Teaching kids about homosexuality

[The Hairminator]

1)Both you and your sister were experimenting with your sexualities, until you found JEEZUS!!!! Is that about accurate?

Or maybe, just maybe, you were experimenting with your sexuality because that's the natural thing to do as a kid, be curious, figuring things out, what you're into and what you aren't. Yeah, it may just be that.

I'm actually an atheist, and in both me and at least in my sister's case I'm pretty sure it was: A)She wanted to rebel against our parents, B) Social insecurity which was a part of her entire adolescence. We have talked about it, and both reached this conclusion.

2)You do have something against homosexuals. You wouldn't need to keep saying you don't. You're trying to prove you don't, to yourself more than anyone else probably, and it's not working. You would not need to qualify it if you didn't.

Here we go, uncertified psycho-analysis :,D

Trust me, doctor, while I can't help my subconscious, I have never acted or even thought worse about someone because of their sexuality since I was over, say, the age of 10. Don't be and asshole and jump to these conclusions.

3)The problem "is with the world" is not an excuse for denying a kid a loving home. In those situations, you fix the problem, which is homophobia. Homophobia is the problem. The solution is to educate and rid of homophobia.

You go ahead and do that, then.

Now you're really getting desperate, I even said gays should be able to adopt for fuck's sake! Not all gays, though, much like I don't think all straight couples should be able to even breed their own children.

4)You're saying homosexuality shouldn't be encouraged, because you DO NOT believe homosexuality is acceptable compared to heterosexuality. Period. Also, sexual orientation isn't a choice, it's a sexual orientation, meaning, an immutable trait.

Just be honest. You think homosexuality is wrong. Yeah, I understand, anti-gays don't like having to wear the label. But, it is what it is.

It is counter productive from a biological point of view. That's all I meant to say.

Therefore it is indeed "unnatural", but I never did say I dislike it.

And since the sexual orientation is not a choice, why even tell the kid at such a young age, to make chances bigger that it will turn out like me and my sister?
This discussion is silly, I don't even care that much, yet still I keep getting poorly motivated insults from you guys.

 

[DisturbiaWolf13]

I'm of the strong opinion that the two should both be taught together. Think about it, if you don't teach them that it's nothing to be ashamed of and no "less" than heterosexuality then they'll just learn from the "ambient negativity" towards it and since you haven't told them any different, that'll stick.

 

[101flyboy]

1)Both you and your sister were experimenting with your sexualities, until you found JEEZUS!!!! Is that about accurate?

Or maybe, just maybe, you were experimenting with your sexuality because that's the natural thing to do as a kid, be curious, figuring things out, what you're into and what you aren't. Yeah, it may just be that.

I'm actually an atheist, and in both me and at least in my sister's case I'm pretty sure it was: A)She wanted to rebel against our parents, B) Social insecurity which was a part of her entire adolescence. We have talked about it, and both reached this conclusion.

2)You do have something against homosexuals. You wouldn't need to keep saying you don't. You're trying to prove you don't, to yourself more than anyone else probably, and it's not working. You would not need to qualify it if you didn't.

Here we go, uncertified psycho-analysis :,D

Trust me, doctor, while I can't help my subconscious, I have never acted or even thought worse about someone because of their sexuality since I was over, say, the age of 10. Don't be and asshole and jump to these conclusions.

3)The problem "is with the world" is not an excuse for denying a kid a loving home. In those situations, you fix the problem, which is homophobia. Homophobia is the problem. The solution is to educate and rid of homophobia.

You go ahead and do that, then.

Now you're really getting desperate, I even said gays should be able to adopt for fuck's sake! Not all gays, though, much like I don't think all straight couples should be able to even breed their own children.

4)You're saying homosexuality shouldn't be encouraged, because you DO NOT believe homosexuality is acceptable compared to heterosexuality. Period. Also, sexual orientation isn't a choice, it's a sexual orientation, meaning, an immutable trait.

Just be honest. You think homosexuality is wrong. Yeah, I understand, anti-gays don't like having to wear the label. But, it is what it is.

It is counter productive from a biological point of view. That's all I meant to say.

Therefore it is indeed "unnatural", but I never did say I dislike it.

And since the sexual orientation is not a choice, why even tell the kid at such a young age, to make chances bigger that it will turn out like me and my sister?
This discussion is silly, I don't even care that much, yet still I keep getting poorly motivated insults from you guys.

1)The Jezzus line was a joke, obviously. Most people say they find whatever God and they become heterosexual. You were just going through life, figuring things out, that's what kids do. But to then essentially say "well, most gay people aren't that way really" is ridiculous. Hell, neither of you are 100% straight either. You may be comfortable in your heterosexuality, but the gay never just goes away.

2)Conclusions? No, it's simply analyzing your own words. Maybe you aren't homophobic, however you do seem heterosexist, which is bad also.

3)You should do that too. We all should be doing our part to make the world a better place. And, of course, not all same-sex couples are fit for children. But, you made it seem that it's because of their sexuality, which is discriminated against. Instead of the actual discrimination. You just need to change your perspective there. Homophobia is the issue, not the gay parents being gay.

4)Homosexuality is not counter-productive biologically. Sex is not just for procreation. Homosexuality does not negatively impact heterosexual reproduction. And homosexuality is rampant in nature, making it natural by definition.

Why tell a kid at a younger age? So they can UNDERSTAND their feelings and emotions and figure them out sufficiently when they start recognizing them, or when they realize the world isn't 100% heterosexual. They'll be somewhat prepared. Ignorant kids make ignorant decisions.

I never meant to insult you, but if you are feeling attacked by several individuals, then it's probably up to you to clarify what you're saying, OR think about what you're saying and realize that is could cause offense. I apologize if you feel character assassination by my comments.

 

[Divine Miss Bee]

absolutely! maybe this isn't true for everyone, but i know that in america, kids use the words "gay" and "fag" by the age of 7 anyway. they have no idea what it means, but they pick it up from television and older kids. they need to be taught what it means by the parents, or they'll get a skewed version by other kids that at best continues a trend of homophobia and at worst scares some children into the proverbial closet. my parents explained homosexuality to me fairly early, as my mother has been a makeup artist most of her life and has a lot of gay friends, and it helped me come to terms with myself as pansexual/lesbian (still not sure) and my brother as genderqueer to know that it was completely normal and acceptable to be that way. if i hadn't had that safe feeling about sexuality, i doubt i'd be as happy with myself as i am today.

anyway, i got a bit off-topic. the point is, whether the girl in question is homosexual or not, kids should know that the world contains all sorts of people who interact in ways that may be different from the way their families interact. parents are charged with shaping the minds of their children, whether they do so with their words or their actions. avoiding difficult subjects for fear of what the teachers may think seems completely backwards to me, as teachers are supposed to be open to whatever the parents teach in the home as part of their jobs. schoolteachers teach facts and figures, parents teach lessons of life. and accepting homosexuality as just another difference among people is an important lesson.

 

[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.

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

Did I say sex? Exactly, I wasn't talking about sex as such. I was talking about the process of reproduction as a whole.

 

[DisturbiaWolf13]

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.

I can certainly understand your point about the biological disadvantage. Yet when you think about it...at our current level of overpopulation and continued population growth, a little less reproduction cannot be a negative. It's also a much more attractive option than a few of the alternatives. Also on the opinion of homosexuality being somehow "unnatural" I really don't see any evidence for that. It's not as if it dosen't occur naturally, there is no outside force manipulating people into it, it's not a mutation, and like I said it is (in the long term) probably slightly advantageous for us as a species.

 

[Igor Florian]

The parents could just inform the child about the homo relations and explain that at the way it is, the truth. Everbody deserves to know everthing, and its better the child knows about it through their parents then someone who's homofobic or gay. But I still think its better to talk about it when they get curious, but like its not a big deal, after all they are the ones who will choose what way to follow.
The parents job is to explain and give advices about everthing.

 

[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.

Did I say sex? Exactly, I wasn't talking about sex as such. I was talking about the process of reproduction as a whole.

Without sex, there isn't reproduction.

 

[Mikeyfell]

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?

there's an easy fix for this
you can't beat your kid over the head with "homo v hetero" because they're young and impressionable and stupid
the simple fix is instead of telling your daughter that she could grow up and fall in love with a man
say she could grow up and fall in love with a "person"
that way she wasn't programed to think either gender was "normal" from a young age
same goes for boys

 

[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.

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

Did I say sex? Exactly, I wasn't talking about sex as such. I was talking about the process of reproduction as a whole.

Without sex, there isn't reproduction.

But there is none in your presented case. Thus not what I'm talking about.

 

[lettucethesallad]

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)

When I responded to her saying this (with pretty much a blank stare and a "I'm sorry, what?"), she said she thought it would be embarrassing if her stepdaughter would ask random boys or other teachers if they were gay, and (jokingly) said "Well, imagine getting a phone call from the school about her asking little Johnny to stick his weewee in little Patrick's butt!"

I'd agree with the notion that she's kinda homophobic, which I find strange, since our aunt is a lesbian. The mere mention of homosexual men makes her act really awkward. And yeah, I am quite a bit embarrassed about her reactions and behaviour at times.

 

[Krantos]

*snip*

You don't need to tell a kid about homophobia, that is something that definitely shouldn't be brought up until experienced. Because at that time, a kid is innocent, so you don't want to pollute their mind with hatred. You want them to understand that being accepting is the only positive option.

Homosexuality isn't just for fun. Gay/lesbian people have sex for the same reasons heterosexuals have sex, the only difference IS procreation. And ultimately, if you're discussing procreation, you're discussing relationships. If you're discussing relationships, you're discussing sexuality. Just putting one option on the table is what will confuse kids, when that isn't a reality, and there are two available options.

Well, I would say that it depends on how you present homophobia to the child that matters. If you make it clear that it's a bad thing, then they're prepared for it. It a real thing, so if the child does end up being homosexual, it won't come as such a shock.

And I think you misunderstood me when I was talking about "sex for fun." I simply meant it as anytime it was used for things other than procreation, so love, intimacy, etc., they're all included (because, hey, they are fun). The problem is, those emotions are too much for a child to understand. Even teens have a hard time distinguishing them. How many times have you seen teenagers certain they've fallen in love with someone they've only known for a short time. So keeping the discussion focused on the procreation side will answer the question "where do babies come from" without needlessly confusing them or making them too interested in sex.

Remember we're talking about a 7 year old. Once they've gotten older, you can talk to them about the sexual choices they can make that don't involve procreation. At that point, I think it's important to make sure the playing field is level. Don't praise one or the other. Let the kid decide from themself how they want to be. And, again, the won't be confusing them because they'll be older and able to understand the concepts better.

 

[Metazare]

Here Lies the deathbed of human intellect. 10,000 B.C. - 2011 A.D.

 

[101flyboy]

Some of you are really dense.

Individual-environmental factors is a PERSONAL thing. Meaning NOT INFLUENCED by social, familial, friends or parental factors. It is PERSONAL. That is what INDIVIDUAL means, factors that are related to a SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL, PERSONALLY.

Is that hard to understand? No, it isn't. Now that we got that out of the way, we can continue.

 

[Jackhorse]

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

-snip-

When I responded to her saying this (with pretty much a blank stare and a "I'm sorry, what?"), she said she thought it would be embarrassing if her stepdaughter would ask random boys or other teachers if they were gay, and (jokingly) said "Well, imagine getting a phone call from the school about her asking little Johnny to stick his weewee in little Patrick's butt!"

I'd agree with the notion that she's kinda homophobic, which I find strange, since our aunt is a lesbian. The mere mention of homosexual men makes her act really awkward. And yeah, I am quite a bit embarrassed about her reactions and behaviour at times.

Sorry but the Johhny line made me crack a smile, I could understand that being a fear but it wouldn't seem as so great a consequence as to entirely neglect the mention of other sexualities.
So its only homosexual men she is uncomfortable with then? That makes a bit of sense if your aunt was lesbian, she would have had to find a way to keep gay relations undesirable without rejecting her aunt. Does she personally know any gay men?
Then again she might just go "Oh well its different for Patrick he was born into a family with three sisters" etc. Uhm... If this really does concern you talk to her and see if theres a reason she thinks such relations innapropiate or sneakily spot check the child on her knowledge and slip in whether she knows about gay relationships or whatnot with the mum onlooking.
Latter option would be strictly a last resort where she didn't have any good reasons not to and you feel it necessary to the child. How strongly do you personally feel about all this?

TLDR: You could challenge her in a sensible conversation or take matters into your won hands if she won't have the conversation and you feel passionately on the subject.

 

[lettucethesallad]

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

-snip-

When I responded to her saying this (with pretty much a blank stare and a "I'm sorry, what?"), she said she thought it would be embarrassing if her stepdaughter would ask random boys or other teachers if they were gay, and (jokingly) said "Well, imagine getting a phone call from the school about her asking little Johnny to stick his weewee in little Patrick's butt!"

I'd agree with the notion that she's kinda homophobic, which I find strange, since our aunt is a lesbian. The mere mention of homosexual men makes her act really awkward. And yeah, I am quite a bit embarrassed about her reactions and behaviour at times.

Sorry but the Johhny line made me crack a smile, I could understand that being a fear but it wouldn't seem as so great a consequence as to entirely neglect the mention of other sexualities.
So its only homosexual men she is uncomfortable with then? That makes a bit of sense if your aunt was lesbian, she would have had to find a way to keep gay relations undesirable without rejecting her aunt. Does she personally know any gay men?
Then again she might just go "Oh well its different for Patrick he was born into a family with three sisters" etc. Uhm... If this really does concern you talk to her and see if theres a reason she thinks such relations innapropiate or sneakily spot check the child on her knowledge and slip in whether she knows about gay relationships or whatnot with the mum onlooking.
Latter option would be strictly a last resort where she didn't have any good reasons not to and you feel it necessary to the child. How strongly do you personally feel about all this?

TLDR: You could challenge her in a sensible conversation or take matters into your won hands if she won't have the conversation and you feel passionately on the subject.

I'm not sure if she knows any gay men, I don't think she does. If she did, I'm sure her reaction would be different.

Personally I feel rather strongly that if the kid is going to learn about love between man and woman, then homosexual relationships should absolutely be mentioned as well, on the "a man can love a man, and a woman can love a woman too!" level. However, as close as I may be to this kid, she's not mine, and thus I don't feel like it's my place to force my way of thinking onto someone else. If there is another discussion like that when I'm present, I'd probably just say it and make sure she knows it's a normal thing, but sitting the kid down to explain it to her without the subject already being up for discussion at that moment is just not something I'm sure would be my place to do.

 

[timeadept]

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.

No i wasn't saying that homosexuality is wrong, less desirable or unnatural, again you are seeing only what you want to see and not taking the time to understand the meaning i intended to communicate. I can understand that there was a SLIGHT implication, and i did my best to avoid that implication, but you can read anything you want to if you try hard enough.
I NEVER said children should be taught to be straight. Yes i did say that teaching children about homosexuality could lead them to believing that they are not straight when they are, BUT you're taken it out of context and lost the full meaning as always happens when things are taken out of context. I said a child may become confused if you teach them about homosexuality AT THE SAME TIME as you teach them about heterosexual relationships. This makes it seem like homosexuality is much more common than it is and yes, then the child may believe they are homosexual or bi when they are not. Oh and btw, people can't learn to be gay, i thought you knew that? You need to teach children to be who they are, and not necessarily what is socially acceptable.

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.

I really don't understand what you meant by this. But if by "heterosexuality is the #1 option" than you meant it is the most common, then yes that is exactly what i believe, and it is not sexist in any way because it is true. If you think that i think that being heterosexual is superior to being homosexual, then you are absolutely wrong. (so long as you put aside the discrimination that homosexuals are facing, because it can't be very advantageous to have to face that, can it?)