The $20 Trail of Tears Continues

YellowSnow

@Swaye must wait until 2028

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/22/reuters-america-u-s-treasury-backs-away-from-plan-for-harriet-tubman-on-20-bill-next-year.html?&qsearchterm=tubman

SFGbob

Is there anyone else who is getting a little tired of the elevation of minor historical figures into positions of prominence in order to fill out some diversity quota? I'll guarantee you that all three of my kids were taught far more about Harriet Tubman and Sojourner Truth then they were about Teddy Roosevelt and Thomas Jefferson.

YellowSnow

SFGbob said:

Is there anyone else who is getting a little tired of the elevation of minor historical figures into positions of prominence in order to fill out some diversity quota? I'll guarantee you that all three of my kids were taught far more about Harriet Tubman and Sojourner Truth then they were about Teddy Roosevelt and Thomas Jefferson.

Kids should learn about Harriet Tubman, Susan B Anthony, etc. They were important figure. Should they learn more about them then Jefferson or Theodore Roosevelt? No, of course, not.

But if you're worried about diversity quotas in your kid's history class, you might want to consider relocation. I just shrug it off up here in Seattle. The bums and REAL socialists on the city council are my primary concern at the moment.

SFGbob

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

YellowSnow

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

SFGbob

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

WilburHooksHands

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

SFGbob

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

WilburHooksHands

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

YellowSnow

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

Creationism should not be taught in public schools. This isn't a religious freedom issue.

CirrhosisDawg

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Move to the south and then you can answer your own question.

RaceBannon

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Look who got indoctrinated

WilburHooksHands

RaceBannon said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Look who got indoctrinated

RaceBannon said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Look who got indoctrinated

SFGbob

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Got to love how they so smugly dump on people who reject evolution when their thinking is every bit as faith based as any fundamentalist Christian and just as doctrinaire.

SFGbob

CirrhosisDawg said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Move to the south and then you can answer your own question.

Sweet Geezus are you a worthless Kunt.

WilburHooksHands

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Got to love how they so smugly dump on people who reject evolution when their thinking is every bit as faith based as any fundamentalist Christian and just as doctrinaire.

I have a dick and yet I can wear dresses and fuck dudes. The gender behavior of a male doesnt seem very hard wired to my actual biology?

RaceBannon

WilburHooksHands said:

RaceBannon said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Look who got indoctrinated

RaceBannon said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Look who got indoctrinated

That's the level of science involved

UW_Doog_Bot

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

If you follow this reasoning through then their is no biological justification for transgenderism unless you are one of the rare individuals who isn't either a XY or XX chromosome.

Which is counter to what is generally accepted that being trans has a biological component. "They are born that way. It's not a choice."

I guess you are a TERF?

Of course there's plenty of scientific evidence that there is a biological link between behavior and biological sex but that's why you have feminist activists shouting down biology professors in colleges. #marchforscience

So which is it?

SFGbob

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

Got to love how they so smugly dump on people who reject evolution when their thinking is every bit as faith based as any fundamentalist Christian and just as doctrinaire.

I have a dick and yet I can wear dresses and fuck dudes. The gender behavior of a male doesnt seem very hard wired to my actual biology?

Great, that still doesn't make you a chick.

The party of Science!!!!

WilburHooksHands

UW_Doog_Bot said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

WilburHooksHands said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

SFGbob said:

I'm not saying that kids shouldn't learn about Tubman or Susan B. Anthony as well as Jane Addams and Emma Goldman, my complaint is the amount of attention these historical figures are given in comparison to Jefferson, Adams, Roosevelt and Grant. Harriet Tubman, while an interesting historical figure who should definitely be studied is given far more attention than her historical importance warrants.

I agree with you. It's just a minor distraction to me in the big scheme of things.

I read my kids history books and it's so painfully obvious that they are written by leftists pushing an agenda. It's indoctrination not education and they start on them early.

Move to the south, then you don't even have to worry about evolution.

As that better or worse than being taught that gender is a choice and a social construct?

Gender is entirely a social construct. Biological sex is not. Gender is a socially constructed set of norms and behaviors ascribed to the biological sexes. hth

If you follow this reasoning through then their is no biological justification for transgenderism unless you are one of the rare individuals who isn't either a XY or XX chromosome.

Which is counter to what is generally accepted that being trans has a biological component. "They are born that way. It's not a choice."

I guess you are a TERF?

Of course there's plenty of scientific evidence that there is a biological link between behavior and biological sex but that's why you have feminist activists shouting down biology professors in colleges. #marchforscience

So which is it?

You are talking about Transsexuality. Transgender and Transsexual are two different things. Transgender is when a person “keeps” their sexual biology and changes their appearance, behavior, etc otherwise. Transsexual is when somebody physically alters their sexual biology (genitals, hormones, etc). I dont know enough about the process, but I dont think anything is alterable at the chromosomal level.

In that way, I dont think you can ever truly change your biological sex, and Ive never said otherwise. You can definitely change your gender because thats shit we made up. There are obviously some behavioral things driven by biology/hormones that define some behaviors, but those don’t cover all the bases like society and culture.

A lot of the discussion goes off the rails when people don’t acknowledge sex and gender as two different things, which I don’t find that difficult conceptually.

At this point I don’t believe there is an easily identifiable biological component to what makes someone want to change their sex or gender, it seems psychological (which still imo doesn't make it any more of a choice). If you want to get into the weeds, how does biology affect psychology (outside of hard wired hormonal behaviors)? I have no idea and I dont think anybody does at the level proof would require.

RaceBannon

Its abnormal behavior in the classic scientific definition of normal or abnormal behavior base on numbers but we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings so the party of science will pretend that its normal to want to cut your dick off

And teach it in grade school

Don't let me stop you. Its working out great