What was the intent?
To try to get the child the support they need, perhaps counseling or medical aid?
To try to beat some sense into the kid so that they properly conform to their gender role?
To out teachers that show sympathy to trans kids, punish them and replace them with hate-filled shit stains.
That doesn’t answer the question at all, nor does that make any sense. Again, informing parents may or may not have a child’s best interest as the intent.
I wonder though, how can you tell if a child is trans through observation?
Here is an article about the proposed Indiana law: https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2023/01/18/bill-would-force-schools-to-tell-parents-about-students-pronouns-gender-identities/#:~:text=“Senate%20Bill%20354%20simply%20requires,at%20birth%2C”%20Raatz%20said.
" Buried in proposed school accreditation legislation authored by Sen. Jeff Raatz, R-Richmond, is a provision that mandates teachers and school employees to report to the school if a student indicates that they want to change their “name, attire, pronoun, title, or word to identify the student in a manner that is inconsistent with the student’s biological sex at birth.”
School employees would also have to report if a student expresses having “conflicted feelings about … or difficulty handling or coping with” their gender identity or gender expression. The student’s parents must be notified with that information within five days, according to the bill."
Furthermore, "The bill is additionally void of details about how school employees are supposed to report the student disclosure to the school. The measure simply states that employees should make the report “in a manner prescribed by the school.”
The bill says that school psychologists, nurses, social workers and counselors are not required “to violate a federal law or regulation.” It does not carve out consequences for school employees who refuse to comply with the bill’s provisions."
if it was a simple case of the teacher directly informing the parents that their offspring wishes to use a different name and/or gender preference it would be one thing, but this proposal goes far beyond that.
Yeah that’s pretty fucked up.
Imagine a scenario (and it isn’t that hard to do) where a teacher is reprimanded for not reporting to the school board that a student that was biologically female at birth was dressing and acting a bit butch, or that a student that was biologically male at birth seemed and/or dressed “like a girl”. That are school boards packed with the far right that would love any excuse to rid the system of sympathetic teachers and replace them with people that think like them.
I don’t see that as primarily an attack on teachers. I see that as making sure a child whose parents are bigoted and unsupportive doesn’t have the ability to find a sympathetic teacher for guidance.
Wait, excuse me, let me translate that into conservative brainworm speak: “We will protect the child by defending the sanctity of their home environment, and reinforcing the authority of the parents to always do what they believe to be in the child’s best interests without interference from any outside party.”
Getting rid of the “wrong” teachers is just an added bonus.
Well, sure. I just don’t see it as the primary driver. Keeping the kids handcuffed to their parents with no paths to freedom is the main objective.
Let me guess. This only applies to the public schools?
Sure, so long as what the parents believe is in the childs best interest is to beat the “girl” out of them. But if instead the parents decide in consultation with medical professionals that transition therapy might be best, then that’s child abuse and their parental authority must be immediately revoked.
You could even say “headcuffed”.
Yes, if I’m reading that correctly this Florida senator wants to take the CIS children away from any households where they might be exposed to ‘The Trans’.
Sport your trans child and you risk having your other kids taken by the state. I consider that the same kind of terrorism they employed with the border families.
Sorry, that should be ‘support your trans child’, hope there wasn’t any confusion.
I just assumed you used the definition of “sport” as in “display”; “He was sporting a brand new hat.” In that case your post made sense.
I’m not a big fan of writing long multi paragraph posts, or engaging in long back and forths, so sometimes I worry that I’m too cryptic for the medium.
Anytime someone is wondering what I mean, they’re welcome to ask in the thread or PM me.
For the record, I think human rights are human rights, and we can’t ethically or legally erase non-binary gender or orientation people any more than any of the other disadvantaged people that have had to fight for those rights.
I also think non-binary gender and orientation in entirely consistent with how we understand early human embryonic development.
I actually don’t think its just the exposure that they are worried about. I think that they worried that the parents will transition all of their other kids as well. Remember conservatives don’t view this as something that is done because of the needs of the individual child. They view it as something that the parent invent and inflict on their child to score points with their woke friends.
The more I read and hear about this the more I think the ultimate goal of the conservatives; is to make life so onerous for LGBTQ in their respective states. That we all get so fed up with all of their shit, and we all pull up stakes and leave. You know move back to the larger east and west coast cities and out of the “heartland” letting it return to its original feudal state. Just like it was 30 years ago.
…1993?
After the red states expel everyone, new LGBTQ kids will of course keep showing up in the next generation, because there’s little if any heritable component (either genetically or culturally) to any LGBTQ identity or orientation. So I guess they will attribute the next generation of LGBTQ kids to… video games? Vaccines? Insufficient piety? Liberals running secret underground drag shows in red states?