"Homosexuality in its myriad forms has been scientifically documented in more than 450 species of mammals, birds, reptiles, insects, and other animals worldwide. Biological Exuberance is the first comprehensive account of the subject, bringing together accurate, accessible, and nonsensationalized information. Drawing upon a rich body of zoological research spanning more than two centuries, Bruce Bagemihl shows that animals engage in all types of nonreproductive sexual behavior. Sexual and gender expression in the animal world displays exuberant variety, including same-sex courtship, pair-bonding, sex, and co-parenting—even instances of lifelong homosexual bonding in species that do not have lifelong heterosexual bonding."
.... But, invisible man says no.
I think it's completely out of line and bigoted for an English teacher, paid to teach English and expose children to appropriate and relevant cultural topics such as food, music, greetings etc.to come here and preach highly controversial and inappropriate topics to children. Any NET who disagrees should be fired. This is an issue for parents to discuss with their children, not YOU!
I don't hate gay people nor do I wish harm on them, I view them in the same way I'd view someone with depression, chronic anxiety or OCD, a person to be treated with respect I stick to my principles.
There is a zero percent chance the lesson goes over well and a very large and real chance that there is serious punishment for it. Is that good? Is that "fair?" Probably not, but one has to be pretty naïve to teach that here. It would be like me going to teach in Saudi Arabia and constantly talking about how beer is made and doing a vocab lesson on brewing techniques. It is NOT going to go over well. I imagine a very large chunk of Koreans don't genuinely care if a person is gay or not, but that's not the same thing as having a Pride lesson in an English class.
I think most people would agree with this.There is no way that is what Aristocrat received his warning for. Multiple people brought up similar concerns. The comments were deleted because it went from "this lesson isn't going to go over well" to "keep your mental disorder out of Korea" to "In Canada, they let children identify as cats and eat food from the floor during lunchtime"
Yeah, but why didn't they just delete those posts that took the conversation well out beyond the lesson plan discussion? That was irresponsible moderating. In fact, that was the opposite of moderating. Any naive teacher that does that lesson plan may be posting on here the next day asking "What can I do if my school won't give me a letter of release?" A lot of those responses had nothing to do with homosexuality, but rather the appropriateness of that theme for a lesson plan. Right on topic.
Like the Lions club internationally: Don't talk about topics involving partisan politics, religion, sex.We are here to teach mostly English as a 2nd language for international business, university entrance exams and introductory conversations with foreigners. Try to stay in your lane.
I agree that they could, and probably should, have left the on topic replies. But as to the point of this topic, I don't think Aristocrat received his warning for his post related to the appropriateness of the lesson. Did you get a warning for your deleted post?
(If you wanna argue Hitler was great, this ain't the forum; if you wanna say critical race theory has become a problem in America, go for it, as that is an identified issue that is about ideas debated in the public forum.
So, at best we can argue that there exists NO definitive scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is innate and natural or a mental disorder, or stress response as we see in the animal kingdom.
This means that it is perfectly reasonable to allow people to hold either belief. I said I believe homosexuality is a mental disorder and I will stick with it.