By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Muslim parents in UK protest school children's storybook featuring same gender parents

Been happening over in Toronto for about a year now. And children shouldn't learn sex ed at such a young age, it should only be in middle school when their bodies start to change, so everything they are taught makes sense, and is relevant.
Teaching a 5 year old about gay people will only confuse em and scare them. They should be playing Minecraft (Not Fortnite), learning social skills & creativity. That is where the school system fails, not enough Minecraft.



Around the Network
DrDoomz said:
Hiku said:

Yeah, I agree that they should be able to voice their opinions. (Maybe screaming in megaphones next to 5 year olds isn't the best approach though.)

But I also think that the idea of letting your children make up their own minds about things (as much as possible at least) is important, and should be to everyone. Just exposing them to the facts first, that things exist, is an important first step.
But even for the parents who just want their kids to believe what they do, they'll still get the first chance to indoctrinate their beliefs unto their children. None of them are denying that same sex couples exist or that they love their children. (I assume...)

But that's the thing though. In order for the school to achieve what it is trying to do, it needs to take the concerns of the parents into consideration. Not force the issue in direct conflict with the wishes of the parents. If the school was located in a dominantly Muslim community, the school should have been aware of this and should have known about how the parents would react. This was insensitive of them. I guess I'm remembering the lessons from university about change management: You cannot force change in a direct conflict with the wishes of the many without causing more harm than good. And there are many ways you can limit this harm, some of the most effective being: allowing participation in the decision and dialogue.

And my biggest issue with the whole thing is: Why weren't the parents informed beforehand about this and why are they not allowed to opt out?

Well what you just said would have also applied if the school taught the kids about sexual education, or teaching them that the acts inherent to LGBT are good.
But they're just introducing them to the notion of families that look different, but love their family the same as they do. (There were also black couples and asian couples in there.)


I don't think that's something to be concerned about, even if you plan on telling your daughter why she should dislike LGBT people.
If you're so concerned about the notion of even exposing children to the idea that different families exist, before ever diving into all the subjects surrounding that, then I think that may be unreasonable.

There's also something about this that even parents against it should consider. And that is to help prevent bullying. Kids are often mean and will pick on people different than them. Even if you want to teach your child to dislike LGBT, you probably don't want them to bully another child for having different parents.



This is why people don't want religion in school. It doesn't belong there.
If you want your kid to only see what you wish, take them out of the school and teach them yourself.
You don't get to tell everyone else what their kids can't and can't see.
You just don't have the right to and I am blown away that people can't see that.



TheBird said:
Been happening over in Toronto for about a year now. And children shouldn't learn sex ed at such a young age, it should only be in middle school when their bodies start to change, so everything they are taught makes sense, and is relevant.
Teaching a 5 year old about gay people will only confuse em and scare them. They should be playing Minecraft (Not Fortnite), learning social skills & creativity. That is where the school system fails, not enough Minecraft.

No one is being taught about sex ed. I'm surprised at the number of posts in this topic that think that's the case.
They were just shown a story book with pictures of families that look different, but love their families the same way they love theirs. Black couples. Asian couples. Same gender couples. Etc.

These couples exist, and the idea is to make children aware of it, to increase tolerance and prevent bullying because some people look different.

Many years later they will learn sex ed, if not by their parents, and form their ideas on the subject.

Last edited by Hiku - on 03 June 2019

Pemalite said:

Machiavellian said:

So how do you tell a kid, why a family have 2 dads.  How do you get into that conversation and not talk about the relationship especially if your child has witness your relationship between you and your wife.  You make this statement as if you do not have children but I have actual personal experience with this subject. You cannot just say they live together it will not be enough to satisfy a child curiosity.  Do you believe the conversation just ends there but it doesn't.  The child will repeatedly come back with more questions and each time they will be more detailed and more involved.  If you do not provide this information then someone else will and their bias will be the formation of their development from there on.  Once you open the pandora box it doesn't close until the child is curiosity dissipate.  You will be very surprised how much a information a child picks up by age 5 and how much concept they understand.

You tell them that kid has two dads that love each other and leave it at that. Kids are extremely open minded and understanding, often more so than Adults.
If they ask questions, just be honest, no need to lie. - They don't need to know the gritty details.

They won't be anymore curious than when asking about opposite sex relationships. Be tactful.

Lol, if you believe just saying people love each other and leave it at that then you have no experience in this area.  That's the simplistic logic people state when they have not had this conversation multiple times.  Once a child curiosity is engaged within a subject they will constantly talk about it.  They will bring the subject up multiple times and during the oddest of places and events.  If you have the talk about how children are brought into the world then you have to talk about Dad and Dad.  There is no tactful way around these questions because you need to be honest with the child not sugar coat it with BS.

Some parents are prepared for these questions some are not.  I have had multiple conversations along these lines and each time the questions get deeper and deeper.  If you believe you can just leave out the gritty details then you are leaving those gritty details to be filled in by someone else.  Children will constantly talk about the subject among themselves and either get some distorted view from another child or be the one giving it.  

So I will say again, this book doesn't do enough and it leaves gaps that need to be filled in by either parents or someone else.  What it will not do is bring any more education to the subject for a 5 year old besides a lot of questions.



Around the Network
Hiku said:
DrDoomz said:

But that's the thing though. In order for the school to achieve what it is trying to do, it needs to take the concerns of the parents into consideration. Not force the issue in direct conflict with the wishes of the parents. If the school was located in a dominantly Muslim community, the school should have been aware of this and should have known about how the parents would react. This was insensitive of them. I guess I'm remembering the lessons from university about change management: You cannot force change in a direct conflict with the wishes of the many without causing more harm than good. And there are many ways you can limit this harm, some of the most effective being: allowing participation in the decision and dialogue.

And my biggest issue with the whole thing is: Why weren't the parents informed beforehand about this and why are they not allowed to opt out?

Well what you just said would have also applied if the school taught the kids about sexual education, or teaching them that the acts inherent to LGBT are good.
But they're just introducing them to the notion of families that look different, but love their family the same as they do. (There were also black couples and asian couples in there.)


I don't think that's something to be concerned about, even if you plan on telling your daughter why she should dislike LGBT people.
If you're so concerned about the notion of even exposing children to the idea that different families exist, before ever diving into all the subjects surrounding that, then I think that may be unreasonable.

There's also something about this that even parents against it should consider. And that is to help prevent bullying. Kids are often mean and will pick on people different than them. Even if you want to teach your child to dislike LGBT, you probably don't want them to bully another child for having different parents.

The subject and what it contains is irrelevant here. What is relevant is that sometimes some people won't agree with what is being taught to their kids and they should have the option to either converse with the educators (to create some sort of compromise) or to opt out. You do not create change by forcing something people don't want to swallow down their throats you do it thru cooperation, compromise, mutual respect and mutual understanding. The fact the parents appear willing to speak to the school regarding the matter and only expressed their disagreement thru protest (again, excluding those who sent threats of violence here) should be applauded not condemned. They have every right to protest.

Then that would accomplish the opposite of what should be ideal (w/c is tolerance, respect and kindness towards the LGBT community). One needs to think about best course of action and how to best accomplish it. Again, you do not create change by forcing an idea down those who do not wish to accept it.

Then bullying should have been the lesson that should have been taught at that age, not LGBT issues.

I feel like the subject should stay, but the parents should be allowed to opt out. Maybe when they notice that it is not having a detrimental effect on other kids, they may change their mind on the matter?

Last edited by DrDoomz - on 03 June 2019

CosmicSex said:
This is why people don't want religion in school. It doesn't belong there.
If you want your kid to only see what you wish, take them out of the school and teach them yourself.
You don't get to tell everyone else what their kids can't and can't see.
You just don't have the right to and I am blown away that people can't see that.

This actually have a bigger issue than religion.  Right now people are getting focused that it's Muslims but what if they were not Muslims but just parents who want more of a say in what is taught to their children at a certain age.  The fact that this was not communicated first to the community is a bigger issue I see then the protest.  As a parent I definitely do want a say in what my child learns in the school they attend.  My wife and I just went through this with the current school we registered our 2 kids in.  We looked over the curriculum so we understood what is being taught and how they are being taught before making a decision on the school they will attend.  Having that ability makes a world of difference then just taking what is taught and being complacent.



DrDoomz said:
Hiku said:

Well what you just said would have also applied if the school taught the kids about sexual education, or teaching them that the acts inherent to LGBT are good.
But they're just introducing them to the notion of families that look different, but love their family the same as they do. (There were also black couples and asian couples in there.)


I don't think that's something to be concerned about, even if you plan on telling your daughter why she should dislike LGBT people.
If you're so concerned about the notion of even exposing children to the idea that different families exist, before ever diving into all the subjects surrounding that, then I think that may be unreasonable.

There's also something about this that even parents against it should consider. And that is to help prevent bullying. Kids are often mean and will pick on people different than them. Even if you want to teach your child to dislike LGBT, you probably don't want them to bully another child for having different parents.

The subject and what it contains is irrelevant here. What is relevant is that sometimes some people won't agree with what is being taught to their kids and they should have the option to either converse with the educators (to create some sort of compromise) or to opt out. You do not create change by forcing something people don't want to swallow down their throats you do it thru cooperation, compromise, mutual respect and mutual understanding. The fact the parents appear willing to speak to the school regarding the matter should be applauded and only expressed their disagreement thru protest (again, excluding those who sent threats of violence here) should be applauded not condemned. They have every right to protest.

Irrelevant to what we already agreed on? That the parents should be able to voice their concerns? Yes, but I was never debating that in the first place, and just in case you thought so, made that clear in the last post by specifying that I agree they should be free to do so.

But it is relevant to the decision they'll eventually make. Perhaps they'll let the community vote.

DrDoomz said:
Then that would accomplish the opposite of what should be ideal (w/c is tolerance, respect and kindness towards the LGBT community). One needs to think about best course of action and how to best accomplish it. Again, you do not create change by forcing an idea down those who do not wish to accept it.

Tolerance for the intolerant eventually leads to the extermination of the tolerant.
I don't think every unreasonable notion should be entertained. And I think things like forcing people not to hang "no black people allowed" signs outside their stores for example is necessary in order to change society. People went to war over the right of owning slaves. They had to be forced to stop doing it.

DrDoomz said:
Then bullying should have been the lesson that should have been taught at that age, not LGBT issues.I feel like the subject should stay, but the parents should be allowed to opt out. Maybe when they notice that it is not having a detrimental effect on other kids, they may change their mind on the matter?

I'm sure they have lessons about bullying as well. But practical examples can help children associate them with things that are not unusual, or worthy of ridicule. They won't always realize how bad they're making another child feel by saying those things.
I wouldn't say this is a lesson of LGBT issues, because it is presented out of that context. Like showing a mother and father together isn't teaching them heterosexual issues. The lesson is merely that there are many different looking families, including skincolor, and very old people.

I'm not sure how I feel about them being able to opt out. Going back to what I said about not entertaining every idea that may be unreasonable, that is why we wouldn't generally allow children to opt out of say chemistry class, even if a considerable portion of the parents were against it due to their personal beliefs.
But I do think they should sit down and discuss it.

Last edited by Hiku - on 03 June 2019

LurkerJ said:
Carl said:
As someone who was born and raised in Bradford, I can't say I'm surprised at the developments in Birmingham.

That said, the authorities have banned them from protesting outside schools now. See where it goes when the children return after half-term. See if the police actually have the bollocks to make arrests.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-48480299

Bold: care to elaborate? 

Not much to elaborate upon.

Bradford has a large Muslim population and it's not really surprising to see the Muslim community band together to protest against something they disagree with. They're good at it, it's quite admirable. That this is happening in Birmingham, a City very similar to Bradford demographic-wise, doesn't surprise me in the slightest.



                            

Hiku said:
DrDoomz said:

The subject and what it contains is irrelevant here. What is relevant is that sometimes some people won't agree with what is being taught to their kids and they should have the option to either converse with the educators (to create some sort of compromise) or to opt out. You do not create change by forcing something people don't want to swallow down their throats you do it thru cooperation, compromise, mutual respect and mutual understanding. The fact the parents appear willing to speak to the school regarding the matter should be applauded and only expressed their disagreement thru protest (again, excluding those who sent threats of violence here) should be applauded not condemned. They have every right to protest.

1) Irrelevant to what we already agreed on? That the parents should be able to voice their concerns? Yes, but I was never debating that in the first place, and just in case you thought so, made that clear in the last post by specifying that I agree they should be free to do so. 

But it is relevant to the decision they'll eventually make. Perhaps they'll let all parents of the children attending the school vote.

DrDoomz said:
Then that would accomplish the opposite of what should be ideal (w/c is tolerance, respect and kindness towards the LGBT community). One needs to think about best course of action and how to best accomplish it. Again, you do not create change by forcing an idea down those who do not wish to accept it.

2) Tolerance for the intolerant eventually leads to the extermination of the tolerant.
I don't think every unreasonable notion should be entertained. And I think things like forcing people not to hang "no black people allowed" signs outside their stores for example is necessary in order to change society. People went to war over the right of owning slaves. They had to be forced to stop doing it.

DrDoomz said:
Then bullying should have been the lesson that should have been taught at that age, not LGBT issues.I feel like the subject should stay, but the parents should be allowed to opt out. Maybe when they notice that it is not having a detrimental effect on other kids, they may change their mind on the matter?

3) I'm sure they have lessons about bullying as well. But practical examples can help children associate them with things that are not unusual, or worthy of ridicule. They won't always realize how bad they're making another child feel by saying those things.
I wouldn't say this is a lesson of LGBT issues, because it is presented out of that context. Like showing a mother and father together isn't teaching them heterosexual issues. The lesson is merely that there are many different looking families, including skincolor, and very old people.

4) I'm not sure how I feel about them being able to opt out. Going back to what I said about not entertaining every idea that may be unreasonable, that is why we wouldn't generally allow children to opt out of say chemistry class, even if a considerable portion of the parents were against it due to their personal beliefs.

1) Irrelevant meaning that it is not what I am discussing. I agree about the subject existing, but also agree that parents should be allowed to voice their concerns as long as they do it peacefully and are willing to have a conversation about it to correct misunderstandings. You mentioned that the subject is mostly benign and I agree. But the content being reasonable and benign is irrelevant here as not everyone in the world share the same opinion about anything (what is reasonable to you and me may not be reasonable to other people). But I feel we already agree on the general concept, just not the details on it.

2) Only if the tolerant is known to be violent. The thing is, you do not convince the intolerant to be tolerant by fighting them, you do it by slowly teaching them (them, not their kids). And reasonable compromises can be reached when dialogue is allowed. Wouldn't simply allowing them to opt out be very reasonable. After all, I don't think they are demanding that the school teach anti-LGBT subjects and the school can simply reject calls to have the subject removed entirely. But  I don't see the hard in simply allowing their kids to opt out when they have zero choices in where to send their kids to school.

3) Well then, that should be enough, shouldn't it? And if bullying can't be prevented thru the methods being taught by the school, then I feel that LGBT tolerance might be even less effective.

Again, you might feel that what is being taught is mostly benign. But not everyone agrees with you.

4) There is an element of subjectivity when we think about reasonable-unreasonable here. I do not see this as unreasonable, for example. There is a difference between a science that teaches them a skill they would likely need in the future to get a career versus a subject that has ideological baggage attached to it. Like I said, if the school starts pushing fossil fuel into its subjects I feel like I should have the right to opt out.