Shouild Same-Sex Parents Be Featured In School Books?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10171005/Same-sex-parents-should-be-featured-in-school-books.html

Would this type of thing be beneficial to children as young as five, or only create confusion?

[ummmm]

O_G it's not abnormal to the people involved in them.

[craft1948]

The book explaining how Mummy and Daddy, and Mummy and Mummy, and Daddy and Daddy have children should be a hoot................

[Zeuhl]

/Methinks that they would still draw a male and female. /

aog and sqad

your argument appears to be that at 5, children should only be exposed to what they already know or assume

that seems somewhat limiting

and contrary to what learning is actually about

as i wrote earlier; confusion is good! it is natural precursor to enlightenment and increased understanding

[daffy654]

It was mum and Glen(nis) in my case as nobody ever tried to force us to call my mum's partners (she had several over the years) by anything other than their given name.

[ummmm]

But this isn't sex education.

[B00]

Just because they consider it normal OG it doesn't mean that is the road they'll be taking!

Some people like to exercise and go to gyms, I fully accept that and also accept that it's considered normal for them to do so, me personally however think it's wrong if I ever set foot in such an establishment ;-)

[Peter Pedant]

Yeah but aog is right.... a wedding - but no priest but they are not the norm, and certainly not an R C priest - heavens ! -

and not a muslim wedding - certainly not normative
nor a jewish wedding - uh uh not normative - in fact I've never been to one !

and no racial minorities - only on the ground that they are not nomrative


and we are left with the very normal white anglo-saxon protestants

which is definitely the place some people wish to be....

[jim360]

OG -- it may not be "normal", as in the most common relationship, but why should it be suppressed? It's not encouraging such relationships to present it in books. And indeed the implication is that same-sex relationships should not be encouraged -- or even discouraged? Tsk tsk.

[anotheoldgit]

ummmm

/// Don't worry AOG, they won't catch gayness!! ///

No but it has been known for it to encourage experimentation.

[craft1948]

But ummmm surely at some stage it will have to be explained how they became parents...........

[jim360]

What's so bad about experimentation though?

[Zeuhl]

/Educational books for children at that age illustrate the norm, in my opinion and not the exceptions. /

whose norm?

growing up in Liverpool in the terraced streets I found that 'Janet and John' always lived in suburban semis or villages surrounded by fields, duck ponds and woods.

that was alien and possibly confusing initially; but a useful learning experience nonetheless

[daffy654]

There is nothing wrong with experimenting with your sexuality.

[Davethedog]

I think the point is being missed here, they are not talking about teaching sexuality but relationships.

Children can be cruel, with anything seen as unusual, to teach children that two people of the same sex can have a loving realtionship and bring up children, just like their own parents is surely justified?

Their are gay people, those people are "out" they are going to get married and they are going to have children. I have no idea how may gay marriages there wil be, there will be.

To deny it, is archaic, like hiding your head in the sand, but people should really understand that todays 5 year olds will be FAR more accepting and understanding of gay people than todays population.

To be taught this has nothing to do with our perceptions, but theirs.

In a society that has celebrity gay couple Elton & Daveid etc, gay relationships in TV shows, Modern Family, Will & Grace and others. To not discuss and explain it to some extend is ridiculous

[jim360]

It's possibly a return to section 28 all over again, the way people are talking about " we shouldn't be encouraging [such abnormal relationships]".

[Sharingan]

What about Sikhs? They believe that couples are a joining of souls and that the body you happen to be in is niether here nor there, thus they aren't hung up about ' gayness' at all. They are a major religion who have managed just fine not suppressing or promoting it, just accepting it. No big deal, as some might say.

[Zeuhl]

/No but it has been known for it to encourage experimentation. /

That is factually untrue

A phase of homosexual experimentation is a natural and spontaneous process among a high percentage of people without any external models to copy

The vast majority of those individuals develop into heterosexuals

[anotheoldgit]

daffy654

/// It was mum and Glen(nis) in my case as nobody ever tried to force us to call my mum's partners (she had several over the years) by anything other than their given name. ///

Perhaps not the best example to set.

[ummmm]

Then you explain it, Craft, as and when the child asks and in a language relevant to their age/understanding.

Kids are open minded and accepting.

[Peter Pedant]

Don't worry AOG, they won't catch gayness!! ///

No but it has been known for it to encourage experimentation.

umm no: Frankie goes to Hollywood was marketed as that year's fad - homosexuality. Holly Johnson and Paul Rutherford were feted as gay members - and the ad campaign was abandoned.
The ads were changed to a memorable - Holly and Paul like.... fruit

and that was because the kids wouldnt buy it.
so much so
that they had to change the campaign

so no it doesnt encourgage experimentation aog