bullets13

I symphathize more with Ms. Klug.  It boils down to personal opinion, and my personal opinion is that i feel worse for someone who is cast out because of their appearance despite their performance than i do for a parent who doesn't want their child exposed to real-world issues. 

making assumptions without knowing someone... sounds familiar. if only i could put my finger on where else that's happening elsewhere in the area.  oh yeah, right here, on this issue.

i will reply to this before i leave, however.  I have seen nothing to imply that Klug is disgruntled in any way.  every quote i've read has been upbeat, and the footage i've seen of her seems to show a happy person.  it's important to remember that this is not a fight that she brought to the district as a disgruntled ex-employee.  disgruntled parents (perhaps rightfully disgruntled, depending on your side) brought this fight to the district.  all she's done is answer requests for interviews and show up for the hearing that decided her fate.

it's all good, bud.  As for this particular issue, i think it also is important to me because i can understand a little what Klug is going through.  I'm a man who teaches pre-k.  I've been doing it for 8 years, and now i've got a great reputation in the community i teach in, and actually get requests for students to be in my class from parents i haven't even met.  but i've had instances where kids have been pulled out of my class not because i'm not good at what i do, but because i'm a man.  and i can honestly say that i understand why someone might be uncomfortable with that.  it's not an everyday occurence for a man to teach this age group.  but just because i'm not the prototypical teacher does not mean that i'm not more than capable at what i do... and there are many parents that have been hesitant at first to have me as their child's teacher who have since then requested me to teach siblings, friended me on facebook so i can keep up with their child, etc. etc.  so for me, as i honestly can say i understand why parents would not be comfortable with this, the most important thing is that the child is being treated well, and that the teacher is doing their job.  and by all accounts, Klug has satisfied these requirements, and as it truly is about the kids, to me that is by far more important than her appearance.  If she was using her position to try and indoctrinate the children, i would actually side with you.  but i've heard nothing of the sort.  so i'm going to end this now by saying that while i disagree with you, i do understand you.  i've got a long weekend of moving into my new house, so i doubt i'll be back on here much, and i don't know if by the time i get back on i'm going to have the energy or desire to answer 20 posts directed at me from 15 different people, but we'll say.  have a good weekend.

This is more about a few parents' discomfort than about the kids as well. Also, I saw there were only 13 people who chose to speak, and if a decent portion of those spoke in her behalf, then only a handful of parents had a big enough problem with this to speak out. I would've expected dozens or hundreds of upset parents speaking out if your take on the general climate of this issue were true.

You nailed it. I see no difference there. Give me a break.

  now this is ridiculous.  what agenda?  she worked a job, and did it well.  the agenda was pushed by those who were uncomfortable with her.  i understand why they were uncomfortable, although i strongly disagree.  but don't go placing blame on her for simply working a job and making a paycheck. 

i think we should adopt liberal progressive ways of doing things on CERTAIN issues because it's the right thing to do... and from what i've seen and heard myself, there were PLENTY of people supporting Ms. Klug at the meeting.  as for me being "normal folks", i'm plenty normal, at least in my age-group. 

you're entering a gray area on the legality of dress code.  of more concern would be restrooming, but every school lounge i've ever been to had a uni-sex one seater, so that wouldn't be a problem.    and i agree to an extent with a parent having a say in what their child is exposed to... but where do you draw the line?  is Ms. Klug the line?  by all accounts she's pleasant, and she does her job, which she is vastly OVERqualified to do.  she doesn't talk about her sexuality, she dresses in extremely conservative female dress, and has substituted on other occasions for LISD without incident. if we're honest, a few parents in Lumberton would be unhappy if an African American substitute taught their kids (Calm down LRF, i'm not saying that everyone in Lumberton is a racist).  Would it be okay for them to raise an issue then?  would we not take offense to their protest?  It's a tough issue, because you have to balance Ms. Klug's right to work a job that she does more than capably, versus a few parents' right (not sure if it is) to not be uncomfortable.  I would think that there's no law saying that Lumberton parents can't take their kids out of LISD and put them into a private school, so i guess parents do have that right to pick what their kids are exposed to..   also, as an aside, i do agree that it would've been good to let parents know ahead of time so they could address it with their children, although it seems like the kids weren't exactly running home upset about it, conflicted and confused, or we would've heard about it after some of Ms. Klug's previous substitute jobs in the district.

  you have to realize you're not "normal folks" anymore.  you're still thinking SETX is the normal way of things.  it's not.  i saw the news, and saw a couple of people for and a couple of people against.  i've also seen a lot of feedback on social media.  were you at the meeting?

  i think this whole situation goes to show that "radical" is constantly shifting and changing from generation to generation.  support of Ms. Klug was widespread, even from areas that you and I both would not have expected.  (Yes i understand there were dissenters as well)  50-60 years ago blatantly discriminating against someone because of the color of their skin would not have been radical at all, and in fact what was radical was wanting equal rights for African Americans.  Southeast Texas was one of the last areas to get past that.  Now here we are, and it would appear that wanting rights for someone like Ms. Klug, who even a decade ago might have been completely run out of town, is no longer a radical position to take, even in backwoods Southeast Texas. 

LISD might not have wanted to do this, but this is the right thing to do.  this wasn't an issue until a couple of students  PARENTS OF STUDENTS were "distracted" by this teacher.  this was never an issue for the kids, it's a parent issue.  and while i can understand why someone might be uncomfortable, especially when they were raised to be uncomfortable with this issue, as Southeast Texans so often are, the fact of the matter is that times are changing.  which is why Ms. Klug garnered a tremendous amount of local support in what is a traditionally very conservative area.    All that being said, Lumberton probably wasn't quite ready for this, even in 2014.  But by going to the media instead of quietly talking to the school board and superintendent, the uncomfortable parents of the "distracted" students ensured with all of the attention they brought to the matter that Lumberton would have to retain her in order to A) avoid a massive lawsuit, and B) not incur the wrath of a great many people, including a surprisingly large number of Lumberton residents.  Had this been approached differently, then Klug would have likely just quietly stopped receiving sub jobs and nobody would've ever known the difference. 

have you seen pictures of the guy/girl?  she really looks quite ordinary.  i'd be pretty distracted if she came in dressed up like a drag queen, but from what i've seen in the media, i just don't see much there that is going to get the kids wound up.  as for distractions, i know a teacher that weighs nearly 600 lbs.  Should he be put before the board because he's a distraction?  should good looking female teachers be put before the board because they're distractions?  i remember in 5th or 6th grade we had a young, attractive teacher who wore tight, form hugging shirts, and it was generally quite obvious when it was cold in the room.  she was dressed nice, she didn't show a bunch of cleavage or anything like that, but on most days most of the boys had their attention glued to the teacher, but i don't believe many of us heard what she was saying.  all that to say, apart from maybe a temporary distraction, i'm having a hard time buying the argument, and it's even harder in light of the fact that this sub had apparently subbed there multiple times before without significant enough of a distraction for it to be brought up.

  yeah steve.  and they ought to tax the top 1% to fund it. 

that was the guy who brought it up and was interviewed for kbmt and kfdm's main argument.  was not directing that at you in particular...

and a natural, healthy, CONSTANT distraction for young men.  the main difference i see is that these kids go in, see this guy dressed as a lady (think Ms. Doubtfire, not Ru Paul), and MAYBE it distracts them for a few minutes, and then likely only for the first time she subs for them. on the flipside, they go in and sit next to a girl they think is pretty, and not only will it distract them all class, it will distract them all YEAR.  my point being i respect a Biblical argument in this situation much more than i do a "distraction" argument, as the distraction argument is really just a copout made by those who don't have the backbone to admit why they really have a problem with it. if this were truly such a distraction, than this issue would've come up during one of the previous times that she subbed in the district.  and if we're truly so worried about distractions, then all schools should be divided into boys and girls so that they'll concentrate on learning.  

i know.  young women are a much bigger distraction. 

the only types of fields that i would think women might not be as capable as men would be fields where physical size or strength would provide a distinct advantage.

the only thing this will do is make sure that someone with the same experience performing the same job will make the same salary.  the markets will still determine fair pay for the job itself.  but gender should not be a factor in determining fair pay, at least in fields where women are just as capable as men. 

So are these men and women performing the same job?  or is it comparing female secretaries to male analysts or some other shady misrepresentation?  the way it's worded, i'm willing to bet that there's some misguidance there.  but i'm not surprised that the right is lining up to try and diminish what is likely to become one of the few good things to come from Obama's time in office.

if we're this worried about distractions, the only answer is to completely seperate boys and girls from middle school on.  i guarantee you girls beginning to turn into young women is much more distracting to young males than some kid's long hair or questionable t-shirt. 

I talked to the middle schooler's conservative father, not the middle schooler. Is that a choice the father should be able to make, or should you be the one to make it for him?

First off, it's also been allowed in several places. I also didnt claim that people EVERYWHERE outside of setx would disagree with the mindset here. You're putting an awful lot of words in my mouth tonight. And secondly, while the topics are kind of related, it's not the same issue.

On an interesting note, I did poll ONE conservative lumberton parent about this issue, and he answered that he would be tentatively open minded to it, but would want the option to discuss it with his child first.

I don't put the two on the same level, although you've made it abundantly clear that you do.