SteelReDux, at a guess the reason suicides have dropped from their peak in the 90s is due to the enormous amount of antidepressants being prescribed for children and adolescents these days.
Suicide may not be on the rise, but depression certainly is and personally I feel part of it is due to the lack of boundaries and rules in children's lives today. They can't even trust having restraints and boundaries on their sexuality any more, and are left to float on a sea of confusion at a time hormones and peer pressure are forcing them to question their every emotion.
It's perfectly normal for girls to go through a stage of wanting to dress like a boy and be one of the boys at school. This has been known for generations. One of my daughters went through it. But it is a passing phase for the vast majority and they certainly don't need to be told that they are gender fluid or any such dogma, when all it is is just a common phase girls go through.
And certainly at primary school level, kids don't care if the girls want to play with the boys, or vice versa.
A study on the upbringing of adult transexuals shows that they had different parenting dynamics within the family to hetero normal kids. Which suggest a lack of conventional parenting roles within those families. Rather than reinforce their different view of sexual roles, perhaps teachers could focus more on teaching these kids about conventional parenting roles within the traditional family. Who knows, it may help them.

//Children are asked to do things like imagine they are sixteen and in love with someone of the same sex.//

Yes, god forbid that children be asked to use their imagination. And you definitely don't want them empathising with other people (sarcasm).

//The whole program is wrong on more levels than I can discuss here//

I'm pretty sure that you actually only find it wrong on one level: the level where it says there is nothing wrong with not being heterosexual. For some reason people on the religious right find such a notion deeply offensive. I can't for the life of me figure out why. The religious right don't care if you're not tall, not pretty, not intelligent, not good at sport, not polite, not compassionate etc. - only if you're not heterosexual. I find their single minded obsession with human sexuality very strange - there's a lot more to my life than just sex. Maybe they just don't have much imagination.

//keep primary school especially a politically free zone.//

//perhaps teachers could focus more on teaching these kids about conventional parenting roles within the traditional family.//

ROFLMAO

Unless it's the politics of the religious right, eh Big Nana? It's fine for kids be indoctrinated in that sort of politics - just none of this dreadful liberalism or accepting those who are different.

There's no need for the dishonesty, Big Nana. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

You give an activist an inch, and he/she/it will take a mile.

What a waste of $8m

Toni Lavis:

“Yes, god forbid that children be asked to use their imagination. And you definitely don't want them empathising with other people (sarcasm).”

Why do you need to tell us that is sarcasm? Surely no one could presume that it is a logical argument. Big Nana says that she does not think it appropriate for primary school children to use their imagination in one particular case and you infer from that that she never wants them to use their imagination at all – it is such a ridiculous conclusion that it could not be serious.

You conclude from her opposition to one exercise that she does not want children empathising at all. How could such statements be anything but sarcasm?

Why do you need to resort to sarcasm? It serves no purpose in the pursuit of truth. It is only used to pour scorn on an argument without ever presenting a counter argument. Scorn tells us nothing of the scorner’s opinions but only of their inability to argue and the hope that they can ridicule their opposition into oblivion.

Why does it matter if arguments come from the religious right? It is the arguments themselves which are important – not where they come from. If you really want to find the truth then you will listen to what they have to say and then dismiss it for its poor logic rather than the fact that it came from any particular group. Pointing out that it comes from a particular group only serves to show us your prejudices and bigotry towards the religious right.

Phanto, you spend far too much time big-noting yourself and your holier-than-thou attitude about everyone else's views on subjects, we rarely get to see exactly what you think.

Just because someone disagrees with someone else's take on a subject, doesn't make them a bully. To my mind, homophobes are bullies.
Not because they don't understand or agree with the gay lifestyle, but because they denigrate gay people and all those who support their right to legally live the life they were born to.
That is ignorance and bullying in the extreme, whether you like it or not.

Suseonline:

“Phanto, you spend far too much time big-noting yourself and your holier-than-thou attitude about everyone else's views on subjects, we rarely get to see exactly what you think.”

If you do not know what I think about the subject of this thread then you have not read the thread. I have given my views and I have also pointed out the bullying by you and Toni Lavis. They are two entirely separate activities. Pointing out bullying is not having a holier than thou attitude it is something we should all take responsibility for on the forum and throughout society. You think that homophobic people are bullies and you think that their behaviour should be exposed for what it is – does that mean you have a holier than thou attitude?

“Just because someone disagrees with someone else's take on a subject, doesn't make them a bully. To my mind, homophobes are bullies.”

I can’t see where I have said that it does. Can you show me where I have said that? Like I have said arguing about the topic is one thing – using the forum to display your predjudices and bigotry is another altogether. We do not need to know what you think about homophobic people - that is an entirely different subject to the subject of this thread. When you use this topic to denigrate homophobic people it is because you are more interested in denigrating them than you are in the topic at hand which is the welfare of children at school.

There is no reason to denigrate homophobic people just because of their views and there is no need to denigrate them because of their behaviour. If you think their behaviour is wrong then tell them so and report them to authorities if they have broken the law but making snide remarks in totally inappropriate discussions is just bullying and cowardly.