Category: Conversation Starters

In this school it does!  Once again we go overboard, does this really help anyone?  Modern education is not really educating people but making them look foolish.

Since the first schoolhouse opened in the West, parents have entrusted their children to esteemed educators who were charged with instilling the latest trends in modern education. One such subject that has recently taken the public education system by storm is LGBT education.

This movement has been so widely accepted by the schools that even the way children are socialized in the classroom must fall under the guidelines put forth by this minority demographic. While the schools have done everything they can to ensure that this minority is accepted, the group consistently submits requests for policy changes, some of which affect the majority as well.

In one British school, the emotional wellbeing of the campus’ transgender students is a top priority. In fact, the principal holds the feelings of this small group of children so highly that all it took was a few complaints to have him changing long-standing school policy.

According to The Sun, the Priory School in Lewes has informed all female students that they will no longer be allowed to wear skirts after “concerns” were raised by “5 or 6 transgender students” who said that the clothing made them feel uncomfortable. As such, headteacher Tony Smith banned the feminine clothing and instead implemented a “gender neutral” dress code.

The new dress code mandates that all students must wear pants, a move that has been attributed to the complaints of a handful of preteen transgender students. Now, first-year students will be required to wear the new uniform, which consists of a shirt, tie, jumper, and grey slacks, the BBC reports.

Headteacher Tony Smith explained that the policy addresses issues of “inequality and decency.” In a statement, he insisted that the majority must respect the minority, which, in this case, seems to entail appeasing their demands.

He added: “Respecting people’s rights are very important. We believe in rights and responsibilities, we believe in equality and we believe in fairness. We want to treat everybody the same. We hope that it will provide a smart, comfortable and affordable alternative to the current uniform.”

While the transgender students and their families are obviously on board with the change, claiming it involves acceptance and inclusion, others see it as a negative. One university sociologist predicted that this change will usher in a plethora of demands.

Frank Furedi, sociologist at the University of Kent said: “You start with uniform on Monday, by Tuesday you’re going to say, ‘maybe we shouldn’t use the pronouns he and she.’ By Wednesday, you’re going to talk about having gender neutral bathrooms. In so doing, you’re raising fundamental questions about people’s identity.”

One mother pointed out that, while the move appeases the minority, it discriminates against the majority of students who are not gender fluid or non-binary.

Mother-of-four Lara, who did not want to give her surname, said: “My daughter said she has got a gender and it’s female so being gender neutral when she has got a gender is a big deal for her, as she proud to be a girl.

Since the policy was announced, the school has been in hot water with the community. Headteacher Tony Smith is also discovering that there isn’t a policy that will make everyone happy, and his move will likely make more students unhappy than were before.

In catering to the vocal minority, the majority is often disenfranchised and even discriminated against. Disturbingly, many of these political movements have led policies that are often confusing and impossible to follow.

For the first time in history, a major political party in the United States has several women who have declared their candidacy to be their party’s presidential nominee. But TV pundits have been questioning whether, despite the progress indicated by the huge influx of women elected into Congress last fall, the U.S. is ever going to elect a woman to the country’s highest leadership position.

This is baffling to us, especially in light of what we see in our corporate research. In two articles from 2012 (here and here) we discussed findings from our analysis of 360-degree reviews that women in leadership positions were perceived as being every bit as effective as men. In fact, while the differences were not huge, women scored at a statistically significantly higher level than men on the vast majority of leadership competencies we measured.

We recently updated that research, again looking at our database of 360-degree reviews in which we ask individuals to rate each leaders’ effectiveness overall and to judge how strong they are on specific competencies, and had similar findings: that women in leadership positions are perceived just as — if not more — competent as their male counterparts.

Still, the disturbing fact is that the percentage of women in senior leadership roles in businesses has remained relatively steady since we conducted our original research. Only 4.9% of Fortune 500 CEOs and 2% of S&P 500 CEOs are women. And those numbers are declining globally.

There are of course many factors that contribute to this dearth of women at senior levels. For centuries, there have been broad, cultural biases against women and stereotypes die slowly. People have long believed that many women elect not to aspire to the highest ranks of the organization and take themselves out of the running (though recent research disputes that). Lots of research has shown that unconscious bias places a significant role in hiring and promotion decisions, which also contributes to the lower number of women in key positions.

Our current data presents even more compelling evidence that this bias is incorrect and unwarranted. Women are perceived by their managers — particularly their male managers — to be slightly more effective than men at every hierarchical level and in virtually every functional area of the organization. That includes the traditional male bastions of IT, operations, and legal.

As you can see in the chart below, women were rated as excelling in taking initiative, acting with resilience, practicing self-development, driving for results, and displaying high integrity and honesty. In fact, they were thought to be more effective in 84% of the competencies that we most frequently measure.

According to our updated data, men were rated as being better on two capabilities —”develops strategic perspective” and “technical or professional expertise,” which were the same capabilities where they earned higher ratings in our original research as well.

Women Are Rated Better Than Men on Key Leadership Capabilities

According to an analysis of thousands of 360-degree reviews, women outscored men on 17 of the 19 capabilities that differentiate excellent leaders from average or poor ones.

Interestingly, our data shows that when women are asked to assess themselves, they are not as generous in their ratings. In the last few years we created a self-assessment that measures, among other things, confidence. We’ve been collecting data since 2016 (from 3,876 men and 4,779 women so far) on levels of confidence leaders have in themselves over their careers and we saw some interesting trends.

When we compare confidence ratings for men and women, we see a large difference in those under 25. It’s highly probable that those women are far more competent than they think they are, while the male leaders are overconfident and assuming they are more competent than they are. At age 40, the confidence ratings merge. As people age their confidence generally increases; surprisingly, over the age of 60 we see male confidence decline, while female confidence increases. According to our data, men gain just 8.5 percentile points in confidence from age 25 to their 60+ years. Women, on the other hand, gain 29 percentile points. One note: This is what we see in our data though we recognize that there are studies that come to different conclusions on whether women truly lack confidence at early stages in their career.

These findings dovetail with other research that shows women are less likely to apply for jobs unless they are confident they meet most of the listed qualifications. A man and woman with identical credentials, who both lack experience for a higher level position, come to different conclusions about being prepared for the promotion. The man is more inclined to assume that he can learn what he’s missing, while in the new job. He says to himself, “I am close enough.”  The woman is inclined to be more wary, and less willing to step up in that circumstance.

It’s possible that these lower levels of confidence at younger ages could motivate women to take more initiative, be more resilient, and to be more receptive to feedback from others, which in turn makes them more effective leaders in the long run.

We see a similar trend in women’s perceptions of their overall leadership effectiveness, with their rating rising as they get older. This data is from a study that includes 40,184 men and 22,600 women and measures the overall effectiveness rating of males and females on 49 unique behaviors that predict a leaders effectiveness. Again, women at younger ages rate themselves significantly lower than men but their ratings climb — and eventually supersede those of men — as they get older.

This data continues to reinforce our observations from our previous research — women make highly competent leaders, according to those who work most closely with them — and what’s holding them back is not lack of capability but a dearth of opportunity. When given those opportunities, women are just as likely to succeed in higher level positions as men.

Keep in mind that our data is mostly perceptions of current and past behavior and performance. That’s different than a promotional decision that involves movement to a higher position and involves taking a bigger risk. If 96 out of 100 people currently serving in comparable positions are male, and you are making the decision about who to promote, and you have a highly qualified female and a highly qualified male, what are you inclined to do? It may seem safer to choose the man.

Leaders need to take a hard look at what gets in the way of promoting women in their organizations. Clearly, the unconscious bias that women don’t belong in senior level positions plays a big role. It’s imperative that organizations change the way they make hiring and promotion decisions and ensure that eligible women are given serious consideration. Those making those decisions need to pause and ask, “Are we succumbing to unconscious bias? Are we automatically giving the nod to a man when there’s an equally competent woman?” And, as our data on confidence shows, there’s a need for organizations to give more encouragement to women. Leaders can assure them of their competence and encourage them to seek promotions earlier in their careers.

Everyone has passing intrusive thoughts that seem to come from outside their control: the content may feel alien, absurd, or threatening, and they pass after a few weird moments.  Intrusive thoughts can be frightening thoughts about what might happen to you or someone you care about, or what mistake you might make or what terrible impulsive act you might possibly commit.

For some people, intrusive thoughts are part and parcel of panic or intense anxiety. In this type of intrusive thoughts, it feels like they are a result of or about the anxiety itself, and they function to add more fear to the anxiety you are already experiencing. The intrusive thoughts keep the anxiety going, and maintain the fear-producing spiral. So, for example, you might think, “what if I have a heart attack?” in the midst of an anxiety attack. Or you might envision yourself knocking people over as you rush to exit the room.

However, there is another class of intrusive thoughts that we call unwanted intrusive thoughts.  These are stuck thoughts that cause great distress. They seem to come from out of nowhere, arrive with a distressing whoosh, and trigger anxiety, guilt, disgust, panic or misery. The content of unwanted intrusive thoughts often focuses on sexual or violent or socially unacceptable images. Here are typical examples of intrusive obsessive thoughts: Killing someone. Torturing a pet. Stabbing or molesting a child. Throwing someone (or yourself) out of a window or in front of a train. Raping someone. Taking off your clothes in public. Grabbing a stranger’s hand. Some refer to sudden doubts like “ Did I hurt someone or make a bad mistake and  not realize it? What if I am not who I seem?” This is not a complete list, but it gives you a good feeling of the content of these thoughts.

People who experience unwanted intrusive thoughts become afraid that they might commit the acts they picture in their mind. They also fear that the thoughts mean something terrible about them. Many are ashamed and worried about them, and therefore keep them secret.

Many unwanted intrusive thoughts have a much more benign content, consisting of repetitive doubts about relationships, decisions small and large, sexual orientation or identity, intrusions of thoughts about safety, religion, death or worries about questions that cannot be answered with certainty.

There are many myths about unwanted intrusive thoughts. One of the most distressing is that having such thoughts mean that you unconsciously want to do the things that come into your mind. This is simply not true, and, in fact, the opposite is true. It is the effort people use to fight the thought that makes it stick and fuels its return. People fight these particular thoughts because the content seems alien, unacceptable, and at odds with who they are. So, people with violent unwanted intrusive thoughts are gentle people. People who have unwanted intrusive thoughts about suicide love life. And those who have thoughts of yelling blasphemies in church value their religious life. 

 A second myth is that every thought we have is worth examining. In truth, these thoughts are not messages, red flags, signals or warnings–despite how they feel.

The problem for people who have these thoughts–and one estimate is that more than 6 million people in the United States are troubled by them–is that unwanted intrusive thoughts feel so threatening. That is because anxious thinking takes over, and the thought—as abhorrent as it might be—seems to have power it does not.  People tend to try desperately and urgently to get rid of the thoughts, which, paradoxically, fuels their intensity. The harder they try to suppress or distract or substitute thoughts, the stickier the thought becomes.

People who are bothered by intrusive thoughts need to learn a new relationship to  these sticky thoughts–that their content is irrelevant and unimportant. Virtually everyone has occasional weird, bizarre, socially improper, annoying and violent thoughts. Our brains sometimes create junk thoughts, and these thoughts are just part of the flotsam and jetsam of our stream of consciousness.  Junk thoughts are meaningless. If you don’t take them seriously or get involved with them, they dissipate and get washed away in the flow of consciousness.

In reality, a thought—even a very scary thought—is not an impulse. People with unwanted intrusive thoughts don’t have a problem with impulse control: on the contrary, their problem is one of over control! They are trying to control their thoughts!  And we all know what happens when you try not to think of pink elephants…. However, sufferers get bluffed by their anxiety, and  become desperate for reassurance which only works temporarily: people can become reassurance junkies. The only way to effectively deal with unwanted intrusive thoughts is by reducing one’s sensitivity to them. Not by being reassured that it won’t happen or is not true, but by rising above them.

Unwanted intrusive thoughts are reinforced by getting entangled with them, worrying about them, struggling against them, trying to reason them away. They are also made stronger by trying to avoid them. Leave the thoughts alone, treat them as if they are not even interesting, and they will eventually fade into the background.

Here are the steps for changing your attitude and overcoming Unwanted Intrusive Thoughts

Try Not To:

This approach can be difficult to apply. But for anyone who keeps applying it for just a few weeks, there is an excellent chance that they will see a decrease in the frequency and intensity of their unwanted intrusive thoughts.

One of the most popular mantras for innovation is “avoid criticism.” The underlying assumption is that criticism kills the flow of creativity and the enthusiasm of a team. Aversion to criticism has significantly spread in the last 20 years, especially through the advocates of design thinking. (In 1999, in the ABC Nightline video “The Deep Dive,” which ignited the design thinking movement, criticism was stigmatized as negative.) In IDEO’s online teaching platform, the first rule of brainstorming is “defer judgment.” To make this rule even more practical and straightforward, others have reworded it to say: “When a person proposes an idea, don’t say, ‘Yes, but…’ to point out flaws in the idea; instead, say, ‘Yes, and…’” — which is intended to get people to add to the original idea.

We challenge this approach. It encourages design by committee and infuses a superficial sense of collaboration that leads to compromises and weakens ideas. Our view, the product of years of studies of and participation in innovation projects, is that effective teams do not defer critical reflection; they create through criticism.

We therefore propose a different approach: the rule of “Yes, but, and.” To explain how this rule works, let’s first discuss why criticism alone (“Yes, but…”) and ideation alone (“Yes, and…”) do not work.

The rule of “Yes, but.” The problem with this rule is that ideas, even if truly exceptional, often have major flaws. This is especially true for the most innovative ones because they dive into unexplored spaces. If someone uses the existence of a flaw to kill the idea, a great innovation may be missed.

The rule of “Yes, and.” The notion of building on an idea, rather than criticizing it, in order to maintain a creative flow might sound like a good thing. Yet without critical feedback, you would hardly understand why your original idea did not work. You would perceive the new proposal as an unrelated diversion or, most likely, a different conflicting perspective. And the team would miss the opportunity to dive deeply into the original idea. It’s moving forward without progress.

The rule of “Yes, but, and.” We suggest combining the best features of criticism with the best of ideation. When you propose Idea A, a colleague first addresses what he perceives to be a flaw in it, provides constructive feedback (this is the “but”), and then suggests a possible way to overcome or avoid the flaw, yielding Idea B (this is the “and”). Then you do the same: You acknowledge Idea B, provide a constructive critique, and develop a new, even more improved result. Others can jump in with their critiques and proposals during the process. This kind of constructive interaction encourages a deep cycle of critical dialogues that can lead to a coherent, breakthrough idea.

Note that the “but” anticipating the “and” is essential. In order to build on your idea, your colleague does not just add a new improved proposal. First, she provides a critique, which enables you to receive precious and specific information, see weaknesses in your half-backed idea you couldn’t spot yourself, and therefore learn. You and the entire team will then be ready to dive deeper into the next iteration. It is the combination of “but” and “and” that creates real progress, enabling the team to see both positive and negative components and allowing each iteration to go even deeper into the analysis.

To create breakthroughs, it is necessary to leverage the contrasts that come from critique instead of escaping them. In her research on the power of dissent, Charlan Nemeth shows that debate and criticism do not inhibit ideas; rather, they stimulate them. Progress requires clashing and fusing — not compromising or postponing — different perspectives.

Francesca Gino rightfully maintains that criticism works only when it leads to enhancing and improving an idea. A key element in this process is respectful listening and acknowledgment of the talent and abilities of colleagues. When the “but” becomes an attack on the other idea (or even worse, on the other person), then the result is detrimental. Adding “and” to the “but” fosters constructive and positive criticism, turning it from an idea-killing phrase into a way of expanding the flow of creativity rather than stopping it.

Critique, Creativity, Curiosity

The rule of “Yes, but, and” must be performed with care and a significant dose of discipline. Here are a few simple guidelines.

First, when you critique another’s ideas, you need to tap into your creative mind as deeply as possible.

Second, when you listen to someone’s critique of your idea, you should try to learn from it. A practical way is to listen carefully to the critique, be curious, and wonder, “Why is my colleague suggesting this contrasting view that is not in line with what I see? Perhaps there is an even more powerful idea hidden behind our two perspectives.” The critique becomes a positive force, focusing the team on overcoming its weaknesses and enhancing the original idea.

The secret of criticism in innovation lies in the joint behavior of the participants. Those offering criticism must frame their points as positive, helpful suggestions. Those who are being criticized must use critiques to learn and improve their ideas. When conducted with curiosity and respect, criticism becomes the most advanced form of creativity. It can be fascinating, passionate, fun, and always inspiring. Let us combine “Yes, and” with “Yes, but” to create the constructive and positive “Yes, but, and.”

In a trend that is sweeping across the United States this summer, churches all over the country are helping their congregations eliminate their medical debt. From coast-to-coast churches are stepping in and surprising their congregants by lifting financial burdens that plague them in their daily lives. The churches partner with RIP Medical Debt, which is a company that targets people earning less than two times the poverty levels, to help eliminate their medical debt. RIP Medical Debt also negotiates lower prices for debt portfolios, which makes the donations worth incredibly more than they are at face value. “On average, each dollar donated to the nonprofit abolishes $100 of debt,” according to the Statesmen Journal. Here are the stories of five churches, in five different states, making an incredible financial impact on their church members, and in the community around them. One of the most recent churches to eliminate their congregant’s debt is Stetson Baptist Church in DeLand Florida. This Southern Baptist-affiliated church is paying off over $7.2 million in medical debt over the next year.

A Southern Baptist church in Florida will pay off over $7.2 million in crippling medical debt impacting over 6,500 individuals and families living at or below the poverty line in five Florida counties. Additionally, the church will also fund three foster homes for the next year.  Dan Glenn, the senior pastor of Stetson Baptist, told the Christian Post that the church would be raising money for both the RIP Medical Debt program and Florida Baptist Children’s Homes. RIP Medical Debt is a company that assists families and individuals in paying off their medical debt, while Frlodau Baptist Children’s Homes is a network of foster care homes. During their first Sunday fundraising, the church donated over $153,000, which will be split between both causes. “This was something that really struck a chord with our church,” Glenn told the Christian Post. “Medical debt is something that I think everyone can get behind. But our church is unique in that we have an undercurrent in our church of fostering and adoption, both from the perspective of families that have fostered kids and adopted children but also through adults who were foster children or adoptees.”

The Vineyard Church – Ann Arbor, Michigan

The Vineyard Church in Ann Arbor, Michigan was among many that used this year’s Easter tithes to help eliminate debt for people living in nearby counties. The church was able to eliminate over $2.9 million in medical debt, covering more than 2,100 people in their area. Donnell Wyche, a pastor at Vineyard Chruch, explained that each Easter the church decides a different cause to donate to. In the past, they have donated to Food Gatherers, Habitat for Humanity, and  Religious Action for Affordable Housing. This year, after seeing a story in the New York Times, they decided to donate to RIP Medical Debt. “When we learned about this medical debt, we realized there is probably no better way to help people experience new life than to help them get free from debt,” Wyche said. “Debt – and especially this kind of debt – it can devastate people because it sits on their credit, it affects their housing, it affects their jobs, whether or not they can get car loans.”

Life Church of the Nazarene – Medford, Oregon

Life Church of the Nazarene in Medford, Oregon partnered with RIP Medical Debt after they found the company and realized how simple it was to help people eliminate their medical debt. Dale Schaeffer, the pastor of New Life Church of the Nazarene, found the company after watching a John Oliver segment when he used RIP Medical Debt to eliminate around $15 million in debt rather quickly. “I was really moved by the power of a little bit of resource to eliminate that much debt,” Schaeffer said. “I’ve had family members and friends who have had to file bankruptcy due to those kinds of debts — it’s just heartbreaking to watch that.” New Life Church of the Nazarene raised around $30,000 this past Christmas, which ultimately was able to help forgive more than $2 million in medical debt for people in Oregon, as well as another $1 million for veterans around the United States.

Pathway Church – Wichita, Kansas

Over Easter weekend 2019, Pathway Church raised $22,000 for debt forgiveness, which when paired with RIP Medical Debt, amounts to over $2.2 million in total. Larry Wren, the executive pastor at Pathway, said that it painted the perfect illustration for the celebration of Easter, what it looks like to have a debt paid by someone else. “Being able to do this provides an opportunity to illustrate what it means to have a debt paid that they could never pay themselves,” he said. “It just was a great fit.” In May the church pledged to raise $15,000 to go towards RIP Medical Debt, which will come to eliminate around $1.5 million in medical debt. Pastor Jeff Kinkade of City Church encouraged congregants to donate, emphasizing how Jesus paid the ultimate debt. “We have been speaking about Jesus paying our debt. Let me tell you about something that is a chance for City Church to pay someone else’s debt,” Kinkade said during a May church service. “We are able to completely erase that entire $1.5 million of debt for those people and we can do it with a $15,000 contribution from City Church. It is pretty remarkable. So, we are going to do that as a church.”

view

Philadelphia police say a carjacking suspect has died after he allegedly stole a car with three children inside and was chased down by their parents Thursday night.   The incident occurred just after 9 p.m. at 29th and Dauphin Streets in Strawberry Mansion. Investigators say the 54-year-old suspect stole a car with three children inside and was chased down by the children’s mother and her 25-year-old boyfriend. The pair eventually caught up with the car and pulled the suspect from the driver’s seat. A fight broke out and police say other men from the neighborhood jumped in. The suspect was taken to the hospital where he later died. The mother and her boyfriend are cooperating with police and are being questioned by homicide detectives. The district attorney’s office will decide if any charges will be filed. The other men who jumped in the fight were not located. The mother’s boyfriend is the father of two of the children.

view

Digital technology has an invisible environmental impact, but researchers suggest it might actually be very, very size-able, so you better get your hands off your laptop if you don’t want to be a climate criminal.

Watching adult films accounts for over 4 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions associated with digital technologies, says a new study.

“Climate crisis: The unsustainable use of online video”, a report published by French think-tank The Shift Project, highlights that pornography makes up 27 per cent of all videos viewed online.

Furthermore, online videos – one of the most common forms of online entertainment – are said to generate 60 per cent of world data traffic, based on 2018 estimates.

In other words, it means that they account for 300 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year (resulting from energy consumption), with porn ‘emitting’ just under 100 million tonnes – nearly as much as Belgium and Kuwait.

The authors point out that “viewing pornographic videos in the world in 2018 generated carbon emissions of the same magnitude as that of the residential sector in France”.

Meanwhile, video-on-demand services such as Netflix or Amazon Prime reportedly generated the same volume of greenhouse gas emissions as the entire economy of Chile.

Digital technologies are estimated to be consuming 9 per cent more energy every year, but the situation is only going to get worse with the wider spread of ever-higher-resolution videos.

The authors propose to practice ‘digital sobriety’ – namely to reduce the use and the size of videos. This would require certain regulations to be put in place, which should be preceded by a public debate.

They write: “From the standpoint of climate change and other planetary boundaries, it is not a question of being “for” or “against” pornography, telemedicine, Netflix or emails: the challenge is to avoid a use deemed precious from being impaired by the excessive consumption of another use deemed less essential. This makes it a societal choice, to be arbitrated collectively to avoid the imposition of constraints on our uses against our will and at our expense.”

view

Sure, there are all kinds of news about many misfortunes all over the Internet. But you know something’s really wrong with this world when something comes up, like Canadians who can’t pay for their healthcare anymore. Something unheard of, isn’t it? But it all makes sense since this story involves a man with cancer and we all can imagine how costly the treatment could be even for those living in one of the most developed countries in the world. Having this in mind, his son came up with a great idea to help make ends meet. Scroll down to find out about his genius idea!

source

Why, why do schools need to teach the difference between people instead of teaching we are all human and get on with it.  People can make their own choice of who, what and may become.  Just like you get to choose what you do for a career when you are older.

A 10-year-old girl in Britain is bravely speaking out on video after being suspended from class, accused of making homophobic comments during an LGBT class lesson. Not only is she denying that claim, she says she didn’t even know what that word meant.

Kaysey and a classmate named Farrell, studying at a school in South London, both asked to be excluded from a school lesson that promoted LGBT pride month.

The teacher, Susan Papas, told the two students that the lesson was part of the curriculum and refusing to participate was not an option, according to the Christian Legal Centre which fights for religious freedom in the UK.  But the two children courageously stood up for their beliefs, despite their young age.

Kaysey and Farrell were told they were being homophobic and were accused of making anti-LGBT comments in class. The teacher even accused them of wanting to kill LGBT people. Both of the young children say they never said that, and they had rejected the statement when the teacher demanded, “Do you want them to die?”

Kaysey says she did not even know what the word “homophobic” meant until her teacher explained it.

“I was confused when she said that I was being very homophobic. I’m not homophobic I’m just against the point of putting in schools and teaching it to children. I think that they are trying to confuse children. Before all this happened, they were completely confident of who they were but now they’re not,” Kaysey said.

Kaysey, a pentecostal Christian, defends her beliefs in a Christian Concern video and explains that kids are losing self-confidence.