parents have to make sure the kids get the information. Same with any other subject.

Now back to the question you're avoiding: do you think that the State will promote transgender to children and that the course content will include information about puberty blockers and surgery, yes or no?

Parents are the primary educators of the child this is enshrined in our constitution. My children will be 100% opting out of anything related to gender ideology, it has no basis in science and is an ideolgical viewpoint there is no mandate on the state from the parents of Ireland to teach about gender ideology. Trans activist groups like TENI and Belong to are responsible for lobbying for its inclusion on the curriculum.

Explain to me what my own enforced ideology is? Your ideology has no scientific basis. It has no long term studies where children have been affirmed socially medically and surgically.

I believe that trans people exist. Gender dysphoria is a medical diagnosis, people with gender dysphoria have to meet certain criteria to have a medical diagnosis.

Unfortunately what has happened is anyone can now self identify as trans and self diagnose themselves surely you can see the problem with that in terms of people suffering with mental health comorbidites having a genuine belief that being born in the wrong body is the reason they are so unhappy without exploring the other issues.

As an adult I think if you suffer from gender dysphoria and are trans you should be free to live your life as you please like all of us are, my issue is with the indoctrination of an entire generation of children that there is a scientific basis for gender ideology and the advertisement that transitioning will solve their problems when no scientific studies say that. We are not protecting our children.

I have children. I teach children.

Conversion therapy is now being described as psychotherapy for children who say thay are trans. Regardless of their mental health comorbidites. Imagine talk therapy with a young child to discover if there are other issues at play is now called conversion therapy. We know from the tavistock data that children with ASD and children who are victims of sexual abuse are more likely to come out as trans. Imagine affirming this belief in these children after a consult of a couple of hours by tavistock staff who are either pushing this ideology or pressured into affirming these children. Basic child safeguarding says the adults in the room have to protect children from harmful things and gender ideology is harmful, it's far more harmful to vulnerable children.

Education also in your reply suggests settled science. None of this is settled science. They are no long term studies in relation to children that are being affirmed. Again we have gone from 40 to 1800 referrals for girls to tavistock in a decade. We have 0 long term follow up studies in fact tavistock have 0 studies other than proving that those who receive puberty blockers early 98% go on to cross sex hormones that is medicalisation for life for the 98% when up to 90% of those in previous studies who went through puberty reverted to their natal sex.

But I suppose what the hell would I know I'm just a big transphobe.

I was going to list a few examples of transphobia in your posts, but i see I've been beaten to it, so I'll.just add the following posts and point out the bias and ignorance in each one (which is frankly dangerous if this truly is your job):

What is a child's reference point for definitely being trans? Is it that a girl likes playing soccer or a boy likes dolls?

Incredibly ignorant: seriously not knowing the difference between something you are and something you do.

At this point youn don't nt even know what gender is.

Explain how brain washing an entire generation of children form the age of 5 into believing men can actually become biological women

Bias: just because you don't like it, it's 'brainwashing' - it's not even on the syllabus how could it be anything to an entire generation of kids who are barely able to read?

Ignorance: men factually can't become biological women.

On top.of not knowing what gender is, now you don't know what transitioning changes...

If you tell small children that boys and girls can be born in the wrong body then because they lack the critical thinking of adults they will believe you

Ignorance: lots of kids already know this and understand it. And even if you were right, it just proves the need for education

 looking for consistency in an ideological viewpoint that lacks any

Baseless accusation

My children will be 100% opting out of anything related to gender ideology,

Bias: they will, or you will on their behalf? Do they get a say? And are you in danger of passing your phobia on to them?

How about finding out what think instead of dictating to then what to think.

They are not you!!

it has no basis in science and is an ideolgical 

Ignorance: Science is responsible for the medication and surgeries that transition entails - how could this be possible if it had "no basis'.

(Also contradicts your first paragraph: I believe that trans people exist. Gender dysphoria is a medical diagnosis, people with gender dysphoria have to meet certain criteria to have a medical diagnosis.

Odd belief in something you believe has "no basis in science".

There is no way in hell that all that came from rational unbiased thinking and balanced research on the subject.

So you are not a parent? No side stepping the issue I'm afraid - are you familiar with Article 42 of the constitution and related parts??

"The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children."

Can't be clearer than that. Parents make decisions with their children in their best interests and parents/ families should be the arbiters of whether the materials you want should be brought into the classroom. There's nothing to stop parents dealing with these matters in the privacy of their own homes.

As i said to Brian, that doesn't mean you can opt out of everything you see fit and just not educate them - you still have to operate in the same framework and you still you still have to make sure kids get lessons. And if that means social education, so be it. Would you rather they grew up ignorant or getting their information from an unvetted source you had no control over?

Also - Martina Burke is a parent - and two of her kids wound up in jail and a thrid destroyed her career.

Well no - because religion is not a part of the curriculum and the State does make it mandatory. Irish is, but you got an exemption: that's not avialable to everyone. During one of the "should Irish be optional" debate threads, it emerged that you still have to study Irish - even if you're homeschooled - until the Leaving Cert, if you don't meet the criteria for an exemption (and it isn't easy).

So whlie the family is primary educator, it works within the framework set by the State. Which, I know, sounds like a contradiction (and is) but that's something you's need to take up with whoever wrote the Constitution.

Again - what makes you think either is going to be the path chosen by the State?

Adkins seems to think careful consideration before transition is important for teenagers (which I would agree with) but that it shouldn't be banned and information should be available.

https://www.wral.com/story/top-transgender-doctor-warns-teen-treatment-ban-could-be-deadly/19618762/

So not sure what you're trying to say here...?

But again: we're talking about education and awarenes, not transitioning - so why this is relevant, I don't know...?

Deanna Wilson Atkins (if that's who we're talking about) is actually a "she".

Beyond that, you're not making a point very well - are you talking about this Gingerbread group? If so, what's her connection with them? And what's their connection with the State educating about transgender issues? And before I even get to grips with that you're talking about steilisation of teenagers, then repressed memory syndrome, and teaching homosexuality to kids in the 1960s?

Are you saying that we shouldn't teach abouttrans now for the same resaon we didn;t teach about homosexuality in the 60s? Are we that hung-up?

Seroiusly - what the f are you on about??

You're all over the place her, and frankly, I'm confused. And I think I'm out at this point. There may have been a valid point in here -but it's impossible to say.

The left movement will migrate on to the next thing in a few years. It should be up to each individual school what they wish to teach. Parents can decide of they want a normal traditional school or a school which teaches what the LGBTQ believe.

I'm saying that happens if it's brought in and made compulsory learning.

if it's not - fair enough - but how are you going to stop your kids finding out on their own and either challenging your view or bullying? (Hypothetical question)