|
|
Post by sarah on Nov 25, 2009 12:14:48 GMT -8
fortunately Barbie's clothing choice will be self correcting after only one day of chasing little kidos around! Tomorrow she will show up in a more sensible outfit. Perhaps some jeans, Elmo t-shirt, tennis shoes, and hair back in a ponytail. She may well skip the makeup as well, why bother when some little girl is going to want to do it for you anyway! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Nov 25, 2009 13:48:13 GMT -8
Agreed. But how is it OK for you to wear your identity "on your sleeve" when a TS/TG/GN person can not? I assume you dress like the societal norm for a male. It is the "societal norm" I think we should look at changing here. It is sad to me that someone has to feel that they are not a part of the societal norm because they have a different gender identity.
Not if you taught Automotive Repair, or were a mechanic. However, where you and I differ is in our understanding of "identity". Sure, your hobbies and interests make up a part of your identity, but they don't fully define your identity. It is not just about comfort...have you ever cross dressed? It is not necessaraly comfortable. The cross-dressers I am talking about here are not just wanting to dress up as a hobby, or because they think it is "neat" (like you with working on your truck or enjoying U2), they do it because it is WHO THEY ARE.
I also make a distinction between sexual identity and gender identity. So your argument as to why a person could not wear S/M attire does not make sense to me. Gender is a whole lot more than sexuality, and vice versa. There are people of all sorts of sexual ilk, gay, straight, bisexual, asexual that question their gender identity.
It is because of that embarrassing part of our history that we need to fight for civil rights for all. I think that we have moved past the idea of enslaving a particular group, but we consistently deny liberty to some...isn't that a form of slavery? Or do you believe that some are more equal than others?
Makes sense, but again, it is not a matter of "wearing what I want to wear". And using the same logic, is it not also unfair to the parents who want their kids exposed to that kind of diversity.
And that is too bad. If you read thru the other thread linked above, you will find a few of my thoughts on that issue. In a nutshell, I think teachers should have the right to explain and exhibit personal beliefs in order to contribute to a complete and ecclectic education. Unfortunately, a lot of parents are under-eduacated or closed-minded, and would not be able to back that kind of education up at home with discussions. Admittably, it is a unrealistic and utopian idea of education, but a boy can dream.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 26, 2009 8:46:33 GMT -8
Rbbaily/ Sarah: I just read the Barbie stuff. Funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by Margot on Nov 27, 2009 8:49:55 GMT -8
fortunately Barbie's clothing choice will be self correcting after only one day of chasing little kidos around! Tomorrow she will show up in a more sensible outfit. Perhaps some jeans, Elmo t-shirt, tennis shoes, and hair back in a ponytail. She may well skip the makeup as well, why bother when some little girl is going to want to do it for you anyway! ;D Lol! I love course correction. So true!! |
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Feb 10, 2010 16:30:31 GMT -8
So, the ban on religious dress in teh classroom has ended. Any crazy reports Josh or Rbbailey?
EDIT: Oops. I guess the ban does not end officiall until the 2011-12 school year. We will have to revisit it then. Plan your outfit!! I'm thinking just a strategically placed chrome "Jesus fish"
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 10, 2010 22:10:41 GMT -8
I think I'll try and get ahold of Steve K.'s old "lost coin" outfit for the first day of school next year!
|
|
