Welcome back from the holidays and sorry to say the continuation of these crazy times we are carefully navigating. In the first two parts of this series, we just tried to show what policies are/have been implemented and conclude what it means, or maybe how to interpret it all. No spin, no hot takes or fear porn; just what is actually in the documents and how it’s not even being challenged with any commonsense.
In part III, the plan is to look at the digestion of all of this information from a basic standpoint. The goal is to simply explore some of the commonsense natural interpretation of once again; what is said vs what is meant -and in particular it’s potential effects.
In part IV the gloves come off. Three parts were offered for the middle or those still on the fence. For the preservation of essential innocence and the protection of the children, a line needs to be drawn.
Part III
When gender identity is inordinately the focus and emotional breakdowns can occur over addressing someone using the “wrong” pronouns, as a society, are we looking through the wrong end of the telescope? Probably, but this is also a time when people seem more interested in the approval of others and less reliant on their own core values to define themselves.
Does this reveal a lack of validity in what people seek to approve, or is there really genuine vitriol towards the recognition of different views and life choices? Are terms like equity and gender identity fundamental to our communities and society, or do they now manifest as the new consolation prize for attendance rather than achievement?
It would seem pretty straight forward that it’s a lack of confidence in validity. If someone feels certain in their beliefs, why would they need them validated and protected by everyone else? This is why commonsense is blocked in social exchanges because it would reveal that any argument to sexualize children is simply abhorrent.
Then there is this question of who is attacking the LGBTQIA+ community? Why is all the affirming needed? As obsessed as the media and one political party is with protecting the LGBTQIA+ community, one would think the attack stories would be available nightly for all to see.
Once again, it seems like everything is in the guise of its opposite.
In part I and II, the case was made that the sexualization of children and the push to have
This name approach through overly defining each individual part of this trans agenda synthetically creates its own world with its own rules. The sexual act and its name are being systematically separated as to create enough time for mental acceptance between a play on words and physical action.
Plainly, they are giving kids enough time to wrap their heads around what comes next, while dictating and assisting the progression. Essentially, it is a sexual pre-programming and desensitization initiative all wrapped into one “protective” and “caring” movement to provide a “safe space” for this perverted ecosystem to grow and thrive.
You have to give it to them, its evil genius.
This is from August 31, 2021 –NJEA.org
“Rainbow Connection” is the new NJEA Review column that focuses on LGBTQIA+ issues in our schools. As we prepare for our first interactions with students this school year, let’s consider some best practices for making education spaces queer inclusive and affirming. One way to get started is by honoring the gender identity and gender expression of our students with special attention to their use of personal gender pronouns (PGPs).”
This is all from the same “Rainbow Connection” 8/31/2021 on the NJEA’s website.
What happens when decisions regarding the determination of appropriate content and personal life choices are controlled by institutions and government? What happens when local school boards are forced to adhere by legislative mandate not a local district vote? What happens when the people in charge stray from the logical clear cut values that provided for the integrity that our institutions were originally built upon?
What happens when people disagree with those determinations?
The good intentions of putting educated people in positions where we lean on them to be subject matter expert’s, sounds like a pragmatic intellectual approach. However, what happens when the well is poisoned?
Many people too busy for constant research rely on local media outlets for their news and daily reporting. We thought we were leaving this up to the “Experts”. People are now seeing that these practices may have allowed decisions to go un-scrutinized, degrading the quality of the decision making, the information being provided, and ultimately the outcome. Anyone remember COVID-19?
Before skipping to motive or speculation, it’s important to understand the severity of this point.
The act of voting for representation or relying on someone else to report “what happened” inherently draws lines around results and content. It creates an extension of trust. Whether it’s in a classroom, a news outlet, an elected official or a sports coach etc; there is a level of trust assumed.
An important aspect is the general idea that the person in their position is qualified and willing. For instance, it’s assumed that the person driving a bus or plane has been educated in such field and maintains the skill set to do their job.
There are typically standards enforced providing a test, certification or licensing of some sort to ensure a level of competence. However, there is also a trust factor as the bus drives off with our kids or we feel the wheels bang against the bottom of the plane after take-off.
This trust, once freely given creates a relationship, and if it’s betrayed it’s not taken lightly. The reason is because it requires an act of vulnerability. There are also different levels of this vulnerability. For example, parents will give less rope when extending this trust regarding their kids.
For all of the parents reading this, you know that feeling. It’s genetic, it’s natures code; protect my child. This is why nicknames like “Mama Bear” demand such gravitas in communities and society in general. This creates a demand for a certain level of seriousness, integrity, and professionalism when subject matter experts are trusted and judged by the measures of their work.
When so called news anchors and politicians freely throw around words and terms such as gender identity, racist, white-supremacist, safe-space, bigot, fascist, terrorist, equity, etc; it changes the impact and importance of them in reality. In addition, what goes in our eyes, ears, and ultimately our brains works similarly to what goes in our stomachs.
All intakes yield a result, be it healthy or not. The importance of a healthy mental diet intensifies with children and young adults.
Imagine a world where you can spawn in midair and then glide your way into a neatly presented suburban neighborhood with your pickaxe to claim the treasure in a house you’re ransacking. Imagine in this virtual world, this will get you money/points, better weapons, and you’ll even be able to attend live international parties hosted by real life DJ’s. Imagine you’re 12 years old doing this with your friends, and this is all possible from your bedroom.
Now imagine how these images in a young person’s brain could change their outlook on reality, being that many during adolescence naturally base their ambitions on a mix of aspirations and realism. Would this qualify as a healthy mental diet?
Could this be interpreted as pre-programing or desensitization to extreme visual intake? Social media anyone? In addition, how does the desensitization of violence, extreme situations, sex, and vulgar graphics transcend generationally and socially? Think this question is reaching? Search “people twerking on cop cars”.
No, NJLIBERTY is not advocating for living in a cave, but parents attentive head on a swivel might save from a few situations…
Game consoles, TV shows, movies, and videos can be responsibly used, viewed, and enjoyed with discretion of the parent or guardian. Recommended age warnings are posted on just about everything nowadays. Plus, there are plenty of opinions and reviews online to help with those determinations.
There are also videos of other people playing games and watching content, which have become very popular with young people, where additional information is available; good luck.
There should probably be a study regarding the tight editing of those videos and their possible relationship to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and patience, but that’s for another piece.
Also, we could get into
But that’s for another piece as well. However, the ties to the LGBTQIA+ community have to be noted. It’s well, in their own words…
Again, the thought process here is perverted and subjugated purposely, to make the person or child believe they are thinking for themselves -and pleasure, pleasure, pleasure. You know because they get to choose their identity. When in fact, they are choosing a flavor out of the carefully prepared, but totally fictional social identity bucket.
In part IV we will break down how and why it’s completely fake and fictional, but let’s finish up with the exposure of why their approach is just crazy.
Once again, what happens when decisions regarding the determination of appropriate content are left up to institutions and government? What happens when the parents and guardians are sidelined in those discretions? When personal life choices of a sexual nature become the subject matter, determinations of appropriation become paramount.
Traditionally, life choices might start with following in the footsteps of Mom or Dad, or at least based on conversations with the people with whom they were raised. Hopefully, this would help guide immature minds into making decent decisions, yielding decent outcomes.
However, when adults start pushing for teaching gender ideology, racism, profiling, and all other forms of division rather than teaching math, science, reading, history and core values emphasizing hard work yielding strong character; it’s probably time to stop and think. If kids don’t know their left from their right, but know what a pride flag is or have attended a drag show; it’s time to stop and think.
Finally, if children can’t decide what time they have to go to bed, it’s probably not a good idea to convince them they can decide their gender identity at school.
We showcased how schools, government, and institutions are trying to separate the social from the sexual. We showed what they are planning to do and how. We even offered up some simple back and forth about the effects and how things of this nature might be digested or traditional be addressed.
In part IV we are going to shift from the schools, government, and institutions, and expose once and for all why this fake movement is totally dangerous and absurd.
Hope you’ll join us.
Thanks for reading.
Cited:
NJEA: Back-To-School with “Rainbow Connection” – New Jersey Education Association (njea.org)