This is how queerdom starts

[jimnyc]

Nevermind teaching little boys to do things that, well, little boys would do. Let's now let them choose how they want to be raised. It's a shame. And what's worse, it's paid with taxpayer money. How long before we see this shit here?

STOCKHOLM (AP) — At the "Egalia" preschool, staff avoid using words like "him" or "her" and address the 33 kids as "friends" rather than girls and boys.

From the color and placement of toys to the choice of books, every detail has been carefully planned to make sure the children don't fall into gender stereotypes.

"Society expects girls to be girlie, nice and pretty and boys to be manly, rough and outgoing," says Jenny Johnsson, a 31-year-old teacher. "Egalia gives them a fantastic opportunity to be whoever they want to be."

The taxpayer-funded preschool which opened last year in the liberal Sodermalm district of Stockholm for kids aged 1 to 6 is among the most radical examples of Sweden's efforts to engineer equality between the sexes from childhood onward.

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/no-him-her-preschool-fights-gender-bias-122541829.html

[darin]

...war on Males...Masculinity...25 years before that's here...tops

[DragonStryk72]

But it's not just about what makes males male. When you look at it, they're removing the feminine identity, too. They see it is as not wanting to "label" the children, but everything, in all the world, is labeled. labeling them as "friends" is still a label.

[jimnyc]

But it's not just about what makes males male. When you look at it, they're removing the feminine identity, too. They see it is as not wanting to "label" the children, but everything, in all the world, is labeled. labeling them as "friends" is still a label.

A little boy should be treated like a little boy. A little girl should be treated like a little girl. Asking them to be "neutral" and not who they ARE is sickening.

[Dilloduck]

Agreed------natural men are an endangered species.

[jimnyc]

Agreed------natural men are an endangered species.

That wouldn't be the point. ONE child not treated like a CHILD is one too many. Kids are supposed to grow up as little boys and little girls, and have a childhood to remember just like we do. They shouldn't have to have memories of being little programmed robots without preferences or individuality.

[gabosaurus]

You have found one case, in Sweden no less, and it proves your hateful views on personal behavior?

This is how idiocy continues. :rolleyes:

[avatar4321]

You have found one case, in Sweden no less, and it proves your hateful views on personal behavior?

This is how idiocy continues. :rolleyes:

You want our children confused about who they are? What is hateful about not wanting that?

[jimnyc]

You have found one case, in Sweden no less, and it proves your hateful views on personal behavior?

This is how idiocy continues. :rolleyes:

Is it not a real story? Is Sweden somehow a 3rd world country? Is their public not funding this disgrace?

And why can't we DISCUSS things such as this, when it makes national headlines here in the US - from reuters and the AP?

Oh, because you're a filthy liberal and you want to step on any speech that shows what idiots you fucktards are.

[DragonStryk72]

You have found one case, in Sweden no less, and it proves your hateful views on personal behavior?

This is how idiocy continues. :rolleyes:

Explain how his views are hateful.

[KarlMarx]

You have found one case, in Sweden no less, and it proves your hateful views on personal behavior?

This is how idiocy continues. :rolleyes:

It's not hateful to call something unhealthy "unhealthy". No use of the words "he" and "she"? What kind of psycho case came up with that nightmare? And what kind of parent would want their kids to be exposed to that?

[jimnyc]

Explain how his views are hateful.

My views on wanting children to have individuality to grow, as boys, and girls - somehow makes me hateful?

[gabosaurus]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

[jimnyc]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

Look and find scientific evidence on hair or eyes. Ok. Now do the same proving queerism being genetic. It doesn't exist other than in theories.

[gabosaurus]

Look and find scientific evidence on hair or eyes. Ok. Now do the same proving queerism being genetic. It doesn't exist other than in theories.

Most Christians who oppose homosexuality do so because the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. But in biblical times, it was almost universally believed that only God could heal. Even the king of Israel, to whom the king of Syria sent his general, Naaman, for healing, remarks, "Am I God, to kill and make alive, that this man sends a man to me to heal him of his leprosy?" (II Kings 5:7).

[jimnyc]

Most Christians who oppose homosexuality do so because the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. But in biblical times, it was almost universally believed that only God could heal. Even the king of Israel, to whom the king of Syria sent his general, Naaman, for healing, remarks, "Am I God, to kill and make alive, that this man sends a man to me to heal him of his leprosy?" (II Kings 5:7).

WTF does this have to do with what I asked of you? :slap:

[KarlMarx]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

Tell me then, why were most of the Roman Emperors gay or bisexual? Don't tell me it was because they were related, they weren't. I can't believe that it was just a coincidence. .... perhaps they were gay because that behavior was acceptable in that society....

Also, in Plato's Republic, he talks about the love of a man being superior to that of a woman... again.. in that culture, that sort of thing was acceptable....

Homosexuality, when it is acceptable, becomes more prevalent in a culture. Claiming that it is inherited, like blue eyes, has not been scientifically proven.

[avatar4321]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

Gabby. I know you believe this. But it's a lie. People choose what they do. No one is forced into any relationship. No one is forced to engage in every behavior.

Besides, you've already admitted that it's behavior. So maybe you don't believe it as much as you'd like to admit.

[avatar4321]

Most Christians who oppose homosexuality do so because the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. But in biblical times, it was almost universally believed that only God could heal. Even the king of Israel, to whom the king of Syria sent his general, Naaman, for healing, remarks, "Am I God, to kill and make alive, that this man sends a man to me to heal him of his leprosy?" (II Kings 5:7).

And God can heal all people. In fact, the central tenant of Christianity is that the Atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature itself so that we are born again.

[Dilloduck]

That wouldn't be the point. ONE child not treated like a CHILD is one too many. Kids are supposed to grow up as little boys and little girls, and have a childhood to remember just like we do. They shouldn't have to have memories of being little programmed robots without preferences or individuality.

maybe not THE point but a damn relative one. Boys are being programmed to be pussies.

[DragonStryk72]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

We're not talking about homosexuality. Why are you?

[gabosaurus]

Now here is something interesting ... boys with several older brothers are more likely to be gay.
Jim, who do you think it might be in your family? :p

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2120218&page=1

[avatar4321]

Cant answer the question so obviously it ends up being deflected.

[logroller]

A little boy should be treated like a little boy. A little girl should be treated like a little girl. Asking them to be "neutral" and not who they ARE is sickening.

I agree with you, on its face this appears ludacris, but there are marked differences in the way women and men are treated in this world. Pay for example, men are paid more than women for the same job. Understanding these behaviors to be instilled from an early age, to abate theproblem, it requires debasing the stereotypes. Say a little boy, I mean male friend:rolleyes:, enjoys sewing and playing dressup with dolls, he may have a great skill which could be developed but may not be encouraged to do so because gender stereotypes assign such roles as strictly feminine. He needn't be classified as queer, ridiculed by society and stigmatized as homosexual. To illustrate my point, ask yourself what you would think if you were told a guy was a clothing designer.

[Kathianne]

I agree with you, on its face this appears ludacris, but there are marked differences in the way women and men are treated in this world. Pay for example, men are paid more than women for the same job. Understanding these behaviors to be instilled from an early age, to abate theproblem, it requires debasing the stereotypes. Say a little boy, I mean male friend:rolleyes:, enjoys sewing and playing dressup with dolls, he may have a great skill which could be developed but may not be encouraged to do so because gender stereotypes assign such roles as strictly feminine. He needn't be classified as queer, ridiculed by society and stigmatized as homosexual. To illustrate my point, ask yourself what you would think if you were told a guy was a clothing designer.

Can you give some real life, current examples of women being paid less than a man at same entry level job? Please don't give me a long term example, when even in this day and age, women take off months, years, for reasons that have nothing to do with their jobs. I took off 15 years, should those years be counted the same as those that didn't?

Mind you, I've no regret to my choices, well maybe I do, but they were mine to make. I wanted to be there for my kids and I was. I knowingly made that choice. Some men do too, but it's most often women.

I think the example of 'friends' is ludicrous from the get go, where do they get the instructors that are sold on the idea? Will it turn the kids into homosexuals? Unlikely. However, will it further erode gender modeling? Likely with unstated predicates.

I'm all for girls wanting to play with guns or boys being allowed to play with dolls, if that's their choice of the day. If memory serves correctly as a kid and as a mother, more girls want what are 'boy things' than vice versa. Boy toys were cool.

Kids raised without 'guns' turn every type of object into them. Even Barbies. LOL! Don't find a lot of guns being turned into dolls. Just saying.

[logroller]

Can you give some real life, current examples of women being paid less than a man at same entry level job? Please don't give me a long term example, when even in this day and age, women take off months, years, for reasons that have nothing to do with their jobs. I took off 15 years, should those years be counted the same as those that didn't?

Mind you, I've no regret to my choices, well maybe I do, but they were mine to make. I wanted to be there for my kids and I was. I knowingly made that choice. Some men do too, but it's most often women.

I think the example of 'friends' is ludicrous from the get go, where do they get the instructors that are sold on the idea? Will it turn the kids into homosexuals? Unlikely. However, will it further erode gender modeling? Likely with unstated predicates.

I'm all for girls wanting to play with guns or boys being allowed to play with dolls, if that's their choice of the day. If memory serves correctly as a kid and as a mother, more girls want what are 'boy things' than vice versa. Boy toys were cool.

Kids raised without 'guns' turn every type of object into them. Even Barbies. LOL! Don't find a lot of guns being turned into dolls. Just saying.

hmmm. I'm sure you're aware of the "glass ceiling", so I'm perplexed as to how to best answer your question. You invite an interesting question though;, are women, being more likely the homemaker, offered lesser pay as a result of their lesser likelihood to perform the actual work? Possibly. Though I wouldn't find that to be evidence to the fact, not from a policy standpoint anyways, but rather a preconceived archetype instilled by a patriarchal society; one which the Swedes have sought to quell. I would offer labor statistics as paramount evidence to the fact more so than any particular instance-- as there's always exceptions.

Would statistics answer your query? as I'm sure there is overrwhelming evidence as to peak, esp. managerial and executive, compensation favoring men. Not to mention the number of said positions being predominantly male. However, you specified Entry level compensation...so i shall offer some evidence and my interpretation.
http://www.cba.ua.edu/assets/docs/efl/WP_215.pdf

This study was of entry level academic economists, with many variables, but age and gender apply best here. The gender gap was minimal(~5%), while age was significant(~20%). Now this may lead one to believe gender isn't of primary significance; but assuming the gender role of women as the primary caregiver as valid, a delayed entry would likely result in a greater age of the female worker and thus lesser pay. As you stated it was your choice to leave the workforce, but how significant was the gender role in that choice? Without removing the archetype, its difficult know.

[Kathianne]

hmmm. I'm sure you're aware of the "glass ceiling", so I'm perplexed as to how to best answer your question. You invite an interesting question though;, are women, being more likely the homemaker, offered lesser pay as a result of their lesser likelihood to perform the actual work? Possibly. Though I wouldn't find that to be evidence to the fact, not from a policy standpoint anyways, but rather a preconceived archetype instilled by a patriarchal society; one which the Swedes have sought to quell. I would offer labor statistics as paramount evidence to the fact more so than any particular instance-- as there's always exceptions.

Would statistics answer your query? as I'm sure there is overrwhelming evidence as to peak, esp. managerial and executive, compensation favoring men. Not to mention the number of said positions being predominantly male. However, you specified Entry level compensation...so i shall offer some evidence and my interpretation.
http://www.cba.ua.edu/assets/docs/efl/WP_215.pdf

This study was of entry level academic economists, with many variables, but age and gender apply best here. The gender gap was minimal(~5%), while age was significant(~20%). Now this may lead one to believe gender isn't of primary significance; but assuming the gender role of women as the primary caregiver as valid, a delayed entry would likely result in a greater age of the female worker and thus lesser pay. As you stated it was your choice to leave the workforce, but how significant was the gender role in that choice? Without removing the archetype, its difficult know.

Attempt to show you are as intelligent as you think you are. Say this in a way a 5th grader could understand, in English.

[jimnyc]

Now here is something interesting ... boys with several older brothers are more likely to be gay.
Jim, who do you think it might be in your family? :p

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2120218&page=1

I read a study where little girls who had mothers in california who were fucking complete idiotic liberals, grew up to be treehugging lesbians.

Good Luck

[darin]

Most Christians who oppose homosexuality do so because the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. But in biblical times, it was almost universally believed that only God could heal. Even the king of Israel, to whom the king of Syria sent his general, Naaman, for healing, remarks, "Am I God, to kill and make alive, that this man sends a man to me to heal him of his leprosy?" (II Kings 5:7).


Let's see - Homosexuals die sooner, have higher rates of STDs, higher rates of domestic violence, higher rates of suicide, higher rates of drug use, uh...what about all that causes offense to dear gabby by describing it as 'unhealthy'? There's lots of correlation between higher rates of physical AND mental illness either caused by the behavior or resulting from it. Not MY data - data from scientists. Homosexuality is a very risky behaviour. Should go without saying. (http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/health-risks-of-the-homosexual-lifestyle/)

[logroller]

Attempt to show you are as intelligent as you think you are. Say this in a way a 5th grader could understand, in English.

Society raises women to believe their place is in the home. To reinforce the belief they aren't rewarded in the workplace equally. That easier to understand? That studyfound not inly were women paid less, but they expectedto be paid less.

[logroller]

Society raises women to believe their place is in the home. To reinforce the belief they aren't rewarded in the workplace equally. That easier to understand? That studyfound not inly were women paid less, but they expectedto be paid less.

Check out the Human development iNdex for Sweden, #3, Norway, #1. Scandanavia has far superior education system and policy towards family rights. Instead of ridiculing them, we should take note and try to change our outdated model.

[gabosaurus]

Let's see - Homosexuals die sooner, have higher rates of STDs, higher rates of domestic violence, higher rates of suicide, higher rates of drug use, uh...what about all that causes offense to dear gabby by describing it as 'unhealthy'? There's lots of correlation between higher rates of physical AND mental illness either caused by the behavior or resulting from it. Not MY data - data from scientists. Homosexuality is a very risky behaviour. Should go without saying. (http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/health-risks-of-the-homosexual-lifestyle/)

You are exactly right. So tell me, with all this in mind, why would anyone voluntarily CHOOSE to become a homosexual?
I never said that being homosexual is healthy. Smoking is not healthy, and look how many people voluntarily smoke. It's who you are.

A lot of people confuse being homosexual with being bisexual or bicurious. There are some who become curious about same sex relationships due to certain close exposures to those of the same sex. (including a surprising number of military personnel who spend weeks and months in close confinement with other men).


I read a study where little girls who had mothers in california who were fucking complete idiotic liberals, grew up to be treehugging lesbians.


Link, please. :)

[fj1200]

Check out the Human development iNdex for Sweden, #3, Norway, #1. Scandanavia has far superior education system and policy towards family rights. Instead of ridiculing them, we should take note and try to change our outdated model.

We should change our model to a non-diverse culture consisting of 10 million and 5 million people respectively while we are number 4 on that same list to start? :rolleyes: I'd say we're OK in comparison.

[darin]

You are exactly right. So tell me, with all this in mind, why would anyone voluntarily CHOOSE to become a homosexual?
I never said that being homosexual is healthy. Smoking is not healthy, and look how many people voluntarily smoke. It's who you are.


It's because their 'reward' is worth the risk. Instead of coddling, maybe we treat folks with those issues - or, simply allow them to reap the outcomes of their chosen behaviour. SANCTIONING it, and providing special legal status, or indoctrination of our kids is the WRONG choice.


A lot of people confuse being homosexual with being bisexual or bicurious. There are some who become curious about same sex relationships due to certain close exposures to those of the same sex. (including a surprising number of military personnel who spend weeks and months in close confinement with other men).


You're a retard. Is that your choice?

[logroller]

We should change our model to a non-diverse culture consisting of 10 million and 5 million people respectively while we are number 4 on that same list to start? :rolleyes: I'd say we're OK in comparison.


Are you saying diversity and greater populaton causes lesser development??? Sort of. That's like saying guns increase homicide and suicide rates. Greater pop and diversity allow for cultural segregation and inequality which retards development, but a direct link it is not.

WHen adjusted for inequality, the US IHDI rank is #12, an 8 place downgrade; the highest among the top 20 countries and the 16th worst out of the the 139 countries compared. On par with Mexico and in the ranks of countries like Israel, South Korea, Chile, Panama, Argentina, and Brazil- just to name a few. Maybe that's "OK" to you, but I think we can do better than that.

[gabosaurus]

It's because their 'reward' is worth the risk. Instead of coddling, maybe we treat folks with those issues - or, simply allow them to reap the outcomes of their chosen behaviour. SANCTIONING it, and providing special legal status, or indoctrination of our kids is the WRONG choice.


If we do that, let's also treat folks with similar afflictions such as smokers, alcoholics or psychotic gun nuts. Since allowing them to reap the outcomes of their chosen behavior could endanger others of us.
The last sentence is just hateful idiocy from the normal source of such and I won't address it again.



You're a retard. Is that your choice?

You're a hateful idiot. Is that your choice?

[fj1200]

Are you saying diversity and greater populaton causes lesser development???
...
Maybe that's "OK" to you, but I think we can do better than that.

No, but if I were going to develop programs to serve an entire population then I would start with a small homogeneous society.

We can do better but we shouldn't start with this quackery.

[darin]

If we do that, let's also treat folks with similar afflictions such as smokers, alcoholics or psychotic gun nuts. Since allowing them to reap the outcomes of their chosen behavior could endanger others of us.
The last sentence is just hateful idiocy from the normal source of such and I won't address it again.


Excellent ideas!


You're a hateful idiot. Is that your choice?

Slightly wrong. I hate idiocy. That's about it. Talk to me about how much I hate after you've served ONE DAY for the greater good of our nation. Just one. :)

[jimnyc]

If we do that, let's also treat folks with similar afflictions such as smokers, alcoholics or psychotic gun nuts.

We do! We try and get smokers to quit smoking, we try to get drinkers to stop drinking. Both will have to deal with the repercussions if they don't. We don't appease what they do, in fact, they are somewhat pushed away by society. Since you're only talking about "psychotic" gun nuts, they generally end up getting shot or jail time.

Should we afford additional or special rights, or "equal" rights, or cater to any of those you mentioned?

[gabosaurus]

Slightly wrong. I hate idiocy. That's about it. Talk to me about how much I hate after you've served ONE DAY for the greater good of our nation. Just one. :)

I have served the last three years for the greater good of this nation. I am an educator.
Everybody serves in some form or fashion. Some of us just don't have an ego complex about it.

[darin]

I have served the last three years for the greater good of this nation. I am an educator.
Everybody serves in some form or fashion. Some of us just don't have an ego complex about it.


Not even close. With your point of view, I doubt you're doing a service other than to promote your agenda onto the lives/minds of some of the most vulnerable. I question your integrity to be an impartial educator - so I ask again. Work today to do good for the nation. Then talk to me about what you think I hate or not.

[logroller]

No, but if I were going to develop programs to serve an entire population then I would start with a small homogeneous society.


A small homogeneous society...Like that of Sweden???

I recall a SCOTUS opinion (dissenting I think) re:med marijuana where they mentioned a state's rights to "experiment" in matters. They ruled against it on commerce clause reasoning(big surprise:rolleyes:), but they mentioned it. I think it may have been a quote/paraphrase of Jefferson.

I mention this because Jefferson, like you and I, agree a test of a policy on a smaller segment of a population is wise. In this case in Stockholm, Sweden, it isn't a nationwide policy; 33 kids from a liberal district... Small...homogeneous...sounds like it fits the bill, no?


We can do better but we shouldn't start with this quackery. quackQUACKquackquack:laugh:

[fj1200]

^Yes, Sweden. And I was rebutting your HDI ranking argument.

And yes, quackery.

[J.T]

First they taught you that race does not exist. Now they seek to erase the existence of sex...

[logroller]

^Yes, Sweden. And I was rebutting your HDI ranking argument.


Not much of a rebuttal, more like omitting the premise. Like saying gender doesn't matter if you don't keep track. Ignoring stereotypes doesn't make them go away; they tend to manifest themselves.

Reagrdless of diversity, telling me we can't find a homogeneuous group of 33 people in the US is quacky, crackpot even. Exactly how much more diverse are we, is there some other gender we have here that Sweden doesn't? the gender demographic for{Sweden M/F(49/51%), US (48.5, 51.5%)wiki}. No "other" was listed, maybe they exclude those, too diverse.

P.S. It's all soapboxing from here-- :dance:

Why can't we focus on individuality without consideration of gender? It doesn't have anything to with diversity or population size. It has to do with social engineering a population to exhibit certian behaviors--an archetype. Does Sweden have a different archetype, sure it does. But that doesn;t make their methods quackery, anymore than it makes our more conservative views of sex passe. Even with our far higher population and economic performance, we still have lesser rank than Sweden

t's coming up on fifty years since the civil rights movement. At what point do we move on to the next affront to freedom? Harping on diversity as our problem doesn't solve it, anymore than a gay pride parade integrates them into society. Just the opposite, it further entrenches the stereotype

Quackery is saying a group of children must learn and behave within the stereotypes we impose on them, merely because that's the way its been done in the past. Exactly what purpose do gender roles serve? Will kids, growing up seeing themselves as "friends", being unique based on their character degrade society? I'm sure the same was thought of civil rights--


I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

Did MLK dream of quackery? I guess not, he discerned between genders.

[avatar4321]

I have served the last three years for the greater good of this nation. I am an educator.
Everybody serves in some form or fashion. Some of us just don't have an ego complex about it.

Those poor poor students:(

[avatar4321]

First they taught you that race does not exist. Now they seek to erase the existence of sex...

That's never going to happen. May as well try to turn the moon into the sun or a cat into a dog.

[LuvRPgrl]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

So you are saying you want to give these kids, and ours, every chance they can have at becoming homosexual?

AND YOU ARE A FUCKING COUNSELOR TO KIDS? NO WONDER THIS COUNTRY IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES.

[logroller]

No, your views on any event or circumstance that someone causes a child to "become" is ludicrous and wrong. Homosexuality is genetic, just like blonde hair and blue eyes.

People can dye their hair and get contacts to change their eye color. Besides, people don't emerge from the womb seeking sexual relationships. Something happens hormaonally in puberty that causes us to pursue such activities. Rather that be someone with blond hair and blue eyes, tits, ass or dick is irrelevant. Its a preference one has a choice in acting upon. Thus, I understand homosexuality to be choice, maybe that's not the way they feel about it, but there's still a choice in how they express themselves.

[sundaydriver]

I can understand breaking down barriers by maybe showing that not all policemen are men, the majority of great chefs are men, women are pilots. But what they are doing there is just , well...whack!

[logroller]

I can understand breaking down barriers by maybe showing that not all policemen are men, the majority of great chefs are men, women are pilots. But what they are doing there is just , well...whack!

A. whack
1. adjective; appalling in nature, unconventional...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whack

Unconventional, but not appalling. What's the worst that could come from this? Kids seeing eachother as "friends" aside from gender. Pretty benign, IMO. It's not llike Sven and Greta will be confused as to gender when it comes time to seek one over the other.

[darin]

I agree with you, on its face this appears ludacris,


?



http://magmp3.com/i/Ludacris.jpg