Yanks and Brits angry about gay fairytales

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

oic

i guess it's time for me to come out of the closet, i must be gay

[R00k]

That's the obvious joke, yes.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

it's like you guys and I are from different worlds

[Scourge]

I think that's what he's saying.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

do any of you people know any gays or lesbians?

[R00k]

lol


Seriously though - different worlds? You've been posting here long enough to know a setup for a gay joke. Who here hasn't been called a homo?

You're exaggerating for effect now.

[Scourge]

do any of you people know any gays or lesbians?

Yes and yes.

[iambowelfish]

Can you tell me of a textbook you had that taught kids that men and women were supposed to be together? I don't recall anything of the sort.

We're not talking about textbooks here. The thread is about "gay fairytales." I would hope that textbooks teach the facts and only include sexuality where it's relevant.

Do our established fairytales teach that men and women were supposed to be together? Taken as a whole, they do.

I was referring to the story being added to school curriculum. I mistook your post as addressing the same thing.

So to restate my position: I have no problem with this being published and widely distributed. Just not as school curriculum.

Not sure we agree.

text·book (tĕkst'bʊk') pronunciation
n.

A book used in schools or colleges for the formal study of a subject.

There are plenty of story books in the early stages of school. We never called them textbooks (at least in the UK, a textbook refers to something more specific), but you could say that they were part of the curriculum, even if it was reading itself, rather than the content of the stories, that we were supposed to be learning.

My position is that if love stories are included among such books in schools (and that's an issue in itself - we could teach kids to read with plenty of good stories that aren't about romantic love), then there ought to be both same and different sex couples in those love stories, as we find and accept in life.

Sound reasonable?

[Nightshade]

do any of you people know any gays or lesbians?

Actually, Captain Thenthitive, I was going to make what I thought was the obvious crack about you being in touch with the gay community.
I don't know any gay men, not that I know of anyways, but a good friend of mine is a lesbian.

[Giraffe }{unter]

books are crap anyways

one of my favorite stories "the mole that wanted to know who took a crap on his head"

Please tell me that's not the actual title of the book. I don't speak moon language, so I have no idea.

Not only is it the title but he questions each animal he meets and they take a dump for him to show him what their poop looks like. I don't want to give away the end but the mole gets his vengeance
:icon30:

[AmIdYfReAk]

i think people should make there own diecision, not be forced in beleving shit...

[Wabbit]

I know a number of each. I have no issues I'm aware of with them.

[R00k]

There are plenty of story books in the early stages of school. We never called them textbooks (at least in the UK, a textbook refers to something more specific), but you could say that they were part of the curriculum, even if it was reading itself, rather than the content of the stories, that we were supposed to be learning.

My position is that if love stories are included among such books in schools (and that's an issue in itself - we could teach kids to read with plenty of good stories that aren't about romantic love), then there ought to be both same and different sex couples in those love stories, as we find and accept in life.

Sound reasonable?

I would say that, if there is a rack of story books in the back of a classroom, and one of them happens to be a love story, I don't feel it is imperative to make sure the school also purchases a love story about a homosexual couple, or replaces the book with one that is about both sexual preferences.

If there were several love stories, and none of them featured homosexuals, then I think it would be an issue.

Out of curiosity, would you want a man-woman couple, a man-man couple and a woman-woman couple all represented as well? Because little kids don't know what homosexual really means, any more than they know what heterosexual means, even if you were to explain it to them. If you want a true sampling of what you find in real life, I would think you would need to include all three types, lest they get the impression that women and women are supposed to be together, but men and men are not, right?

[LawL]

As soon as I read the first page of this thread I knew the next 2 pages would consist of puffondicks wanking on with his fag-loving internet freedom fighter bullshit.

[Eraser]

Wow, quite the discussion here.
Something people should know about the book is that it's not written as a book about homosexuality. It's a plain fairy tale. It wasn't the intention of the authors to go ahead and write a book about homosexuality. They just decided to write it about two princes instead of a prince and a princess, just to give it a bit of an off beat spin.

The thing about children (and Fender's post about his daughter seeing families in rocks illustrates this) is that they have a very narrow field of view. Whatever's fed to them as being normal, they think is normal, and I think that children thinking that two boys loving each other is just as normal as a boy and a girl loving each other is an important step towards acceptance.

Children go through various stages of their grasp of identity. At one point in life they discovery they have the power to express their own will (saying no to things. This often goes to extremes where young children say no to everything), then they understand that identity isn't influenced by external factors (many young children think that a boy dressed as a girl actually is a girl, it's their kind of logic). So once children grasp the difference between boys and girls, I think it's important for them to at least know that there is such a thing as two boys (or two girls) loving each other and that it doesn't always strictly have to be a boy-girl thing.

[iambowelfish]

There are plenty of story books in the early stages of school. We never called them textbooks (at least in the UK, a textbook refers to something more specific), but you could say that they were part of the curriculum, even if it was reading itself, rather than the content of the stories, that we were supposed to be learning.

My position is that if love stories are included among such books in schools (and that's an issue in itself - we could teach kids to read with plenty of good stories that aren't about romantic love), then there ought to be both same and different sex couples in those love stories, as we find and accept in life.

Sound reasonable?

I would say that, if there is a rack of story books in the back of a classroom, and one of them happens to be a love story, I don't feel it is imperative to make sure the school also purchases a love story about a homosexual couple, or replaces the book with one that is about both sexual preferences.

Fair enough. As I've said, they should reflect life, so pretending homosexuals aren't a minority would not be something I'd advocate.

I guess one could argue that the a school, as an institution run for the benefit of the child, offers an alternative to popular commercial culture which promotes exclusively heterosexual love stories, even to the very young. I'm thinking Disney here, amongst other things. I was witness to a discussion in one of my university classes where a number of smart, educated, generally liberal women confessed just how much of an influence Disney movies had on their expectations of love. Kindof scary- unless you're Prince Charming.

However, I don't like the idea of it being the school's duty to try to counter the effect of fast-moving mainstream culture by going in the opposite direction. Rather the school should set an example in its choice of books.

Best example to set would probably be what you called "true sampling."

If there were several love stories, and none of them featured homosexuals, then I think it would be an issue.

Out of curiosity, would you want a man-woman couple, a man-man couple and a woman-woman couple all represented as well? Because little kids don't know what homosexual really means, any more than they know what heterosexual means, even if you were to explain it to them. If you want a true sampling of what you find in real life, I would think you would need to include all three types, lest they get the impression that women and women are supposed to be together, but men and men are not, right?

Right. Either male-male or female-female would be better than neither though. The first priority ought to be ensuring kids don't end up with some expectation of heterosexual universality.

I know I did. The first time I heard "gay" explained was when I was 5 or 6 and another boy told me that it's something they do in prison where a man puts his willy up another man's bum.

I really got sidetracked with this post. Basically, I pretty much agree with agree with you.

[Eraser]

I don't think schools should be forced to put a book like this in their curriculum, but it being there shouldn't be a problem either.

The thing is that the people this thread was originally about argue that a book like this shouldn't be in schools or shouldn't be released at all. I think that's absurd.

[LawL]

[GONNAFISTYA]

Please tell me that's not the actual title of the book. I don't speak moon language, so I have no idea.

Not only is it the title but he questions each animal he meets and they take a dump for him to show him what their poop looks like. I don't want to give away the end but the mole gets his vengeance
:icon30:

That's the part that made me crack up: Here's a children's book that explicitly depicts animals taking a dump. The real kicker is the moral of the story: Don't get mad...get even. I think this is a moral any child should learn by the age of four. :icon26:

I seriously doubt that book would ever be sold anywhere in prudish North America.

BTW...that moon language is Danish, a very "throaty" language. When people speak it...it sounds like they're choking down a cock.

[ek]

lol at the shit book.

i don't think any normal parent will be buying that book for their normal kids to read anyway. only homos will buy it for their bastard kids.

[Tormentius]

Right. Either male-male or female-female would be better than neither though. The first priority ought to be ensuring kids don't end up with some expectation of heterosexual universality.

IMO schools aren't the place to push this kind of thing at a young age. I think that a child's education on alternative lifestyles is best left to the parents, at least until the child is a little older.

That said, I live near in Vancouver's West End, which has a huge gay and lesbian population. My 4 year old son and 6 year old daughter have already has asked "why" when seeing gay men or women hold hands or kiss on the street. I simply told them that some people like the same gender and thats their choice. I didn't see the need to go into detail or talk about it being either right or wrong, it just is and thats all they need to know at this age.

The point is that their education in this regard is my responsibility as a parent, not a schools.