I hate to break it to you karl, but it's still legal to say gay in Florida, now if you want to criticize the bill for not being a great piece of legislation to prevent creeps from grooming children, be my guest.
But if parents don't want their children involved in identity politics while they are trying to have kids graduate their grade at the reading level they should be at, that's their right.
If you think kids need to know about gender identity and their parents don't agree, you, not them, may go to hell sir. Because they aren't your damn kids.
This bill is very much misunderstood by many- the effect of it being a vaguely written bill which leaves what exactly it means to individual interpretation and will almost certainly require multiple possibly lengthy legal challenges to establish a legal precedent to its meaning- and still be very open to individual judges interpretations.
Like most bills there were probably good intentions behind this as well as ulterior motives of some- that can be said of almost any bill.
I would say that any objective logical examination of this bill patently rejects the premise it is designed to keep children from being a tool of identity politics- even if we ignore the fact that it was voters and legislators without subject matter expertise in child development who made the decision and not educators and child development and mental health professionals- we can’t ignore the bill is a ban- not a framework of requirements or conditions leveling the criteria that constructive discussion would…
… have to meet or banning any specific acts deemed harmful- it is a blanket ban on discussing reality. In principle it wouldn’t be so bad- k-3 students rarely if ever receive sexual education of any sort- but because of the vagueness of the bill it is left open to individual interpretation if you’re even allowed to broach the subject of family with children. It leaves the only safe answer to any question of “why does Billy have 2 daddies..” or the like as pretty much: “we don’t talk about that.” A real concern there is how such aversion to these topics- the “elephant in the room” not being addressed or making adults uncomfortable or closed off might impact the development of children.
There are many questions and wether one believes whether these subjects belong in school or why etc- such a broad bill is a poor tool for the job. It’s like using a nuclear weapon to stop a bank robbery at best. Poor judgment.
As it exists this bill is a mess. Wether one agrees or not with the goals, it is a vague mess.
A major factor for me is the issue of support for this bill on the grounds of shielding children for identity politics. Let’s ignore the bill itself is political instrument between voters and politicians and not the reflection of an accepted majority of accredited experts on child development or mental health-
If we are not allowed to teach gender identity or sexual orientation in schools…. That would include “straight” and “cis” identities. To have the bill be equal, we couldn’t teach children about “boys as girls” even- as those are expressions of gender identity too. No “boys line up here, girls there.” No “boys use this bathroom and girls use this one.” No talking about marriage, stories about marriage or romance etc. like fairy tales where the prince and princess live happily ever after and so forth.
As “straight cis people” we don’t tend to think of our gender and sexual…
.. identities as identities. We consider them the “normal” or “default” and anything else is some sort of alternative style. If we seek to shield children from gender politics then we can’t teach them our own ideas of what their identities are or should be or what normal is either can we? You can’t ban religious teachings in schools and then read the Catholic Bible for story time and discuss the life of Christ when asked but when the Prophet Mohamed comes up say: “we don’t talk about religion here.”
Just because something is “normal” to us doesn’t mean it is the default.
So really- if we are to honor this bill without discriminating, we’d have to stop teaching “heteronormative” lifestyles as well and go to a genderless school environment outside sexual education classes and the like.
Some people may support that too- a generation of children experiencing a school where there are no “boys sports” and “girls sports” for example…
There are people who actually believe the bill bans saying the word gay
Might want to delete this Karl
Of course
But if parents don't want their children involved in identity politics while they are trying to have kids graduate their grade at the reading level they should be at, that's their right.
If you think kids need to know about gender identity and their parents don't agree, you, not them, may go to hell sir. Because they aren't your damn kids.
Like most bills there were probably good intentions behind this as well as ulterior motives of some- that can be said of almost any bill.
I would say that any objective logical examination of this bill patently rejects the premise it is designed to keep children from being a tool of identity politics- even if we ignore the fact that it was voters and legislators without subject matter expertise in child development who made the decision and not educators and child development and mental health professionals- we can’t ignore the bill is a ban- not a framework of requirements or conditions leveling the criteria that constructive discussion would…
There are many questions and wether one believes whether these subjects belong in school or why etc- such a broad bill is a poor tool for the job. It’s like using a nuclear weapon to stop a bank robbery at best. Poor judgment.
A major factor for me is the issue of support for this bill on the grounds of shielding children for identity politics. Let’s ignore the bill itself is political instrument between voters and politicians and not the reflection of an accepted majority of accredited experts on child development or mental health-
If we are not allowed to teach gender identity or sexual orientation in schools…. That would include “straight” and “cis” identities. To have the bill be equal, we couldn’t teach children about “boys as girls” even- as those are expressions of gender identity too. No “boys line up here, girls there.” No “boys use this bathroom and girls use this one.” No talking about marriage, stories about marriage or romance etc. like fairy tales where the prince and princess live happily ever after and so forth.
As “straight cis people” we don’t tend to think of our gender and sexual…
Just because something is “normal” to us doesn’t mean it is the default.
So really- if we are to honor this bill without discriminating, we’d have to stop teaching “heteronormative” lifestyles as well and go to a genderless school environment outside sexual education classes and the like.
Some people may support that too- a generation of children experiencing a school where there are no “boys sports” and “girls sports” for example…