A final note.. My Niece is a teacher in lower grades, K to 4. Her school, like many, are pushing more coloured people content. Normally I'd say fine, show the kids early that they are people too and all around us. What is not fine? The school banned ALL books in the school library that had ANY white people in them. My niece, who has black friends and is not the least bit racist, had brought in a few harmless books of her own that had white people in them and they were confiscated.

They must not have very many books left.

They are also teaching almost exclusively about LGBTQ++ to 5 and 6 year olds to the point where heterosexual kids may start to feel like they are wrong
to feel the way they do. I can understand at that age teaching that Some families may have 2 mommies or 2 daddies but there should be a line..

Is this where we are heading?..

I am not certain that the people pushing this agenda at young children are
a part of the LGBTQ++ movement. I think a lot of them are politicians or
other nefarious individuals who have some other agenda. There may be some
kids who know what their sexual orientation is at that age but I feel for
most, teaching children that young about sexual topics (even hetero) is a
giant mistake. They are not mature enough mentally or emotionally to
handle such things, and it will only lead to trouble in their lives.

Here in the US there has been some attempts at getting sexually explicit LGBTQ++ material into the libraries of younger students... not 2 moms or 2
dads materials, but books that include illustrations of things like two younger same-sex persons fondling and performing other sex acts on each other.

I don't care if it is hetero... exposing children to such material when
they are too young to process it is damaging. At the very least, I feel
the persons responsible don't want kids to have a childhood any more (porn exposure will ruin that quick), but I suspect it goes far beyond that.

The people who act OK with it... the ones I know... are usually parents of older kids who are somewhere on the non-binary spectrum. As long as it
aligns with their own kid's feelings, they don't care what damage it might
do to others. When our state overreacted by instituting a book ban law,
they couldn't understand that this overreaction was in direct reaction to
the overaction of whoever is pushing such material at kids.


* SLMR 2.1a * Press any key to continue or any other key to quit
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

Here in the US there has been some attempts at getting sexually explicit LGBTQ++ material into the libraries of younger students... not 2 moms or
2 dads materials, but books that include illustrations of things like
two younger same-sex persons fondling and performing other sex acts on each other.

Any news sources that are verifiable? How legit have these attempts been, and by whom? Some kook that nobody would otherwise pay attention to however it's so salacious and on brand with political discourse at the time that we feel the need to highlight it, or is it a serious attempt to get sexually explicit material of any sort in front of minors? I have a very hard time believing the latter is true.

I don't care if it is hetero... exposing children to such material when they are too young to process it is damaging. At the very least, I feel the persons responsible don't want kids to have a childhood any more
(porn exposure will ruin that quick), but I suspect it goes far beyond that.

Agree. Who are the persons responsible in this case?

The people who act OK with it... the ones I know... are usually parents
of older kids who are somewhere on the non-binary spectrum. As long as
it aligns with their own kid's feelings, they don't care what damage it might do to others. When our state overreacted by instituting a book
ban law, they couldn't understand that this overreaction was in direct reaction to the overaction of whoever is pushing such material at kids.

You know people who are cool with putting sexually explicit material in front of children?

Anywho, to put the shoe on the other foot, the argument for introducing the concept of same sex parents and things of that nature, is to not alienate the kids who belong to these nontraditional families. When folks are accustomed to privilege equality can certainly feel like oppression. Kids of traditional families are not being screwed over here. It's merely putting a lens on kids from other backgrounds that have traditionally faced a lot of shame and hardship which is not their fault.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/02/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M (618:300/56)

On 09 Jul 23 18:00:58, Esc said the following to Mike Powell:

You know people who are cool with putting sexually explicit material in fro of children?

Oh I do... I've met many parents who just give their kid a cell phone with unrestricted Internet and of course the first thing that happens is the kid looks at porn... the sexually-explicit material all begins with the cell provided by parents.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (618:500/24)

Any news sources that are verifiable? How legit have these attempts been, and
whom? Some kook that nobody would otherwise pay attention to however it's so lacious and on brand with political discourse at the time that we feel the

ee

to highlight it, or is it a serious attempt to get sexually explicit material
any sort in front of minors? I have a very hard time believing the latter is ue.

The article I wanted to find was one from New Jersey or New York where the news interviewed a parent who was told he had to quit reading a book in front of
the school board because it was "pornographic," which was his point. He
wanted to know why the school board allowed the book into the school library
of his < 18 year old kid (i.e. a minor).

That one made our local news at the time (earlier this year).

Here are a couple of others.

Maine: https://nypost.com/2023/02/28/knox-zajac-reads-aloud-from-pornographic-book-at-s
chool-board-meeting

https://tinyurl.com/ypkjtt7a

This story mentions the book "Nick and Charlie," which apparently does not contain illustrations, and "Gender Queer," which does. The later book is
one they have tried getting/keeping in under-18 school libraries even though
it is labeled as 18+. The child who found the former in the school library, and is attempting to read it to the school board, is a minor.

New Jersey: https://www.propublica.org/article/conservative-transformation-wayne-new-jersey-
school-board

https://tinyurl.com/2w6a8ah4

A woman attempts to read passages out of a book that was found in the school library only to be told she cannot read it aloud because there are children present. I guess it is ok for a kid to find it and read it on their own, but not so much so when an angry parent is reading it to them. Her child was
under 18, a minor.

In this case, it apparently lead to reprocussions for the school board.

You know people who are cool with putting sexually explicit material in front
children?

No but I do know people who like keeping their heads in the sand, or who
like to claim it isn't happening.

We had protesters show up at our capitol to protest the removal of said materials from school libraries.


* SLMR 2.1a * Humpty Dumpty was pushed! Well, I saw it on X-Files....
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

Here are a couple of others.

<snip>

Geez. Yeah that's messed up. Thanks for providing links.

That said it doesn't seem terribly widespread, I guess? Seems like a few unique cases, no?

In any event, I think we all agree kids shouldn't be exposed to stuff like this. We all know they'll find it on the internet (just like I found it on BBSes back in the day lol) but nevertheless we owe our due diligence to do our best.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/02/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: m O N T E R E Y b B S . c O M (618:300/56)

The school banned ALL books in the school library that had ANY white

>> people in them. My niece, who has black friends and is not the least bit
>> racist, had brought in a few harmless books of her own that had white peopl
>> in them and they were confiscated.

They must not have very many books left.

That was my thought as well. They must be importing them..

They are also teaching almost exclusively about LGBTQ++ to 5 and 6 year old

>> to the point where heterosexual kids may start to feel like they are wrong
>> to feel the way they do. I can understand at that age teaching that Some
>> families may have 2 mommies or 2 daddies but there should be a line..

I am not certain that the people pushing this agenda at young children are

>a part of the LGBTQ++ movement. I think a lot of them are politicians or
>other nefarious individuals who have some other agenda.

I'm sure it's a way for politicians to get votes from some sectors and I
agree that most responsible adults, regardless of their orientation, would think things are going too far.

I won't suggest this is mainstream but I heard someone saying the other day that there are some who are saying that all sexual preferences should be accepted and that it's being pushed by pedophiles. If there's any truth to
that I hope that common sense wins out..

Here in the US there has been some attempts at getting sexually explicit

>LGBTQ++ material into the libraries of younger students... not 2 moms or 2
>dads materials, but books that include illustrations of things like two young
>same-sex persons fondling and performing other sex acts on each other.

No, we don't need that. They never went that far with young kids when the
world pretended that we were all heterosexual so why is it necessary to
tell kids far too young to be having sex more than not all families are
the same. (Plus tell them enough to know if someone is 'molesting' them.)

---
* SLMR Rob * If idiots could fly, this place would be an airport
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

In any event, I think we all agree kids shouldn't be exposed to stuff like

hi

We all know they'll find it on the internet (just like I found it on BBSes

a

in the day lol) but nevertheless we owe our due diligence to do our best.

Indeed, we do. :)

Mike


* SLMR 2.1a * IBM = Institute of Black Magic
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

I won't suggest this is mainstream but I heard someone saying the other day that there are some who are saying that all sexual preferences should be accepted and that it's being pushed by pedophiles. If there's any truth to that I hope that common sense wins out..

There are some pedos who are trying to mainstream their preference. They
have a more acceptable sounding name for it... it isn't youngphilia, but it
is something like that... in order to make it sound more legit and probably confuse people who don't know better.

No, we don't need that. They never went that far with young kids when the world pretended that we were all heterosexual so why is it necessary to
tell kids far too young to be having sex more than not all families are
the same. (Plus tell them enough to know if someone is 'molesting' them.)

It is sad enough we have to tell them the latter, but it is necessary. I suspect those who want to tell them more than that are not well-intentioned.

Mike

* SLMR 2.1a * Taglines: the toilet-stall walls of BBSdom.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

I won't suggest this is mainstream but I heard someone saying the other day

>> that there are some who are saying that all sexual preferences should be
>> accepted and that it's being pushed by pedophiles. If there's any truth to
>> that I hope that common sense wins out..

There are some pedos who are trying to mainstream their preference. They

>have a more acceptable sounding name for it... it isn't youngphilia, but it
>is something like that... in order to make it sound more legit and probably
>confuse people who don't know better.

I heard a new name recently as well and was trying to find it again..
Not sure if this is the same term I heard earlier but one of them now
being used is Minor Attracted Persons.

Makes it sound a lot 'nicer'...

---
* SLMR Rob * Girl Guide cookies don't taste at all like Girl Guides
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)

There are some pedos who are trying to mainstream their preference. They

>have a more acceptable sounding name for it... it isn't youngphilia, but

t

>is something like that... in order to make it sound more legit and

robably

>confuse people who don't know better.

I heard a new name recently as well and was trying to find it again..
Not sure if this is the same term I heard earlier but one of them now
being used is Minor Attracted Persons.

Makes it sound a lot 'nicer'...

That is one of them.... MAPS for short. It does make it sound mainstream
and, if you don't think about what you are reading/hearing, you might not realize what it means.

Mike


* SLMR 2.1a * (a) Fast, (b) Reliable, (c) Inexpensive - Pick Two.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (618:250/1)