2 ms·

"Age appropriate" means "whatever we feel like being uncomfortable at the time of expression to any time afterwards so long as the person we have decided to tur

"Age appropriate" means "whatever we feel like being uncomfortable at the time of expression to any time afterwards so long as the person we have decided to turn into an offender is still within the system and therefore capable of being punished by it"

salawat 5y ago
Age appropriateness is: that quality by which a topic is delved or addressed at a stage when an individual is most readily going to be receptive to it. To whit: development of sexual appetites, or sensitivity to sexual characteristics/behaviors in post-pubescent individuals that did not exist or have personal precedent pre-puberty. Look, I'm one of the most sensitive people to legislative generality and ambiguity to attempt to exploit, but this one isn't that tough to connect the dots on. People are uncomfortable with adult life choices taking center stage in early phases of education. Cis-hetero is not remotely emphasized at that point as anything more than the "historically traditional default by accident of being how biology mechanically works", and even then, adoption, and many other accidents of life can lead to the same awkwardness introduced by other lifestyles or orientations. And that's all okay, but all the more reason to just pass over the tordid messiness of human social relationships in general until at least maybe algebra has a snowball's chance in hell of being absorbed, because at least then the student should be acclimatized to receiving things that seem as arbitrary and pernicious as the awful things we adults foist on each other. It's not a conspiracy. It's just, trying to deal with matters with the least awkwardness all around.
- olliej 5y ago
  Cool, if that were the case why does this bill specifically victimize lgbtq people? Discussion of orientation is only age inappropriate because of bigots who consider discussion of straight relationships to be “normal” and so acceptable. The stated intent in the bill’s preamble, is to target lgbtq kids. The stated intent of the law makers voting for it was to criminalize acknowledging lgbtq people are humans. If the bill wanted to not be an obvious attempt to dehumanize lgbtq people it could have removed the discriminatory language: ban discussion of gender and relationships. Ban those young kid faux-“home coming”s, etc But that is not what this is about. The stated view of the Republican Party, and the Conservative movement in general, is that lgbtq people are not people. That their orientation or gender identity is wrong. That lgbtq people are inherently less deserving of human rights, and that acknowledging there existence is inherently a matter of “adult” sexual perversions.

salawat 5y ago

Age appropriateness is: that quality by which a topic is delved or addressed at a stage when an individual is most readily going to be receptive to it. To whit: development of sexual appetites, or sensitivity to sexual characteristics/behaviors in post-pubescent individuals that did not exist or have personal precedent pre-puberty. Look, I'm one of the most sensitive people to legislative generality and ambiguity to attempt to exploit, but this one isn't that tough to connect the dots on. People are uncomfortable with adult life choices taking center stage in early phases of education. Cis-hetero is not remotely emphasized at that point as anything more than the "historically traditional default by accident of being how biology mechanically works", and even then, adoption, and many other accidents of life can lead to the same awkwardness introduced by other lifestyles or orientations. And that's all okay, but all the more reason to just pass over the tordid messiness of human social relationships in general until at least maybe algebra has a snowball's chance in hell of being absorbed, because at least then the student should be acclimatized to receiving things that seem as arbitrary and pernicious as the awful things we adults foist on each other. It's not a conspiracy. It's just, trying to deal with matters with the least awkwardness all around.

olliej 5y ago
Cool, if that were the case why does this bill specifically victimize lgbtq people? Discussion of orientation is only age inappropriate because of bigots who consider discussion of straight relationships to be “normal” and so acceptable. The stated intent in the bill’s preamble, is to target lgbtq kids. The stated intent of the law makers voting for it was to criminalize acknowledging lgbtq people are humans. If the bill wanted to not be an obvious attempt to dehumanize lgbtq people it could have removed the discriminatory language: ban discussion of gender and relationships. Ban those young kid faux-“home coming”s, etc But that is not what this is about. The stated view of the Republican Party, and the Conservative movement in general, is that lgbtq people are not people. That their orientation or gender identity is wrong. That lgbtq people are inherently less deserving of human rights, and that acknowledging there existence is inherently a matter of “adult” sexual perversions.