Religious parents ...boy wearing dress
Comments
-
burnthesheep wrote:I live in the US. I have 2 boys. I don't force them to play with toy soldiers, weapons, snakes, and sports. But they will NOT be allowed to wear dresses and pretend to be a gender they are not.
That is ridiculous. There could be circumstances where your "NOT" comment could be damaging. Those circumstances are very rare and hopefully neither of your boys will find themselves at the mercy of your inflexibility.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:I think it's correct and fair (within reason) for parents to be allow them to bring their children up in a way they they see fit.
If someone has found their devotion to a faith to be helpful to their lives, what is it your business to stop them imparting that understanding onto their children?
Well, there's nothing can be done about what parents do. Knocking religion out of schools and every last aspect of life in this country where possible would be a good thing though. We are lucky we live in a country where religion is on the decline, speeding it up by any means would be positive.0 -
mfin wrote:burnthesheep wrote:I live in the US. I have 2 boys. I don't force them to play with toy soldiers, weapons, snakes, and sports. But they will NOT be allowed to wear dresses and pretend to be a gender they are not.
That is ridiculous. There could be circumstances where your "NOT" comment could be damaging. Those circumstances are very rare and hopefully neither of your boys will find themselves at the mercy of your inflexibility.
Indeed - there was a story in the papers the other week about a boy obsessed with Elsa from Frozen, who was initially refused a "Be a Princess for the day" experience at Disneyland (Paris iirc) because he was a boy ... fortunately Disneyland bosses saw sense and said that of course a boy could be a princess for the day if that's what they want. At that age it has nothing to do with "being a boy" or "being a girl" as they are one and the same thing until the age of puberty. It's adults that impose the differences in gender - usually right from birth.0 -
mfin wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:I think it's correct and fair (within reason) for parents to be allow them to bring their children up in a way they they see fit.
If someone has found their devotion to a faith to be helpful to their lives, what is it your business to stop them imparting that understanding onto their children?
Well, there's nothing can be done about what parents do. Knocking religion out of schools and every last aspect of life in this country where possible would be a good thing though. We are lucky we live in a country where religion is on the decline, speeding it up by any means would be positive.
You might be overplaying the school thing.
FWIW, I'm still close to about a dozen people who I met in my class at primary school, which was a full blown CoE 'Glebe' school. Readings from the bible every day, core RE work twice a week etc.
Not one of us, not even the vicar's son, is religious. Of the other 20 or so in the class, 15 are still in the village and of those only one appears to attend church (according to local village gossip).
So of a sample of 32 or so, we have 18 who are definitely not, 1 definitely is, and the rest are unknown.0 -
burnthesheep wrote:Look, the wife and I both completely agree on this issue.........it's BS. Yes, we're both what you would call "believers".
We can accept the decision of an ADULT or children medically born intersex and treat those people as whomever they choose to be.
We however cannot accept that an average CHILD can suddenly determine they want to be a different gender. Well......my son said he wants to be a dinosaur or a toucan. Let's see THAT happen too then.
I have a tolerance for a well thought out and difficult decision. I don't have tolerance for stupidity. A 6 year old can NOT make that determination.
The best you can do for a child that was NOT born intersex is to properly guide that child in the direction of their born gender until that child is an adult. Then you can support that adult however possible if they decide otherwise.
It's gone TOO far when children with no medical reason to be otherwise have the decision making powers at the hands of their parents to identify with another gender.
No, you don't pick on that child. But if I were putting my kids in a school I THOUGHT agreed with my opinion on the topic, yeah, I'd pull my kids from that school also.
I live in the US. I have 2 boys. I don't force them to play with toy soldiers, weapons, snakes, and sports. But they will NOT be allowed to wear dresses and pretend to be a gender they are not.
Disagreement on this topic is often seen as bigotry or ugliness, when sometimes it isn't. It turns to that when you intend to hurt the other person. I'd never intentionally try to hurt a child whose parents can't properly raise them. It's not "offensive" to accidentally mis-take a boy for a girl if you let their hair grow out and wear dresses.
Why cant a child feel they are born into the wrong body? or make decisions on their sexuality? and whats your real objection here?
if its just a phase then they ll quickly grow out of it, you cannot force/guide anyone to do anything they dont really want too (within reason that is) as to doing this guiding until they are an adult ie 18yo, best of luck with that.....
An ex GF s son was always different, even at 6 or 7 his mum knew he d not be straight and boy did he suffer for his sexuality, he has been picked on by parents, children and teachers, he came out in his teens.
He is a kind sensitive young man and worth a 1000 of many so called "normal" men.
You should perhaps re read the bible and expand your mind.0 -
Lovin' your narrow minded and intolerant rant.mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
Whereas it seems that you are okay with people being narrow minded and intolerant for reasons other than religious views - as you have repeatedly demonstrated.0 -
mfin wrote:fat daddy wrote:mfin wrote:I also think it is completely offensive to push religion onto any child, doing so is a form of abuse
yeah and the tooth fairy, Santa and the Easter bunny ... child abusres all of them !!
Not the same, not at all, these are simple things everyone grows out of. Religion pushed as if it is real is an attempt to brainwash someone into believing complete and utter b*****cks, and most religions like Christianity have underlying fear and control.
There is absolutely nothing real in them, kids should be taught of the susceptibility of the human mind to be brainwashed by what they are exposed to, hence why if you live in a predominantly muslim country with muslim parents you are likely to believe that version, and if you live in a predominantly christian country with christian parents you are likely to go that way.
I really think you need to read up on at least one religion, if only for the purposes of knowing your enemy. Making generalised claims that everyone who has any kind of religious faith has been brainwashed just makes you look a bit hysterical. What if your parents bring you up to be a hardcore socialist - is that brainwashing, too? We all learn from our parents and then grow up and learn to think for ourselves.
Certainly people have co-opted religion as a means of control. The Constantine co-opted Christianity as a state religion when it suited his political ends. But that control is not fundamental to Christian belief. As has been endlessly pointed out before people wanting to have control over other people is far from unique to religion.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
When I was 6 years old, I always wanted to dress up as the fairy princess and not the cowboy or spaceman. Spent most of adult life struggling to come to terms with LGBT issues. Been to Sparkle a few times. (If you dont know what that is look it up). The local churches had services for TV/TS folks and they were welcomed warmly. My own church has folks who enjoy 'alternative ' lifestyles. When a guy turns up in a dress as they sometimes do, the girls are happy to include and to give advice on clothing and makeup. My God is concerned with the heart and not what clothing the person happens to be wearing.
Clearly 6 is too young to be making long term and irreversible decisions such as this but much counselling awaits. Good on the parents and the school and the other family for raising the issue. They do not come across as religious nutters but are just wanting some clarification. Perhaps they can all be left in oeace to get on with their lives now...
@Op ... thank you for opening this debate. Fortunately the other contributors have not lowered themselves to the same level...0 -
Mikey23 wrote:
Clearly 6 is too young to be making long term and irreversible decisions such as this but much counselling awaits. Good on the parents and the school and the other family for raising the issue. They do not come across as religious nutters but are just wanting some clarification. Perhaps they can all be left in oeace to get on with their lives now...
@Op ... thank you for opening this debate. Fortunately the other contributors have not lowered themselves to the same level...
a: they are taking their kids out of school to be home educated, presumably to avoid contact with such Satanical influences?
b: its a 6yo kid who like to wear the occasional dress, hardly long term, let alone irreversible.0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
Lovin' your narrow minded and intolerant rant.mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
Cheers
It is correct though. 0 -
Not intending to feed the troll anymore. Night all...0
-
So, what's your excuse?mfin wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Lovin' your narrow minded and intolerant rant.mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
Cheers It is correct though.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Sounds like you're the one with all the fear. What specifically is fear driven? As for it being "made up" if you are thinking of the Bible (or any other religious text) as a Jumbo Book of Facts then you are completely missing the point.mfin wrote:rjsterry wrote:What if your parents bring you up to be a hardcore socialist - is that brainwashing, too?
The problem is brainwashing with stuff that is fear driven made up crap, religion. It is not real. I can't see how you can compare that with socialism.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
So, what's your excuse?mfin wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Lovin' your narrow minded and intolerant rant.mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
Cheers It is correct though.
Well, read what I wrote again. We'll split it into sentences...
"My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant." - note the 4th word there, a fair sentence?
"Religious views are stupid" - well, they all are in essence because religion is rooted in a bunch of made up fairy stories.
"When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view". - when a religious person has a normal view on something they can be quick to falsely attribute it to coming from their religious views. Take the classic that many religious people say their religion provides them their morals.
"Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour" - an example, um, throwing homosexuals off tall buildings?
...not narrow minded really.0 -
mfin wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
So, what's your excuse?mfin wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Lovin' your narrow minded and intolerant rant.mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
Cheers It is correct though.
Well, read what I wrote again. We'll split it into sentences...
"My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant." - note the 4th word there, a fair sentence?
11, 12 and 14 also apply to you.
"Religious views are stupid" - well, they all are in essence because religion is rooted in a bunch of made up fairy stories.
So are political views, and views in general.
"When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view". - when a religious person has a normal view on something they can be quick to falsely attribute it to coming from their religious views. Take the classic that many religious people say their religion provides them their morals.
See the above. People try to justify their opinions and views.
"Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour" - an example, um, throwing homosexuals off tall buildings?
An extreme example to make a point. There is also extreme examples of kindness.
...not narrow minded really.
Yes, really.
Read the small print.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Religion is the human species way of managing the unknown IMHO. Death, the origins of everything, what happens after death, etc. If you have a better way of doing that then good for you
As for the way religion has developed that's due to social matters. What religion becomes is down to the way society is, it's a reflection of society but with a time lag in many cases. If religion is intolerant it's because society is too IMHO. I think there's a few atheists / secularists / or whatever they call themselves on here who show this intolerance.
As for religious story such as in the Bible, it's got many ways of interpreting it from a strict guide to b how you should live to a fairy tale. The former ends up with a high potential for intolerance but the latter can result in that.
As far as my views go I'm not at any end. I see religion has its merits and demerits. I don't believe in a deity of any kind but I understand religion as a way of presenting a way of living that works as a society. By that I mean it's kind of like modern laws of its day. In fact in the UK a lot of the clerical aspect of English law was carried out and organized through the church. It was the only body with enough educated men who could write to form the legal mechanisms the king needed to create rule of law across England.
Whether you believe in or dispute that religion should be allowed to exist there is simply too much evidence around that religion has provided a lot of very good things for our species. It is human nature though to use it as a mode of control. In this modern, secular age it is becoming less important in this role. Money and other things become methods of control in this modern age.
Just my input to this religion is bad digression that is feeding the intolerant troll.0 -
Kids are taught lots of things which are opinions, beliefs or views which aren't based on fact. Teach your kids whatever you think is best for them so long as it doesn't negatively affect anyone else. My opinion is that they are failing as parents because they are getting their own opinion about sexuality confused with fact which negatively affects their child's life by teaching it to be intolerant.
Burnthesheep, I really don't mean to be rude but I completely disagree, please don't take this the wrong way. Essentially what you are saying is 'kids are stupid, what they do now is inconsequential so they DEFINITELY CAN'T do something'. Some kids may well know they are intersex from a young age and you gently steering them in the wrong direction might be damaging. What are the negative effects of a boy wearing a dress who isn't intersex? Nothing. What are the negative effects of a boy wearing a dress who is intersex? Nothing. It seems like its a much bigger thing for adults than it is for kids, at that age they are amazingly adaptable. It might actually mean that once they are adults they might be generally more tolerant0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
Read the small print.mfin wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
So, what's your excuse?mfin wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Lovin' your narrow minded and intolerant rant.mfin wrote:My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant. Religious views are stupid. When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view. Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour.
Cheers It is correct though.
Well, read what I wrote again. We'll split it into sentences...
"My problem is when religious views lead people to be narrow minded and intolerant." - note the 4th word there, a fair sentence?
11, 12 and 14 also apply to you.
Ah ok, don't answer whether it is a fair sentence then, it is if you read the "when", but you're preoccupied with trying to sound right by the looks of it and haven't even read it properly.
"Religious views are stupid" - well, they all are in essence because religion is rooted in a bunch of made up fairy stories.
So are political views, and views in general.
No they are not, in this case, read the word "because". You can't say that political views and views in general are stupid because they are rooted in a bunch of made up fairy stories, but you can say that about religion.
"When a particular religious view is pretty much normal it is not a function of the religious view". - when a religious person has a normal view on something they can be quick to falsely attribute it to coming from their religious views. Take the classic that many religious people say their religion provides them their morals.
See the above. People try to justify their opinions and views.
See the above where I pointed out what you said made no sense. In fact, nothing you have said above this line makes sense, or answers anything in the context.
"Plenty of religious views are stupid and many of them when informing some sections of people are dangerous and justify all sorts of behaviour" - an example, um, throwing homosexuals off tall buildings?
An extreme example to make a point. There is also extreme examples of kindness.
There are loads of unacceptable and backward prejudices informed by religion, as I said, this is dangerous when it informs some sections of people, and at best it keeps rational thought at bay about many topics in others.
I don't think extreme acts of kindness that happen from religious people are any more prevalent than from people who are not religious. I expect the religious ones to falsely attribute it to their religion where most other people just see it as being kind or normal though. Also, do you really think religious people show more kindness than those who aren't religious??!!!
...not narrow minded really.
Yes, really.
Ah, but at bright enough at least to understand how words like "when" and "because" affect the meaning of a sentence eh? At least I get points for that when you don't.0 -
Going back to the original video
Son comes home and says "I'm confused, there's a boy at school who sometimes comes in as a girl, sometimes comes in as a boy"
And the parents are concerned over what effect that may have....
Really? Children are very accepting of pratically everything - as long as they have an explanation ...
My 2yo was really afraid of fans and air-con units - anything that made a loud noise really ... it took 30 seconds to show him that they're nothing to be afraid of and the game is to whoosh your teeshirt up at them ... now he's not afraid at all and even asks to have the hair dryer used on him.
Do 6yo's need to have a peers sexuality confusion explained to them in detail? No, of course not - they just need to know that the child is ok to be friends with no matter what they're wearing. Will they always address the other child correctly? I doubt it - sometimes on purpose, sometimes accidentally, would it be correct to punish a child for incorrectly addressing another child? If they did it on purpose and with malicious intent and had been warned about it previously, then yes - I'm sure the teachers are more than capable of dealing with it.
The BBC report does say that the couple believe that Gender fluidity conflicts with their Christian beliefs - well, that's fine, but the CofE accept it (not completely yet) and the school wouldn't have let the child dress as a girl if they hadn't already had guidance from the LEA and the Diocese so the couple have no argument to bring - their choice is simply whether to school the child at that school or not. It seems the parents are the ones incappable of understanding.
I still wonder why a 6yo is struggling with sexual identity - I do wonder if it's not sexual identity at all - but a confusion as to whether to behave like a boy or like a girl ... as recent experiments have shown - girls and boys at that age are equal and it's parents and adults that encourage and sometimes force differences on them.
Interesting quote from the Telegraph
followed byWe believe it is wrong to encourage very young children to embrace transgenderism, boys are boys and girls are girls.
I agree with the first part of the first quote - to a point - it depends what he means by that - if it's encouraging a child to think they're of the opposite sex just because they like what others of that sex do then yes - that's wrong - if it's encouraging a child to accept that a person is now the other sex then thats right - they should be encouraged to accept everyone for their own individuality. I have to totoally disagree with the "boys are boys and girls are girls" ... as I've said - at the age of 6 they are equal - including in terms of strength (for the same size child).“Gender dysphoria is something we as Christians need to address with love and compassion, but not in the sphere of a primary school environment.”
As for the second quote - one word ... bigot...
The couple are going to mount a legal challenge against the school, arguing it has not respected their rights to raise their children in line with biblical values.0 -
So when it's a bad thing it's down to religion but when it's a good thing it's just human nature. That doesn't sound very rational. A more rational approach would be to see the whole spectrum of human behaviour - good, bad and indifferent (and including religion) - as 'human nature'.I don't think extreme acts of kindness that happen from religious people are any more prevalent than from people who are not religious. I expect the religious ones to falsely attribute it to their religion where most other people just see it as being kind or normal though. Also, do you really think religious people show more kindness than those who aren't religious??!!!1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The main problem I have with the parents is that they say the school did not handle it well and seemed to want to be part of the decision making process regarding another child. If I was that parents child then I would not be keen on this avenue and therefore the school are right. I can't think of another condition affecting a child either emotionally or medically that would be right to open up beyond the parents.
As for their child being confused I have a 5 and 6 year old and they are often confused. If they can't explain this situation to their child without them getting overly stressed then good luck to that kid getting through life.
Home schooling for this child with these parents is likely the worst outcome for the child.0 -
rjsterry wrote:
So when it's a bad thing it's down to religion but when it's a good thing it's just human nature. That doesn't sound very rational. A more rational approach would be to see the whole spectrum of human behaviour - good, bad and indifferent (and including religion) - as 'human nature'.I don't think extreme acts of kindness that happen from religious people are any more prevalent than from people who are not religious. I expect the religious ones to falsely attribute it to their religion where most other people just see it as being kind or normal though. Also, do you really think religious people show more kindness than those who aren't religious??!!!
I can't see how you concluded that I meant that from what you quoted me saying there. It's not what I was saying.0 -
mfin wrote:rjsterry wrote:
So when it's a bad thing it's down to religion but when it's a good thing it's just human nature. That doesn't sound very rational. A more rational approach would be to see the whole spectrum of human behaviour - good, bad and indifferent (and including religion) - as 'human nature'.I don't think extreme acts of kindness that happen from religious people are any more prevalent than from people who are not religious. I expect the religious ones to falsely attribute it to their religion where most other people just see it as being kind or normal though. Also, do you really think religious people show more kindness than those who aren't religious??!!!
I can't see how you concluded that I meant that from what you quoted me saying there. It's not what I was saying.
You previously claimed all sorts of negative behaviours are motivated by religion, but in the paragraph I quoted you then claimed that positive behaviours are just that and any religious motivation is post-rationalised. Either religious beliefs motivate people - for better or worse - or they don't.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Slowbike above sort of mentions this, but the school is bound by the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010. Google it, it takes a second to read. As I understand this situation, the school have followed this duty and the parents of the child do not agree with their decision. I don't see how the school could have acted differently, perhaps the parents will take the local authority to court.Ecrasez l’infame0
-
rjsterry wrote:You previously claimed all sorts of negative behaviours are motivated by religion, but in the paragraph I quoted you then claimed that positive behaviours are just that and any religious motivation is post-rationalised. Either religious beliefs motivate people - for better or worse - or they don't.
Ah, ok, I disagree with some of that. I think kind acts are mis-attributed by religious people to being a product of their belief, remember importantly that what they believe is not true, so it's some sort of mental condition.
The mental condition might motivate them to do something, but not the religion. Mostly though, religious people like to attach anything charitable they do to being a product of their beliefs, whereas normal people just see it as plain old being kind, and that's actually all that religious people are doing.
If a murderer said his table lamp had told him to go out and kill women, you'd think he had a mental problem of some kind wouldn't you? That's because no table lamp exists that tells people to do things. No god exists either.0 -
But you are blaming religious beliefs for bad things. Maybe that's not what you mean but that's certainly how it reads. If a belief can make someone do something wrong it can surely influence behaviour for the better as well.mfin wrote:Ah, ok, I disagree with some of that.0 -
Veronese68 wrote:
But you are blaming religious beliefs for bad things. Maybe that's not what you mean but that's certainly how it reads. If a belief can make someone do something wrong it can surely influence behaviour for the better as well.mfin wrote:Ah, ok, I disagree with some of that.
I don't disagree with your last sentence there when I read the word "can". But, what I am saying is the positive side of things gets mis-attributed by those doing it way more often than not, because many religious people tend to automatically think all their good qualities come from their religion. All religion is complete made up nonsense, so in cases where it does inform any behaviour, positive or negative, then these actions by people are being informed by not just rubbish, but someone believing that that very rubbish is true, going against all common sense and logic.0
