Georgia school board fires teacher for reading a book to students about gender identity
apnews.com
A Georgia school board voted along party lines Thursday to fire a teacher after officials said she improperly read a book on gender fluidity to her fifth grade class.
why the fuck is a schoolboard voting "along party lines." I know it's been this way for a while, but it doesn't make it any less stupid that your godamn political party decides your EVERY attitude in life.
"I'm a Republican because I want small government! Government so small it fits in my head and determines literally everything I do! I'm also a free-thinker by the way, or at least that's what Sean Hannity says I should call myself."
It’s a republican strategy decades in the making to “fix” the phenomenon of liberal schools. School board members now campaign on national right wing outlets.
You’d also love to know that some hospitals boards are public and therefore elected positions are available to the community.
In Sarasota County in Florida they tried to get enough votes to take over the board to change the hospital policy from following CDC policy and best practices to the sole discretion of the doctor. This would of allowed the hospital to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID.
It ultimately failed so they are now opening a clinic in Venice Florida that follows no guidelines. The other half of the building is a podcast studio.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the intent.
Is this a case where she was fired because the book didn't have anything to do with the class she's teaching? Or because a bunch of parents went Karen and it made the school district look bad?
If a history class references passages from the bible, I think that is inappropriate in general but it depends on context. If it's using the bible to explain say the history of the Holy War, that makes sense. Having the context about the why does help.
If she was teaching Sex Ed and talking about gender fluidity, in that context it makes sense to me.
Like you can't talk about Hitler's philosophies without being up Mein kampf even at a shallow level. And to ignore it is disingenuous to education.
The thing is: You need the kids to have this information before puberty really starts to take off so they know what's going on with them when they start to feel things that are related to gender fluidity/homosexuality/whatever, so they grow up without the self-doubts and such but with the feeling that what they are is just another human being.
Things related to sexual attraction (e.g. homosexuality) might start around puberty, but things related to gender itself can start even earlier than that. This source claims that about ¾ of folks with gender dysphoria first experience it by age 7.
The intent is transphobia, anything else is an excuse.
The 'insubordination' part is especially confounding. She's insubordinate by reading a children's book to children? What?
If it's "insubordination' then it's safe to assume either (a) she was explicitly told not to do this by a superior, or (b) there must be a rule or regulation against it in the school district.
Or (c) they're making up bullshit reasons to fire her.
Applying logic to bigotry is a waste of time. It's just ingroup loyalty. The rest is mouth noises. They won't be clever noises, and they won't be consistent noises.
I did some digging to see if she was teaching a particular subject or anything. She was a teacher in the schools gifted program and per her Wikipedia page "According to the Cobb County School Board, Rinderle read the book during a time block that was supposed to be dedicated to mathematics instruction and enrichment, but Rinderle denies this allegation.".
I'm going to keep looking but it seems like their schooling is structured differently than I have any experience in. When I was in 5th grade we had 3 teachers that we rotated between for different subjects. It seems like she was responsible for several subjects or the entire curriculum for her students. Either way, the school boards intent is clear and malicious.
Thanks for looking into this.
Reading an off topic book during a particular time block isn't an offense deserving of termination to any same person, either.
The book, My Shadow Is Purple is one I have had the pleasure to read thanks to my wife's job as a school librarian. The theme of the book is acceptance of differences, centered around a child's parent who at first seems unaccepting but who surprises the child and the reader at the end for a happy, wholesome outcome.
The board went against the recommendation of a panel and fired her over this book, voting along party lines, for an offense that would not ever warrant termination in an even marginally sane world. To me, this strongly suggests that this is another case of extremist right wing / regressive people trying to silence and further marginalize people different from them. Out of fear and hate, as usual. The effect of which is detrimental to each of the children who are not gender conforming. I personally think this school board needs to hear from people opposed to their decision en masse. They have already gone too far with their harmful ambitions.
This is the dumbest reason to fire a teacher. The education system is already hurting for teachers.
Ain't that what they want? No education and kids that work factories for pennies.
same people rolling back child labor laws and campaigning against unions so.... yeah. Remember when Florida decided it didn't need educated people as teachers, and instead made it so anyone who was in the military (or had been married to a military person) eligible to be a teacher?
They're all fucking morons, actively hurting everyone around them
Stop attributing to stupidity that which is better explained by malice.
These people aren't morons; they know exactly what they're doing: deliberately trying to create an underclass to exploit.
In what way could this be remotely worse then pushing a Bible on to a class
In no way, for those who consider everyone of equal value.
The Bible has many disturbing stories and isn't appropriate for children in my view, having read the whole thing as a kid.
For those (i.e. bigots, fascists, ...) that feel humanity is a hierarchy of value where the in group is at the top and the out group are below that, they are opposed to validating the perfectly normal and human experiences of people with a range of gender identities. For the subset of those that consider themselves Christian, they believe (without evidence) that the Bible is somehow better for kids than allowing them to be themselves and be validated and accepted by others.
A friend of my kid is exploring their gender identity. We have known the family since they were a baby. My wife is friends with the mom. They are religious we aren't. Unfortunately the mom insists on rejecting their identity and new chosen name. I personally cannot comprehend how one can prioritize anything over my own child's happiness.
Sigh... of course it's fucking kkkobb county.
Cobb county has actually turned pretty solidly blue over the past decade.
So what? The school board and other elected officials haven't.
It will be soon
I hope so, but that's cold comfort to this already-fired teacher.
Also, even if it flipped today (and "soon" isn't that soon), it'd still be decades and decades before Cobb gets MARTA rail. Cobb's influence on metro Atlanta as whole is an unmitigated catastrophe and probably will be for the rest of my lifetime.
Cobb might join MARTA sooner than we think, but sadly you're mostly right. I have no hope for any rail expansion in my lifetime, and I'm not even old.
Unfortunately, "joining MARTA" and "getting rail" are far from synonymous, as Clayton is learning the hard way. But the United States in general's comprehensive inability to build infrastructure in a reasonable timeframe these days is a rant for another thread...
Depressing truth
The baller move here would be to show up and keep teaching anyways.
Got em
ITT:
https://youtu.be/a6tQ6P0jCvg
She violated district policies on controversial , so she's wrong. If she was teaching any subject other than human growth and development, she's doubly wrong.
Elementary school teachers should be teaching their assigned subjects, not their personal politics.
Great news!!
I just don't understand why 5th graders should even be exposed to that that early. For kids that haven't even gone through puberty yet I think gender identity is a pretty mature topic, and I don't think I'd want a teacher being the one to discuss it with my child.
And before someone says that I just want to suppress the info keeping it out of school, what about the flip side where a nut job teacher decides 2 genders is part of the lesson plan?
Edit: Never been so dogpiled about a comment before. In MY OPINION I just think 5th grade is too early. According to the hive mind I am wrong.
I also get nervous having government agencies (schools) involved with anything lgbtq+. We all know the government and our courts always side with the compassionate and accepting side. And would never suppress people's rights. /S
Some of you are out of control, I never thought that comment would cause people to assume my gender, orientation, political affiliation, hell one of you assumed my race (wtf)
5th grade seems like an appropriate time to start educating students about this as part of their health curriculum. That's the grade when they gave us the puberty talk in my old school district.
Some early bloomers absolutely start puberty during or before 5th grade.
For people outside the US how old would 5th graders actually be?
11 usually
That seems like a perfectly reasonable age to introduce a person to a topic like puberty.
Like I’m pretty sure I was taught the basics of it and what it does to your body when I was that age.
Isn't that a bit late to be starting basic health education? For girls, that's above the average age of beginning puberty and for both, it's years after the cutoff for it being consider precocious.
It is a bit late, but for what it's worth, we started the puberty lessons at 10 years old and I was one of the older kids in class. Most were 9.
Nowadays a lot of girls at that age already menstruate. It is not only appropriate, you might even argue it is a tad late.
Maybe it's just how I was raised or taught, sex ed didn't start till 7th/8th grade for me, and looking back seemed like an appropriate age to me.
But this isn't sex ed. Discussing gender doesn't mean discussing having sex.
The teacher was fired for teaching gender theory, not sex education. Those are very different things and I suspect you know that.
Yes they are two different things but they are related. Puberty can be devastating to a child who isn't comfortable with their body. In some cases puberty blockers are prescribed to delay the physical changes for children with gender disphoria. So educating gender identity along with puberty isn't a bad idea.
And yes, some children do start questioning their gender before they start puberty.
But this is all speculative. We don't know what the context for this teacher reading the book, but calling it inappropriate for their age is wrong.
I think it's wrong. Gender theory is pretty radical. It has no factual basis. Reinforcing delusions is universally destructive in psychology. As long as those delusions aren't reinforced, most kids reconcile without intervention. This study found that only 37% of children still identified as dysphoric five years later. This study found that 88% had desisted (they were no longer dysphoric). This mirrors other historical research into various areas of child psychology. Children frequently change identity and beliefs around identity.
As for puberty blockers, they don't just delay puberty. They also have devastating side effects, including osteoporosis and diabetes. That is why puberty blockers for gender dysphoria have now been banned in Sweden, the United Kingdom, and other European nations.
This topic is rather personal to me, so I've researched it to the best of my abilities. I'm happy to concede this isn't settled science, but must reinforce that this isn't settled science. It's not clear that affirmation is beneficial, and in fact, research indicates the opposite.
My sister "knew" she was trans when she was around 8. Granted, we didn't have the terminology back then so...
That being said, how is it a "mature" topic? We teach children the concept of "this boy" and "this girl" much earlier than that. And I'm confused how the concept has anything to do with puberty either.
Same with my younger sibling. It was very obvios early in their life, but we didn't had words for it either. Didn't understand and didn't took it that serious.
I had my period with 11 years, but suffered till i was 30. Cause it was a tabu to talk about that. I need to Suffer, i was told. BS.
It is crucial to give kids knowledge that they are not wrong. That they are not weird. That they know everything is okay and their parents are here guiding them. AND they need to know that other people are not weird so they can learn empathy.
Said it in another thread on this:
I'm trans.
I figured it out, literally in the fifth grade.
It's not too early. It's not too hard. It's not bad for them. Not having proper knowledge of things has made my life harder and worse than it had to be. If you want to help kids, teaching them things is how you do that. Hiding things from them hurts trans kids, and it makes it easier for predators to predate on kids. If you want to hurt kids, that's on you, but say it with your fuckin' chest. Don't hide behind this line that you know is false.
Oh, and re nutjob teachers:
We teach evolution in school, because the data backs it. We don't teach creationism in school, because the data doesn't back it. It's not that hard, this argument is pointless chaff.
As someone who grew up on the home school christian cult side of things.
I've done the abstinence only teaching, to the point I was in my teens and thought all girls had a penis.
Ya, ya, laugh it up.
Only thing I can say is, it doesn't work, it never did. Once body changes start happening kids have tons of questions and when the answer to those questions is "Do nothing", that's not going to be enough.
Especially when we grow up in a society that encourages asking questions and giving answers. Until it gets into this one topic.
"I'm privileged enough to have been born cis and straight in this cis-heteronormative world where my gender and sexuality have been openly discussed and supported (if not enforced) since birth, but when those who are trans and/or gay want to talk openly about how they've also known their gender and orientation for just as long, it's suddenly a sensitive topic I don't think children are ready to hear"
And you know what that says about you?
That you're not as tolerant or progressive as you like to tell yourself you are.
Jesus Christ I just thought 5th grade was too young. I think your reading my comment a little too deep.
No, I'm really not.
Because I guarantee that you have no issue with cis-heteronormative fairy tales being told to kids, nor cis-heteronormative gender stereotypes enforced on them, from significantly younger than the 5th grade. I also guarantee that you don't give a shit about how those who aren't cis or hetero are impacted by only ever learning about those who are.
You're only clutching your "think of the children!!1" pearls now because you've been socialised to other trans and gay people and to believe that their entire existence revolves around the act of sex, so in your mind teaching kids about gender (something we all have an experience of, even if we conclude we don't have one, and are aware of from as early as infancy) is the equivalent of somehow exposing them to porn or some other "immorality" (when the book literally just teaches kids about accepting others).
So you can keep telling yourself whatever you like to make yourself feel better, but the reality is that you are buying in to, and actively perpetuating, transphobia and homophobia.
Most of these discussions don't really get into the details of it. It isn't like a 5th grade teacher is going to go into exactly how the surgery and hormon injects work. It is a pretty top level PG rated discussion. I agree if that strawman was happening it would be if nothing else very strange.
There is a difference between telling a kid that two guys can marry and showing a kid a hardcore gay porno.
I mean I remember taking biology that went over reproductive anatomy in 6th grade. I feel like gender identity isn't any more mature of a topic than penises and vaginas. Maybe my school was an outlier though? Either way I think letting kids who might not feel comfortable with their gender know that their feelings are valid is important enough to warrant mentioning in elementary school
It's clearly a children's book. Do you really think it's presented in any sort of inappropriate way?
Except gender is a much less mature topic than sex and sexual attraction, something that should be taught around 5th grade if not earlier, before children have confusing feelings and their bodies undergo confusing changes. The media atmosphere already leaves impressions about sexuality in the minds of children much earlier, so there isn't much harm for parents or teachers to discuss the topic in a much healthier way.
Gender on the other hand is something impressed upon and experienced by even toddlers, so the topic of gender isn't all that mature, it's only treated as mature because of the social taboos regarding trans individuals.
People are gender non conforming from a young age, not after puberty. Making them wait to learn about it just means they will be confused about it for longer, whether it's themselves or their peers
You can easily talk to preschoolers about this stuff. A little bit of information about the world they live in doesn't hurt them in the least.
My daughters went through puberty at 9 and almost 9. That's 4th grade. The older one knew she was gay by 11. I had sex ed starting in 5th grade back in the fucking 80's.
Yeah why tell kids about puberty until they're done with it?
In response to the edit: I notice you pivoted from it being a function of "maturity" and placement relative to puberty, to now wrapping it in concern of the gov't - some how - surpressing "lgbtq rights" by teaching about their existence, which is a contradictory stance, but w.e.
Look, my sister's trans, my mothers are gay, and I'm the straight dood in my family. I'm not in a hivemind, and my experience watching them wade through life informs my thoughts. Your appeal that people who disagree with you are in one is troubling, to say the least.
Heck, you didn't even address a few anecdotes of people being precisely in the age range you had issue with, and instead chose to take a different tact -- instead doubling down you are correct.
I didn't "pivot", i didnt brink up the age aspect because it is pretty apparent that i'm in the minority (at least on here) with my opinion, The government / school aspect was before the edit if you look again. I only brought that back up because I felt i could expand my train of thought on it, i didn't feel there is anything to add about the age when such education is appropriate, especially when me and the other commenters disagree so strongly that nothing will come of it.
Yeah, you think they should wait until the trauma really sets in? That's the right time?
I think it's common to conflate Gender Dysphoria and sexual maturity since hormone therapy is a common treatment. Here is a study from the nlm about the age transgender adults first experienced symptoms of GD. It's only one study so maybe do some additional reading.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8766261/#:\~:text=Gender%20dysphoria%20history%3A%20Of%20the,among%20their%20earliest%20childhood%20memories.
What does puberty have to do with the topic? Should we wait til puberty to teach people that the flu or covid exists? It's a topic connected to many deaths, so surely it's a mature topic. Otoh, gender is a pretty basic topic parents force onto children, often before the child is even born. Why do we allow such inappropriate behavior towards literal children?
Well, some kids in 5th grade will start to wonder about themselves so it sounds pretty age appropriate to be taught differences exists.
I think my teachers did a really good job discussing this when I was a kid. In fact, I think they did such a good job, that it should be the standard until we have a more agreed-upon understanding of gender fluidity. I mean, I'm in favor of teaching it but I understand not everyone is and it's maybe not fully understood yet.
Way back in 2005, my 5th grade health teacher essentially said this:
"Usually men want to have sex with women and women want to have sex with men. But sometimes, men want to have sex with men, women want to have sex with women, and not everyone feels like they were born in the right body. Sometimes, men feel like women and women feel like men.
You guys have probably heard a lot about gay marriage and homosexuality in the news. This is what they are talking about and adults don't always agree on some of this. A lot of people think it's okay to be gay or to change your gender. Other people think it goes against their religion. I'm here if you have any questions, but you can also ask your parents what they think about it."
This was after he sent home a permission slip to talk about sex ed. in general. Every parent signed except for one Muslim girl in the class. She went and watched movies in the room next door because her parents preferred to talk to her about it in their own way.
I thought it was a pretty uncontroversial way to handle this whole thing. We could probably go a bit farther today, but this was pretty progressive for 2005.
I remember this so vividly because I could feel that there was tension around the topic and I could tell that my teacher was respectfully trying to share "both sides" of an issue. I use quotes around both sides because I honestly think homophobia and transphobia are ridiculous views to hold, but I know people have them, unfortunately. And I do think people have some right to dictate what education their child receives even if they're teaching them abhorrent things.
I remember thinking it was interesting that adults didn't agree on this. There was a legal battle over gay marriage licenses in New York City going on in 2005 and it was all over the local news, so I remember it being a big deal.
At what age should people be given the mental framework to understand their own gender?
I was in catholic school and started sex ed (well what counts as sex ed for a catholic school) in 5th grade. They told us about some of the most extreme cases of what some.of the worst sti's do and we watched video of an actual birth so if we could handle hearing and seeing those things in a catholic school, I think 5th graders can handle learning about how people express their genders.
They already do that in every school I know of. These idiot say they are indoctrinating kids to be homosexual or trans ( tbf not sure if there is a real difference besides body look) yet all “health” classes focus on the male and female reproductive system. I remember parents getting In an uproar over high schoolers being given condoms in the class.
Yea some children are rebellious against the norma, however I truly believe that if the parents want to control the schooling so bad, then their asses should quit their jobs and home school. Otherwise they should all just STFU.
Let's keep going. Hope you disabled notifications.
Just cuz you had a bad take doesn't mean we're a fucking hive mind. I didnt even bother reading others' replies before giving you my piece. But way to be condescending to cushion your ego!
So you support government censorship as a tool to protect against... government censorship?
Still haven't read what others had to say, it's probably quite disgusting yes
Look you had a bad take and now you're lashing out to protect your ego. its fine
You are 100% correct. Absolutely no reason to be bringing up any of this nonsense to 10 year olds.
But good luck having a logical conversation with some about this - just because you don't want 10 year olds exposed to this, they immediately (and quite wrongly) accuse of you being some bible-thumper or some right wing nazi or a MAGAt or someone along those lines. Maybe you just know your kid and know it is too early to discuss this stuff with them? This teacher forced the hand of the school board panel to fire her because she specifically pull this stunt against parent wishes.
It is obnoxious to see that many on the far-left act the same way and use the same attack techniques as those on the far-right. They both are just as stubborn and just as closed-minded to altering viewpoints. What makes it especially bad is that liberals at least like to pretend that they are open-minded to differing viewpoints, but the reality is that for many, that is absolutely not the case.
This shit has no business in schools, especially at this young age. Those who are stubbornly pushing this nonsense are doing way more harm than good to liberal causes. These people are painting a terrible picture to the country of what the far-left wants to do and that they will do it regardless of what parents agree to.
You all are setting the movement back, not helping it move forward. You come off as clowns.
I don't care what you feel, if the parents tell you "don't read that to my kid" and you do it anyway, you get what you get.
No genuinely, 100%, actually, fuck that. Forget gender, lgbt, and all that for a moment. In a very general sense, a teacher has a duty to society to challenge children and teach them to be better people. Sometimes that will clash with the bigotry and racism held by their parents, and that's a good thing. The moment we prevent teachers from trying to make a better world is the day our society ends.
Until the pendulum swings, like it always does, and the right wing grabs hold of all of these tools that the left has created. And then you'll be told that you have no choice regarding the changes they will make. It's best to leave that authority with parents.
What in the country fried fuck are you talking about? Do you honestly believe that conservative teachers aren't already doing this? There is no pendulum. Conservatives attempt every trick they can come up with to sneak their ideology into classrooms.
So don't play their games. Get the people on your side, instead of trying to get around them.
Tell that to the right.
in 2020 51.31% of the popular vote went to "the left" and 46.85% to "the right".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election#Results
That 81 million and 74 million. Sometimes it feels like both halves are pretending the the other half is all crazy people. So you're saying that we should do something because the other side does it too.. But if the other side is crazy, why do we emulate them?
Oh no, God forbid the right gets a hold of checks notes gender fluidity.
Everything is a tool to authoritarians, it doesn't mean we should stop making tools.
...yes it does?
so what you're saying is that everything's fucked, lets give up?
No, let's move ahead carefully to not fall over and slide further back down the hill.
Don’t teach my kids reading!
Don’t learn my childrens ‘bout no demonic algebra.
Don’t read that evil evolution book to my offspring.
I mean, have you seen the symbols they use in math? It's obviously a demon summoning. No kid of mine will learn about librul irrational numbers. /s
But naw, that's what they sound like. They want to pick and choose facts to teach their kids. They might not be going after math symbols this time, but they're still anti-reality. Parents can have some leeway in how to raise their kids, but they don't get to choose to keep their kids ignorant of reality. Well, unless they live in Georgia apparently. Or Florida. Or one of several other states that have done similar and just coincidentally happen to be red states.
Full of nuance. Love it!
It doesn't matter how backwards you think it is, the parents have the authority. If you want the kids to start learning a topic, get the parents to agree.
Oh, my bad. I didn’t realize the parents were all experts in education and also made the rules and could even change reality to fit their whims.
I hate it when people try to change reality to fit their whims.
Says the person doing exactly that.
Like it or not, parents don't own children, nor do they have an absolute authority over them.
If parents abuse or neglect their child (and yes, depriving them of an education is both) then the other responsible adults in that's child's life have not only every right, but the absolute responsibility, to override the abusive parents' instructions or demands, and intervene in the child's best interest.
Hey now! You stop it with that reasonable speak! That isn’t allowed on the internet.
Then take the next step and vote to get those kids taken away, if you think it's that much harm.
jesus tapdancing christ, just say you think parents should control every aspect of their child’s lives including everything they THINK and HEAR.
Child disagrees with parents? Fuck em, parents are always right. Always. Right?
All I'm saying is that if you want the government to parent the kid, then have the government parent the kid full time.
one of the man benefits of public education are having the kids taught by people who actually know what they are teaching, rather than random parents who think they know. yeah, its not perfect, but parents generally make worse teachers than, ya know, trained teachers.
its classic micromanagement of the kid. let go
Conservatives believe that their children are their property. Or a close analog thereof.
So you teaching their kid something they don't want the kid to know is treated like you're damaging "their stuff".
Conservatives are all about protecting property, even when said property is actually a person who might not want their "protection".
I'm very pro public schools. I'm only saying that parents must have authority over schools when it comes to their kids.
You contradict yourself.
No I mean what I say.
You mean what you say, but don't understand it. So you contradict yourself.
Two things can be true. Reading sure is tough!
I bet it is.
@vlad76 @originalucifer
It takes a village to raise a child, for good reason.
That's some absolute nonsense. I shouldn't have to rely on other parents for my kid to be able to learn certain things in school. They don't like it, they can pull their kid from the class during that instruction. This whole thing of "I don't want it, so no one gets it" is absolute bullshit.
If that teacher tried to teach creationism against school rules it would be the same exact thing, but you'd feel different about it.
Parents have the option of homeschooling their kids. That's them exercising their authority. But public school curriculum should be decided by an apolitical body that follows evidence based practices. Don't like it as a parent? Then homeschool.
I don't disagree.
Try getting a majority of parents to agree to your opinion first.
I don't have one. I'm just saying that if it's not the curriculum then it shouldn't be taught. But if you want it to be taught then you need to change the curriculum, and if you want to do that, then you need the parents to be on board. So, my assumption is that the parents in that community are against this topic being taught to their kids. It doesn't matter what the topic is. A teacher just choosing to do read books on topics that the parents may believe their kids are not ready for is wrong.
Did you read any required books in school? Did you parents have to fill out a form agreeing to those books? If not, then maybe "you need the parents to be on board" is a bullshit excuse.
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that parents should be on the board. Although maybe some should? I don't really care.
What I'm saying is that in the real world, I hope, the people have influence on what their government does. So, when the government does something, like add something to school curriculum, the people can be involved. That's why we vote for things. That's the parental influence on schools that I'm referring to.
@vlad76 @Decimit
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKjRMMU9HI
https://youtu.be/dgha9S39Y6M
It's not parents' job to dictate school curricula. All these "PaReNtS' rIgHtS" bills are bullshit pandering to people afraid of their own shadows. They can all take a long walk off a short pier.
Ok, but was it in the curriculum? Because if not then the teacher wants doing her job.
Personal responsibility for all, if you don't like the public system teaching publically accepted science of psychology and biology pay for your own schooling then.
Doesn't sound like that book was part of the psychology or biology curriculum.
if you cant handle your child being taught reality, then maybe teach them your self? you can home school.
If it was part of the curriculum then it's one thing. But if it was a choice made by this one teacher against the wishes of the people who wrote the curriculum then it's right that they got fired.
Independent thought IS overrated after all. Many things in society are tamped down to some lowest common denominator level to placate the masses and be palatable to the broadest cross segment. Emerging ideas though need discussion and facts being what they are the adults in the room are much more likely to be fixed in their ways and unwilling to acknowledge anything that goes against their 'good old days' perceptions of right and wrong.
I happen to be one of those adults and understand that some of the lenses I view things through are tinged by the experiences and perspectives around me while growing up. Those things though are not the current reality that we have to work within. I may not agree with every notion that my kids bring forth, but they're welcome to challenge me on it to explain their point. If you don't allow kids the information to make a detemination of their own however then the future world suffers for it.
I don't disagree with you. But, there's a reason I don't show my toddler violent movies. I don't think that the kid is old enough to see that. Also, a 4 year old doesn't need to know what World War 2 was. I'm not saying that it directly compares to this topic but I'm saying that a parent has to make choices of what I fo their child can consume based on what they think their child is ready for. So, if there's a topic that I don't think my kid is ready for now, and the school tells me that they're not going to cover it now, then if a random teacher goes against that, I'll have a problem with it. As you should.
The way around that around here is a parental permission slip if there is any question on a topic being age appropriate. Affirmative rejection of education by the parent is recordable and should be actionable by society if at egregious enough levels where it's seen as restricting a proper education.
I have a problem with your logic. Because in that world the status quo would never change and people would still be taught that homosexuality is a mental disorder. And I feel as though you would not agree with that.
First, parental permission slip. I'm actually against a system that constantly checks with parents regarding every little thing. I'm just saying that parents already have an influence as the public on what the curriculum is. So, if there's a topic you want, but is missing from it, or if the topic is present and you don't like it, then go to the school board. Don't insert, or remove content on a whim. And if the curriculum is not changed and you're not willing to deal with that, then private or home schooling is an option. So I don't think permission slips are necessary.
"Affirmative rejection of education by the parent is recordable..." How do you define "rejection" and "education"? And how is that being recorded? People had to reject a lot of education in order for the civil rights movement to get any traction. I wonder what kind of things we were being taught about women before they were allowed in schools. The problem I have with the lack of definition here is that you follow it up with "...and should be actionable by society..." because that means there's legal action that can be taken based on those loose definitions. And the rest of "...if at egregious enough levels where it’s seen as restricting a proper education." doesn't clarify it at all.
The "good guys" aren't going to be in charge forever. And we need to make sure that we don't make it easy for the "bad guys".
The notion of the slips as I've seen them implemented is as such:
In X grade we will have education on Y topic which has some measure of content that parents may find questionable for their children. If you object to this then please advise us in writing (through whatever means the school prefers) and we will have them placed in an alternative class dring that time.
If the parent rejects the class then it will be presumed they will attend the class the next year/semester, if it is rejected again at that time then there needs to be some intervention to have a discussion to identify a specific cause. That could include school counselers, social services or whomever else is required to ensure the kids get a comprehensive education in accordance with the established modern standards.
Parental interests should be noted, but not the exclusive dictation of what information is available to a kid. Those who look to restrict access to information are almost universally going to be doing so because they're afraid that their own version of things is going to be seen as wrong, usually for good reason. Ignorance is bred in isolation through unopposed repetition of opinions stated as facts.
Helping shape curriculum is distinct from the choice to engage with it at any given point and not mutually exclusive. Arguing for the exclusion of information is almost always bad, arguing for the inclusion of it is less often bad but needs to be backed by sound logic and science.
I'm reading what you wrote and I disagree with a lot of it, but I feel like our disagreement runs deeper into something more fundamental. I'm just not sure what it is. To my logic, it's obvious that this kind of centralized influence on childhood development is a bad idea because of how easily it can fall into the wrong hands. The classic "But what about when the bad guys win an election?" comes to mind. And I don't know if that's just not a concern, or is it not even a consideration for you? To me it's all about the net-positive or net-negative. And to me, the system you propose has a net-negative impact on society.
I assume that there will be some measure of eternal back and forth as one side or the other fights to have their side expressed, but that given ready access to information there is an inevitable tendancy for progressive ideals to become adopted as the norm.
Consider the major advances over the past 200 years in society, women's suffrage, civil rights, the generalized acceptance of LGBT rights, etc. Im the early 1900s it was the norm to say interracial couples where immoral, now to publically say so would have you in a virtual pillory. When I was young gay jokes where commonplace and to be gay was used as an insult, now I'm here arguing that free discussion of such as being good science and should be valid public education material. Short of extrordinary efforts at repression those kinds of advancements are not going to be reverted. The very fact that I even can have such a discussion with people across the globe at leisure helps ensure that.
There's a solid reason why urban centers tend to have a more liberal bend to them in that the common exposure to alternate ideas, particularly at a young age, lends itself to acceptance of those ideas on their merits.
I don't disagree that progressive ideas tend to be accepted as time goes on and that the "left" tends to be the main driving force behind them. However I also don't think that the people that are on the left or right are inherently different. They believe different things and act on those beliefs, but underneath that there's a common biological limitation of being human with a human brain. And I don't think that we humans are as smart as we think. So, even the good side needs to have a limit on its power. Every government thinks they are the good guys. Because of that I fundamentally oppose creating systems where power is centralized in "the few".
That's the crux of it though. Public education and the standards of it are by default driven by a consensus on truth and rational. What's perceived as truth can change over time as people learn amd society accepts new norms, but by the fact that these things are at least obstensibly deemed by the majority of credible bodies to be true, that by definition doesn't make it power centralized in the few. The outliers that reject the standards are the few in this case and are welcome to voice their opinions through whatever reasonable means they wish, but are not permitted to deny the existance of or silence the generally accepted norm.