sub shows Brokeback Mtn to 8th graders

[Shazza]

Took me a while but I read pretty much all of this thread, and what I got out of this was that KOOL LOOK could not answer questions that were asked without hiding behind the reason that she would be breaking the TOS rules, if you cant back up your stories with facts we dont want to hear them, sounds like you are preaching to us with nothing to back it up. So please dont say anything that you cant back up with the truth. You are telling us of your understanding, which is not the understanding of everyone, everybody comprehends things differently, I do not think the same as you so therefore before you say anything make sure you are willing to answer questions about it instead of hiding behind the TOS rules.

 

[narlacat]

I know some fanatical New Agey-types who believe this...if they're right, we're all doomed!!!

Yeah I don't buy all that Louise Hay type stuff either South- as much as I am New Age- it doesn't all sit right with me-

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I found this definition of "chronic" as a scientific term:

"A chronic condition is one lasting 3 months or more"

Your statement is false. I've given two links detailing homosexual bonds far longer than that.

I used the word chronic simply to mean more than one or two occurances, but not an extinuating long term practice. I'm not going to debate an actual scientific definition about chronic, I was just trying to get the point across the behaviors were more than once but not forever during an animals life span unless just a few animals are caged or housed in a situation they can't control and act out in, doing naturally what they do during their mating seasons. Chronic is just a word I used, not to be taken so whole heartedly to the tee of the scientific term. Did I explain what I mean in longevity behaviors?

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I didn't say you had, in fact I didn't even mention the word stolen- what I said was some people don't give me faith in mankind- that some piggies think they are more equal than others.

I'll say it again- people who think there is something wrong with gays are the ones that have something wrong with them! -they are ignorant and obviously need to get out more and get themselves a life save them sticking their noses into other peoples lives- grow up- let people be who they are fgs

Narla, no you didn't mention the word "STOLEN", I did however. The first part of your post is correct in quoting yourself. However the last sentence of your first paragraph was never mentioned by you. So your quoted quote is inaccurate to start with. The way it was said in your post directed at me quoting one of my posts to another poster does insinuate it, there's nothing else that it can mean. If I don't give you much faith in mankind, according to you, then I've obviously did something to take faith away from you, being intentional, non-intentional stolen, etc... The essence and meanings are the same, and took to be the same by me. Going deeper, being that we don't know each other well, your claim I've not given (but really I've taken, haven't I) your faith in mankind? I took it just like you wanted me to, so be pleased with yourself. I used the word stolen because I don't even know you. I wasn't even posting to you when you quoted me, and then you say I don't give you much faith in mankind, obviously I've stolen something from you then, that in my opinion, if were true, which it's not, I would have stolen your faith, hope in mankind. This is from post 243, the original.


The second paragraph of this quote is totally intentionally misleading. Your quote is from post 241 quoted and aimed at Ntegrity's post. I never once had anything to do with this part of the discussion. You never said any of paragraph two to me in a post, nor did I ever respond to it anywhere. If I have said what your claiming, where did I? I also have never said there is something wrong with homosexuals, that's your words, not mine. This paragraph is also an attack and uncalled for. I won't respond to anymore of your posts, unless you can quote me correctly, and leave off the name calling, for you know not how ignorant I am or how much of a life I need to get or how big my nose is.

I hold no grudge, just don't want to be involved in posts that appear to be hate filled to me on a personal level towards me. You have continued to follow my posts on controversial issues and attack me, never once responding to the many posts that have ministered and uplifted another. Have a wonderful day.

 

[Ntegrity]

I hold no grudge, just don't want to be involved in posts that appear to be hate filled to me on a personal level towards me. You have continued to follow my posts on controversial issues and attack me, never once responding to the many posts that have ministered and uplifted another. Have a wonderful day.

:blowkiss: KOOL LOOK

Sorry for the personal attack on you, sweetie. That was totally uncalled for.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

:blowkiss: KOOL LOOK

Sorry for the personal attack on you, sweetie. That was totally uncalled for.

Thank you, I only responded to quotes quoting a post directed at me with the exception of only one other post on this thread that was not a direct quote and of course when I sort of nosed my way into Nova and Sherri's conversation I thought in a kind way.

The intent of the posters can clearly be seen in the attacks without even any references to this thread.

I would clearly state my opinions concerning some of the questions given to me but it's clear it would be going way out of the topic scope and I can just feel Tybee coming on this thread and reminding us in only the ways she could do it. Funny, firey and to the point. I'm really not hiding behind TOS, anyone that knows me here knows I observe the rules here and I don't want to hijack the thread.

It sort of seems quiet around here since I've been back, especially from the mods, it makes me sad, cuz I came back on as soon as we were finding out about Tybee. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like almost everyone has really been on their best behavior in memory of Tybee.

 

[Ntegrity]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like almost everyone has really been on their best behavior in memory of Tybee.

Nope, not EVERYONE. I do agree most have!

 

[kygal]

Okay, I HAVE read the last few posts, but I wanted to post on the ORIGINAL TOPIC here. I don't even care or want to think about it. I guess having been a teacher (High School History -- yawn NOW ) caught my attention.

I have taught in three states, and I guess most places have the same rules. Viewings such as Brokeback Mountain MUST be approved by the administration or school boards (depending on where you are) WELL BEFORE you show them. Anything above *PG* MUST have parental approval *by signature* (ie. permission slip) to be shown. (This is recommended by most experts within teaching organizations -- and usually these are followed by most schools.) Students are to be given alternative EQUAL assignments as the other students.

When I was teaching (I now stay at home with a toddler and a preschooler), I showed Scheindler's List in my World History classes. It too only had ONE questionable scene, but was rated R so I had to do exactly this. If parents had a problem with it, I had the students read The Diary of Anne Frank in the Library during class time and do similar types of work on it (special quizzes similar to ones given to those that watch the movie).

This subsitute can actually have her career ended before it stops. She can be barred from teaching in that state -- and due to reciprocity laws -- could be banned from getting a certificate to teach in just about every state in the Union. She could honestly have avoided this by going with the teacher's plans, or at least finding one student that will tell you where they are in the book (there's one in every class that will know and tell) and have them read the entire hour or something.

 

[Marthatex]

Okay, I HAVE read the last few posts, but I wanted to post on the ORIGINAL TOPIC here. I don't even care or want to think about it. I guess having been a teacher (High School History -- yawn NOW ) caught my attention.

I have taught in three states, and I guess most places have the same rules. Viewings such as Brokeback Mountain MUST be approved by the administration or school boards (depending on where you are) WELL BEFORE you show them. Anything above *PG* MUST have parental approval *by signature* (ie. permission slip) to be shown. (This is recommended by most experts within teaching organizations -- and usually these are followed by most schools.) Students are to be given alternative EQUAL assignments as the other students.

When I was teaching (I now stay at home with a toddler and a preschooler), I showed Scheindler's List in my World History classes. It too only had ONE questionable scene, but was rated R so I had to do exactly this. If parents had a problem with it, I had the students read The Diary of Anne Frank in the Library during class time and do similar types of work on it (special quizzes similar to ones given to those that watch the movie).

This subsitute can actually have her career ended before it stops. She can be barred from teaching in that state -- and due to reciprocity laws -- could be banned from getting a certificate to teach in just about every state in the Union. She could honestly have avoided this by going with the teacher's plans, or at least finding one student that will tell you where they are in the book (there's one in every class that will know and tell) and have them read the entire hour or something.

I would imagine her career subbing did end. I'm sure different states have different standards, and some districts are more "hard up" for subs than others. I have subbed before and certain schools were poorly supervised - a sub could come in and yell or probably hit a child and get away with it, back in the 70's.

If I had to choose between my children seeing violence and sex, I would choose sex (not graphic, of course). I think violence is much more harmful to young children.

I have seen Brokeback and the gay sex is more like "they're wrestling"; naive kids wouldn't even know what was going on. The heterosexual sex is more graphic. It's inappropriate for youngsters; however it is no worse than what you might see in a soap opera during the day. If parents ignore their kids and let them watch soap operas, those are as bad an influence as an R rated movie IMO.

Brokeback Mt. is about love, frustration and angst. You have to see the movie to understand it really isn't about sex. I thought it was well done and deserved to win the Academy Award that year. But the Academy decided to be PC. Some stupid movie won. We're way too "up tight" about things in the U.S., and too "loose" about others(guns), violence - in Europe no one would bat an eye about Brokeback Mountain.

When I was in the Carribbean, my family went to a nude beach. We weren't nude, but we just looked around. My kids looked, but it wasn't that big a deal - we left fairly quickly, but My point is we just didn't say that much about "bodies"; or laugh at them; we always taught our children that their bodies were normal, healthy and beautiful, but this is what they sometimes do in other countries.

My children are very modest and and it didn't affect them at all; they have healthy relationships with the opposite sex. Parents have to be vigilent and a use discretion, but not get so "up tight" about sex, our bodies, etc. IMO