Teaching kids about homosexuality

[Vault Citizen]

Being gay is a choice

Lex Luthor would like to have a word with you

But anything else at a young age may confuse them.

are you saying only hetersexual relationships are simple enough for children to understand? I know children are small but I don't think their brains are that tiny.

 

[Dexiro]

I hope you're not male, otherwise YOU FAIL BIOLOGY FOREVER!!

I mean, if you ARE male...please don't tell me that you didn't get erections until 18? Because if you did, I hate to break it to you but there IS something wrong with you. Most of us get erections when aroused from about 11-12 at latest.

Isn't that a pretty good guide for sexual attraction? Obviously you can get an erection without being interested in someone, but as a general principle you get an erection through sexual attraction. How the hell can you get confused about who you get erections around? I mean, it's pretty clear when it happens...

Actually, I know my biology. In truth a man can get erection for both anything and nothing at all without feeling any sexual arousal (it happens on an every day-basis as well). Your argument is null.

Assuming this is the argument about people under 18 not being able to tell if they're gay, the average age for people realising their sexuality is around 12-14, very early in puberty.

Sure a few people get it wrong and they're just confused, which could be avoided given the proper education (topic relevant!), but they usually leave that phase before they even come to terms with it. Then you have assholes that just say they're bi because of some vague reason and they think it makes them all edgy and different.

For most people when they realise they're gay they're damn sure of it, for me it was a big confidence boost because It cleared up a lot of confusion, and my parents were very open minded about the subject when I was a kid so I wasn't ashamed or anything.

Also topic relevant, you have to make sure your kid is 100% ok with the idea of being gay before they find out they're gay, or else you could be putting them through hell. You're not going to know if they're gay or not until they've come to terms with it either way.

But yeah, telltale signs that you're gay prop up at around 12-14, takes some people a while to realise. Most commonly getting turned on by other guys and not by women :3

 

[The Hairminator]

I hope you're not male, otherwise YOU FAIL BIOLOGY FOREVER!!

I mean, if you ARE male...please don't tell me that you didn't get erections until 18? Because if you did, I hate to break it to you but there IS something wrong with you. Most of us get erections when aroused from about 11-12 at latest.

Isn't that a pretty good guide for sexual attraction? Obviously you can get an erection without being interested in someone, but as a general principle you get an erection through sexual attraction. How the hell can you get confused about who you get erections around? I mean, it's pretty clear when it happens...

Actually, I know my biology. In truth a man can get erection for both anything and nothing at all without feeling any sexual arousal (it happens on an every day-basis as well). Your argument is null.

Assuming this is the argument about people under 18 not being able to tell if they're gay, the average age for people realising their sexuality is around 12-14, very early in puberty.

That is not the argument about people under 18 not being able to tell if they're gay (I'm not saying they can't). I simply corrected an anatomical misconception of TheAceTheOne.

 

[Dexiro]

I hope you're not male, otherwise YOU FAIL BIOLOGY FOREVER!!

I mean, if you ARE male...please don't tell me that you didn't get erections until 18? Because if you did, I hate to break it to you but there IS something wrong with you. Most of us get erections when aroused from about 11-12 at latest.

Isn't that a pretty good guide for sexual attraction? Obviously you can get an erection without being interested in someone, but as a general principle you get an erection through sexual attraction. How the hell can you get confused about who you get erections around? I mean, it's pretty clear when it happens...

Actually, I know my biology. In truth a man can get erection for both anything and nothing at all without feeling any sexual arousal (it happens on an every day-basis as well). Your argument is null.

Assuming this is the argument about people under 18 not being able to tell if they're gay, the average age for people realising their sexuality is around 12-14, very early in puberty.

That is not the argument about people under 18 not being able to tell if they're gay (I'm not saying they can't). I simply corrected an anatomical misconception of TheAceTheOne.

Ok fair enough :3 Guess the argument still stands for anyone that wants it though, I thought I got a few decent points out of it.

 

[Caliostro]

You would be amazed how many people think they have a sexuality they indeed have not (at least that's what I firmly believe). I feel sorry for people under 18 who claim to be homosexual, as it's more often than not insecurity.

You'd be amazed at how many more people live their whole lives thinking they're straight when they're not.

 

[Adultism]

No, Unless the child is homosexual (which in most cases, is not) You should avoid the topic.

 

[TheDarkestDerp]

I think they should be taught about "relationships", period. Last I learned "love" is supposed to be blind, not being based solely on sex of the two people involved, or hinge on it. Let the children be taught what love is and what it really means to love someone unconditionally, without reservation. They'll not understand such a complex concept completely for a long time anyways, most people don't.

 

[TheDarkestDerp]

No, bisexuality is an actual attraction to both sexes. a straight who sleeps with a member of the same sex who they're not really interested in doesn't suddenly become gay or bisexual, nor does a gay sleeping with someone of the opposite sex they're not attracted to make them straight or bisexual.

So no, everyone is not bi. Everyone is what they are, and can choose to deny their nature. That doesn't change their nature, however.

Honestly, can you control who you love? I mean, really love? Can you even control who turns you on?

*applauds* Perfectly said. Pansexual here.

 

[Jackhorse]

as the step-daughter might discuss it at school and awkward phone calls from the teachers might follow.

My standard position would be pretty much sidenoting it, not really making a big deal of it so "the special hug is done when a man and a woman or a man and a man or whoever love each other very much" etc. I'd try and make no big deal of it just leave it as one of the way it is things rather than delve into it with them, I wouldn't explain why a man likes a woman.

I'm more interested why one of her reasons is that she might get phone calls from the teachers. What kind of school does she go to where talking about sexuality would be an issue? (Qouting as its a specific question and I doubt you hit refresh after a certain number of pages)

 

[101flyboy]

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.

The same goes for the opposite- The kid will learn soon enough, and probably ask her parents about it- then they should tell her, naturally, as unbiased as they can. If she later finds out she is indeed actually queer, it would be better if she does not have any subconscious issues with it inherited from her parents.

I'm going to have to agree with you.

I second that agreement.

Thank you guys. There's so many people replying positively to my post (or replying to replies to my post) that I can't help but think I got at least something right- despite the large bulk of people in this thread telling me what a moron I am.

There is a lot of heterosexist individuals on this forum, for sure. That doesn't mean you aren't a moron, though.

 

[101flyboy]

I hope you're not male, otherwise YOU FAIL BIOLOGY FOREVER!!

I mean, if you ARE male...please don't tell me that you didn't get erections until 18? Because if you did, I hate to break it to you but there IS something wrong with you. Most of us get erections when aroused from about 11-12 at latest.

Isn't that a pretty good guide for sexual attraction? Obviously you can get an erection without being interested in someone, but as a general principle you get an erection through sexual attraction. How the hell can you get confused about who you get erections around? I mean, it's pretty clear when it happens...

Actually, I know my biology. In truth a man can get erection for both anything and nothing at all without feeling any sexual arousal (it happens on an every day-basis as well). Your argument is null.

It actually isn't null, sorry. Until you actually walk up to someone of your same-sex, ask them out, go to the bedroom, get hard, stay hard, and have sex, you actually do NOT fit the qualifications of someone who is actually attracted to men. Yeah.

The whole "guys can erections from anything" is not relevant to this discussion. We're not talking about one of those fluke hard-ons. We are discussing actual sexual attraction and knowingly being aroused by someone. If you are knowingly aroused by the same-sex, you are not 100% straight. So no, you don't seem to know your biology, or common sense.

 

[101flyboy]

Psst... The Swedish point of view isn't all that different...

They've got homophobes and racists over there too. Linguistic quirks don't make a country more accepting.

We ARE rather liberal about most things, though. For example, two of our ministers are openly homosexual. We're close to the top on both Social and Gender equality indexes as well.

That doesn't make you gay accepting. Having a token gay doesn't mean you're accepting or liberal on the situation.

 

[101flyboy]

Psst... The Swedish point of view isn't all that different...

They've got homophobes and racists over there too. Linguistic quirks don't make a country more accepting.

We ARE rather liberal about most things, though. For example, two of our ministers are openly homosexual. We're close to the top on both Social and Gender equality indexes as well.

And my home country's going to have a gay President. Go figure.

My problem is with the views you're expressing. I'm still waiting for you to support those assertions you made about gender and sexuality.

You're getting me very wrong here. I do not mind homosexual people AT ALL. In fact, the sexuality of someone (unless I intend to romance the person in question) is completely irrelevant to me.

And the index refers to the gap between the genders- not equal treatment of homosexuals, although I believe we are far ahead of most countries on that front as well.

EDIT: What country, by the way? I think Iceland beat you to it.

Translation: I don't mind those fags, as long as they don't make their being fags an issue, we all know their deviant sinners who are usually sexually confused.

 

[joshthor]

I think in school it shouldnt be covered. it effects a small minority of the population, and will just confuse kids. if parents want to cover it, more power to them, but otherwise no.

 

[101flyboy]

No I wouldnt. See hetrosexuality, is pretty much the whole "where do babies come from" thing, telling her about homosexualit would be "well that man/woman likes having sex with men/women because he/she thinks its fun". I would tell the kid to answer the question about sex, but if you say sex is something people do for fun, well it might encourage the kid, hich is bad. They will learn sex is fun at a safe age, 7 is not a safe age. Hope I explained properly.

Oh. People are gay because they just like to have fun indiscriminate sex. Interesting.

Talking about sex lets see gay people cant have kids, so that leaves sex for fun. If you leave out the sex part fine, but im pretty sure that this topic is talking about sex therefore you cant really leave it out.

..We are inferring that homosexuals cannot haven't sex for the sake of love and intimacy now, like everyone else (header: even heterosexual sexual relations are not always about the child, or even the possibility of one, even)? Simply "fun"?

Really?

Yes well aware eople have sex for fun, the thing is I dont want to tell kids sex is fun, they can find out when they are older, saying something is fun encourages it, last thing you want is kids thinking sex is fun, before they are even old enough to have sex. So I would leave out the fun part hetrosexual or homosexual dosent matter.

You said homosexuality is simply indiscriminate fun sex. You specifically said gay people have sex "because it's fun." That statement is false to quite a degree. Being gay is not just about having sex with anyone just to get off. Also, I understand not encouraging sexual activity with a child, saying "sex is fun" is irrelevant. However, you shouldn't put sex in a negative light, either. That will mess a kid as much as telling them that sex is a loose fun thing that you should do without caution.

 

[101flyboy]

I think in school it shouldnt be covered. it effects a small minority of the population, and will just confuse kids. if parents want to cover it, more power to them, but otherwise no.

"Some men like men, some men like women"

Can you tell me what is confusing about this statement?

Also, most kids have same-sex thoughts. Or should that be ignored, and we tell kids that there are only ONE option, and that is heterosexuality, although most people are not 100% straight?

 

[Riff Moonraker]

My pregnant sister has a 7 year old step-daughter who's in the process of learning about the birds and the bees. I was a little rattled to learn that my sister is only teaching her about hetrosexual relations, saying that it would be 'inappropriate' to tell her about homosexuality at such an early age as the step-daughter might discuss it at school and awkward phone calls from the teachers might follow. Since my sister is in a hetrosexual marriage she argued that it's what her step-daughter encounters on a daily basis, and thus is what she should be taught as the 'norm'.

Do you escapists think that children should be told about homosexuality and homosexual relationships at the same time as they're learning about straight relationships?

Absolutely not.

If an adult wants to make the decision that that lifestyle is for them, thats their business. But I completely disagree with teaching a child about it. As a parent, I find it outrageous that anyone would try to do so, to be honest.

That lifestyle is a sexual orientation and an attraction that most people in their lives feel at one time or another. And, I find it outrageous you think it's outrageous to teach kids about reality.

You may as well just say "I disagree with homosexuality and don't want kids to think it's an acceptable option." Since it's clear that is what you're saying.

If you go read all my other posts, you will see that I do not agree with homosexuality. I have stated that. I also disagree that MOST people feel a sexual attraction towards their own gender at some point in their lives. Sure, there are people that experience it. But most? I dont buy that.

Either way, you have your opinion, and I have mine. You will have to accept that they are different from each other.

 

[101flyboy]

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.

The same goes for the opposite- The kid will learn soon enough, and probably ask her parents about it- then they should tell her, naturally, as unbiased as they can. If she later finds out she is indeed actually queer, it would be better if she does not have any subconscious issues with it inherited from her parents.

But still, they should not be handled equally, as heterosexuality is still the norm- and the natural way to reproduce. If the children are gay, they will probably find it out themselves. The important thing is to then make sure they are neither ashamed or feel otherwise repressed.

Yes because informing them about it is so "encouraging" it, they're going to learn about it eventually why not tell them in a completely unbiased way so they can make up their own decision when they're older about whether they think it's right or wrong.

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.

I wanted to go back and reply to this, because this post was eye openinng. Yes, you were saying homosexuality is wrong, or less desirable and basically is unnatural. It's pretty obvious. And you're saying teaching kids about homosexuality will lead them to potentially believe they are bisexual or not straight, and that is a problem, that they should be taught to be straight. If you weren't saying homosexuality is wrong, why qualify it? At the very least you think heterosexuality is the #1 option, which is heterosexist.

 

[WanderingFool]

Crap... well, on one hand I feel that I shouldnt deny my child the knowledge of what Homosexuality is, as s/he may encounter it, and may one day be homosexual.

Yet on the other, I dont want to expose that to them when they are young.

Actually, I think my best solution would not be to tell my 7 year old child about the "birds and the bees" until they either are old enough that it becomes important and nessacary, or until it becomes obvious that they do have an obvious sexual curiousity.

 

[Daveman]

tbh at that age (7) I think homosexuality is going to be harder for them to understand, whereas people have this enforced idea of what families are like from their own and those of their friends. I don't think it's particularly homophobic. It's like the time a guy wrote in a newspaper article about my home town saying it was racist and one reason given was that his kids (both under 11) hadn't been taught about the civil rights movement in history. Firstly this is stupid because the government sets the syllabus and is therefore the same across the country and secondly at that age kids wont be able to understand it adequetely, which is why it is taught at GCSE level (15/16). I feel the same idea applies. Although I definitely would tell them before 15, just not at age 7.

What's hard to understand about homosexuality? Some men like men. Some women like women. It's very simple. Ignoring it or not discussing it, is what will cause the confusion, because when kids see it, or potentially feel it, they wouldn't understand.

Yes, in that case I'll say "some men like men, some men like women" and that'll wrap up nicely homosexuality. Thanks for the advice, my future kids will be very grateful for your incredible insight.