Posted on 08/13/2005 10:25:42 PM PDT by scripter
Things have certainly changed everywhere. ONE generation ago, parents big worry was grades. And now? It's a constant battle over the physical and spiritual welfare, on top of marks. Everyone wants a piece of your kids. Remember Channel One? They promised educational TV in class would modernize education and give more time to teacher/child interaction. What crap! It degenerated into commercialism and indoctrination in no time. Who could have ever imagined gay activists getting class time to indoctrinate and normalize homosexuality and getting FULL support from teacher's unions and school boards. And now, Ritalin and Prozac for 7 year-olds- to raise their grades, to give them the best shot at life. Horsesh!t! ADHD is a marketing invention of Ciba Gigi-period. The disorder simply didn't exist when I was in school-now 1/3 of kids have this "physical" disease? Riiight. Don't look to the FDA to step in and put a stop to it. Big Pharma owns academic medicine and the DSM. These people are FRIENDS with each other since med school and business college. They golf and go to the same spas together. Could they stop the massive fraud behind Vioxx, PhenPhen, Progesterone, Ritalin and off-labelling SSRIs? Poor kids. You're right, Booka, it is all gone. School is a very dangerous place in 2005. (/rant)
I've never felt my sexuality to be fluid.
I still remember (when I was about 12) the first time my sexuality became fluid .
Then they should be told to get the f$%k over it because only two genders exist.
To you and me, sure. For today's youth (and some adults), it's all about how you feel on the inside at any specific time. The issue of gay teens being attracted to male or females could be the launching of a new type of sexuality with a mix of transgenderism.
( ;-D
""Gay Cornell University Professor Ritch Savin-Williams argues that teenagers are rejecting gender categories in their pursuit of satisfying sexual relationships. And, he's encouraged by the trend."'
so homosexuality is a choice, not something your born with?
That would be a logical conclusion to the article, but that's definitely not what they are trying to communicate. What's unfortunate is they can't see the obvious or they refuse to see the obvious.
it is sort of like the left promoting pro-choice and pro-gay is something youre born with messages.
then I guess it is ok to abort fetuses that are suspected to be gay
we as a nation need to be more pissed.
I can't say this enough. Our culture needs to get educated on the subject and take action but few ever really do anything about it. IMO, more folks (many, many more) need to yank their kids out of public schools.
An average boy loses the 'icky' feeling they have for girls by age 7 - 8, after that, the 'icky' feeling is used due to peer pressure, when, deep inside, they don't consider girls to be that much 'icky'. 12 is a bit late, but don't worry, different people grow up differently.
Sounds like a pedophile to me. Why isn't this pervert in prison?
Because in academia, gay activists have replaced the term pedophilia with the more benign "intergenerational love" That way predators like Savin-Williams can indulge and get funding for their perversions. Read this individual's published reseach- it's basically just his sickness dressed up in academic weasel words in his desperate attempt to feel normal.
After the 9th circus ruling that we have no right to object to what is taught in public school, I'll definitely be finding a way to get my daughetr out.
Mine is. I drift from blondes to brunettes to redheads, all in about an hour.
He admits he skewed the research, molded it to fit the researchers, misled teens - or what we used to call 'lied'. Little wonder, then, that he was such a follower of the 'research' of Kinsey et al.
In Chapter 7, "First Sex," Savin-Williams introduces the subject of gay childhood sexual experiences by noting that Alfred Kinsey and his associates were the first to systematically explore the "onset and nature of sexuality during childhood." (p. 133)
I wonder, does he follows up the research with the effects of his pan-sexuality tweaking - i.e. is it fair then given what he's said about how he's invented (misled) his research, to assume that some straight teens, teens without pan-sexual leanings, have been misled or coerced or suggested to try sexuality that didn't feel led to and may have led to conflict?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.