Got harsh here, my apologies.
Texas teaches abstinance only education…basically the scream at the kids “DON"T HAVE SEX OR YOU"LL DIE!!!” over and over again.
We now lead the country in teenage pregnancy and VD.
and we rank 50th in education.
And yet you still think that it somehow innapropriate for 5th graders to view, even when the parents signed permission slips? It’s OK to fire a teacher about after the fact, even though school field trips have been visiting there for years without a somplaint?
Excuse me, I must have misunderstood the words you wrote before. Allow me to go back and reread them.
Wonderful…Why are we importing ignorance now?
Shit, with folks like you here, anyone from New Mexico unless they’re from Albuquerque or Santa Fe, importing New Mexicans just improves the place. 
I can understand why you would think so.
I said she is getting a raw deal. But seriously, if this hadn’t had been an accident, then her getting in such trouble should not have been un-expected. I do believe that some art, including Lefhand’s depiction of an his art museum, is inappropriate for fifthgraders.
Are we really that high/low? I don’t support abstinance only education FWIW. But neither do I think that the VD films that I saw in ninth grade, in a segregated by sex class, are appropriate for fifthgraders.
I thought so. My parents started taking me to museums when I was a toddler.
Of course they were on the crazy side and let me study science and read the books I wanted to read to read. I guess they had no morals because they nurtured our intellectual curiosity instead of making us wear blinders and earplugs.
Things weren’t this bad in the 50’s. And I’m talking about the 1850’s.
I seriously wonder about how this generation of kids will be able to compete in the global economy when we seem to be raising a generation of socially backward, poorly educated kids that aren’t exposed to anything.
Your Virgin Marys bottle feed? We got lotsa religious boobies. I’m sure we also have our share of putti, but I don’t usually see a lot of putti being breast fed and haloes all around and the occaisional dove and such.
It’s funny, in the Louvre we saw so many Baby Jesus’ weenies that even I started to long for some sort of loincloth arrangement.
Exactly.
It’s not like the Dallas Museum of Art is secretive about the fact that it has nude paintings and sculptures on display.
Here is one of the offending pieces describes in the NYT article, on the Museum’s own website.
More nudes and semi-nudes on the website here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Ever hear of the Lactation of Saint Bernard?
Anyway, if you ever need an argument as to why it’s important to expose children to great art early and often, Unregistered Bull here seems to have volunteered as our object lesson. Don’t let your children grow up like him: take them to an art museum today.
yes, we really are…
I dont think think that VD films are appropriate for 5th graders…but nobody is suggesting that they are.
But the ignorance in all things biological that perpetuated on our kids in this state has a bad effect in the long run.
the dallas museum of art is not a particularly cutting edge musem…anythingthing nude in there is a probably a 2000 year old statue. To think that seeing something like that is harmful to a a child is silly.
How’s that?
I’m intelligent enough to know that taking fifth graders in Texas to see nude art can cause a stir.
I think that the lady is getting a raw deal.
I think that some nude art, like that huge photo of a cunt that Lefthand bragged about are inappropriate for fifthgraders.
It seems like basic intelligence, compassion, and morality would be good qualities. I really don’t see how taking your kids to art museums is going to rob them of these traits. Or why robbing them of these traits would be desirable.
“Ah thunk there’d be sum velvet Elvises and sum doggies playin’ poker – ya know, ART…”
That saddens me. That’s like leaving out significant parts of human history when educating kids. It does nothing but hamper their developement and their understanding of the world around them. But I digress.
I’m just sort of curious now Unregistered Bull, at what age do you think it’s ok for children to see art that has nudity? I’m not talking about VD videos or Bobby fucks Betty videos, just simple art which includes a breast or penis or vagina. Granted I grew up in a much different environment, but by the 5th or 6th grade children knew what these things were just from seeing art/pictures or talked about them in discussions on the school playground.
But not smart enough to recognize that the complaints are quite staggeringly ignorant.
Also, not smart enough to understand the context in which Left Hand mentioned that photo.
Well, you sure haven’t demonstrated much of the first qaulity in this thread, and you’ve failed to show how the second two qualities are remotely applicable to the situation described in the OP. I don’t know for a fact that more time spent staring at marble tits would have helped you in any of these areas, but it sure as hell couldn’t have hurt, and would have prevented you from making your hilariously ignorant statements about what sort of art you’d expect to find in a museum.
me too. Luckily, I’ve got my kid covered as far as teen pregnancy/VD goes. I got him a mensa membership.
In order to not piss parents and get your ass in trouble as a teacher, junior high. Though you probably ought to put a warning in your school manual that you send home.
For me personally, some the Greek statue stuff, some of non-sex murals, etc. is fine for 5th graders. I certainly don’t think that there should be saturation of that subject area. But there is a lot of shit out there that is considered art that isn’t appropriate. Nude photographs, erotic art, some nude drawings, etc. There is plenty of art that isn’t contraversial that is still good art and doesn’t contain nudity.
So, all the other kids in the class have to have a substandard education because the school is affraid of offending a few ignorant parents?