SAFE SCHOOL PROPOSAL: TWO IA LAWMAKERS WANT TO EXCLUDE GAY AND LESBIAN STUDENTS: WHOtv.com

reports:

Two Iowa legislators are getting heat from the gay community. The lawmakers want to remove protection to lesbians, gay and transgender students from the Safe Schools Law, in and effort to reverse the Iowa's Supreme Court decision to legalize same-sex marriage. ...

Last April, one of the reasons the Iowa Supreme Court pointed to for legalizing same sex marriage, were bills like the Safe Schools Act, which protects gay and lesbian students. He wants to take out the wording in the Safe Schools Act, and all Iowa legislation, so lawmakers can debate same sex marriage on the floor. ...

"People smeared paint on my locker and pushed me in the hallway and I've been made fun of for who I am. Why would lawmakers want that to continue? Why wouldn't they want to protect me and better my education and time in my community?" says gay Stephen Boatwright.

Rep. Schultz admits the bill won't go anywhere, but that's not the point. He hopes it will renew the efforts to make same sex marriage illegal here in Iowa, and start a debate on the house floor sometime this session.

more

[Eve says: I get that slopes can be slippery. And I get that maybe people can feel tricked, when they support a really basic anti-bullying bill which identifies one of the most bullied classes in our country, and then their support of that bill is played as support for gay marriage.

[What I don't get is thinking that slopes only slip one way. How can you explicitly act to remove protection from gay students without thinking this will increase abuse of gay students--which hi there, is against Biblical teaching? This whole thing is especially heartbreaking to me because I oppose gay marriage, and yet--or, I'd say, and therefore--I'm especially concerned with anti-gay bullying. It seems to me like the best example of what the theologians mean when they use the phrase, "objective counter-witness." This bill gives aid and comfort to the Enemy. And I used the capital letter on purpose.

[--Eve's opinion]

Labels: adolescence, children, culture, gay marriage, Iowa, religion, schools

posted by Eve at 12:56 AM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

THE PUZZLE OF BOYS: Thomas Bartlett

in the Chronicle Review:

...These are the kinds of questions asked by anxious parents and, increasingly, academic researchers. Boyhood studies—virtually unheard of a few years ago—has taken off, with a shelf full of books already published, more on the way, and a new journal devoted to the subject. Much of the focus so far has been on boys falling behind academically, paired with the notion that school is not conducive to the way boys learn. What motivates boys, the argument goes, is different from what motivates girls, and society should adjust accordingly.

Not everyone buys the boy talk. Some critics, in particular the American Association of University Women, contend that much of what passes for research about boyhood only reinforces stereotypes and arrives at simplistic conclusions: Boys are competitive! Boys like action! Boys hate books! They argue that this line of thinking miscasts boys as victims and ignores the very real problems faced by girls.

But while this debate is far from settled, the field has expanded to include how marketers target boys, the nature of boys' friendships, and a host of deeper, more philosophical issues, all of which can be boiled down, more or less, to a single question: Just what are boys, anyway?

more

Labels: adolescence, boys, childhood, children, culture, gender, gender differences

posted by Eve at 4:05 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

UK: MODERN GIRLS PUT CHILDREN BEFORE MARRIAGE: The Telegraph

reports:

A ground-breaking series of studies, published next month, show liberal attitudes towards the make-up of the family, religion and cultural integration among the modern generation of girls and young women.

The survey, which questioned a representative sample of 1,109 seven to 21 year-olds across the UK, found that a third of girls in the younger age group thought they would be "grown up" by the age of 15, while 90 per cent of 16 to 21-year-olds regarded themselves as "grown up".

Girls were generally positive about marriage but less than half thought it should come before parenthood. One in four thought it was "OK to get married several times", rising to a third in the 16 to 21 age range.

One finding suggested that some teenagers actively plan to become single mothers. Of the girls questioned who had left schools and were unemployed, almost half (45 per cent) expected to have a baby before they were 21.

more

Labels: adolescence, childhood, children, culture, family structure, Marriage, out-of-wedlock births, remarriage, United Kingdom

posted by Eve at 3:28 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

WHAT THE EXPERTS ARE SAYING NOW: Kay Hymowitz reviews new book, NurtureShock

in the Wall Street Journal:

...Education policy makers will find more cause for embarrassment in "NurtureShock." Drop-out programs don't work. Neither do anti-drug programs. The most popular of them, D.A.R.E (Drug Abuse Resistance ­Education), developed in 1983 by the Los Angeles ­Police Department, has become a more familiar sight in ­American schools than algebra class. By 2000, 80% of American school districts were using D.A.R.E. materials in some form. Now, after extensive study, comes the news: The program has no long-term, and only mild short-term, effects. Oh, and those tests that school districts use to determine giftedness in young ­children? They're just about useless. According to Mr. Bronson and Ms. Merryman, early IQ tests predict later ­achievement less than half the time. Between ages 3 and 10, about two-thirds of children will experience a rise or drop of 15 points or more.

You might assume from these examples that the ­authors want to make a point about our national ­gullibility in the face of faddish science. Unfortunately, they deconstruct yesterday's wisdom at the same time that they embrace today's—even when research is on the order of "do-we-really-need-a-$50,000-study-to-tell-us-this?" or of dubious practical value. Kids lie, they ­inform us. In fact, 4-year-olds lie once every hour. Still, Mr. Bronson and Ms. Merryman are impressed by ­research showing that "lying is an advanced skill," ­supposedly demonstrating both social and cognitive sophistication. ...

Given how often last year's science has become ­today's boondoggle, Mr. Bronson and Ms. Merryman's analysis would have benefited from a dose of ­skepticism. Yes, social science has become more ­rigorously empirical in recent decades. A lot of the findings described in "NurtureShock" might even be true. But that doesn't mean that we have the remotest idea how to translate such findings into constructive parental behavior or effective public programs.

more

Labels: adolescence, childhood, children, parenting

posted by Eve at 5:13 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

SYMBOLISM AND NEUTRALITY: Andrew Sullivan

blogs:

Jon Rowe argues against both me and Robert P. George in favor of a libertarian position in which no-one gets married but civil unions are available for all. I sure understand the theoretical reasoning for this, but I have two objections.

The first is simply that there are some minimal tangible social goods associated with marriage that I believe would be enormously beneficial for gays and straights: the institution encourages stability and commitment in an emotional and sexual world which often pulls us away from that. It encourages shared sacrifice; it instills the disciplines of shared living; it promotes thrift; it integrates gay people into their own families and society; it harms no-one. In that sense I'm a weak libertarian, believing in a minimal state that can nonetheless encourage core shared values and social goods and treats the equal inclusion of minorities as something worth sacrificing for. That's the social conservative side of marriage equality - and the evolution of gay culture even in the past decade shows how that could occur, especially as the first generation of gay kids grows up knowing in advance that marriage is an option.

In fact, a great deal of this symbolism has to do with gay kids more than adults.

more

Labels: adolescence, childhood, civil unions, gay marriage, government interest in marriage, Marriage

posted by Eve at 7:11 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

UK Pupils Told: Sex Every Day Keeps the GP Away: The Times

reports:

A National Health Service leaflet is advising school pupils that they have a “right” to an enjoyable sex life and that regular intercourse can be good for their cardiovascular health.

The advice appears in guidance circulated to parents, teachers and youth workers, and is intended to update sex education by telling pupils about the benefits of sexual pleasure. For too long, say its authors, experts have concentrated on the need for “safe sex” and loving relationships while ignoring the main reason that many people have sex, that is, for enjoyment.

The document, called Pleasure, has been drawn up by NHS Sheffield, although it is also being circulated outside the city.

Alongside the slogan “an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away”, it says: “Health promotion experts advocate five portions of fruit and veg a day and 30 minutes’ physical activity three times a week. What about sex or masturbation twice a week?”

more

Labels: adolescence, premarital sex, sex, sex education, United Kingdom

posted by Imapp Staff at 7:17 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS FOR PARENTS ON FATHER'S DAY: "The Internet Monk"

blogs:

...I raised two kids whom I love and am endlessly proud of, but there were and are places along the way that I felt helpless and a complete failure.

I’ve spent thousands of hours helping parents and teens work through all those problems that families with teenagers inevitably face.

Because of my current ministry, I’ve reviewed painful family histories and interviewed desperate parents looking for anything that would help them somehow reclaim a teenager that was lost, failing or in destructive rebellion.

For whatever reasons, God has put me in the world of teenagers and their families. I never asked for this, but it’s been my assignment.

So on this Father’s Day Weekend, I want to ask some of the questions I’ve never (well, almost never) asked the parents of teenagers. These questions aren’t subtle or academic. They are “gut-level.” They’re real.

Is this advice disguised as rhetoric? A bit, yes. I don’t claim to know much about parenting teenagers. I think the questions have their own wisdom.

(By the way, I know that these questions don’t apply to every parent, and I’m aware that some of you have a philosophy of raising kids that answers all of these issues. I’m also aware that some of you did all the right things, just like the books say, and now you’re wondering why it didn’t work.)

1. Why so much freedom, money, cars, privacy, free time, video games and electronic devices?

more

Labels: adolescence, culture, Fathers, parenting, religion

posted by Eve at 1:06 AM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

MODEST BUT NOT MOUSEY: WHY TWEEN GIRLS ARE FINALLY COVERING UP: TrendCentral

suggests it's a trend.

Labels: adolescence, childhood, culture

posted by Eve at 1:32 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT

IT'S COOLER THAN EVER TO BE A TWEEN, BUT IS CHILDHOOD LOST?: USA Today

feature:

The prepubescent children of days gone by have given way to a cooler kid — the tween — who aspires to teenhood but is not quite there yet.

Tweens are in-between — generally the 8-to-12 set. The U.S. Census estimates that in 2009, tweens are about 20 million strong and projected to hit almost 23 million by 2020. ...

Tweens have "their own sense of fashion in a way we didn't have before and their own parts of the popular culture targeted toward them," says child and adolescent psychologist Dave Verhaagen of Charlotte. How will this shape their personalities? "Time will tell. We don't know."

Research has shown that middle school is where some troubles, particularly academic, first appear. Also, a 2007 review of surveys in the journal Prevention Science found that the percentage of children who use alcohol doubles between grades four and six; the largest jump comes between fifth and sixth grades.

BETTER LIFE: Links between self-esteem, grades and obesity

"They're kids for a shorter period of time," adds psychologist Frank Gaskill, who also works with tweens in Charlotte. "More is expected of them academically, responsibility-wise."

Many parents, including Beth Harpaz, 48, of Brooklyn, are well aware of this short-lived time. Her older son is 16 and a high school junior; her younger son is 11 and in fifth grade.

"I'm trying really hard to save his childhood. I want him to enjoy little-boy things and don't want him to feel that he has to put on that big hoodie and wear the $100 sneakers and have that iPod in his ear listening to what somebody has told him is cool music," says Harpaz, author of 13 is the New 18.

more

Labels: adolescence, childhood, consumerism

posted by Eve at 11:53 PM EMAIL SHARE PRINT