Teaching kids about homosexuality

[101flyboy]

If she later finds out she is indeed actually queer,.

Please don't use the word queer when talking about homosexuality. I find it offensive just use homosexual or gay, I see "queer" as a derogatory word.

So? I find a lot of words offensive, but I don't act like a diva and ask everyone to stop using them. There are too many opinions in this world to satisfy everyone.

Translation: Shut the fuck up queer, I don't respect you.

 

[M Rotter]

heterosexuality nor homosexuality shouldnt be taught to young children. The mechanics of sex should be clearly talked about and the child should be made sure that they understand how it works. Teaching kids about SEX itself is of course a heterosexual model, but thats incidental because actual procreational sex (which is usually the kid's question "where do babies come from?") is heterosexual. Talking to a nine year (who at that point does not have sexual desires in the same way an adult does) about any sexual orientation during the discussion about how babies are made could be extremely confusing. So i dont think kids should be explicitly taught hetero- or homosexuality. Theyll figure it out once they have the basics

I don't really agree with you, because the fact is, by the time they are..............13, if you essentially teach them nothing, they will be ignorant, and ignorant kids make ignorant decisions, or will be confused and not understand what they are seeing, thinking and feeling. If you are going to bring up the mom+dad=sex=babies, yeah, that's a start. But that can't be the finish either, because that's not really even the basics of the mechanics of sex. That's just saying that people have sex to make babies. There are a lot of other questions kids will ask after this, why do people have sex, what do people do when the have babies. Instead of keeping kids in the dark they need to be taught in responsible ways the realities of things so they will be educated in the future.

i was speaking more about young children, you know 6-9 range. As kids get older, theyll obviously have more questions about sex and sexuality. Of course sex is more than just the mechanics, but since, again, a child 6-9 does not have a sex drive in same way an adult has, its pointless to explain. It would be like trying to explain STDs to a six year old, they have no context for it. When they come back when they're 10+ of course explain it to them, and their questions are more likely to be better thought out (since you've given them an unbiased baseline), because they created the questions themselves, instead of you putting them there.

At 10+, they are already experiencing these feelings and beginning to hear about STDs and see sex more and contextualize it, though. Which is the issue. You don't want a kid to go into something ignorant. You want them to be educated on some of the basics early on so at the very least, they won't be totally shocked when they do experience these things. Keeping kids in the dark, could lead to ignorance. Could lead to kids thinking they shouldn't discuss these things. WILL lead to kids learning in other, less productive ways. And that's something that needs to be avoided.

are you agreeing with me? Thats what i said...so thanks

 

[101flyboy]

I don't think kids should get lectures about homosexuality forced on them. Just as I don't think they should get lectures about hetreosexuality forced on them. Let kids by nice and naive for a while before dumping all this complicated stuff on them.

If they're curious about the subject they'll ask you in their own due time... Unless ofcourse they don't know yet when they're about to enter high school, then you need to have a serious sit-down.

This seems reasonable on the surface, but it isn't. Because kids encounter heterosexuality and these days in most cases homosexuality on an every day basis. So, it's not something you can hide. Instead you need to teach kids about the facts of life so that when they do encounter these things or start realizing "hey, I'm attracted to ____," they aren't ignorant going into the situation, which could lead to bad decisions being made.

I'm not saying hide it, just don't blindside them with lectures about sexuality. Little kids won't know what to do when a slew of information about something so complex is suddenly unleashed upon them.

If a kid encounters homosexuality in real life or on TV, he/she is going to ask questions about it or comment on it. And a good parent knows how to gage their child's inquisitory nature. Don't force the information, just let it gradually reveal itself.

I partially agree that you shouldn't just throw the situation out there. With that said, you can't just say "I'll wait until THEY bring it up," because that could be never. If they do bring it up, they could have heard ignorant things, and then you have to more or less reprogram them. If you teach them the basics early in an age appropriate way, they'll understand the basic realities of life, and when they are a bit older, they won't go into a situation uneducated, or unknowing, because that is scary and will cause confusion.

 

[101flyboy]

heterosexuality nor homosexuality shouldnt be taught to young children. The mechanics of sex should be clearly talked about and the child should be made sure that they understand how it works. Teaching kids about SEX itself is of course a heterosexual model, but thats incidental because actual procreational sex (which is usually the kid's question "where do babies come from?") is heterosexual. Talking to a nine year (who at that point does not have sexual desires in the same way an adult does) about any sexual orientation during the discussion about how babies are made could be extremely confusing. So i dont think kids should be explicitly taught hetero- or homosexuality. Theyll figure it out once they have the basics

I don't really agree with you, because the fact is, by the time they are..............13, if you essentially teach them nothing, they will be ignorant, and ignorant kids make ignorant decisions, or will be confused and not understand what they are seeing, thinking and feeling. If you are going to bring up the mom+dad=sex=babies, yeah, that's a start. But that can't be the finish either, because that's not really even the basics of the mechanics of sex. That's just saying that people have sex to make babies. There are a lot of other questions kids will ask after this, why do people have sex, what do people do when the have babies. Instead of keeping kids in the dark they need to be taught in responsible ways the realities of things so they will be educated in the future.

i was speaking more about young children, you know 6-9 range. As kids get older, theyll obviously have more questions about sex and sexuality. Of course sex is more than just the mechanics, but since, again, a child 6-9 does not have a sex drive in same way an adult has, its pointless to explain. It would be like trying to explain STDs to a six year old, they have no context for it. When they come back when they're 10+ of course explain it to them, and their questions are more likely to be better thought out (since you've given them an unbiased baseline), because they created the questions themselves, instead of you putting them there.

At 10+, they are already experiencing these feelings and beginning to hear about STDs and see sex more and contextualize it, though. Which is the issue. You don't want a kid to go into something ignorant. You want them to be educated on some of the basics early on so at the very least, they won't be totally shocked when they do experience these things. Keeping kids in the dark, could lead to ignorance. Could lead to kids thinking they shouldn't discuss these things. WILL lead to kids learning in other, less productive ways. And that's something that needs to be avoided.

are you agreeing with me? Thats what i said...so thanks

OK, great! Yes, I guess we agree.

 

[vento 231]

I'm not gonna with my kids, they will be traditionally raised, but if it's brought up, I'll explain it unbiasedly of course.

Traditionally raised? Interesting. You gonna dress your kids in the traditional outfits, teach your sons to be the breadwinners and the daughters to cook and clean? Of course, you want to be perfectly traditional.

Yes actually, they can dress as they like, you know, unless they sag or dress slutty. Other wise yeah, I don't think the woman should not have to work, that's kind of the mans duty, but this isn't about that, is it? I don't think I should have to teach my kid about homosexuality unless they have questions of course. I would be telling her/him that when a mommy and daddy love each other, they make love and then a baby comes. That is what sex is for, reproduction, the reason it feels good is because it's a natural urge to reproduce. It's not like I'm saying it is teh only way, but at seven, I assume they wouldn't have a sexual preferance, and not hbe interested in the oppisite sex (or same sex) or really anything to do with sex.

OMG.......you were being serious.

Teaching kids in a heterosexual-only way is doing a disservice to kids. Life is not heterosexual only. Most people are not 100% heterosexual. And yes, only teaching one way is effectively putting one option on the table. But that's not life. If you're going to bring up babies, you already are bringing up sex. If/when you bring it up, then keep it real with your child in an age appropriate way, don't nitpick basic reality.

You truly believe that women shouldn't work? What if she doesn't want to be in a kitchen all day? What if she wants to be independent? You basically are not allowing your kid to be free. You're saying she has to be __________. But, that is, if you're going 100% traditional.

Sex isn't just for procreation AT ALL, but I'm not going to get in an argument with you there. I hope you don't engage in any sort of sodomy.

Since you're going all traditional, I wonder, why are you on a computer? And do you plan on your kids working out on picking crops and doing chores around the house before meals?

I said she shouldn't have to work, she can go out and work if she wants, but why get one if you don't need one. I'm not fucking omish, I have a computer. Maybe I should just bring up every possible choice, fetish, kink, or really anything that can be imagined using anything possible. Maybe I should by her a dildo at seven, would you be happy with that? The girl in the OP is seven, that is what this is about. They don't have to be anything, I would never force any child of mine to be something they don't want to be, I'm just saying maybe they should be more mature before they learn every single possibility. Sex is for procreation, that is what it is naturally for, but there are plenty ways to get off.

 

[vento 231]

So? I find a lot of words offensive, but I don't act like a diva and ask everyone to stop using them. There are too many opinions in this world to satisfy everyone.

Gasp.. A white, straight boy comparing his experience of being insulted with that of other people.. I never saw that coming!

(BTW I am NOT trying to imply that homosexuality is wrong.)

You are however managing to do so pretty substantively.

Holy shit!!!! A gay guy acting like straight guys can't possibly have problems! O my God!!! A minority thinks whites can't possibly be as bad off as them because they are desciminated against every day purely because of their race and not at all because of their personality. How fucking revolutionary.

Talk to the gays when you're denied the right to marry your partner under the law, and basically not allowed to be open with your sexuality. Until then, get off the victim act.

I'm not playing victim, you are. Why do you need to be married any way, everyone I know hates it. You can be as open as you want, why do you care what people think if your scared of discrimination. Those people don't matter, do they?

 

[101flyboy]

Well, the Jedi never told their little students about the Dark Side, because that's Evil. And so many little jedi students fell to the Dark Side for some reason.
Except that gay people are not cool, and the above comparison is completely pointless. I don't care when or even if you decide to teach your kids about gay relations. I don't like gay people. I'm not gonna bash them over the head with a baseball bat, or gather a nazi mob to lynch them, but I dislike them.

If you are over the age of 18, you are a complete and utter fail. You don't even know most gay people to dislike all gay people, so I guess you simply dislike an entire group of people solely for their sexuality, which is about as ridiculous as it gets.

But, it doesn't ultimately matter, since I'm sure the gays don't like you either

 

[ShankHA32]

Well I don't plan on having children and these parenting choices are a big reason why. Personally, I would not talk about it with my child because most other parents dont which therefore makes both my parenting and my child more socially acceptable? Maybe I'm being too narrow though.

 

[101flyboy]

So? I find a lot of words offensive, but I don't act like a diva and ask everyone to stop using them. There are too many opinions in this world to satisfy everyone.

Gasp.. A white, straight boy comparing his experience of being insulted with that of other people.. I never saw that coming!

(BTW I am NOT trying to imply that homosexuality is wrong.)

You are however managing to do so pretty substantively.

Holy shit!!!! A gay guy acting like straight guys can't possibly have problems! O my God!!! A minority thinks whites can't possibly be as bad off as them because they are desciminated against every day purely because of their race and not at all because of their personality. How fucking revolutionary.

Talk to the gays when you're denied the right to marry your partner under the law, and basically not allowed to be open with your sexuality. Until then, get off the victim act.

I'm not playing victim, you are. Why do you need to be married any way, everyone I know hates it. You can be as open as you want, why do you care what people think if your scared of discrimination. Those people don't matter, do they?

I'm not gay, but with that said, if I were, why would I need to be married? Excuse me, but it's not up to you to question why a couple NEEDS to marry. And to actually try to project others' experience on same-sex couples is ridiculous. If anything, same-sex couples will respect marriage more because they understand the true sacredness and power of the word, having been denied it. Why do I care what people think? Because what people think affects the world, and homophobia affects the world negatively and harms people who don't deserve any criticism. Saying gay folk can be as open as they want isn't true, they can be, but then there is discrimination if they are in most places. So, again, don't play the victim act, because yes, the gays ARE victims of anti-gay discrimination on an every day basis worldwide. No-one is saying other folks being discriminated against don't matter, but don't try to trivialize anti-gay discrimination, because it's REAL.

 

[vento 231]

So? I find a lot of words offensive, but I don't act like a diva and ask everyone to stop using them. There are too many opinions in this world to satisfy everyone.

Gasp.. A white, straight boy comparing his experience of being insulted with that of other people.. I never saw that coming!

(BTW I am NOT trying to imply that homosexuality is wrong.)

You are however managing to do so pretty substantively.

Holy shit!!!! A gay guy acting like straight guys can't possibly have problems! O my God!!! A minority thinks whites can't possibly be as bad off as them because they are desciminated against every day purely because of their race and not at all because of their personality. How fucking revolutionary.

Talk to the gays when you're denied the right to marry your partner under the law, and basically not allowed to be open with your sexuality. Until then, get off the victim act.

I'm not playing victim, you are. Why do you need to be married any way, everyone I know hates it. You can be as open as you want, why do you care what people think if your scared of discrimination. Those people don't matter, do they?

I'm not gay, but with that said, if I were, why would I need to be married? Excuse me, but it's not up to you to question why a couple NEEDS to marry. And to actually try to project others' experience on same-sex couples is ridiculous. If anything, same-sex couples will respect marriage more because they understand the true sacredness and power of the word, having been denied it. Why do I care what people think? Because what people think affects the world, and homophobia affects the world negatively and harms people who don't deserve any criticism. Saying gay folk can be as open as they want isn't true, they can be, but then there is discrimination if they are in most places. So, again, don't play the victim act, because yes, the gays ARE victims of anti-gay discrimination on an every day basis worldwide. No-one is saying other folks being discriminated against don't matter, but don't try to trivialize anti-gay discrimination, because it's REAL.

Of course it's real, it's discrimination, but you are more than free to be open about it your sexuality. Last time I checked, they are people, and others problems can be projected onto them, they are very similar.

 

[dlsevern]

I haven't read all of these replies, but imo let kids be kids, if they ask tell them honestly without personal biases. Anyone who said no to this idea obviously has a problem with homosexuality and should therefore not be allowed to teach a child about sex. The problem with the world is that more people than not try to encourage a child one way or another and that is where stereotyping and hatred come from, the idea that one belief or another is the norm, which is totally false. Love is love no matter what form it's in.

 

[101flyboy]

I would not teach my kids about homosexuality at an early age for the same reasons your sister describes. I would only explain it if someone else mentions it to the kid anyway, and I need to clarify.

I would try to think back to my childhood to consider how my parents' way of handling it affected my understanding of homosexuality, but oddly enough, I don't really remember finding out about it. I don't think my parents told me at all, really. I could've found out in school at any time from 6th grade to early high school.

So, you wouldn't mention it AT ALL? That's exactly the reason why kids are ignorant on the issue, because parents keep them in the dark INTENTIONALLY. Because of ignorant parents, kids are ignorant. And the cycle of ignorance continues.

You basically don't know anything about homosexuality or homosexual persons past some basic life experiences. So, your more or less admittedly ignorant. That may be alright for you, but think about a kid who is gay/lesbian. You're effectively closeting them. And not supporting them or guiding them when they need it, as much as and more than heterosexual kids.

And people really wonder why gay teens kill themselves? It's actions such as this. You keep the gay hidden, you're creating stigma around it. Stigma turns into hate, and you've raised your perfect little homophobic child.

There's a difference between not explaining it until the kid is older and teaching him that homosexuality is an inappropriate subject. I'm not saying that I'll avoid the subject. I'm saying that I won't bring it to the kid's attention so he doesn't misinterpret it and start telling others that "daddy told me about" something he retells incorrectly. If my child asks about it, I will explain before he gets the wrong idea.

Also, your accusation doesn't make sense and leaves a LOT of questions to be asked. How are you assuming this information that you don't know about me? How am I responsible for gay teen suicides? Did I say I'm a homophobe or a bully? How am I supposed to "know anything about homosexuality or homosexual persons"? My parents? They aren't homosexual, and know about homosexuals through "basic life experiences," so how should THEY "know"? What do you mean by "know" anyway? Do you mean the knowledge that can only be known by being in the shoes of a homosexual? If that's the case, there is no way for any heterosexual person to truly know about homosexuality.

Why don't you quit looking for excuses to call people homophobes and try having a rational discussion?

I didn't call you a homophobe. I said that keeping everything gay related hidden creates a culture homophobia, which leads to homophobic kids. Teaching it "until their older" is too late. By the time their older, they have already been affected. By 14, kids are already experiencing their sexual attractions, already have seen gay couples, and probably have used anti-gay slurs. Silence is stigma. You keep something intentionally silent, you're effectively saying that something should be hidden. That leads to shame, which leads to gay teens hating themselves.

Saying "I don't want my kids to misinterpret", well, that's up to you as a parent to keep it simple stupid, KISS. That's up to you to make it clear what the facts are and go through any questions the kid has. Just saying __________ and _____________ is ____________, isn't enough. You have to go through it with your child and actually educate them. If you don't you will create an overload and confusion.

By "know", I mean simply why people are gay, what being gay means, the realities of being gay in every day society. I'm not advocating that for kids, but by 18, if you're knowledge of everything gay related is "I know a couple of them," you're ignorant. Adults know about heterosexuals, why people are straight, what it means, their relationships, the sex, the everything. So, why is there a different attitude when it comes to the gays? Why is it "Oh, their GAY? Whatever." It's not whatever, though. It's a real part of every day life. It's a reality. It's not something that can nor should be dismissed.

At 17, I had gay friends, I was a part of a gay-straight alliance, and my best friend had a BF, that I'd hang out with. I guess I'm just different that way, I try to actually understand and embrace all walks of life.

You can put yourself in the shoes of another person, if you allow yourself to be vulnerable and not one-track minded. Most aren't capable. Especially when you're in a position of power.

 

[timeadept]

No but i agree with The Hairminator, If you're teaching kids a "rule" about life, like a family is a mommy and a daddy and whatever kids they might have, then you don't go on to immediately tell them about the "exceptions" to that "rule". You let the kid learn the rule and then let them start applying it. when they start to notice that there are exceptions to their rule then they are ready to learn about them and you can have that second talk about homosexuality. I know from experience that when learning something new (and i'm talking about academics now)if i am taught the wrong way to do something first, or how many people do this thing wrong or so on(BTW I am NOT trying to imply that homosexuality is wrong.) then i end up remembering both ways, the right way and the common mistake, and i'm continually confused as to which one was the right way to do this thing from that point on.
Basically you end up confusing the idea that you are trying to teach and making it harder to sort it all out in the future.

But life doesn't have "rules", and homosexuality isn't an "exception". I don't see your point about how learning something that's pretty clear-cut like a maths theorem with a right and wrong way to do things is in any way related to what you're talking about.

Life very much has "rules" or at least we perceive it that way. When we learn something new, ANYTHING new we have to either fit it into our perception of the world (or our rules for the world) or change our perception of the world so that it can now fit this new information that did not have a place before. My point is that when teaching a child about sex and what it has to do with your family you need to make a clear rule. "Your mommy and daddy had sex and that's why you're here and we're a family". Something like that anyways. But the second you add in that "but" as in "but sometimes two mommies or two daddies want to make a family..." you start to confuse the rule and make it seem like homosexuality is just as common as heterosexuality, and again, adding another "but this isn't very common" could clear it up or just confuse the child further. In any case, in this analogy homosexuality is very much an exception to the rule. It is uncommon and i really don't know the stats and i won't bother to guesstimate, but the majority of couples by far are heterosexual.

 

[101flyboy]

Not everyone is born gay, while people most certainly don't CHOOSE to be gay, that doesn't mean it can't develop because of external stimuli.

BULLSHIT.
http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/06/30/genetics-and-environment-shape-sexual-orientation/2522.html

i accept environmental factors cause it but i still dont believe it to be genetic

And it is. Genetic factors play a major part in why people are gay. People are born gay.

What you believe is irrelevant. Facts are presented, and gay/lesbian folks are telling you themselves what the truth is. Either learn it or don't.

 

[gl1koz3]

I think they should choose by themselves.

(Now, I'm not against all that stuff or anyone regarding this - I believe everyone should choose how to live the life and, believe me, I'm incapable of judging individuals before I know them; But here is me just saying what I REALLY think about this issue; if you feel strongly about it, stop reading)

Spoiler

Firstly, the nature (and us) should get the facts straight: MALE + FEMALE = NOT FAIL. Pointless to argue. Ends all arguments.

Secondly, everyone should decide for themselves. If she decides to do that, then fine. If otherwise, fine too. It's a conflict of nature. No matter how to twist.

nature=homosexual dolphins having blowhole sex

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

scroll down to amazon river dolphin

Animals can go against the natural cycle.

Edited for spelling

I was referring to reproduction. All the rest is a byproduct of it.

 

[ninja51]

No, I do not. I don't think homosexuality should be encouraged, unless it actually comes from the child itself, with as little as external influence as possible.

...or the kid might catch the gay?

Hey dont joke about that. I know a guy who caught the gay, oh he may seem happy, comfortable, and perfectly normal like every other healthy person, but I know inside its a crippling sickness thats probably fatal. Once he dies at the ripe old age of 80 or somthing due to his crippling disease "someone" will feel pretty jerkish if you ask me.

*psst* *im being sarcastic by the way, dont tell no one*

 

[101flyboy]

No but i agree with The Hairminator, If you're teaching kids a "rule" about life, like a family is a mommy and a daddy and whatever kids they might have, then you don't go on to immediately tell them about the "exceptions" to that "rule". You let the kid learn the rule and then let them start applying it. when they start to notice that there are exceptions to their rule then they are ready to learn about them and you can have that second talk about homosexuality. I know from experience that when learning something new (and i'm talking about academics now)if i am taught the wrong way to do something first, or how many people do this thing wrong or so on(BTW I am NOT trying to imply that homosexuality is wrong.) then i end up remembering both ways, the right way and the common mistake, and i'm continually confused as to which one was the right way to do this thing from that point on.
Basically you end up confusing the idea that you are trying to teach and making it harder to sort it all out in the future.

But life doesn't have "rules", and homosexuality isn't an "exception". I don't see your point about how learning something that's pretty clear-cut like a maths theorem with a right and wrong way to do things is in any way related to what you're talking about.

Life very much has "rules" or at least we perceive it that way. When we learn something new, ANYTHING new we have to either fit it into our perception of the world (or our rules for the world) or change our perception of the world so that it can now fit this new information that did not have a place before. My point is that when teaching a child about sex and what it has to do with your family you need to make a clear rule. "Your mommy and daddy had sex and that's why you're here and we're a family". Something like that anyways. But the second you add in that "but" as in "but sometimes two mommies or two daddies want to make a family..." you start to confuse the rule and make it seem like homosexuality is just as common as heterosexuality, and again, adding another "but this isn't very common" could clear it up or just confuse the child further. In any case, in this analogy homosexuality is very much an exception to the rule. It is uncommon and i really don't know the stats and i won't bother to guesstimate, but the majority of couples by far are heterosexual.

A majority of people have same-sex thoughts. A majority of people are not 100% heterosexual. And, that is irrelevant as the strength in numbers argument is a fallacy. That doesn't make the minority number not a legitimate thing.

Saying "homosexuality isn't common" isn't necessary. It's just simply not a necessary comment. If you start with "two people who love each other" or "some men like men, some men like women", you have presented a clear statement. And you can branch from there. And if you do so in an appropriate and concise way, there wouldn't be any issues.

But really, what your aim is, is very clear. You want to basically present a straight-only option and take gay off the table as not as legitimate or on the same level as heterosexuality. It would be nice if you were honest about that.

 

[101flyboy]

No but i agree with The Hairminator, If you're teaching kids a "rule" about life, like a family is a mommy and a daddy and whatever kids they might have, then you don't go on to immediately tell them about the "exceptions" to that "rule". You let the kid learn the rule and then let them start applying it. when they start to notice that there are exceptions to their rule then they are ready to learn about them and you can have that second talk about homosexuality. I know from experience that when learning something new (and i'm talking about academics now)if i am taught the wrong way to do something first, or how many people do this thing wrong or so on(BTW I am NOT trying to imply that homosexuality is wrong.) then i end up remembering both ways, the right way and the common mistake, and i'm continually confused as to which one was the right way to do this thing from that point on.
Basically you end up confusing the idea that you are trying to teach and making it harder to sort it all out in the future.

But life doesn't have "rules", and homosexuality isn't an "exception". I don't see your point about how learning something that's pretty clear-cut like a maths theorem with a right and wrong way to do things is in any way related to what you're talking about.

Life very much has "rules" or at least we perceive it that way. When we learn something new, ANYTHING new we have to either fit it into our perception of the world (or our rules for the world) or change our perception of the world so that it can now fit this new information that did not have a place before. My point is that when teaching a child about sex and what it has to do with your family you need to make a clear rule. "Your mommy and daddy had sex and that's why you're here and we're a family". Something like that anyways. But the second you add in that "but" as in "but sometimes two mommies or two daddies want to make a family..." you start to confuse the rule and make it seem like homosexuality is just as common as heterosexuality, and again, adding another "but this isn't very common" could clear it up or just confuse the child further. In any case, in this analogy homosexuality is very much an exception to the rule. It is uncommon and i really don't know the stats and i won't bother to guesstimate, but the majority of couples by far are heterosexual.

Anyway, guess what the main rule of life is? Some men do like men, and some men do like women, and the same for the ladies. That's the basic rules of sexuality. Your perception of the world, and what you're advocating for kids, is that their perception is 100% heterosexually based. That is ignorant and not reality.

 

[101flyboy]

I think they should choose by themselves.

(Now, I'm not against all that stuff or anyone regarding this - I believe everyone should choose how to live the life and, believe me, I'm incapable of judging individuals before I know them; But here is me just saying what I REALLY think about this issue; if you feel strongly about it, stop reading)

Spoiler

Firstly, the nature (and us) should get the facts straight: MALE + FEMALE = NOT FAIL. Pointless to argue. Ends all arguments.

Secondly, everyone should decide for themselves. If she decides to do that, then fine. If otherwise, fine too. It's a conflict of nature. No matter how to twist.

nature=homosexual dolphins having blowhole sex

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

scroll down to amazon river dolphin

Animals can go against the natural cycle.

Edited for spelling

I was referring to reproduction. All the rest is a byproduct of it.

Sex is not just for procreation. And for gay/lesbian folk, man+woman is a fail. Because they ain't straight.

 

[101flyboy]

Considering the age of the kid in question from the OP I would think no, for many of the good reasons outlined here. At the heart of the problem is adults meddling in the lives of children to effect social/political change. While this may be done with good intentions you can't actually know the effects, short or long term, on children.

For example, all the apparent 'bi' kids these days. Homosexuals only represent a very small portion of the population (it's more like 1-3% rather than the 10% that usually gets reported), so the large majority of kids will not grow up to be gay. It's just a simple fact. However, to protect those few that will we now often teach them about homosexuality as part of a normal sex-ed and as we see now when they start to develop sexually there's a lot of confusion. So is teaching them young really the best way?

Personally rather than focus on the kids to fix the problem I think it needs to start with us. Kids learn not only through what there parents and teachers teach them but also through observation. If the gay community can exist in our society without prejudice or persecution, kids will naturally pick up on this as well.

Homosexuality is normal. So saying "we're now teaching them about homosexuality in normal sex-ed," that's a positive. It's normal to be gay. Gay/lesbian folk are real. Most people are NOT 100% straight. 100% heterosexuality is not the norm. Most kids do have same-sex thoughts or encounters. These are realities of life that cannot be ignored.

The whole "it's not normal" argument is such a fallacy. Just because something isn't as big in numbers at the majority doesn't make it any less legitimate or any less of a reality or impactful.

This isn't about social change, that's a product of what the main intention is, which is educating kids on things they need to be educated on. Not educating your kids=ignorance. Ignorant kids do ignorant things and think ignorantly.

Bisexuality is NOT A CONFUSION. You are seemingly confused, and projecting that confusion on others, by making this offensive statement. Yes, teaching kids before they are 15 and still not understanding what sex is about, their feelings and the world around them is important. You keep gay silent, you stigmatize gay. You stigmatize gay, you are doing a disservice to ALL children.

The reason the gay community cannot live in society without hostility is because of ignorance, the same ignorance that many so-called gay supporters on this very thread want to continue to propagate because homosexuality "isn't normal." Ignorance leads to hatred, and hatred leads to the destruction of those in the path of it.