[eskimobobseal]

This should be classified as sexualizing children which is PEDOPHILIA.

From Steve Crowder:

Quote:

Speaking of cross-dressing, a Michigan school has been incorporating LGBT awareness into its curriculum. They’re doing so via a book about a “boy in drag dress.” Apparently it’s a big issue for third graders. As in 8/9-year-olds.

“Morris Micklewhite and the Tangerine Dress” is a children’s book about a young boy who likes to wear a dress to school. He also wears high heels and fingernail polish. Morris finds himself isolated and ridiculed but eventually convinces his classmates that he is just a boy who happens to like to wear a dress the color of a tiger and his mother’s hair and they eventually accept him. The story aims to encourage acceptance and discourage bullying.

“The book was chosen after some students kept raising questions about some people dressed differently,” [Superintendent] Bekhm said.

If anything, these schools are itching to make an unnecessary political statement. They probably took notes from Target. They want to seem cutting edge and progressive. Not when it comes to important stuff, like actual education or technology, though. Just FEELINGS.

Source: http://www.infowars.com/third-graders-fo...-in-dress/

This is all being done by design for the purpose of confusing the population with regard to gender thus rendering them a bunch of docile sheep who are easier to control. I know one thing, when I start having kids they are staying the hell away from this corrupt, disgusting, leftist propaganda indoctrination system known as common core education.

The degeneracy of western culture continues...

[mammal]

This is twisted and sick.

[Thomas the Rhymer]

School curriculums serving propaganda purposes is not a new thing though.

I remember going to school as a kid in the 80's. It was the dying days of apartheid in South Africa. We had to learn various propaganda bullshit such as:

- How slavery in South Africa was not bad, and that South African slaves were the best treated slaves in the world
- How the Afrikaners were God's chosen people to settle South Africa
- How the interior South Africa was completely empty when whites settled it and blacks only arrived after the white settlements appeared
- How the British, in their misguided attempts at social justice, kept trying to undermine white rule and therefore social stability during the colonial times.
- How Apartheid is awesome

Remember, I had to answer test questions on the above nonsense. I also remember standing in assembly in the mornings before school started in order to sing the national anthem, which was all about how white pioneers crossed the mountains in ox wagons and endured hardship to settle the country and stuff.

Then apartheid started dismantling and the classroom environment started getting oddly uncomfortable at times. The teachers didn't know what to teach anymore, so a lot of the South African history curriculum was simply dropped.

Then in the 90's there was a shift towards African writers and the history of South Africa as seen in the context of the struggle for freedom. All of a sudden slavery was evil, Afrikaners were invaders, and there were rich thriving kingdoms that existed before whites appeared, and the British, in their misguided attempts at social justice, kept trying to conciliate the Afrikaners and therefore undermined social stability during the colonial times. And how Apartheid was very very bad. And of course, there was a new anthem, about how Africans are all one big happy family and that we should stop all the wars and suffering and stuff.

The truth, of course, is either lost or somewhere inbetween the extremes; but lately I've become rather cynical and I think it is more lost than anything else.

It was interesting to watch this sudden shift in propaganda and how the teachers were forced to adapt to it.

The point I guess I'm trying to make: the issue above is not the students are made to read some book about a transvestite (although yes, that is abhorrent), but that education tends to deal in propaganda. We should focus not just on getting rid of the book, but on insisting that the purpose of education is not to spoon feed propaganda.

[dicknixon72]

At heart, education - outside of hard sciences - is supposed to generate discussion amongst different viewpoints through which learning occurs. Anything more is indoctrination.

[philosophical_recovery]

Public schools: Best way to inject propaganda into soft young minds ala Bezmenov.

And the "slippery slope" of homosexuality is somehow still a logical fallacy.

[samsamsam]

Have to imagine at some point there will be a resurgence of religion. The pendulum has swung too far.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

This is the modern-day version of a controversy we had back in the 1990s, when schools had kids read a book called "Heather Has Two Mommies."

As the title suggests, the book was meant to get kids to see lesbian relationships as normal. There was also one titled "Daddy Has a Roommate" (I'm not making this up!).

Here is my question: Where do schools get off telling us what to accept? This is not teaching, it's PREACHING a specific type of MORALITY.

Doing this would be fine if all sorts of moral preaching was allowed in schools, but they banned religion -- so it's only their flavor-of-the-month leftist morals that are allowed to be taught.

The state has usurped the family's role in giving its kids a moral upbringing. We now answer to the schools, not parents or churches, about what constitutes right or wrong. Say the wrong thing and you get suspended and there goes college...and your future.

How is this not a church by any other name? When you're telling people what to think and punishing them when they don't think that, you're a church, not a school.

The mistake Americans made is that when they allowed God to be taken out of the public schools, they didn't say that now that Christian morality can't be taught, NO morality at all can be taught. So that left the door open for the leftists who actively sought to replace traditional religion with their own brand of anti-religion.

Wonder what the contrived "issue" the schools will come up with in the next decade? Cross-species dating? Coming soon to a bookstore near you: "Heather loves Rover!"

[Scoundrel]

Here is the author of the book:

On the book's main Amazon page, there are 7 instances of the word "mother." 0 instances of "father."

Quote:

One day when Morris feels all alone and sick from their taunts, his mother lets him stay home from school.

His mother does not pass judgment when she notices a boy wearing a dress in her son's painting, and she complies with his desire for nail polish.

After spending the weekend with his mother, Morris begins to feel better and on Monday morning he begins school with a different outlook on life.

Seems poor Morris doesn't have a Dad in his life.

[BortimusPrime]

I think the goal is to manufacture evidence of transgenderism in children at as young an age as possible. This is the only way liberals can "prove" their model of sexuality where a child is born with the wrong gendered brain and needs to have his genitals removed and sold to the Chinese. If you're born the wrong gender, it's just like being born as one of the "victim" races so liberals will get to come to your defense and have a new social justice cause to crusade. So every time a little kid puts his mommy's dress on they rush to insist he's actually trans, and put the poor kid on hormones just to ensure that he'll never actually grow out of it.

It's the same as when the gay community jumped on the "born that way" model, because they were trying to undercut the argument from the Christian right that homosexuality was a behavior subject to free will.

[philosophical_recovery]

(05-14-2016 02:47 PM)Scoundrel Wrote:  

Here is the author of the book:

On the book's main Amazon page, there are 7 instances of the word "mother." 0 instances of "father."

Quote:

One day when Morris feels all alone and sick from their taunts, his mother lets him stay home from school.

His mother does not pass judgment when she notices a boy wearing a dress in her son's painting, and she complies with his desire for nail polish.

After spending the weekend with his mother, Morris begins to feel better and on Monday morning he begins school with a different outlook on life.

Seems poor Morris doesn't have a Dad in his life.

More than anything, she needs a treatment for Lindy West Disease.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

I'm gonna take this to a weird place. Go with me on this.

Point #1: Men have been wearing dresses for ages. It's already normal.

David Bowie wore a dress. So did Kurt Cobain. So did Frank Zappa and the Mother's of Invention on the sleeve of We're Only in it for the Money. So did comedian Milton Berle. Alx Rose wore kilts on stage. And so on.

All of this was done long before they started preaching about it in schools. If it's so taboo, then why have men done this already? Granted, the people I mentioned were in the entertainment business, but no one stopped them. They were not beat up off-stage because of this.

Point #2: If you can be born with the wrong gender identity it stands to reason you can be born with the wrong racial identity.

Al Jolson wore blackface on stage. Yet that eventually was considered to be in poor taste. Had Bowie or Cobain attempted to perform in blackface, their careers would have ended on the spot.

But what if a kid is white and feels black? Why is it OK for the kid to feel like a girl BUT NOT A BLACK GIRL?

In other words, why is #1 OK but #2 isn't? By WHAT morality do we judge one to be right and the other to be a sin? Not by the bible. Because we're not going by that in schools.

You can say "blacks are offended by blackface." Point taken. But what if Christians and/or victims of sexual abuse are offended by boys in dresses? Why does their opinion count less? Who is to say one group matters more than another group?

Ultimately, this comes down to who gets the authority to say what's right and wrong. Who is it, then? The media? The schools? Whatever public opinion happens to be at the moment?

When you make morality "whatever people say it is" you open yourself up to tyranny. What if morality becomes "all Jews are bad?" Should we go along with that, too, just because?

To conclude, dresses on men aren't as taboo as liberals would like to believe. Blackface is. If they really want to "defy norms," that's what they should be pushing.

[philosophical_recovery]

(05-14-2016 04:18 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

[snipped brilliant point on transgenderism is okay but blackface is badthink]

This is goodthinking, progressive, and empowering:



This is badthinking, regressive, racist, and cultural appropriation:



How could we be any clearer?

[scorpion]

This is pure evil. What's so insidious about this is the fact that children at this age are only just beginning to understand acceptable social norms and differentiate between right and wrong. They have no other frame of reference for understanding these things except what they're taught by their parents, teachers and society. And now they're being taught at a very impressionable age that mental illness and sexual deviance are perfectly normal and healthy. This is a deliberate effort to poison the minds of the youth and corrupt their concept of morality, as well as to totally confuse their natural understanding of human sexuality. It's brainwashing, pure and simple.

The end goal of these efforts is the sexualization of children and the push for acceptance of pedophilia as a sexual orientation. It's already clear the route they are taking to do this - the transgender and homosexual nonsense is the battering ram they're using to break down the gate. Once you establish that it's acceptable for young children to declare themselves to be the opposite sex they were born, and to encourage them to undergo mutilating surgeries and hormone treatments to enhance this delusion, it's not a far leap to declaring them capable of consenting to sexual relations with adults. After all, if a 10 year old boy is deemed to be legally entitled to chop off his penis, how can one say he is unfit to consent to sex? Is not the mutilation much more extreme? That's how they've already gotten their foot in the door.

Does that sound too crazy and fucked up to be true? Just wait. These people are sick and insane. They love to destroy all that is good and innocent, which is why children are their primary target. Children who have been sexually molested grow up with all sorts of mental problems, and are an order of magnitude more likely to become homosexuals and drug addicts, as well as child molesters themselves. These people simply want to destroy and degrade humanity until everyone is as sick and twisted as they are. I know it sounds hyperbolic, but this is truly demonic stuff.

[Scoundrel]

(05-14-2016 03:32 PM)BortimusPrime Wrote:  

I think the goal is to manufacture evidence of transgenderism in children at as young an age as possible.

A "transgender" child is the dream trophy/status symbol for an SJW parent — even more so than an autistic child.

If you present the idea of a boy wearing a dress to very young kids in a storybook, at least some boys will express interest in doing this themselves. Didn't we all emulate things we heard about or saw on TV when we were young? Don't all children act out roles of characters in books/movies/shows as a normal part of play?

This sort of thing allows the SJW parent to be able to say retroactively that their son was playing dress-up with his sister's clothes and asking for nail polish when he was five. This is used as evidence that the child really, truly is transgendered.

(05-14-2016 04:39 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

Does that sound too crazy and fucked up to be true? Just wait. These people are sick and insane.

Just look at the video I posted above of the author of this book. It's obvious — or at least it ought to be — that this person is not mentally well. This is someone (presumably female) who is deliberately trying to look outrageous and gross, and yet at the same time is utterly indistinguishable from countless other modern, lunatic, liberal SJW's with an agenda to push.

[LeeEnfield303]

(05-14-2016 11:37 AM)mammal Wrote:  

This is twisted and sick.

Sending your kids to a state-run school constitutes parental malpractice.

[LeoneVolpe]

This is absolutely disgusting. Can people not see this for the unapolegetic attempt at brainwashing our nation's youth that it is? If this is indicative of the curriculum being taught across the country, parents need to start pulling their children out of schools and educating them at home. Why the hell should our hard-earned tax dollars be used to support this?

[CRR]

They're teaching this to eight year olds???

   

EDIT:

And you know what, if I were to have kids, I don't want a woman who looks like that to teach them anything.

Purple hair, obese, mentally unstable. Just like at my office there are dress requirements, there should be the same at schools, and I would expect a teacher to have certain standards just as a client would run in another direction if I didn't conduct myself in a professional manner.

And I'm sure the SJWs would freak out if someone said this. However, I am not saying she can't dress or act the way she wants in her private life, what I'm saying is I don't have to think it's ok, nor would I ever accept someone like that teaching my children anything.

[budoslavic]

Without a doubt, this is pretty disturbing, sick and twisted in the "Progressive world".

[Mage]

Not gona pile on why this is sick, because it's obvious, just want to note that the school director in the OP video has an extreme case of Backpfeifengesicht. I know a cuck when I see one.

[HectorLavoe]

Are private schools any better or is it the same indoctrination but for children of the wealthy? Maybe it is time for red pill charter schools.

[Cr33pin]

Young kids are dying for some kind of identity, to fit in, to be popular.

They read a book like this and they think boys wearing dresses is the new trendy thing to do. So boys start thinking wearing dresses are cool and people will accept them an they live this facade for a while then one day realize they don't like to wear dresses but that has become their identity and with the way we are raising weak kids today more then likely they kill themselves. Then we blame bigots and bullies for pushing them to suicide. With all this bigotry the "higher ups" decide in order to prevent more suicides we need more tolerant kids so they make them read more books about boys in dresses and chicks with metaphorical dicks... an the cycle keeps on keeping on.

[Glaucon]

this is child abuse

[All or Nothing]

On a day to day basis, I am a white man.

But... when it comes to getting a job, applying for college, or federal subsidies, I am a black woman.

That is how my fluid gender and racial identity works.

If you have to ask questions, you are part of the problem. #transphobic #racist #buzzwords

[infowarrior1]

Homeschool your kids now!!! I am not kidding. Be prepared to fight when the time comes. This is not going to stop.

[EDantes]

(05-14-2016 04:48 PM)Scoundrel Wrote:  

A "transgender" child is the dream trophy/status symbol for an SJW parent — even more so than an autistic child.

Definitely makes me wonder how many of these so-called "5 year old transgenders" were actually coached into it by depraved parents.