Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law has two ostensible purposes. One is to bring national attention to Governor Ron DeSantis as the heir to Donald Trump’s MAGA base. The other is to humiliate gay people, who are collateral damage in DeSantis’ pursuit of the 2024 Republican nomination. Since teachers in K-3 in Florida do not teach sex education, the law is no more than a symbolic insult.
Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law is described as a “parental rights” law. Among other things, House Bill 1557 bans any instruction about sexuality and gender identity in grades K-3, and requires that any such instruction in grades 4-12 must be age appropriate. The law allows parents to sue the district if they believe the law has been violated, and the district must pay the cost of the lawsuit.
What’s it really about? This bill is rightly understood to be a condemnation of homosexuality across the board. It strikes out at students, teachers, parents, and other people who are gay. It stigmatizes all gay people. Children who have gay parents must not mention that fact in school. Governor Ron DeSantis and the Florida legislature want to shove them back into the closet.
The same people who worry that white children will be shamed by any discussion of racism in the history classroom don’t care at all about children who might be gay or who have gay parents and family members. The “Don’t Say Gay” law is the Republicans’ effort to “cancel” people who are gay, make them invisible. That should work as well as eliminating racism by banning any discussion about racism.
Florida does not require schools to offer sex education. If they choose to do so, the curriculum must emphasize the importance of abstinence. Parents may opt their children out of sex education.
DeSantis signed the bill at a charter school founded by the wife of the state education commissioner Richard Corcoran.
Here is House Bill 1557, which includes the history of the bill and the full text. Much of the language is vague, opening the door to litigation, which is already underway.
On a lighter note, I received the following joke from a gay parent in Florida:
Subject: DADDY IS A GAY DANCER!
A fourth-grade teacher asked the children what their fathers did for a living. All the typical answers came up – fireman, mechanic, businessman, car salesman… and so forth.
However, little Johnie was being uncharacteristically quiet, so when the teacher prodded him about his father, he replied, “My father’s an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret and takes off all his clothes to music in front of other men and they put money in his underwear. Sometimes, if the offer is really good, he will go home with some guy and stay with him all night for money.”
The teacher, obviously shaken by this statement, hurriedly set the other children to work on some exercises and took little Johnie aside. “Is that really true about your father?”
“No,” the boy said, “He works for the Republican National Committee and helped get Trump elected, but it’s too embarrassing to say that in front of the other kids.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
How appropriate to sign such a piece of legislation in a charter school. The far right has decided that it can forever ride the white horse of moral correctness to cover up the fact that they, like the charter industry, are fleecing the very people who support them. They must spend hours laughing.
I haven’t followed the trail but I would think that the spark that led to this bill was concern about trans activism in the classroom, not homosexuality.
Interesting side note: I had assumed that Florida was quite religious, but looking now at polling data, it appears to be middle of the pack at most in terms of the relative religiosity of states.
Blaming trans-activism ignores DeSantis’ political aspirations. Surely you know better than that.
Certainly there is a political aspect to this — it’s legislation, after all. I’m just suggesting that concern about trans activism, rather than homosexuality, is what has galvanized public support of this law in 2022. This is just my instinct and it’s partly informed by how normalized homosexuality is in the world I live in. But maybe that’s not the case in Florida.
To be clear, I’m not saying this is a good law. I don’t think it’s a good law.
I haven’t seen any evidence of trans activism in any elementary schools. Nor any evidence of gay activism in elementary schools. Do you know of any?
This is a solution in search of a problem.
Diane, I don’t have a firsthand sense of what’s in elementary schools because my kids are much older now. But there are certainly elementary schools that teach students about “gender identity.”
I did some googling, and here’s one example of lesson plans created by an activist group, aligned to Common Core standards, and designed to be implemented as early as grade 3.
https://hrc-prod-requests.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/welcoming-schools/documents/WS-Lesson-Gender-Snowperson.pdf?mtime=20210509204029&focal=none
The “goals” of the lesson are:
“**To explore the concepts of gender identity and gender expression with students.”
**To help students understand the differences between gender identity, sexual orientation and sex assigned at birth.
**To help students understand that there are many ways to be a girl, boy, both or neither.
**To help students understand that gender, gender identity, sexual orientation and sex assigned at birth are not binaries, but spectrums.”
Here’s another lesson, again aligned to Common Core standards, designed for K-2.
https://hrc-prod-requests.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/welcoming-schools/documents/WS_Lesson_Red_A_Crayons_Story.pdf?mtime=20200713131950&focal=none
The goals of the lesson:
“• To provide students with an opportunity to share some of their identities with classmates and teachers.
• To explore the concept of identity with students and embrace differences within the classroom community.
● To explore the concept of gender identity with students.”
Welcoming Schools claims to have “trained educators in 43 states, DC, Canada, Mexico and Taiwan, reaching over 10.5 million students. The Welcoming Schools program has also formed strategic partnerships with national and state organizations, as well as large districts across the country.” So I think it’s fair to say that stuff like this is being taught in some elementary schools. Better to acknowledge that than to pretend it isn’t happening at all.
“So I think it’s fair to say that stuff like this is being taught in some elementary schools.”
Making that conclusion based on the so-called “evidence” – “I googled a lesson plan by an activist group”- presented here is truly ridiculous. Random internet searches are cited to justify the ugly innuendoes about trans activists infiltrating public schools who MUST BE STOPPED!
For the record: Welcoming schools is an anti-bullying organization and I find it appalling that someone would try to mislead Diane Ravitch by citing all the schools and teachers this organization works with to combat anti-gay bullying as “evidence” that trans activists have infiltrated kindergartens.
Furthermore, the link went to a sample story that – while there is no evidence at all that any elementary school uses it – went to a perfectly fine story about a crayon.
I am trying to imagine the hate a parent must feel for trans kids that they would demand that this story of the crayon be banned because it might provide their own precious child with a little understanding and empathy for the kid sitting next to them who might be trans.
Parents filled with hate. That’s the only reason I can see for why they would make ugly and completely untrue exaggerations about “trans activism in the classroom” being a serious problem. Because to them, reading a story about a crayon is much too dangerous for their precious child to hear. It might make their child trans.
FLERP!,
What are some examples of “trans activism in the classroom” that are supposedly happening all over Florida that this bill addresses?
I am sure there are just as many examples of “Christian activism in the classroom” as there are examples of “trans activism in the classroom”. So laws must be passed, at least according to the laughably weak rationale offered by defenders of the “don’t say gay” bill. Activism!!! It’s making your kid trans!
I find this all so ridiculous, but no doubt there should also be laws to ban the mention of any religion period in public schools because of the infiltration of the Christian right who are forcing all students to pray to Jesus during school, which has been especially harmful to Jewish children whose parents did not know they would be taught to hate themselves for killing Jesus.
Or, using flerp’s rationale: Activism! It’s making your Jewish kid into a far right Christian anti-Semite!
“Don’t say Christian, don’t say religion” bill must be passed unless those folks are the hypocrites we know they are.
Correction: “I am sure there are many more examples of “Christian activism in the classroom” as there are examples of “trans activism in the classroom”.”
. . . than there are. . .
Thank you, Mr. Swacker, for correcting my grammar.
It is ALL about trans activism. LGB never wanted the T added into their group (and Q?….my gosh! LGB fought for years against that slur!). It’s to prevent this from entering public schools via 3rd party vendors (because there really isn’t a “sex ed” curriculum for young children) selling poorly written and age inappropriate DEI/SEL curriculum (have we seen this before, recently? )
What better way to have this boil come to a head than to let DeSantis get a hold of it. Left leaning MSM won’t cover it because they have been institutionally captured by mob think activists and if the Right covers it, they are considered bigots, homophobes and transphobes.
While everyone was enthralled with the battles in Loudon Co, VA everyone missed the smaller battle raging in Fairfax Co, VA over Panorama Education (3rd party vendor) and its big funder, Facebook/Meta, to collect very personal data on children via some pretty sleazy questionnaires.
This will be my only comment on this blog post. Have a good day.
LisaM,
What you meant is that as everyone was all riled up by the fear of their school making their kid gay or trans, the far right has allowed our children’s privacy to be violated in the name of capitalism and making a profit.
But no worries because the far right is working to end democracy and you won’t have to worry about any trans or gay kids because they will have conveniently disappeared.
While you are empowering the folks who want to target trans kids to make them disappear, the public is so riled up they don’t care if all their kids’ privacy is violated. Good on you!
I noticed that like flerp, you can’t give a single example of a school teaching kids to be trans. In fact, I know trans kids and not a single one decided to be trans because their school taught them to be. But sure, go ahead and let our kids privacy be violated while you get the haters riled up about trans activists invading our schools.
You have absolutely no right to speak for lesbians or gays. Regardless of their views of whether trans athletes should compete in women’s sports or other issues, I don’t know any lesbian, gay or even JK Rowling who believes the nonsense spouted about schools making kids be trans.
You have no right to impose your hateful views on the lesbian and gay community because that community rejects most of the ugly innuendoes you make. Your innuendoes about schools teaching kids to be gay or trans makes you a pariah in the lesbian and gay community. But you would be welcome with open arms in the right wing Christian anti-gay community.
“LGB never wanted the T added into their group.” This is false. Most people who support LGB rights also support trans rights.
“and Q?….my gosh! LGB fought for years against that slur!” No. The term queer has long been embraced by most LGBTQ+ persons as referring to persons in general who embrace variants from strictly hetero or cis sexual orientations or identities. It doesn’t mean what it did in 1940. It was a standard rallying cry of gay rights organizations way back in the 1970s (“We’re here. We’re queer. Get Used to It”) and especially of Act Up, starting in the late 1980s.
Anyone here have an example of this “trans activism” turning kids trans in public schools? Or is it just as phony as most anti-public school lies?
flerp! implies this is so rampant that laws are passed to address it. And yet no one can give an example. I guess we should just take the word of the anti-covid regulations crowd.
^^Clearly as the post below demonstrates no one who cites this supposedly horrific problem that offends them so much — “trans activism” that is taking over public schools — can give some specific examples of horrible things these public school “trans activists” are doing that they are so desperate to protect their own children from.
I should add that, as usual, if anyone other than NYCPSP wants to ask me a question, I’ll answer as best I can.
Show us some examples of trans activism being taught in a Florida school .
Please answer pretty please , with sugar on top.
I don’t know about Florida, Joel, but see my post above, based on about 5 minutes of googling.
Joel,
the example that flerp! posted was a perfectly nice story about a crayon that – fyi – flerp provided no evidence was used in any kindergarten.
flerp is like Marjorie Taylor Greene calling Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson “pro-pedophile”. They both cite the same kind of “evidence” to support the truly hateful things they want the public to believe because their goal is about fomenting hate.
The idea that a parent would try to ban materials that would have other students gain more empathy and understanding of their trans classmates is sickening.
These parents are terrified that a school will not reinforce their own view that trans kids are hateful and nasty, and they are obsessed with googling to find any “proof” that their hateful views about trans kids won’t be reinforced by the school.
Joel, I bet Marjorie Taylor Greene and flerp! believe that
“Students choose, combine, and apply effective strategies for answering quantitative questions” — the math standards for Kindergarten – means that 5 year olds are being force taught algebra and geometry.
After all, a book about crayons that might make a 7 year old more empathetic must be banned because it is evidence to them that those “trans activists” have taken over elementary schools.
NYC PSP, why are you so obsessed with whatever FLERP writes?
Diane,
Eric Boehlert died Monday evening in a bike accident. Boehlert devoted many decades of his life doing the thankless task of counteracting misinformation and especially media bias. He will be sorely missed by those of us who believe in democracy – a huge loss to our country and I am not sure there is someone out there who can immediately replace him.
I am no Eric Boehlert — I only admired his work from afar.
But I believe that the only thing that will save our democracy is to counteract the misinformation that is out there instead of ignoring it or amplifying it by engaging on the terms set by those who are purveyors of misinformation.
Is the fact that the unions protect pedophile teachers a huge and dangerous problem or a less serious problem that the union must address right now if they ever expect to have any support from the public? Let’s discuss which of those 2 things are true.
Is the recent good jobs report a bad thing for Biden because it will cause more inflation or is the recent jobs report a bad thing for Biden because there is still a lot of uncertainty and the public is in a sour mood? Let’s discuss why Biden is in so much trouble because of that jobs report.
How bad is it that trans activists have infiltrated public elementary schools all over the country? Is the extreme influence of trans activists on the elementary school curriculum a terrible thing or not? Let’s discuss how we all agree that the influence of trans activists is wildly inappropriate in Kindergarten but perhaps their questionable influence might be more appropriate for 3rd graders or maybe not.
When your blog is discussing issues on the terms set by those who specialize in misinformation, it merely amplifies the misinformation. Eric Boehlert understood that the media accepting the misinformation at face value and treating those who spread it as if they had the same honesty as those who actually wanted to discuss issues was a big part of the problem.
I am not “obsessed” with anything except countering misinformation. I tend to post frequently when those folks — and there are only a few of them on here who most of us know by name — keep posting their misinformation.
flerp posts misinformation about CRT and COVID school closures and mask-wearing and trans activists and many other things. Others here who shall go unnamed post misinformation about Russia and Ukraine and I respond to them when they intentionally post misinformation to start the phony “debate” that accepts the right wing framing as the starting point.
I believe that if those who specialize in posting misinformation are legitimized by having a discussion on their terms — something Boehlert often pointed out that the media does — that they win. Their falsehoods and scaremongering gets legitimized and amplified.
If they are called out as the propagandists, and not allowed to get away with spewing their innuendo and falsehoods, democracy wins. In my opinion.
How those 3 issues could be discussed:
Why are anti-public school folks lying about pedophile teachers?
Will Biden’s great jobs report lead to a huge victory at the ballot box in November or just an unusually good pick up of seats for the Democrats?
Why is the right wing lying about trans activists infiltrating elementary schools? Do they hate trans folks themselves, or are they just using the hatred they believe other Americans feel for trans for their own political gain?
Until we recognize that we all get brainwashed by this right wing framing and start calling out those who specialize in pushing propaganda and citing ridiculous “evidence” to support their lies, our democracy is in danger.
And I mourn the loss of Boehlert.
Those who specialize in pushing false narratives should be called out.
Here is an example of how dangerous it is when folks start normalizing the smears of the propaganda pushers instead of calling it out.
https://pressrun.media/p/how-the-media-normalized-qanon-smear?s=r
Flerp, as Diane has repeatedly pointed out, it simply is not the case that there is widespread “trans activism” in school curricula. That there might be some somewhere is doubtless the case, but it’s rare. I think that this is a case of misattribution. The fact is that there is a lot of discussion of sexual orientation and variations in gender identities in the culture at large. This stuff is everywhere in the media AND in discussions that kids are having with one another at school, before and after school, in the hallways, in the cafeteria, on their social media platforms. Parents find that their kids are questioning this stuff, and they are shocked, some of them, about that, and they blame teachers and curricula, when this is actually a phenomenon in the culture GENERALLY.
As you doubtless know, I expect a Republican takeover by 2014, and given the extremism of the party today, I fear this. But I think that once they have all the reins of power, they are going to find that they can’t legislate away all the stuff they hate–gay, lesbian, bisexual, and fluid sexual orientations, trans identities, irreligion, progressive political ideas. These are simply too widespread, especially among the young. They have no notion how much resistance they will encounter. They are like Putin thinking that he is just going to waltz over Ukraine. LOL. Good luck with that.
nycpsp comment 4/6 6:31– Excellent link. “In a puff piece highlighting four GOP senators this week, the Times elevated Hawley as one “to watch” during the confirmation hearings.” Exactly like pre-game commentary before a highly-anticipated ball game.
I realize this wasn’t the main point– which was to associate Judge Jackson with child pornography & thus link to QAnon conspiracy. But I wonder if the analogy doesn’t underlie the media-framing issue. A lot of MSM political coverage looks like sports analysis—sizing up the prospects between the two sides of an exciting competition. And you won’t hear the mainstream sportscasters calling out one side’s approach as outlandishly incompetent, the coach should be fired, worst play I’ve ever seen etc. For that you’ll have to tune in to your fave radio sports-shockjock call-in show. The big guys can’t afford to alienate the rabid superfans who make up a sizeable chunk of their audience.
Sad to hear we lost this noted journalist.
Flerp, I don’t think that those lessons are at all representative of what’s being done in schools. I can’t imagine that anyone sane would think it a good idea to do those breathtakingly poor lessons with 3rd graders (or with students of any age). Anyone who was insane enough actually to try to do the Snowman lesson in a classroom with real kids would rapidly find that it was impossible, that the kids would have no clue whatsoever what it was supposed to be about. The whole thing would quickly degenerate into confusion and chaos. This is why I sincerely doubt that this lesson was ever done by anyone except the teacher who created it. There are almost 4 million K-12 teachers in the US, not including substitutes. So, it’s always going to be possible to find some idiot somewhere who produced a lesson that is totally bonkers.
Bob, I don’t know how widespread this stuff is, but it is definitely being done in some elementary schools. Here’s the “gender snowperson” lesson being taught to a fourth grade class in Massachusetts. (Note this would still be permissible under the new Florida law.
FLERP, under the new law in Florida, the teacher would be fired and fined $10,000 for teaching such a lesson. Very likely in any grade, not just K-3. The law is vague, as “age appropriateness” is in the eye of the beholder. Under DeSantis, racism and homosexuality are “problems solved” by never talking about them.
Flerp, as I said above, I doubt anyone except the teacher who designed this lesson has actually done it in a classroom because it’s so badly designed that it would doubtless degenerate quickly into total confusion. Well, guess what, that’s a picture from the classroom of Lauren Archibald, who designed the Gender Snowman lesson.
I thought the Florida law was just K-3, no?
yes, it is
Oh, I forgot the age appropriateness part. You may be right.
Blaming the fact that some there is widespread consideration among people in the West, today, of possibilities of other sexual orientations and gender identities on schools is like blaming death on pianos falling on people’s heads. No, that is not the widespread, common reason why people die. Almost no deaths result from pianos falling on people’s heads.
Fascists need scapegoats …
Always was true, true now
YES, and those who make the big money need voters who are easily riled up by scapegoat issues
What’s next, a bill for the stoning of gay people to set an example for the kiddies. Is there any chance that Florida can free itself from the maggot/GOP/far right wing stranglehold? DeSantis is a truly despicable political opportunist of the worst order.
Florida has a record of bad laws that are vague, but where the so-called offense is interpreted through perception of one individual. Stand Your Ground is one the worst of these laws. People have been using this vague law to attack others when they feel threatened, particularly when the “threat” is from a person of color. This “Don’t Say Gay” is another of these deliberately poorly written laws. Another component of some of the laws is vigilante clause that encourages people to report on a school, teacher or neighbor. All these laws add up to “freedom” for straight white folks in DeSantis’ mind. He is banking that these culture laws will help him claw his way to the White House. It is up to us, “we the people,” to stop this arrogant, libertarian bigot.
“. . . to stop this arrogant, libertarian bigot.”
Ummm, no, he is not a libertarian bigot. He is an xtian regressive reactionary reich wing snowflake nutjob.
Exactly, Duane. If he were a Libertarian, he wouldn’t oppose gay marriage or the legalization of marijuana.
I agree. Here’s another bad Florida law that gives drivers the right to hit protesters with their car “if they unintentionally hit someone.” The court then has the burden to show that it was an intentional act. Once again, it is a vague anti-democratic law based on a driver’s perspective. https://slate.com/business/2021/04/drivers-hit-protesters-laws-florida-oklahoma-republicans.html
HB1(2021) also did away with the right of people to bring a civil suit against someone who drives through a crowd of protestors.
Does that mean that it’s OK to run over anti abortion protesters?
No. But it does mean that in Flor-uh-duh, now, if you did, you wouldn’t be liable for civil suits by the families of those whom you harmed. There would still be the likelihood of criminal penalties.
It is interesting to see the conservative alliance between the Christian Right and the libertarian left. I do not really understand this making of strange bedfellows.
Next up, the banning of any reference to quadrupedism in grades K-3. There will be no references to tetrapods which could lead to quadrupedality amongst the children. Any books with pictures of cows, horses, ponies, cats, dogs, zebras, elephants, camels, etc., will be banned. Bipedalism now, bipedalism tomorrow, bipedalism forever. Hat tip to Brother Theodore who departed this earth in 2001.
A subject for philosophical speculation:
Is Ron DeSantis a bigot, or does he simply find playing one on television and passing bigoted legislation useful politically?
That he is a fascist, ofc, is a settled matter.
My answer: If you do bigotry, you’re a bigot.
Dear Ron Santimonious: You are a backward embarrassment. None of the cool kids want to hang with you. Ewwwwww.
Sanctimonious
I felt DeSantis’ bigotry out of the gate when he mentioned that we need to stop “monkeying around” in the election. His opponent was a black Democrat, and it seemed to me that it was a racist comment. It’s been one regressive law after another ever since.
Yup. The first bill the guy signed into law, in the wake of the BLM protests against systemic racism, allowed local police authorities to declare any group of three or more persons a riot and did away with the right of a person to bring a civil suit against someone who drives through a group of protestors.
Rational discourse is dead. The assumption that this bill is a gay bashing bill is based on irrational fear and political expedience. the FACT is the bill never includes the word ‘gay’ in it. the FACT is, the bill is about protecting ALL parents rights, including efforts by schools to hide what goes on in a classroom, including supposed gay bashing. Why is transparency EVER a bad thing?? What are you afraid of??
For everyone who falsely claims this is an anti-gay bill, remember the language works both ways so to speak. It prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity IN CERTAIN GRADE LEVELS or in a specified manner means not only can you not discuss non-traditional lifestyles, you can not have discussion about ‘traditional’ lifestyles as well in grades K-3.
Those trashing this bill are also doing an extreme disservice to teachers you claim to support. The language of the law is extremely vague. That gives teachers a great amount of discretion. You assume teachers are incapable to understanding this and are incapable of caring about their students. Give them more credit Quit using teachers and children as pawns in a political fight. If you have problems with parents rights, make it about that. If you think teachers are incapable of critical thinking, maybe you should look for ways to improve the schools and who teaches.
Congrats. This might well be the most idiotic post I have ever read on social media.
and you are why Trump exists. Extremism and petty insults lead to more extremism and more petty insults
I’m sorry. I should not have used the term idiotic. You are right to call me out for this.
LOL. I guess “sexual orientation,” the term used in the bill, doesn’t have anything to do with being straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or some variation thereof.
We don’t have problems with “parents’ rights,” we have problems with troglodyte fundamentalist Thought Police in our schools. If you want your children brainwashed, send them to Image of Jesus on My Toast Academy or whatever.
Image of Jesus on my Toast Academy [hahah-kaff-choke-HAhaha]
Thanks for first belly laugh of day, I needed that.
From the Flor-uh-duh Dictionary
transparency. n. That which is achieved by allowing parents to sue schools in which anyone discusses in a classroom anything that happens to offend said parents or run counter to their prejudices and superstitions
From the Flor-uh-duh Dictionary:
teacher discretion. n. phrase. The choice that a teacher has to allow any discussion whatsoever by any student of anything that might happen to offend anybody, knowing that he or she can be, as a result of that choice, sued and lose his or her job. E.g., allowing the kindergarten kid with two Moms to mention the difference between her family and her grandmother’s family, pursuant to classroom work on Florida Standard SS.K.A.2.1: Compare children and families of today with those in the past.
It is an absurd, non-issue in that there is no K-3 sex education in most public schools in this country. Its real intention is to stir up trouble and put public schools on the defensive.
It’s red meat to the Trumpanzees in an attempt to win their support of his assumption of the Orange Mantle. DeSantis is almost certain to be the 2024 Repugnican presidential nominee. This is what passes, among these fundie dimwits, for virtue signaling.
DeSantis is the new crown prince of the Republican party. He is not a reasonable Republican. People need to understand that he is an authoritarian that suppresses the vote in addition of all the regressive beliefs he has. If he could, he would eliminate democracy.
I agree. He and Scott are both authoritarian extremists. They are Trump, but smarter. Scary.
This is from the Florida Social Studies Standards for Kindergarten:
Standard 2: Historical Knowledge
SS.K.A.2.1 Compare children and families of today with those in the past.
LOL
As noted above, DeSantis signed the bill at………wait for it…….drum roll…….Classical Preparatory School which is a tuition-free charter school that provides a traditional classical/liberal arts education to students in grades K-12th. Liberal arts?
Reblogged this on Lloyd Lofthouse and commented:
“My father’s an exotic dancer in a gay cabaret and takes off all his clothes to music in front of other men and they put money in his underwear. …” LOL!!!!!!!
This law is a political trap for the super-woke, ultra-progressive wing of Democratic party.
And it is working better than the GOP could have expected.
Try to see the forest through the trees on this. It’s all about painting Democrats as the party that is soft on crime, that wants to defund the police, and the party that wants to indoctrinate children with CRT and gender identity values. Its right out of the Trump playbook: push the right buttons, let the opposition’s outrage prove your claims, and then completely own the libs in 2022 and 2024.
The outrage expressed against the DSG law allows DeSantis and Co. to pound home the (probably?) misleading notion that anyone opposed to it, must therefore be in favor of teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity to 5-, 6-, 7-, and 8-year-old public school children.
The reaction here and elsewhere on this bill is making DeSantis and every other Trump acolyte drool with delight.
“the (probably?) misleading notion that anyone opposed to it, must therefore be in favor of teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity to 5-, 6-, 7-, and 8-year-old public school children.”
I would guess that many if not most commenters here are, in fact, in favor of teaching elementary school children about gender identity, including such things as teaching that gender is not natural but is “assigned at birth”; that it is perfectly normal and ok to identify as a gender that is not one’s gender assigned at birth; that some boys can have “she/her” pronouns and some girls can have “he/him” pronouns and others can have “they/them” pronouns.
Informal poll: Does anyone here believe these are things that should be taught to students in elementary school?
FLERP
This is just one more example of a developing trend to treat young children as if they really are mini adults. When it was done academically through Common Core standards and testing, most teachers here (myself included) opposed it vehemently. When it comes to the controversial idea of (formally or informally) teaching sexual orientation and gender identity very young kids it will be interesting to see the responses you get.
Regarding your poll, I am a solid, NO.
And I would guess that most commenters here would be in agreement, especially if they had children in K to 3+.
Now for those who claim it’s not being done on any widespread or organized basis you are probably correct, but the GOP knows full well that perception IS reality and emotion trumps facts every time.
It’s the outrage, stupid.
I don’t know how widespread it is, but it’s certainly organized. There are well-funded advocacy groups that produce curricula for exactly this purpose. E.g., Welcoming Schools (an HRC Foundation entity).
Agree re: the outrage.
Flerp, once again, you are confusing the terms sex and gender.
Rage– Very perceptive hooking this into Common Core. You could go back further; I think CCSS just cast the existing trend—at least in my area– in concrete. I found 1st-gr academics already pushed down into K when my kids started pubsch in early ‘90’s. When I started teaching PreK enrichment in early 2000’s, the trend had already trickled down into 3 & 4y.o. instruction. And it’s more than just early academics per se. CCSS’ conceptual approach to elemsch math [which my kids got earlier, in Everyday Math series] requires tykes to verbally explain the logic behind math operations, which strikes me as treating them as mini-adults. (Also write this out in sentences/ paras prematurely– also do ‘visualizations’ of arithmetic problems requiring kids with barely a pencil grip to laboriously make rows of circles with dots, etc!) And of course CCSS-ELA teaches lit crit methods that are more appropriate to college…
Sex: the biological inheritance, genetic and phenotypical, related to but not necessarily involved in mating and mating behavior; gender: the outward manifestations in behavior, speech, dress, social roles, and other culturally transmitted as opposed to biologically inherited characteristics traditionally but not necessarily associated with belonging to a particular sex. The widespread recognition among young people that these are distinct is a great rebirth of freedom and of human possibility.
Sex tends toward the binary, though there are clear nonbinary exceptions, such as intersex children. In addition, some aspects of sex, such as production of hormones most strongly present in one sex or the other, vary considerably, with considerably varying consequences. Some women produce a lot of testosterone. Some men, a lot of estrogen and progesterone. All people produce all three.
Gender characteristics are different in that they are entirely a matter of enculturation and vary and have varied enormously across and even within human cultures.
FLERP & Rage– interesting discussion. I had more thoughts & put them down under general comments to get more margin space.
That comment still in moderation. Guess I somehow angered the Fickle Finger of WordPress…
Rage– Your advice is part and parcel of the “Sh! Say nothing! Let them walk all over democracy and freedom of speech– or they’ll destroy us at the polls!” narrative. What’s your game plan? Admire and politely clap for Ron’s DSG law, thus converting MAGAs to vote Dem?
If you are referring to the “Incredibly Shrinking MAGA Base” then, no.
There is no Dem message that could break the cultlike spell they are under. And no need to because Trump’s following will be too small to elect him dogcatcher by 2024.
It’s the centrist and center-right Dems and Independents that are being pushed away by the incessant drumbeat of anti-racism, white privilege, gender identity, DEI, defund the police, pro BLM, and voting rights issues of the ultra-progressives.
My game plan would be to stay on message with issues that resonate with the needs of the majority of adult Americans who are struggling to get by.
A constant drumbeat that addresses, the economy, wage equity, unions, health care, home ownership, the benefits of preserving democracy, and back to basics in education. I’d also paint (and constantly re-paint) the GOP as the “Party of Putin” and his autocratic ideology.
Unfortunately, these issues are being completely drowned out by the GOP button pushing tactics and the reaffirming outrage it is inducing.
Oh, and yes, I would ignore DeSantis and his DSG bill
And yes, I would ignore book banning and anti-CRT bills as well.
I would ignore every law or bill being used to bait the extreme left into an argument that allows the GOP to keep a relentless spotlight on issues that are turning voters away. Constantly arguing against generally popular ideas and “all for show” laws is a losing game plan and leaves little time for promoting the important issues that Dems should be pounding daily.
Silence is not approval, and a shrug would be the best way to make these GOP laws disappear quickly. In world where attention spans are registered in milliseconds, the DeSantis bill wouldn’t have lasted the 24-hour news cycle. Instead, a very large block of voters are now convinced that sexual orientation and gender identity instruction is (or should be) taking place in primary classrooms.
Rage,
You push the narrative of the so-called liberal media (really the media that gives invented right wing talking points the same weight as fact.)
How about this:
The right wing’s obsession with legislating Christian fundamentalism in public schools instead of addressing economic problems is going to hurt them in the polls.,
What would happen if everyone kept posting that the Republicans’ obsession with legislating right wing Christianity for all in public schools was going to hurt Republicans at the polls because the Republicans would rather target a few gay teens as their enemy and and turn off all the working and middle class Americans who are are far kless concerned that there might be a gay teenb int ehri kids’ c;sess than they are that the Republicans have bankrupted their country while they have given huge tax breaks to their billionaires who tell them what to do.
What would happen if the media wrote endless articles about whether the Republicans’ efforts to target and harrass and harm gay teens and try to end gay marriage was turning off all the working class Americans who have gay relatives and friends and are sick of the Republicans trying to foment hate against gays instead of doing something about the economy that the Republicans have completely destroyed?
What if Rage posted that Americans were sickened by Republicans trying to target a few trans children while Americans turn to the Democrats who are offering plans for making health care more affordable for all Americans?
I am a moderate Democrat and I am turned off by people lying to me about how I should be more scared of some gay teen than the Republicans attempts to cancel Medicare and Social Security and to foment violence to end democracy.
The people falling for that are not moderate Dems, they are and always were right wing hacks who find appeals to their own hatred of others to be very appealing.
Rage– I completely agree with your game plan. The goal Dems should be moving toward is a party centered on the needs of the middle & working classes, which means focusing on issues common to all races/ ethnic groups: workers’ rights, unions, affordable housing/ healthcare/ childcare/ higher ed would be my priorities– along with the kind of trade/ energy/ climate policies that promote higher-paying jobs for those classes, and tax et al policies that promote reasonable distribution of wealth.
But this means a continued transition in Dem policy away from neoliberalism: we have too much Dem leadership still invested in that camp. Such folk will give lip service to DEI et al bandaid concepts/ unfunded legislative mandates that sound “progressive” while providing cover for same-old same-old privatizing that hurts middle/ working classes & pushes up 1%-10%’s profit margins. I seriously question whether moderate Dems and Dem-leaning independents are driven by the culture wars. People vote their pocketbooks, & Dems must focus on policy that delivers.
“I would ignore every law or bill being used to bait the extreme left into an argument that allows the GOP to keep a relentless spotlight on issues that are turning voters away.” This is just wrong. “Baiting the left” is a collateral benefit, not the driver. They’re about keeping the rwfringe margin needed for Rep wins stirred up & voting. That spotlight stays on for that reason; any lw outrage it spawns is gravy.
nycpsp– If they were truly liberal, we might hear more from MSM appealing to “working and middle class Americans who are far less concerned that there might be a gay teen in their kid’s class than they are that the Republicans have bankrupted their country while they have given huge tax breaks to their billionaires who tell them what to do.” They are not liberal. Rep voters think so only because their party has pushed them so far right they have no perspective. MSM magnifies culture wars because it sells copy. On other issues they remain studiously neutral, because it pleases their neoliberal bosses.
Yours is a sensible argument, Rage.
Only if you accept the false right wing propaganda that is the premise of the argument.
The point of making those arguments that Rage makes are to REINFORCE the false narrative.
Let’s all just ignore all the economic policy the Democrats are trying to pass and help Rage reinforce the right wing narrative that the only thing the Democrats are talking about is “wokeness”.
We need to start flipping this right wing narrative on its head. Because sure when people hear non-stop about the Dems only care about “wokeness” they are like you, Bob, and they think the Dems must be doing something bad and that makes them say why bother to vote for them.
I find it interesting that the narrative is never flipped. The Republicans are the ones who only care about targeting and demonizing gays and trans and non-Christians and yet it is somehow presented as “bad” that the Democrats don’t agree with the Republicans and instead are trying to help working and middle class Americans by addressing the economic issues that the Republicans are against — like making health care affordable for working and middle class Americans.
Why isn’t Rage asking whether the fact that the Republicans oppose making insulin affordable going to hurt them with voters?
Maybe because the horrible things Republicans do that hurt so many Americans are ignored while the media and right wing propagandists keep repeating the right wing propaganda that what Americans really care about is getting those “trans activists” that flerp is so opposed to out of public schools. Repeating it often enough makes folks believe this lie is true.
I see this as an argument about how the Repugnican liberal-baiting works on segments of the population, and I think that it’s correct. Do I agree with the people on whom this works? No. But it’s clearly successful. The right-wing in the U.S. has done a superb job of creating a caricature of the progressive in many people’s minds.
I think that the Democratic Party typically does a TERRIBLE job in messaging. It should be running the sorts of issue-oriented ads that are created sometimes by The Lincoln Project about matters like Republican opposition to insulin cost reduction. Why does this not happen? Because the national party is also rightwing. It belongs to fatcat donors who, for example, oppose universal, single-payer healthcare.
Bob, RE: “The right-wing in the U.S. has done a superb job of creating a caricature of the progressive in many people’s minds.” i’m not sure that’s exactly it. Or rather— yes, but. That’s an opening move in a sort of game where you get back the same from the opposing side. We could go back to the late ’60’s/ early ’70s & note that then-progressives did a superb job of caricaturing right-wingers. We’ve been reaping blowback from that ever since [doubled-down & live in the public sphere (govt) starting with Newt Gingrich] .
I am an inveterate watcher of CSPAN’s daily a.m. call-in show “Washington Journal.” Always impressed by how both right and left wing callers-in express their concern about their opposite numbers with virtually the same verbiage, casting aspersions and voicing fears about where those others are leading the country.
A survey conducted after the beginning of the invasion of Ukraine showed that Republicans disapproved of Biden much more than they did of Vladimir Putin.
Obama was at the White House yesterday. He urged Democrats to “tell their story.” They need to start stating their accomplishments.
“Always impressed by how both right and left wing callers-in express their concern about their opposite numbers with virtually the same verbiage, casting aspersions and voicing fears about where those others are leading the country.”
Um, except that what I see is that the right wingers base their beliefs in lies and the left wing are concerned about the reality.
Presenting those two groups as if they are both making fact-based arguments is a little like claiming that the folks who claim that trans activists and their “agenda” are dangerous and have infiltrated elementary schools are just like those who say that there is nothing dangerous going on if an elementary school kids learn that it is okay and normal that their classmate is trans.
Some people say Judge Jackson is pro-pedophile and others say she isn’t. Two sides of a coin. Not.
nycpsp– “Presenting those two groups as if they are both making fact-based arguments” is not what I intended to convey. There are other callers-in to CSPAN who bring up good questions & or make fact-based arguments [mostly Dems and independents, not Reps as I see it]. I’m talking about the tack of using stereotypes to characterize the other side, and expressing rage and fear about how they are ruining our country etc. The phenomenon I see is that the attacked side lashes back using the exact same phraseology, just substituting their particular concerns. Neither side is being fact-based. So the whole thing becomes like, “No, your mother wears army boots.”
FLERP and Rage– re: FLERP’s “poll” [4/5 3:26pm] on teaching gender identity in K-5. I sort of agree with your vote [“no”], but not all of your comments, which are directed toward preachy storybooks/ curriculum that’s too explicit, and age-inappropriate. I think my main “no” is not so much the concept (which is OK), but how it’s implemented.
1.Been working with PreK/K-2 picture books for over 20 yrs. At least half of them are little morality tales, most along the lines of treating others with respect, fairness, empathy. So one can see these recent entries [purportedly anti-racist or about gender identity] as continuing/ updating a longtime trend, rather than an agenda organized by groups (although that undoubtedly exists, too).
That said, I much prefer the subtler approach. Many of them, e.g., use different types of animals/ creatures/ even geometrical-shape-characters rather than human representations to get across points about ‘it takes all kinds.’ We can—again [see Rage’s comment above]—thank standards-based curriculum for getting us into this mess. Talking about all those stds requiring “Family” to be subject #1 in PreK/K-2. The concept is sound enough: get kids’ buy-in/ interest by discussing what they know best at that age; also use as building block toward concept of community, & eventually govt. Never a problem when you have a skeletal stds framework. Leave the sensitivity training details to professional teachers. But US stds curriculum—like these new laws—are prescriptive.
Something to consider: over that 20yrs I have been watching the not-so-slow transformation of young bodies. Little kids have been maturing physically faster even than general stat trends suggest, at least among those I’ve been teaching. Comparing to my memory of size of kids when I was a kid in the 1950’s, and started raising them in the late-‘80s: about 1/3 are as tiny as they were back in the day, another 1/3 look 2yrs older, and 1/3 look 4yrs older.
By Spring, the students in my 2020 “K-Prep” class (5-y.o.’s whose birth-date just missed the cut-off to start K) were too big for their classroom. They looked like a group ranging from 7-9y.o.’s. And even general stat trends have girls at earliest end of spectrum showing signs of puberty at 8yo, boys at 9yo. This requires advancing sex ed to younger grades.
flerp! linked to a story about a CRAYON to support his false assertion that “trans activists” need to be stopped because they have taken over the classrooms.
And when folks here sit here and do just what the right wing and join in to amplify the right wing framing, it makes me give up on educators. if they don’t see what is happening, when it is exactly what has happened to teachers unions, then I give up.
(Washington Post) “The spokeswoman for Florida’s Republican governor tweeted in early March that anyone who opposes a bill forbidding teachers from talking about gender identity or sexual orientation with students in early grades is “probably a groomer or at least you don’t denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children.” A few days later, Fox News host Laura Ingraham asked on national television, “When did our public schools, any schools, become what are essentially grooming centers for gender identity radicals?”
And, speaking before the Tennessee House of Representatives in February, country music star John Rich compared librarians who allow children access to graphic books to sexual predators — adding he believes that there is “bona fide grooming taking place” in the state’s public schools.
“What’s the difference between a teacher, educator or librarian … or a guy in a white van pulling up at the edge of school when school lets out?” he asked. Students “can run away from the guy in the white van.”
Next time some hater on here posts about how the teachers’ union protects so many pedophile teachers, I will join in to have a “very serious” discussion with that upright and honest person about whether the teachers union is only protecting a few dozen pedophiles who mainly teach in high schools, or whether those pedophile teachers being protected by the union are all over schools in America.
You responding like this to someone claiming to have found convincing evidence that trans activists have infiltrated elementary schools makes me realize I don’t belong on this blog. You and flerp and Rage should live in the country you want and only have the conversations you want. And you don’t even realize how much you legitimizing these folks reinforces their hateful narratives that it is okay to demonize trans and gays in schools.
Marjorie Taylor Greene also believes that trans have infiltrated elementary schools. I have no idea why anyone believes that people will flock to the progressives when they have discussions with Greene and her acolytes who spew the same nonsense about HOW MUCH the trans activists have taken over elementary schools. That is certainly the discussion Marjorie Taylor Greene and those on here spewing the same ugliness want you to have.
Have the trans taken over a lot or a little? When that is what this blog devolves into, I know the danger to democracy is real.
nycpsp– “Red: A Crayon’s Story” is a perfect example of the subtle approach. FLERP read too much into it because of the way Human Rights Campaign’s LGBTQ-Welcoming Schools org chooses to use it.
There’s nothing about that in the book– it speaks to anyone perceived or even labeled in a way that doesn’t acknowledge their unique qualities, and encourages them to be true to themselves. Check out the rave reviews at Amazon to see examples of how kids interpret it, and why parents and teachers of all different kinds of kids treasure it. As one put it, “It’s all about self-acceptance and people’s expectations and being brave.”
Nycpsp– I think the way I respond here is not “joining in to amplify the right-wing framing,” it’s the opposite. I address the framing and add facts to encourage them to frame it differently.
This bill also protects very young children from homophobic teachers. Why it is assumed that all teachers will speak positively about gender and sexual orientation. Many teachers have negative beliefs which they could share. The other benefits will be that teachers will concentrate on their real job, teaching the basics. Florida students score low in reading in the early years. Also, this bill only covers very young children. It does not effect those students over 3rd grade.
The birth of a soundbite: “The Anti-Grooming Bill”
From the WAPO (4/6)
The spokeswoman for Florida’s Republican governor [Ron DeSantis] tweeted in early March that anyone who opposes a bill forbidding teachers from talking about gender identity or sexual orientation with students in early grades is “probably a groomer or at least you don’t denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children.” A few days later, Fox News host Laura Ingraham asked on national television, “When did our public schools, any schools, become what are essentially grooming centers for gender identity radicals?”
And, speaking before the Tennessee House of Representatives in February, country music star John Rich compared librarians who allow children access to graphic books to sexual predators — adding he believes that there is “bona fide grooming taking place” in the state’s public schools.
“What’s the difference between a teacher, educator or librarian … or a guy in a white van pulling up at the edge of school when school lets out?” he asked. Students “can run away from the guy in the white van.”
“The bill that liberals inaccurately call ‘Don’t Say Gay’ would be more accurately described as an Anti-Grooming Bill,” DeSantis’s spokeswoman Christina Pushaw tweeted March 4. In response to questions from The Washington Post, she elaborated: “Those who read the bill and decide they do support teaching kindergartners about sexuality and gender transition may or may not be trying to exploit children themselves — but by sexualizing young kids and normalizing sexual conversations between adults and children, they are contributing to an environment that endangers children by exposing them to inappropriate content while eroding parental rights.”
Here’s the GOP gotcha:
anyone who opposes a bill forbidding teachers from talking about gender identity or sexual orientation with students in early grades is “probably a groomer or at least you don’t denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children.”
Perception is Reality. Emotions beat Facts, every time.
We already know that the same folks were citing pedophile union teachers being protected by the union for a couple decades now. Those same anti-public school folks were citing pedophile teachers many years ago, and now they are citing “trans activists” in the school.
But you have convinced me. I am going to keep reinforcing their view that thousands of pedophile teachers are being protected by the union and we must pass more laws to get rid of them.
I accept all your thanks and gratitude as I help amplify the narrative of the pedophile union teacher that has been around long before this anti-trans narrative. As you so correctly point out, I should be posting non-stop about what a great political argument the right wing is making and we should all admire their argument about how many pedophile teachers there are and let them make it while we stand by silently,
I know that will work because you keep telling me it will.
Campbell Brown started complaining about pedophile teachers, but only union teachers,when she entered the school wars several years ago.
Please stop engaging with FLERP. You are monopolizing the comments.
Diane,
It has been 10 years since Campbell Brown wrote her editorial “Campbell Brown: Teachers Unions Go to Bat for Sexual Predators” in the Wall Street Journal.
If the teachers union in the last 10 years has stopped going to bat for pedophile teachers, that would be a good thing, but of course if Florida wanted to pass a law banning unions from going to bat for pedophile teachers it would be a worthwhile discussion to have about whether such a law was necessary to stop unions from continuing this dangerous practice.
I am not saying that there needs to be a law banning unions from going to bat for pedophile teachers because I do not believe there needs to be a law banning unions from going to bat for pedophile teachers. But, like flerp! does with when he cites the trans activists in elementary schools, I am just pointing out that having unions go to bat for pedophiles is a very concerning issue for many parents and if a state like Florida wanted to pass a law to ban unions from going to bat for pedophiles it would be understandable.
And if a state like Florida does decide to celebrate the passage of a law to ban unions from going to bat for pedophile teachers, I will support Rage when he says we should all remain silent so that Democrats can win elections.
Actually that’s not what I believe. I believe that we should change the framing of the discussion to be “teachers union do not go to bat for sexual pedophiles and people saying that are scaremongering to get people to hate unions.”
Just like I wanted to change flerp’s framing from a discussion about whether laws are necessary to address to dangerous and disturbing influence that trans activists have in elementary schools to a discussion about how anti-trans propagandists scaremonger and push false narratives about trans activists being dangerously influential in elementary schools.
But I give up. I really don’t care anymore. I apologize for challenging the false premises of flerp’s posts and I apologize for monopolizing the discussion in my attempt to correct those false premises.
I will leave because I don’t belong in a blog where folks want to discuss what the “right amount” of trans activist influence in public elementary schools should be and what we do when trans activists are teaching young elementary school students so many inappropriate and dangerous ideas.
I would be sad not to have your viewpoint here, nycpsp. I especially appreciate your good catches on how MSM frames the debate using (or emphasizing) conservative Republican POV’s and then backing off to both-siderism. But also your points in general about media coverage from supposedly liberal MSM. And also always look for your POV as a parent of a NYC pubsch-attending child. It does hurt my feelings a little when you lump me in with some group because of a particular comment I made [basically ‘anyone who thinks that must be xyz’—or even, as you did above, ‘anyone who responds to comments to people like x must be…’- as if you didn’t know me at all after all these years.
The thing is, people play into this by refusing to acknowledge that there would be something wrong with teaching elementary school children that it is a fact that gender identity is a spectrum and that it is completely ok and normal for a boy to be a girl etc. Even if you truly believed that is not being taught anywhere in the country in elementary school (an extremely naive position), if you don’t think those things should be taught to 7 year olds, you should be able to say that. But so many are unable to, either for fear of “playing into the GOP narrative” or because they believe those things should be taught to 7 year olds. (NYCPSP probably fits into both those categories.) And there’s the trap.
FLERP, the problem with your assertion (that it is ok to teach elementary school children that it is “completely ok and normal for a boy to be a girl etc”) is that I doubt there are many (if any) elementary schools where teachers are “teaching” that. You are playing into the rightwing narrative. In Florida, sex education is illegal in K-3. That makes the “Don’t Say Gay” law totally absurd.
The law is a bad law and will have the effect of chilling speech and intimidating teachers.
I’m glad that at least we agree that teachers should not teach about gender identity in K-3. I don’t know if that’s happening in Florida, and if it isn’t, that’s good.
It is NOT happening!
Campbell Brown would say:
“I’m glad that at least we agree that teachers unions should not be protecting sexual predators. I don’t know if that’s happening in Florida, and if it isn’t, that’s good.”
If we don’t recognize right wing propaganda when folks spew it over and over on this blog, then there is no hope for the public to be expected to do so when the lies about teachers are spewed in the media.
Apologies for this last post.
The thing is, parents who hate trans kids play into this by claiming that there is something very wrong with reading elementary school children a book about CRAYONS.
The thing is, people play into this by refusing to acknowledge that there isn’t anything wrong with teaching elementary school students that it is ok that there is a trans child sitting in their classroom.
According to these folks, students should be taught that it is NOT ok and it is NOT normal for a boy to be a girl, etc. According to these folks, gender identity is gender identity and is it NOT ok for a kid to be taught anything but that the trans kid in their class is abnormal.
And they say how dare a school not reinforce their own view that these trans kids are abnormal and their classmates must be taught that they are abnormal. Or that they don’t really exist.
These haters say how dare a teacher read a book about a crayon to her elementary school class. It might make those kids have empathy when their parents want them to be taught that trans kids are abnormal. “Parents rights”, you know!
I can’t really argue with parents like flerp who believe that 7 year olds should only learn that being trans is abnormal and wrong. That is their belief and they will fight to insure that teachers are reinforcing that to their kids.
That book about the crayon was lovely. A parent has to be truly hateful to believe that reading it to a kid would be dangerous or negative. Certainly that is what Marjorie Taylor Greene and her pals believe.
Diane always asks me to ignore your comments and for the most part I do, but I must ask, why do you constantly respond to me?
I think everyone should be treated with kindness and respect. There should be zero tolerance (a quaint old concept that’s probably lost its currency these days) for bullying students for any reason, including on the basis of students’ gender identification.
I also think that teachers should not teach elementary students that it is a fact that gender identity is a spectrum and that it’s perfectly normal and ok for girls to be boys and boys to be girls. I know you disagree with that, and that’s fine—people disagree. But I certainly won’t apologize for my view.
I also don’t think this Florida law is a good law.
You’re upset and I don’t wish to upset you more, but those are things I believe and I don’t have a problem staying then plainly.
“I also think that teachers should not teach elementary students that it is a fact that gender identity is a spectrum and that it’s perfectly normal and ok for girls to be boys and boys to be girls.”
In other words, teachers should teach that all the trans kids in school are ABNORMAL, but then tell their students that they should still be “kind” to their abnormal classmates.
flerp, maybe you should dig deep into yourself and ask yourself why you are so obsessed with labeling kids who are “trans” as abnormal. Why is it so important to you that students be taught that they are abnormal? What is the danger that you believe this would cause?
Because you sound just like the folks 40 years ago who insisted being gay was “abnormal” and it was important that no child ever be taught that it was anything but abnormal.
What is the danger you see with kids believing their trans classmate is “normal”? Why do you feel so determined to make sure trans kids are labeled “abnormal” to all of their classmates?
^^Saying that kids must be taught that trans kids are not okay and not normal but hey, be kind to those kids, is not acceptable.
And I would be surprised if you express those nasty views about trans kids being abnormal and not ok in real life.
“ In other words, teachers should teach that all the trans kids in school are ABNORMAL, but then tell their students that they should still be “kind” to their abnormal classmates.”
No, I don’t think teachers should teach elementary school students that trans kids are abnormal.
Again, I don’t think elementary school teachers should be teaching students about gender identity. You think they should be teaching students about gender identity. I guess I could tell you to look deep within yourself, but the bottom line is just that we disagree, it is what it is. We don’t have to wage a relentless campaign to marginalize and discredit everyone who disagrees with us.
“And I would be surprised if you express those nasty views about trans kids being abnormal and not ok in real life.”
I choose my words carefully in real life depending on the company I’m in. For the most part I’m a non-confrontational person and I don’t like to offend or upset people when it’s not necessary. I’m good at identifying people who need humoring and giving them what they need. If I can’t give them what they need in good conscience, I’ll use humor to get my point across when possible.
I don’t “hate” transgender people.
For what it’s worth—unlike you, I don’t pretend to know what the “gay community” thinks or feels about the issue—but my friends who are most open about their dislike of trans activism happen to be gay.
Teachers teach about things that are NORMAL all the time — endless stories with families that have a mother and father.
You believe that mentioning anything that is ABNORMAL to you and NOT OKAY to you should rightly be banned, like trans kids.
You are being your typically disingenuous when you insist that kids being bullied would not be affected by your view that being trans is not okay and not normal, and teachers who say anything that might give students the impression that being trans is okay must be silenced.
I can’t imagine a parent telling their kid “that trans kids is abnormal and not okay, but be nice to them.” Although maybe you consider that good parenting.
I don’t believe for one minute that your “friends who are gay” agree with you that being trans is not okay and not normal.
I doubt very much that your “friend who are gay” agree with your non-stop exaggerations about “trans activism” in elementary schools or they agree with your demonization of “Welcoming Schools” and their anti-bullying materials. Your citing them to support your own certainty that trans kids are abnormal and not okay seems pretty desperate on your part.
Do you even know any trans kids in your little bubble or do their parents already know your strong feelings about them and make sure they aren’t around in your presence?
“endless stories with families that have a mother and father.”
I have no problem with elementary school teachers reading stories about families with a mother and a father, or two fathers, or two mothers, or a single father or a single mother. If you truly believe that trans men are men and trans women are women, then all of those combinations will necessarily encompass trans parents.
I don’t remember discussing gender theory with my children when they were elementary school age. If the topic ever came up, I probably would have said that some men (for example) feel that they are women, and dress in ways that are conventionally seen as “feminine,” and want to be addressed as a woman. If my child said something like, “that’s silly,” I probably would have said something like, “maybe, but that’s how they feel, and you shouldn’t be mean about it.” This is how I always discussed stuff like politics or religion with my children at that age. I’d lay the issue out like a set of views, like briefing in a legal matter. “Catholics believe X. Other people don’t agree with that.” If it gets to “what do you think, Daddy?” I would try to thoughtfully state what I really believe, to the extent I know what I believe.
But of course everyone has their own approach.
I don’t know many kids in general, because I’m an adult. I was aware of a few trans kids who were classmates of my children, but I didn’t know them. I know some of my children’s friends. My son has no trans friends. My daughter had one friend from elementary school who became “nonbinary,” whatever that means, but they’ve grown apart.
Like I said before, I don’t talk about controversial political questions with people whose views I don’t already have a sense of. And I don’t have strong feelings about trans people–I have no problem with trans people. It’s trans activism that I don’t care for.
That’s fine, I certainly can’t prove it here. And likewise, I don’t believe that, as you claim, you know a bunch of trans kids so well that you know what made them decide to be trans. (“In fact, I know trans kids and not a single one decided to be trans because their school taught them to be.”) How many trans kids do you know? Did you ask them all what made them decide to be trans? I think you’re making stuff up, and I think you do that regularly when trying to claim lived expertise, and you can’t prove that you’re not making stuff up.
As usual in our occasional exchanges, I give up far more personal information than you do. These are usually very one-sided exchanges.
I find all of your anti-trans arguments so disingenuous. You justify your anti-trans beliefs by making up lies about some danger that “trans activists” have infiltrated elementary schools and are teaching kids to be trans.
“I have no problem with trans people. It’s trans activism that I don’t care for.” And of course you stipulate that being trans is abnormal and being trans is not okay.
“I have no problem with gay people. It’s gay activism that I don’t care for.” Do you also stipulate that gay people are abnormal and being gay is not okay?
You can’t actually give an example of this dangerous and terrible “trans activism” that you cite to excuse your very strong anti-trans student. If you weren’t so obsessed in making sure kids were never taught that being trans is okay, you would find that book about crayons to be very sweet. Instead you have falsely demonized that crayon story as if it was a dangerous story for kids to read.
You don’t seem to be able to countenance anything that doesn’t portray being trans as the abnormal condition you believe it to be.
You still haven’t answered my question.
Why do you think it would be so terrible if your kid were taught that being trans was not “abnormal”?
Why do you think it would be so terrible if your kid were taught that his trans classmate was “okay”?
Substitute gay for trans and you could ask the same question of all of your anti-trans friends.
What are you protecting kids from?
You’re like a wind-up toy. You never stop.
I never stop pointing out that you never offer one iota of evidence for your anti-trans views.
You just use innuendo the way you did when you made all your anti-CRT posts.
There is nothing dangerous about anything that elementary school kids are learning in the classroom about gay families or about trans people. There is nothing dangerous about NORMALIZING gay families and trans kids.
Except to you and the far right. They hate the normalization of being trans and they will scare parents into believing lies about some dangerous “trans activists” to get that normalization to stop.
Why does it bother you so much if elementary schools normalize trans kids? Imagine you had a trans kid and some parent kept shouting that the school was teaching that the trans kid was normal and okay when that kid was not.
You sound like that parent. Look in the mirror. Have some empathy.
Remember when a “groom” was a guy who married a woman?
Remember when “grooming” was a reference to people taking good care of how they dress, or a jockey/owner taking care of his/her horse?
We live in an age in which words are redefined for political purposes.
When the folks who are the most anti-trans here are already stipulating that it is fact that trans people are abnormal and being trans is not okay, then it is clear why they are so obsessed with silencing teachers from expressing any view that does not reinforce to their students that trans classmates are abnormal and not okay. They seem obsessed with preventing students from ever learning that being trans is okay.
It is appalling to then hear these anti-trans folks professing some kind of admirable behavior because they do support teaching students that it is wrong to bully the abnormal trans kids.
Trans kids are okay. Being trans is okay. Stop turning them into something that is “abnormal” just because being trans is outside your own comfort zone.
The trans kids in school don’t hurt your precious kids, and yet some parents would hurt those trans kids because they believe they are abnormal and any teaching that they are not abnormal is wrong.
Why do you insist on mischaracterizing every single thing I write?
I have what I believe to be a very mainstream view that elementary school teachers should not be teaching about gender identity. I don’t agree with this Florida law, and I don’t think my view should be legislated at all. But I believe that teachers should not be teaching 8-year-olds to explore the concepts of gender identity and gender expression, or that gender, gender identity, sexual orientation and sex assigned at birth are not binaries, but spectrums.
You disagree and think those things should be taught to elementary school students. I consider that a good-faith disagreement, an issue about which reasonable people can disagree. You think there is no room for reasonable disagreement — that my view is hateful and presumably evil and harmful. It’s not my place to change your mind about that, but query which of our perspectives is the one most Americans would consider “moderate,” as you claim to be.
And why do you never answer a single question that’s posed to you? You wrote that you “know trans kids and not a single one decided to be trans because their school taught them to be.” How many trans kids do you know? 1? 3? 20? How do you know what made them decide to be trans? Did you ask them all what made them decide to be trans?
You invent some false reality to justify your belief that trans people should not exist.
Your comments always include loaded propaganda words to exaggerate some danger that doesn’t exist. 8 year olds taught to explore gender expression!
For the record, folks here, flerp! also did this with CRT and he was demonizing public schoolteachers and implying these evil teachers were teaching dangerous “anti-white” ideas to justify restricting what teachers could teach.
So it isn’t surprising that flerp would do the same with trans. It’s the nasty type of argument that the small-minded right wingers make all the time. It is impossible to argue with them.
It is impossible to have a discussion about teachers unions with the folks who just keep repeating “but those pedophile teachers are being protected by the union”. That is flerp’s way of arguing. He just keeps citing a supposedly dangerous thing that children are being “forced” to learn in school because of some evil “trans activists”.
flerp did exactly the same thing with CRT. Demonizing teachers the way he demonizes trans activists by citing something he googled or usually, from some right wing tweet.
flerp, the bottom line is you believe being trans is “abnormal” and is not okay. You have already stipulated that — are you now taking it back?
flerp has stated on here that being trans is abnormal and not okay. I happen to believe it is those strong feelings flerp has that guide his need to exaggerate this supposed “danger” of trans activists, just like he kept exaggerating the danger of CRT.
It is understandable that those who believe as flerp does that being trans is abnormal and not okay would so strongly support banning teachers from saying that being trans is okay or is normal.
But flerp has never really answered why he is so scared of 7 year olds being taught that being trans is okay. Why can’t they know that? Will it make them trans?
You won’t answer any of my questions. You mischaracterize everything I write. You make up things that I didn’t write. You make up fake anecdotes to create fake lived expertise where it suits you but then accuse others of lying. You are incapable of having a good faith debate because you feel compelled to wage an endless, dishonest battle to insult and discredit and marginalize anyone who disagrees with you. Worst of all, you have the sense of humor of a vacuum. I wish you well but I can’t waste more time on you here.
flerp!,
Are you talking to yourself? I did suggest you look in the mirror.
If you ever want to have a real discussion, where you don’t exaggerate some danger and put words in other people’s mouths, I am happy to have that with you.
But while you continue to post unsupported allegations of “trans activism” in elementary schools and other right wing propaganda, I will simply call it out for what it is.
This comment thread is a good illustration of the “political trap for the super-woke, ultra-progressive wing of Democratic party” that RageAgainstThe Edumeddlers described. As Rage put it, the playbook is: “push the right buttons, let the opposition’s outrage prove your claims, and then completely own the libs in 2022 and 2024.”
Here, we have a law designed to bar teaching about gender identity in grades K-3. A debate about the law ensues here. As if on script, the loudest “super-woke, ultra-progressive” commenter on this blog — who styles herself a “moderate” — takes the position that teachers must teach about gender identity in grades K-3, and that disagreement on that point is hateful speech that must be condemned.
The playbook works.
And here is the propagandists at work again!
I did not know I was taking the position “that teachers must teach about gender identity in grades K-3”. But glad that our resident purveyor of propaganda mansplained it to me.
For the record, what I said it that there is nothing wrong with teachers saying that being trans is normal and okay. The fact that a wonderful group that fights bullying of gay students in schools has a sample way of doing this — with a story about a crayon — that might help teachers normalize a trans student should not be so dangerous but flerp keeps citing this story about a crayon as if it was wildly inappropriate. Why do teachers have to be banned from using that story?
I get that the parents who want their kids to view trans kids as not being normal and not okay would object fiercely to a teacher reading such a story.
But when those anti-trans folks start using falsehoods and making ugly insinuations about how trans activists are infiltrating public schools, you know there is something wrong.
The crayon story is lovely. If someone finds it objectionable, that reflects their own values. But citing “trans activists” to hide their dislike for any normalization of kids who are trans in school is a nasty thing to do.
If you don’t want trans kids to be normalized, just own it. I still don’t understand why you are so determined to treat them as abnormal and “not okay”. Why? Why is that so unacceptable to you?
Dear NYPSP
I think it wonderful that on a blog devoted to topics in education, people are debating issues regarding curricula related to sex and gender. These are extremely important questions. So, I am grateful to Dr. Ravitch for her patience with these exchanges. Democracy is messy.
I rarely agree with Flerp about these issues, and I think that he is confused on fundamental matters like the difference between sex and gender. However, I find many of your comments off base because you have a tendency, OFTEN, to attribute to people positions that they don’t, in fact, hold and then to go on and on about how awful those are. A lot of your comments are of the “Well, then you must think that. . . .” variety. This is a logical fallacy. It’s called “the straw man argument.” One of the many problems with making such arguments is that it derails rational debate. And that’s a shame when the topics under consideration are as important as these are. I do wish you would stop doing this. It’s counterproductive. It sidetracks or even completely derails rational discussion and debate.
Dear Bob,
When Campbell Brown says that teachers unions go to bat for sexual predators, what she means is that teachers unions are bad.
Feel free to attack me for committing one of my usual “logical fallacies”. Campbell Brown just has a genuine concern about pedophiles in schools and I committed my usual “logical fallacy” and accused her of trying to demonize teachers unions when that was clearly not her intent at all. Nope, not at all.
I suggest you ask flerp what is acceptable for a teacher to talk about in class that does not offend those who are outraged about kids learning about “gender expression” because of those “trans activists” who are so influential in elementary schools.
What happens when there is a trans kid in the class? Ask flerp! what is allowed. Or is it “we don’t talk about trans kids, no no no”?
How dare I make the logical fallacy that flerp is anti-trans when you are certain there must be some way that flerp would approve of for a teacher to help the other students in their class to understand, have empathy and accept their trans classmate.
Maybe there is no reason that flerp should have to offer up an acceptable way because once teachers correctly eliminate all the “unacceptable” ways that flerp cites as being pushed by the “trans activists” who are so influential in elementary schools, the teacher will surely come up with something acceptable to flerp! on her own.
See my note, below.
Beautiful and understated, Bob.
True story, Diane. I changed only the name.
Bob,
I think this is a wonderful story.
I think you are incredibly naive to think that folks who keep citing “trans activism” in public elementary schools in a negative way as if this was a real thing would find this story acceptable.
They are citing a supposedly objectionable story about a CRAYON as an example of the undue influence those dangerous “trans activists” in public elementary schools have.
We don’t talk about trans kids, no no no. We don’t talk about trans kids, no no no.
Don’t talk about trans kids, no! (Why did I talk about a trans kid?)
Not a word about trans kids
I never should’ve brought up trans kids!
Gotta make sure those “trans activists” that are influencing public schools to teach kids about dangerous stuff like “gender expression” are stopped before they can do more damage.
“I think you are incredibly naive to think that folks who keep citing “trans activism” in public elementary schools in a negative way as if this was a real thing would find this story acceptable.”
This is but one of many examples of the phenomenon that I’m talking about NYCPSP. I never made the claim that people who do that would find my story acceptable. So, why would you think it naive of me to think something that I don’t, in fact, think? And why would you assume that I think this? The assumption is unwarranted. I never said or even implied any such thing. But here you are, imputing it to me. And you do this ALL THE TIME–you attribute ideas, beliefs, etc. to people that they never expressed and might very well not hold. In fact, I suspect that people concerned about trans activism might not really get the story at all because they are typically confused about the difference between sex, the biological phenomenon, and gender, the cultural one. But I don’t know this for a fact about any particular person unless he or she says something that suggests ignorance of the distinction.
And, for the record, I do not think that “trans activism” is a widespread part of American K-12 curricula. I think this a moral panic with little support in fact. However, I do think that the country is undergoing an awakening about gender expression and identity and that this is a great birth of freedom but that many people find this confusing and scary. But that phenomenon is happening among people young and old, in their personal interactions and conversations, and in the popular culture, and NOT in curricula, typically. That there is some sort of nationwide trans identity inculcation going on in schools is simply false. It’s utterly preposterous. That nationwide, kids are talking about these matters. That’s true.
Also for the record, I hope that the time will come when it will be uncontroversial for people to teach, in later grades, when people are old enough to understand this, a) the difference between sex and gender, b) basic facts about sex and sexuality, and c) acceptance of the wonderful variation in human sexual orientations and gender identities. But we have a long way to go there.
The worry that some folks have about
I also think that if a person graduates from high school or, may all the Gods forbid, from college without understanding what enculturation and aculturation are, then his or her educators have failed to teach really key concepts for understanding the worlds in which people live.
I also think that a lot of the tension being experienced in this cultural moment–the kind of tension that occurs whenever there is dramatic change–would be relieved if people on both sides of these issues understood more clearly that sex and gender are distinct phenomena.
“people play into this by refusing to acknowledge that there would be something wrong with teaching elementary school children that it is a fact that gender identity is a spectrum and that it is completely ok and normal for a boy to be a girl…”
I abjectly apologize for not acknowledging how wrong it is to teach elementary school children that it is completely ok and normal for Casey to be who she is.
I agree that it was completely OK and normal for Casey to be who she was, and I hope that when we grow TF up as a culture, we will recognize this. I came of age in a small midwestern town and knew at least three trans people from that time. All three suffered terribly from the prejudice encountered.
Let me give an example of this, NYPSP, that I hope will be clarifying. In a discussion of whether To Kill a Mockingbird should be a standard part of the curriculum, the following question arose:
Are all white people racists?
I advanced the following argument for why I think this claim untrue and repugnant:
Ethical argument. There are quite a few white people who paid the ultimate price for their antiracist activities—ones who were killed, for example, for their activities in the South as part of the Civil Rights Movement. To say that such people, being white, were racists seems, to me, repugnant and dishonors the memory of these heroes/heroines.
Epistemological argument. We do not have access to the innermost thoughts and feelings of others, and making such an absolutist claim about ALL people is therefore not warranted because of the lack of ability to make the relevant observations. People simply don’t know the hearts and minds of EVERYONE ELSE in that sort of detail.
Argument from Existentialist principles. As an Existentialist, I believe that people are self-creating and responsible for who they are, that, some aspects of their biological natures (their facticity) aside, they CHOOSE and CONSTRUCT who they are, and that this is not a given. So, the notion that people are predefined ethically or politically seems to me absurd, repugnant, and counterproductive. It doesn’t contribute toward support of the notion that people are agents capable of making themselves into better people.
I detest racists and racism and have devoted much of my life, personal and professional, to fighting it. So, I’m an existence proof. I am a white antiracist.
In response to these arguments, PSP, you launched into long, breathless, hyperbolic screeds making the following points, which I am providing in dramatically summarized form and with a lot less loaded language:
That people often aren’t aware of the racist attitudes and behaviors that they have acquired and exhibit.
That racists often say that they are not racists (e.g., Donald Trump’s “I am the least racist person”; the fact that one can have black friends and still be a racist).
That racism is ubiquitous and systemic, so saying that one “doesn’t see color” is disingenuous and/or unaware.
I’ll stop there, but I could enumerate more of these. Here’s the thing: NOWHERE DID I AGRUE AGAINST ANY OF THESE ASSERTIONS. Nowhere. In fact, I agree with all these. So, it was simply bizarre to find myself being attacked for ideas I hadn’t expressed and didn’t believe. Throughout my life, for example, I have written extensively about interpellation and enculturation, about how people acquire ideas, beliefs, behaviors, etc., that they weren’t explicitly taught but that were absorbed automatically (this is a central takeaway from contemporary studies of the acquisition of syntax). So, you literally wrote thousands and thousands of breathless words attacking positions that I did not take and did not hold but directly or indirectly attributing these to me. And you never addressed the actual arguments that I did made. You addressed arguments that you automatically, reflexively, and without reflection, attribute to people who make arguments like the ones that I made.
But that’s not discussion or debate. That’s not addressing the questions raised. It’s sidetracking. Or even derailing.
The bizarre thing, NYPSP, is that because I am left-leaning, and you are, too, I often hold views aligned with yours. But then I see you doing this straw man stuff, and it’s a little crazy-making. And it makes me want to cry because having real discussion and debate about these issues is so important.
Here’s a suggestion that I hope you will take to heart, a kind of exercise for correcting this recurring problem: When you want to respond to something someone has said, quote that. Then, address what was ACTUALLY SAID in the quotation, and not OTHER IMAGINED OR IMPUTED CORRELATES.
cx: that I did make [not made]
Two qualifications of the material in the note above:
Race is primarily a cultural phenomenon. It makes no sense as a biological designation.
I refer to myself as “white,” but that’s questionable to some extent. My biological father was from Cherokee country. He had dark skin, almost no facial or body hair, and coarse, jet-black hair, as did his mother and father. His family and everyone who knew them referred to them as native American/Indian. (In that part of the country, alas, racist epithets were often used in these characterizations.) I’ve never done a DNA test for Cherokee or other ancestry, but I suspect that such a test would confirm that I am at least partly of Cherokee ancestry. I do know that a Jewish fellow married into that family and was a great-grandfather of mine. A little familiarity with studies of genetic dispersion worldwide confirms that we’re all mutts. Consider, for example, the recent DNA tests on bodies from Viking burials. These explode the myth of the pure Nordic racial type.
cx: the fact that a white person can have black friends and still be a racist (i.e., “some of my best friends are _____” is not a definitive argument).
Bob, does having implicit biases make one racist?
I feel no desire to discuss that question because what I have always said is that all white people have implicit biases. Whether or not you believe that having an implicit bias is the same as being racist is a matter of semantics that seems irrelevant to all your other points.
“There are quite a few white people who paid the ultimate price for their antiracist activities…. To say that such people, being white, were racists seems, to me, repugnant and dishonors the memory of these heroes/heroines.”
What is bizarre to me is that you still don’t understand what is wrong with your statement. You say you agree with me about implicit racism, but then you seem to be arguing that it is repugnant to acknowledge any implicit racism in a white person who has paid the ultimate price for their antiracist activities. We can’t say that all white people are implicitly racist because that might include white people who were involved in antiracist activities and paid the ultimate price.
What surprises me is that you don’t realize that the people who sacrifice the most doing antiracist work are most likely to be the ones who can admit to having implicit biases. So I don’t understand why you would even cite them. I doubt they would be offended if someone said that all white people have some implicit racist biases. No one I know has ever insisted that the name of civil rights workers killed in Mississippi must always include the disclaimer *had some racist beliefs. But it is just as wrong to declare without any knowledge that there is no way they could possibly have any implicit biases because they made the ultimate sacrifice for civil rights.
I do not believe that it is “repugnant” to talk about Abraham Lincoln’s racist beliefs. I do not believe it dishonors his memory. It shouldn’t “dishonor” anyone to tell the whole truth about them — the sacrifices they made, the great things they did, and yes, the fact that they still had some racist beliefs.
When people point out that all white people have implicit biases and other folks start attacking them for this, I don’t get it. I don’t understand the extreme defensiveness.
The people who claim to have no implicit racist biases are the ones who I find the most suspect. Did they always know how offensive Billy Crystal in black face was, or are they now exonerating themselves from their own implicit biases by saying that because their biases were acceptable at the time, they were fine.
What I can acknowledge is that I had biases 20 years ago I didn’t recognize. Which tells me that I also have biases today that I won’t recognize until the future. I remain open to having those pointed out to me. Instead of being defensive about having those pointed out to me. Which is what we should all be doing, in my opinion.
In the discussion you cited, people who pointed out that To Kill a Mockingbird” was written by a white person who was racist (whether she knew it or not) were being attacked.
I tried to defend the black parents who were being attacked for daring to challenge those who claimed that neither TKAM nor Harper Lee were racist.
Abraham Lincoln had implicit racism. That does not lessen the good things he does, but denying that or attacking someone for pointing it out is wrong. To Kill A Mockingbird is an implicitly racist book.
I will say it again. To Kill A Mockingbird is an implicitly racist book. That doesn’t mean it can’t be read as a fine piece of literature. But it does mean it should not be held out as some model of antiracism. It isn’t. And if you don’t understand why it isn’t, then you have some implicit biases yourself.
So we will continue to disagree about these things. Sorry not sorry.
^^^I will retract my statement “To Kill A Mockingbird” is an implicitly racist book” because that framing is perhaps unfair.
Instead, I will say that “To Kill A Mockingbird” demonstrates the implicit racism of its white author in a number of ways, as this Washington Post column notes:
“But the story is one by a white author, told through primarily white characters. Rereading the book, I was struck that Lee offers rich profiles of the story’s white characters, their personalities, mannerisms, dress, histories, but there are no such character studies to be found for any of the African Americans in this story. Their humanity is obscured from us, suggesting that it is of little consequence to the author, reader or the whites in Maycomb. White privilege means not actually having to know black or brown people, to live among them but to never really see them, even in one’s own house.
….
Atticus is the unimpeachable and quintessential example of what it means to be a Good White Person, inspiring young people across the country to become lawyers and enabling white Americans to point again and again to a fictional character as proof that not all actual white people are racist.
It is a myth, a lie that America tells itself that perpetuates racism. At best, he was the least overtly racist person in a racist town.”
There was nothing implicit about Abraham Lincoln’s racism. It was right up front and clear. People who doubt that just don’t know much about Lincoln.
“You say you agree with me about implicit racism.” No. I do not say this. I say that implicit racism exists. I do not agree that all white people are implicitly racist.
I find it ironic that anyone would look at someone who gave his or her life fighting racism and say, “But ofc that person was a racist.” Ironic and disgusting.
“And you do this ALL THE TIME–you attribute ideas, beliefs, etc. to people that they never expressed and might very well not hold.”
“I find it ironic that anyone would look at someone who gave his or her life fighting racism and say, “But ofc that person was a racist.” Ironic and disgusting.”
Aren’t you doing the same thing to me that you accuse me of doing to you?
Who are you talking about when you refer to “anyone” who is looking at someone who gave his or her life fighting racism and saying ““But ofc that person was a racist”? Because it isn’t me. Which people are you attributing that idea and belief to?
What I am saying is that excluding a white person from having any implicit biases because they gave their life fighting racism is wrong.
And it’s not a convincing argument (to me) to cite those who gave their life fighting racism as if that is evidence that some white people absolutely have no implicit biases.
I will say this again — I think the people who gave their lives fighting racism would acknowledge their own implicit biases – although of course we will never know. But the young people I know who fight racism are the ones who aren’t afraid to acknowledge that they have implicit biases and they don’t get defensive if someone points out an implicit bias they have — they think about it and try to do better.
So if Abraham Lincoln is the good man we believe, I expect that today he would have noted his own past racism and acknowledge that he still has implicit biases he is unaware of. And that’s what I think those civil rights workers who died would do. But that’s just my theory and clearly I have no evidence to support it.
I even think they would all see the implicit racism in To Kill A Mockingbird! Again, just a theory and I have no evidence to support my belief, except my suspicion that they would be open minded and not defensive.
To repeat, I am not ATTRIBUTING that belief to any of those deceased people. I am just thinking out loud about what their reaction to the discussion of implicit racism might be.
Bob, I am going to give you an example of implicit bias that has nothing to do with race.
Here is what you said to me:
“When you want to respond to something someone has said, quote that. Then, address what was ACTUALLY SAID in the quotation, and not OTHER IMAGINED OR IMPUTED CORRELATES.”
But when flerp! makes comments directed at me, you remain silent instead of writing a long comment criticizing flerp!’s style and telling him to “address what was ACTUALLY SAID in the quotation, and not OTHER IMAGINED OR IMPUTED CORRELATES.”
flerp! says this:
“As if on script, the loudest “super-woke, ultra-progressive” commenter on this blog — who styles herself a “moderate” — takes the position that teachers must teach about gender identity in grades K-3…”
Bob, I challenge you to find a quote where I said “teachers must teach about gender identity in grades K-3”.
I also challenge you to find a place where you lectured to flerp in the condescending and demeaning way that you did to me and strongly criticized flerp! for using “imagined or imputed correlates”.
Part of implicit bias is that folks don’t notice the negative things that people they feel an affinity with do, but they jump all over and criticize the people who they have a bias against for doing the same thing.
This is part of the implicit bias that people like Nikole Hannah-Jones were subject to when white historians attacked and demeaned and undermined her entire body of work for referencing the same evidence used by one of those white historians’ esteemed colleagues – Jill Lepore. Those white historians never tried to undermine Lepore’s body of work — instead they had respectful disagreements with the weight that Lepore gave some evidence she cited and those historians never cited those minor disagreements as proof that Jill Lepore’s entire body of work was hugely problematic and questionable.
On the contrary, those white historians praised and admired Jill Lepore despite those disagreements they had with her. Those white historians undermined and attacked Nikole Hannah-Jones and the entire 1619 Project because of the disagreements they had with her using Jill Lepore’s take on history, and implied that Hannah-Jones’ scholarship was suspect.
You are an amazing and brilliant person, Bob, and I am so grateful to read your many thoughtful and well-reasoned comments on here. All I ask is you please not be defensive and think about what I am trying to say.
I am happy to stipulate that I may jump to conclusions sometimes but I do always try to do better. When I read one of your replies that seems to misinterpret every point I was trying to make, then I write too long posts trying to clarify what I mean. I know you find that annoying.
All I ask is that you please not be defensive and think about how you jump on me for supposedly doing things that you don’t even notice when the person I am replying to does.
NYC PSP,
Please stop responding to FLERP’s comments. You don’t change his mind, and he doesn’t change yours. You monopolize the comments section.
^^And to clarify, those white historians would say that they did “notice” when Jill Lepore cited evidence and gave it too much weight it did not deserve. Just like you likely may notice when flerp! does certain things.
But the difference is that those white historians minimized that as a minor issue when it was Jill Lepore, but when it was Nikole Hannah-Jones they amplified the disagreement about the weight she gave to the evidence and presented it as a huge transgression that supposedly entirely discredited her work and made her entire scholarship suspect. Meanwhile those historians still admired and praised Jill Lepore because when Jill Lepore gave the same weight to that evidence, they didn’t think it was really a big deal and should in no way impugn her scholarship.
That’s implicit bias.
Diane,
I thought I was replying to Bob, but I will stop engaging with both of them. Sorry for posting elsewhere as well. I will join GregB whose wisdom I should have recognized some time ago.
NYC PSP, I did not ask you to stop commenting. I asked you to stop responding to FLERP. You and he have carried on extended exchanges that does not change the other person’s views and consumes lots of space.
I often disagree with FLERP, and I say why. I hope that when I do, I address the points that he made and explain why I don’t agree. FLERP has not made a habit of putting words into my mouth, of attributing positions to me, that I don’t hold.
With regard to the length of replies, I am one of the worst sinners there, I suppose. But people can always choose not to read those.
BTW, I think that one thing educators concerned about transphobia could do early on is to teach students about the difference between learning and acquisition–the former being explicit and the latter implicit. The French Marxist critic Louis Althusser used the term “interpellation” to describe the concepts that people imbibe from their ambient cultural contexts without being aware that they have done so. It’s an extremely useful term and concept, one that educators should understand. Most of the discussions of the acquisition of the grammar of a language are nonsense because people don’t understand this distinction. Ed schools should do a much better job there of making this a standard part of teacher preparation.
BTW, many years ago, when McDougal, Littell was a baby company, it published a series of books for use in then faddish flexible modular ELA instruction. These were anthropology for young people, and they gave many examples of cultural variation worldwide. Often, people aren’t aware that something that they acquired via enculturation is not a given, a matter of human nature, but, rather, a cultural phenomenon. For example, people living in isolated nuclear family dwellings is a relatively recent phenomenon. Throughout most of history, people got up in the morning, stepped out of the wigwam or igloo or clay-and-wattle hut or long house or whatever, and there everyone else was, and it was quite common for them to live in housing for extended families. So, it’s surprising for people to learn that the paradigm of mom and dad and the kids in the house in the suburbs is an innovation, and not a terribly healthy one. Of course, the McDougal series, called, in the sexist way of the time, the Man series, was extremely controversial because it taught that many notions that people think of as human universals and insist upon aren’t. See, for example, the matriarchal, extended family living arrangements of the Mosuo people of Sichuan and Yunnan provinces in China.
Diane, my apologies for a last (too long) post, but felt it was important to clarify.
My comments in response to flerp! have nothing to do with trying to change flerp!’s mind. I am posting to call out the false innuendoes and claims that flerp! uses in his posts (like “trans activists” having too much influence in public schools) so that other people don’t read them and believe they are true.
I did the same when another frequent poster (who seems to have disappeared) was posting things about Ukraine that were false to mislead readers. I never thought it would change her mind. I just believed it was important not to let misleading comments go uncorrected.
I cited the late Eric Boehlert whose necessary media criticism will be sorely missed because he understood how allowing these false narratives to be repeated over and over again without comment allows them to be legitimized and accepted as truth. People read something by someone held out to be an honest actor who would never intentionally try to mislead someone, and assume that it is very likely to be true. As long as the NYT or the so-called “liberal” media presents these spewers of falsehoods as if they are honest and respectable actors — like they did with William Barr or John Durham or Ted Cruz — those false narratives become more and more plausible and legitimate to the public. It always astonishes me that anyone would be surprised that so many people believe those false narratives.
I assumed that people who support public education would get it. If Campbell Brown is allowed to keep invoking the huge issue of teachers unions going to bat for sexual predators over and over again, and no one is calling her out as a dishonest person and purveyor of false narratives, her false narrative becomes more and more believed by the public.
If anti-public school privatizers keep invoking how charters are doing miraculous things and all their students are passing state tests and going to college, and no one is contradicting them or calling out their false narratives, that false narrative becomes something believed by a huge percentage of the public. And that false narrative IS believed by a huge percentage of the public.
When I used to also post frequently in response to folks who used to invoke those false narratives to promote charters, I wasn’t trying to change their mind. I just felt it was the obligation of those of us who knew better not to let them to get away with their attempt to mislead the public to believe something false. Honest actors correct their falsehoods when they are brought to their attention. Folks spewing false narratives won’t ever change their mind because they are doing so for self-serving reasons – those false narratives support whatever policies those dishonest actors want.
GregB used to get fed up when he read too many of these dishonest actors spewing their false narratives and he would sometimes respond intemperately. I don’t do that, but I did understand why GregB would get to that point – especially when there were good folks on here who (incomprehensibly to me) still believed it was very important to present these folks spewing falsehoods as if they were honest actors. I believe GregB understood how dangerous that was. Almost every right wing Republican says something truthful that I agree with sometimes, but that doesn’t mean that they should be treated as honest actors. Anyone who intentionally spreads falsehoods should lose all credibility.
It does bother me when folks don’t lose their credibility despite frequently posting false narratives. Just like it bothers me that Ted Cruz or William Barr don’t lose their credibility with the so-called liberal media despite spewing false narratives sometimes.
If spewing false narratives and continuing to try to mislead the public even when folks have brought to your attention what is wrong with what you are saying does not damage anyone’s credibility – and in the media it does not seem to do so if one is a right wing Republican – it incentivizes folks to keep spewing lies.
Just like the pro-charter folks are incentivized to keep repeating false narratives. At best, the false narrative will be presented without anyone contradicting it. At worst, someone contradicts it and the puveyor of falsehoods doubles down on his falsehoods and everyone jumps on the person trying to correct the record for posting too much or for not being polite enough. Or maybe they tell the person trying to call out the purveyor of falsehoods – who is always characterized as an honest actor who just has a different opinion – that they should stop posting because they won’t change the the mind of this honest actor who supposedly just “unintentionally” keeps posting false narratives.
I get why GregB had to leave. He was getting attacked because he would finally get fed up with those purveyors of falsehoods and respond to them in a way that their defenders on this blog took issue with. Because apparently it is the duty of all of us who seek a truthful debate to always be polite to the folks spewing false narratives and then shut up because “we won’t change their minds.”
For the record, I also responded to Bob Shepherd who is the opposite of those who post false narratives designed to mislead.
I like discussing issues with Bob because I respect him so much. He is always honest and always thoughtful. We don’t always agree and I apologize because I annoy him when I go overboard in hopes of convincing him of whatever fairly small nuanced issue that we argue about. There are quite a number of folks here whose opinions are very different than mine, and I respect them tremendously because they explain their views with truths, not propaganda and false narratives.
But the few folks on here who aren’t honest actors and post false narratives designed to mislead don’t want a conversation. I hope in the future, other people will respond to them so their false narratives don’t get legitimized. It will never change their mind, but it will change the mind of the random people who read their comment and might assume that their propaganda is true because if it wasn’t true, surely someone would have posted that, right?
Bob, I note your point about sex/gender. I wanted to respond because I think there’s more to say about that, but this comment thread is too long and choked-up to have that discussion. So maybe sometime in the near future.
The far-right has succeeded in characterizing public schools as bastions of far-left indoctrination on two key issues that strike a nerve with the majority of parents:
1) Critical Race Theory/White Privilege
2) Gender Identity/Teacher Grooming
And they have managed to do this by implying, through legislation, that a tiny handful of cherry-picked exceptions are instead, the norm.
And the response from outspoken educators has been to (directly or indirectly) defend them both, thus reinforcing the above far-right claim.
The main purpose of public schooling should be teaching novice, K to 12 learners the fundamentals of math, science, history, geography, music, art, and the English language.
This should never have been hard to promote.
Instead, it has been twisted beyond recognition by both extremes of the political spectrum.
Exactly.
This is an opinion piece out of Newsweek, but it is relevant to the topic. It reinforces your opinion on the left/right dynamics.
https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-dont-say-gay-gaslighting-driving-middle-class-republicans-opinion-1696086
ATTENTION! Anyone still reading at this thread? Yesterday, while perusing the related WaPo article, I did some hunting and found an actual example of sex ed in K-3 used by Chicago Public Schools. Based on its source [SIECUS], I suspect other schsystems are probably using it too. This should greatly relieve the minds of those convinced that pubschs are teaching sexual identity and gender orientation in K3—and provide the counterpoint [“this is not happening in K3”] some ammunition. Here’s the segment on K-2, find topics covered on page 2: https://www.georgearmstrongelementary.org/pdf/sexual_health_curriculum//K-2/Introduction%20%20-%20K-2%20Final.pdf You can find the rest of it by googling “Sexual Health Education Curriculum Grades 3-4 [5, 6-8, etc].” The first page will tell you the extent of the program for the grades involved. K-3 is 100mins per school year, in four 25min lessons.
It all looks pretty innocent on paper if a parent decided to contact a school to see the curriculum. The problem arises when teachers are instructed to download the curriculum from the 3rd party vendor…because that would NOT be available to the parent. This is how poorly written and age inappropriate material gets into schools (YOU KNOW THAT). We’ve all seen this before with the “CRT” frenzy and how it was coming in through DEI/SEL curriculum from an outside source. Parents are sensing that something isn’t right and then we are told by our Left leaning leaders that we are crazy or making things up. The problem arose when the HRC replaced biological sex with gender identity. DEI (Crit Theory in general) is a well organized, multi-billion dollar, private industry sucking tax dollars from the Fed Govt…..much like the Charter School Industry.
My gosh….just google the Genderbread man or the gender unicorn and now, the gender snowman. I have trouble understanding the stupid graphics with all the arrows! I don’t think introducing these things to children who believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy is a very good thing to do.
It’s the same thing with the “Crayon” story. No one in good faith could look at a lesson plan that says “read the Crayon story with your students” and lists the “goal” of that exercise as “to explore the concept of gender identity with students” and conclude that the lesson is not designed to teach students about gender identity.
No one could look at that crayon story and think it was “bad” unless they happened to be the same person on here who has a problem with teachers who would teach their students “that it is perfectly normal and ok to identify as a gender that is not one’s gender assigned at birth”
that is a quote from someone here who believes it is wrong for a teacher to teach young students “that it is perfectly normal and ok to identify as a gender that is not one’s gender assigned at birth”.
And what this boils down to is not a debate about the merits of that lovely crayon story at all.
It is a debate as to whether it is right or wrong for an elementary school teacher to teach that it is perfectly normal and ok for a student to identify as a gender that is not one’s gender assigned at birth.”
Why aren’t we having that important discussion?
Why are these folks so determined to PREVENT a teacher who has a trans student from helping that students’ classmates understand that it is perfectly normal and okay for that student to exist?
These propaganda purveyors don’t ever have to justify their hateful beliefs. They just link to snowmen and crayon stories and claim that those stories justify their beliefs that a trans kid is not normal and not ok and any teacher who tries to teach that a trans kid is normal and is okay has no right to do so.
No one except haters of trans kids is harmed if teachers are allowed to teach “that it is perfectly normal and ok to identify as a gender that is not one’s gender assigned at birth”.
And I don’t understand why anyone is allowed to post false innuendo about some unspoken danger in a random story about a crayon without having to explain why they believe there is something wrong with teachers teaching kids that being trans is normal and ok.
Being trans is normal and ok. Are teachers allowed to say that? That is the discussion that the purveyors of propaganda don’t want to have, but it is the discussion that we should be having because all the rest is meaningless until we ascertain whether the real issue is that these folks believe those trans kids are not normal and not ok.
LisaM – We can’t access the detailed lesson plans written by the two RN’s listed, though linked-in shows high qualifications and no “social justice” connections. Nor which precise books and videos CPS has recommended on their Safari Montage page– but if you check out Safari Montage video/book library sources, you’ll find them pretty anodyne. Why assume that CPS is recommending sources at genderbread.org, or linking to the Gender Unicorn, or to the LGBTQ-Welcoming Schools’ Gender Snowperson lesson plan?
p.s. can you give me some details on “when the HRC replaced biological sex with gender identity”?—couldn’t find online. Do you mean Human Rights Commission, or Human Rights Campaign? Thanks.
bethree5….The HRC is an umbrella term for the Commission and Campaign. I cannot provide you with the date, but a gay friend was/is upset that the HRC changed the definition of homosexuality from “same-sex attraction” to “same-gender attraction”. Got it slightly wrong in my above post. LGB groups are getting pretty fired up….they are starting to sever themselves from the “TQ+”.
bethree5….. A substack from a gay man that hits on the education issue, the HRC/ACLU issue, the science/fact issue and the gay rights issue. It’s a long read and listen (yes, I listened to the posted videos). I agree with this man 100% and it doesn’t make me (or him) a hater or a bigot or a transphobe. I hope you can read it as it is behind a paywall (but substack lets people read a few for free).
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/who-is-looking-out-for-gay-kids-a19?s=w
Lisa, I used to read Andrew Sullivan but I stopped when he started echoing the GOP talking points about the dangers of “critical race theory” on his blog. He is a rightwing gay man.
I’ve said it many times: of course it’s happening in K-3. I don’t know how widespread (although CPS policy would be pretty darn widespread—that’s a huge set of schools). But the taking-point response, for now, remains is “it’s not happening in K-3.”
The far-right doesn’t care how widespread it is. By passing bills against teaching gender identity (or CRT) to young children, they get all the press they need to ring the alarm bells. And when the hair-on-fire reaction from the far-left kicks in they get to kick back and high-five each other
When you think about it,
perception may be stronger than reality.
More fodder for the fire:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-jersey-second-graders-learn-gender-identity-alarming-parents
FOX News hysteria about teachers turning children into trans people. Amazing there so few of them.
The next uproar in line is Pedophilia (NAMBLA it’s still very organized). You will start hearing the acronym MAPs (minor attracted persons) more often. It will hit mid/late summer (my opinion). Hawley and his far right GOP pals gave us a preview of that at the SCOTUS confirmation hearings. A few months ago I started noticing a few op-ed’s in left leaning news outlets that pedophiles didn’t want to be called or categorized with child molesters….apparently MAPs are OK because they don’t “act” on their fetishes. These op-eds didn’t sit right with me. Child porn is rife on the internet.
What I don’t understand is that the left isn’t prepared for what’s coming down the line (or they choose to ignore it) and then when it hits them in the face, they deny. It makes the Left look complicit and gives ammunition to the far right. It really makes sensible, middle of the road folks hold their noses and vote Rep.
I refuse to delve into the above ^^^^^ madness of this thread….it was mentally exhausting (but sometimes amusing) to read some of the posts.
From the lesson plan that upsets those who post that it’s wrong for teachers to say that being trans is normal and okay:
“And you might not feel like you’re a boy or a girl, but you’re a little bit of both. No matter how you feel, you’re perfectly normal!”
I can see why the parents like you would be outraged!
How dare a lesson teach that these kids are perfectly normal!
LisaM and flerp! are like-minded folks who make such “fact-based” and reasoned arguments to support their beliefs about trans students and the dangers in our society that there is nothing more for me to say.
Thank you LisaM and flerp! for showing us your wise arguments and how like minded folks like flerp! and LisaM view the world.
How can I possible counter all the “truths” that you cite and those dangers you are protecting all children from?
You have made your very important and “truthful” arguments.
Hello, dear. Weren’t you leaving the blog to join GregB in exile? And/or no longer responding to my comments? How long did that last, 8 hours?
NYCPSP, I have written before that I will not engage with you and I won’t now. Have your “last say” or whatever you want to call it?….because that’s what you do. None of your name calling or insults hurt my feelings one bit….in fact, it amuses me and reinforces my beliefs of the far left. Have a wonderful (rage filled) day!
flerp!
Your nastiness drove GregB away — I never see his posts anymore. I thought I might have shamed you into stopping the very worst of your nastiness, but you continue to post links on here to Fox News and other right wing sources — and you have never once apologized for the demonization of those hapless educators that you were part of.
flerp!, you don’t just condone the right wing propaganda, you participate in pushing it, and when I see you continuing to do that here, and everyone turning the other cheek, I will call out the dishonest innuendo.
If you and LisaM continue to post your false narratives on this thread, I will continue to call them out. If Diane Ravitch wants your misleading anti-trans propaganda to stand uncorrected, then she can ban me.
The disingenuousness with which you post your nasty attacks on teachers who might teach about racism or being trans in ways that make you uncomfortable because you see trans kids as not normal and not okay is disturbing to me. But it bothers me even more that the other folks on here seem to condone it as you being an honest actor.
If you continue to post links to right wing news sources to support the fact that you are very uncomfortable with students being taught that the trans kids in their class are normal and okay, I am going to call them out and correct your misleading propaganda. Folks should realize exactly where you stand on that issue.
A parent who is very uncomfortable with anyone saying that a trans kid in a school is normal and okay is linking to provocative right wing news to support his views.
You haven’t once offered a bit of evidence for your extreme opposition to teachers in K-3 saying it is okay for kids to be trans.
And that is the bottom line that readers here should understand. flerp doesn’t believe it is okay for teachers to tell their young students that being trans is okay and normal.
If you don’t believe me, just ask flerp! He will attack me, but he will neither confirm nor deny that he believes it is wrong for teachers to tell their students that being trans is okay and normal. I expect the folks on here are smart enough to recognize that disingenuousness for what it is.
I do think we should have a discussion here about whether we should ban teachers from teaching that trans kids are normal and okay. I strongly believe we should not ban teachers from saying that and flerp strong believes we should ban teachers in K-3 from saying that.
And now you will see flerp attacking me and saying that isn’t true. But if flerp actually agrees with me that there is absolutely nothing wrong with teachers teaching young students that being trans is ok and normal, he is welcome to state it here and I will immediately acknowledge I was wrong.
If flerp does not, I hope the readers understand that all of these links are coming from someone who believes there is something wrong with teachers who teach their students that being trans is ok and normal.
There won’t ever be any acceptable educational material to use when the very idea of teaching that trans kids are ok and normal is the real problem.
NYCPSP,
I am going to try again. I said the same thing to FLERP. Please stop engaging with one another. It is boring. Respond to the post or to others on the blog.
And, FYI, if we all agree that it is perfectly fine for teachers of younger students to teach that the trans student in their class is ok and normal, then we can have a very good discussion about what materials or approaches would be good to use. Frankly, I thought the crayon story was lovely to use but if there might be a better approach, I’d like to hear it.
Why aren’t we having that discussion? Because anti-trans folks don’t want anything taught but are too disingenuous to admit it.
My younger son gave me a lesson about what is “normal.” When he was in high school, I described something as “not normal.” He patiently explained that it is “normal” to love pizza. But there are some people who don’t like pizza. Would I describe them as “not normal.” I said “of course not.” I did not know at the time that my son would eventually tell me he was gay, that he would eventually marry one of the most wonderful people I have ever met, and that he and his husband would have two gorgeous sons.
What’s “normal”?
“Your nastiness drove GregB away”
LOL, this is some uproarious revisionist history. GregB left the blog (he didn’t actually leave, he comes back to make unhinged comments periodically) as a protest against the fact that Diane does not censor my comments, which he claimed were horribly racist although he could never explain how. This is a man who on one occasion stated that he wished I would die from Covid. On another occasion (his purported “final comment” before leaving the blog), he mocked the mental health issues I’ve struggled with and told me that I should go ahead and commit suicide. On a subsequent occasion, he actually challenged me to a fight. You never condemned any of this because you support it. It is my view that GregB is a blowhard and a bully and an overall terrible person who can’t see his own nastiness because he’s utterly convinced of his own virtue. And you are peas in a pod. Two angry, nasty people who cannot converse respectfully with anyone you disagree with. Thankfully both of you are exceptions to the general rule here, which is that even when people disagree, they do not relentlessly attack each other.
You are incapable of controlling yourself, incapable of stopping. Maybe Diane will do the entire blog a favor and ban both of us. It would definitely improve the comments section.
FLERP, I have repeatedly asked both you and NYCPSP not to engage with one another’s comments. Frankly, it is boring.
I hope that Greg comes back on the blog. He is deeply knowledgeable about European history and I would love to hear his views right now.
I know, Diane, and I apologize. It gets difficult when I see my name uttered over and over in every new comment from her. I will try to do better to ignore her. I will say I almost never refer to her or reply to her without first being attacked. But I’ll try to do better.
Thank you.
I repeat what I said above:
There won’t ever be any acceptable educational material to use when the very idea of teaching that trans kids are ok and normal is the real problem.
It is so disingenuous when those who don’t believe being trans is ok or normal won’t admit that this is really about forbidding teachers from saying to students that being trans is ok and normal. Be nice to those kids, tell their classmates not to bully those kids, but no matter what, don’t say anything that might make their classmates believe they are ok and normal.
bethree5,
Thanks for some truth in here. But look at the replies.
The folks not interested in truth are still trying to intentionally confuse you by telling you that as long as they can search on the internet and find a lesson that is stupid and silly that is ever used in a classroom, that justifies banning it. The snowperson lesson is perhaps silly, not dangerous or inappropriate. The story about the crayon is lovely, not dangerous, as these folks’ innuendo would have readers believe.
My kid has done silly – even stupid – lessons connected with those “fundamental” (thus supposedly perfect) history, math, and reading books. I guess we need to ban the teaching of history, math and reading now?
The discussion we should be having when these folks keep linking to right wing twitter feeds that demonizes a hapless educator or links to some silly lesson plan with a snowperson they found on the internet is:
If we can find a silly and nonsensical history lesson download or math lesson download online that is used in any school in America, does that give scaremongers the right to ban the teaching of math and history?
Or is that standard only applied to DEI lessons and lessons that would help trans kids not be bullied because their classmates parents don’t believe they have the right to exist?
The real cancel culture has always been the purveyors of propaganda who are outraged if a parent objects when a specific book with racist passages is being taught (“censorship!”) but who want to pass laws forbidding teachers from saying or teaching anything that normalizes the families and kids that those purveyors of propaganda keep telling us are not normal and not okay.
The discussion these dishonest folks want is the discussion we are giving them: “Here is a stupid snowman lesson. Prove to me it is a worthwhile lesson.” Which is as valid as my linking to a stupid history lesson I find online and demanding everyone “prove” to me that it is worthwhile. What is the point of that? Nothing except to push their false narratives and double standards.
There is flawed material and silly material being used in education everywhere. But that flawed and silly material is ignored as irrelevant when it is something that the far right approves of, and it is magnified as so dangerous it justifies banning and censorship when it is something the far right hates.
We saw that with the 1619 project, too.
Having the discussion on these dishonest folks’ terms is unwinnable.
Ask them whether teaching history or math should be banned because someone found a stupid or silly worksheet that some school uses? They will shut up fast. Good thing no one ever challenges the false and hypocritical premises that their entire argument rests upon.
While I have much empathy for NYC PS parent, I have learned that misinformationists CHOOSE to spread the lies proliferated by their peer group. They seem to feed on long, passionate arguments and obvious anger. I no longer engage except to point out a few undeniable facts, then I go about my business. You are not going to change flerp’s beliefs because he drinks the QAid for which there is no antidote. He has no idea what goes on in elementary schools, but by googling, he becomes an expert. Anyone with common sense can see through that…so them the misinformationists hang themselves.
Did I write something that’s not true? If so, feel free to identify it specifically. If not, no need to reply.
Dr. Griffith,
Thank you so much for your wise words — I will remember them.
Sorry, I have a migraine today. …so let the misinformationists hang themselves.