I think there's another angle of this that needs to be considered. Go back to what Eliza was talking about in the last Informed Dissent podcast and her most recent substack post on the extreme fear young trans-identified young people are feeling due to a combination of the phobia indoctrination created by gender activists and orgs, online spaces, and the language of the Trump EOs. Now imagine you're a teacher with 2 or 3 panicking trans-identifying students, kids you genuinely like or are concerned about even if you completely disagree with what they believe about themselves or their ideas about sex and gender. Or panicking parents coming to you who have been manipulated and terrified into believing that their child's life is now at risk. It's not the school board or their policy - whatever that policy is - in the classroom trying to manage this day in and day out. What message and support can be sent to teachers wanting to emotionally support these children without feeding into the hysteria and phobia indoctrination or saying things about gender they know aren't true? You can agree with the content of the executive orders and completely disagree with parents and schools affirming gender confusion while still recognizing the deep distress and fears of these kids and their families and want to respond in a sensitive and careful way so they feel safe in your classroom even if their fears are based on complete misinformation. It's an incredibly challenging position for teachers to be in.
We plan to talk about that this week! But, yeah, someone needs to put out some official messaging about this. I guess that should be us. Very hard to get the book done with all this constantly breaking news and adjustment.
Speaking as a reader and ID listener, I'm excited read your book when it is ready, however much time that takes. For now though, given how fast things are moving, I'm very glad that you and the other writers in this area are focusing on helping us understand what's happening now.
Please consider looking up the NIH page on Piaget's 4 stages of child development so the discussion can include the fact that "wrong body since birth" does not fit anywhere into long accepted child development.
This is so thoughtful and important. I, too, was really struck by what Eliza said and wrote. I am very worried about the punitive nature of implementation, too. Thank you for weighing in.
"I should have added that the way to support these kids is to leave them alone. Make sure nobody beats the crap out of them, but also don’t call attention to them. They’re just variations of boys and girls. They’re fine."
So, it's been a long time since I've been in public schools. But, I have a couple questions on this:
1. Is it adequate to simply ensure kids aren't being beaten half to death? Is it okay or desirable to allow relentless bullying when it doesn't get physical? And if not how do we intervene without taking a stand on the issue at the heart of the conflict? When those kids threaten suicide because of how miserable they are, how then do we go about "leaving them alone" without, again, taking some kind of a position on what they believe to be the cause of their distress?
2. How do the rights of parents fit in here? If one parent demands their child be allowed to live as the other sex (let's keep things simple and assume this is a social transition only AND that the student prefers to use a private restroom and changing area) when another parent demands that their child not be forced to call that student by their preferred pronouns and nickname, even if legally changed? When there is substantial concern about a social contagion, how can a school avoid other students catching it without excluding those students who already have?
This is such a complex issue. But looking back on my own school years, I see many kids who were "left alone" to deal with a whole variety of things (though not really with this one, since it wasn't a "thing" then). Many did well. A significant minority did not, and ended up incarcerated, addicted, or chronically mentally ill. Are those lives just the price that must be paid so others can live? If not, how can we possibly meet each person where they are AND remain totally neutral?
You have many excellent questions--which can't be addressed in a three paragraph email to the superintendents who ignore me anyway. How do we exist in a world in which many people have come to accept beliefs and demand cultural changes that are based on a fantastical idea not shared by others? We don't get to find out because instead we're getting the thunderous wrath of Trump. In the meantime, though, we can create politically-neutral zones, and those of us writing about the subject can explain ways to help kids feel safe and secure in the midst of an environment that they're being told is putting them at risk of suicide. That's the number one thing that has to stop.
The available statistics show that it is the children who "transition" by taking hormones and having healthy body parts amputated who have a greater risk of attempting or committing suicide going forward. There is nothing that schools can do to stop children from being told by various actors that if they do not "transition", they will likely kill themselves. Some detransitioners have said that they never thought of suicide until their therapists told them they needed to "transition" or they would likely kill themselves!
Quick other note that I don't think the schools are generally the main ones telling kids they are at risk of suicide. My feeling is that the main problems there are peers and advocacy orgs. Often this happens online first and then comes into the school via peers. So then the school is seeing kids who are at the point of threatening or even attempting suicide. As a mental health worker I feel I need to point out here that, while we often believe we can see some of these treats or attempts as attention-seeking, or unserious, the fact is that a large of evidence shows that even us pros are notoriously bad at determining who is actually at risk of completed suicide and when. So, even "unserious" talk or attempts must be addressed. Because two of the biggest risks for completed suicide are prior threats and prior attempts regardless of percieved severity, even though most people who threaten or attempt won't die from suicide. So, then, the schools are placed in the position of dealing with students who come in at risk for suicide AND who attribute it to gender AND tell their peers. We know that both gender dysphoria and suicidality are social contagions. So even if the school says and does nothing, these things will spread in any place where kids are exposed to other kids. I think sometimes schools actually get an unfair share of blame for this social spread. Regardless, again, there will certainly be kids, at least for the next decade plus, who will come to school already at higher suicide risk and already attributing that to gender dysphoria. And it seems like a giant lawsuit waiting to happen for a school to simply ignore it. But, of course, their interventions can also feed the disorder.
So now again I'm at this point: we desperately need more research in order to find a legitimate evidence-based gold standard for gender dysphoria (and all the associated mental health concerns bpd traits, suicidality, eating disorders, complex trauma...) so that there is some solid guidance we can offer on how to help. In the meantime, though, we are left with trying to find what's best for the individual, and probably with more deference to parent preference than we otherwise would. So how to deal with this when the fact is that there is NO strong evidence-based, apolitical guidelines for schools or treaters to follow?
Understood, and I do so agree on the importance of explaining and politically neutral zones of expression. Although it seems increasingly difficult to separate politics from morals, science, culture, etc. (I noticed this with the increase in reports of estrangement around this election. At this point more than any other in my lifetime, politics is a proxy for overall worldview and view of other people, as well as moral views and acceptance of science.) I guess I do wonder, when trying to picture myself as a thoughtful school admin receiving such a letter, if one reason for silence (though certainly not the only one) is that it does seem like you might as well be nicely asking them to please consider having no chronic absenteeism in their district and having every child graduate and each child have above-average test scores. Because, you see, we know those are all associated with better outcomes. So why haven't you done this yesterday, you silly school person? Just have every student show up and do well! I can imagine that I wouldn't respond to such a request because as you noted it's complex and too much for a few paragraphs.
I feel like you have valid concerns/questions here. It is such a complex issue, as you say. I do think that's why we need an unyielding baseline reality to work with, which is, and always has been, that sex is real and it matters. The bottom line can't keep moving around and be in question, or we will not be able to help the vulnerable. It's so important to keep on insisting on reality.
School staff do not have the expertise to deal with children who threaten suicide, unless there is a licensed psychotherapist on the staff who can counsel such students. What do school staff do with other students who threaten suicide?
Under the two relevant Executive Orders, it is not up to parents to consent to having their children treated by school staff as if they were of the opposite sex, except arguably parents could consent to their child being referred to by a nickname rather than the child's legal name. Under Title IX, sex, not gender identity, is the criterion for all school policies and practices relating to the sex of children (and of staff!).
Parents of a distressed child do not have the right to dictate what other people (students or staff) do, if it would compel the speech of other children and staff, or violate the rights of children and staff to single-sex intimate spaces, single-sex athletics, and equal opportunities to access school services without regard to sex. That's what Title IX is all about!
No bullying of any kind of any child for any reason should be tolerated by school staff. In some schools it is the kids who refuse to use other kids' "preferred pronouns" who get bullied by other kids and "reprimanded" by school staff -- in effect, bullied by school staff.
If they comply with the relevant executive orders and federal civil rights laws such as Title IX, schools cannot "remain totally neutral" if they receive any federal funding, which virtually all public schools do, and which some private schools do. School districts will have to decide whether to comply or whether to not comply and thereby lose federal funding. The power of the federal purse is going to convince most school districts, even in the bluest localities, to comply with the requirements of the executive orders. It will not happen overnight. We are going to see a very serious game of chicken between some school districts and several agencies of the federal govt that provide different types of funding to schools.
It is going to take months and even years for details to get sorted out by court cases which no doubt will be brought, but
You have some excellent points about the EO and Title IX. I would add, though, that your first line about how schools do not have the expertise to deal with psychiatric problems, is an issue with Title 1 and IDEA, and Sec 504-all of which are legislation passed by Congress that cannot be overruled with EOs. And any substantial Congressional action looks unlikely right now, to say the least.
The issue here is this: if in fact gender dysphoria is a psychiatric illness, as I believe it to be, then it must qualify as a disability under the ADA, IDEA and so on. And if it qualifies as a disability, schools (and employers, and public accommodations of all kinds) are required by law to provide reasonable accommodation. I am not a legal expert but am not aware of any current SC cases (since this SC is clearly willing and eager to throw out precedent, I don't think we can count on old rulings for guidance) in which the extent of what is reasonable in this case is directly tested against the Trump interpretation of Title IX and certainly the EOs.
The other glaring problem I see here is one that we often gloss over in this debate because it's prevalence is overstated. But it is very relevant here. And that is the fact that genuinely intersex children do actually exist and must also be accommodated. And that fact makes the administration's unscientific and unclear definition of sex (who produces which gamete "from the moment of conception") a big problem. Since gonads are non-existent at conception, the only way I can make that definition make any sense would be that they are thinking of sex chromosomes since those are the only things that differentiate sexes at conception. But, of course, sex chromosomes do not always line up with secondary sex characteristics, and some individuals with chromosomal variations (xxy, etc) do not have functional gonads and so do not produce gametes at all. So, they must be accommodated in public spaces. And then that accommodation will complicate the accommodation of kids with psychiatric illness affecting gender identity, and with a variation of gender presentations.
The final big problem I see, highlighted by the comments here about child development and also about "malpractice" in gender affirming care, is that, inconvenient though this may be for all of us, there is no "gold standard" for gender dysphoria. That is, while gender affirmation is clearly not evidence based, neither is ANY approach to gender dysphoria. This was highlighted in the Cass Review and unfortunately often overlooked. For schools, that leads to another thorny problem: if there is no evidence based, consensus recommendation, then it becomes quite difficult for them to have any leg to stand on in refusing to implement the recommendations of ANY licensed professional. As you pointed out, schools are generally not psychology pros. So, without a strong evidence based consensus, they are in very dicey territory by denying the recommendations of professionals for any given child.
My point isn't that Lisa is wrong, at all. But I do wonder if part of the reason stuff like this is ignored-though I don't deny there are other big reasons-is that the implementation is far less simple than Lisa's letter would suggest.
The doctors and psychologists have to take responsibility and admit this is malpractice. The EO effects on hospitals will cause doctors to do some thinking.
That is highly unlikely unless and until there is some proven treatment for gender dysphoria that actually works. Until then, "malpractice" is going to be pretty hard to get consensus around. This is a common problem with psych disorders that are under-researched and generally not popular causes with the public. There IS no gold standard, so any attempts to help, no matter how misguided, are seen as equally valid or invalid. This is a big problem with the treatment of addiction as well. Even opioid addiction treatment, for which medication is the gold standard is still held back by this problem. And like addiction, gender dysphoria is even more complicated because (as with all psych diagnoses) it is a rather arbitrary categorization that includes people who share certain characteristics but who also have a wide variety of other psych issues, trauma, social and environmental concerns and so on that all affect the treatment success of any approach for any given individual.
Kids can be taught about subcultures. In years past they would have learned about this without demanding, or being told, that their subculture would conquer all.
In years past, not all kids who didn't do well, did so because of bullies. Not all issues or problems are due to other people. Even if other people are a problem, or are perceived as such, learning that there are limits to what one can force them to do is a useful lesson for a non-coercive adulthood.
K-12 really is too young to introduce kids to the idea of sexual subcultures, but it's been forced upon us by the people these kids encountered online, and by the badly educated activists who were given access to teacher ed programs some years back.
Kids may be distraught to learn they've joined a subculture. They are small in numbers compared to the numbers we'll see if we coddle people today as to what their situation is.
High school students could be taught about social contagions. Also, about sex stereotypes and how no one does completely or should conform to them. Health classes and classes on sex would be the best place for that. I disagree that high school students are too young to be taught about sexual subcultures, although there is the danger that some teachers will in effect promote BDSM or inject their personal biases against homosexuality (or even against heterosexuality) into such a discussion. It is difficult to teach about "safe sex" without discussing sexual subcultures.
Yes the BDSM risk is exactly what I mean but in truth the transing issue is already part of that. In men it's coming from sissy porn and that's a sub/dom subculture.
So if students are going to be taught in a neutral way, not a way that has teachers responsible for figuring out who "needs" to know, then they'd all be told about this ... and it just feels like a bit too much sexualization.
The trans-ing problem is already one of oversexualization. The solution to helping kids understand what they've been caught up in doesn't seem much better to me, but truth is truth.
Unfortunately, its also been forced on teachers by activist parents. I dealt with all sorts of inappropriate material being brought to me with the expectation I was going to read it to the class, and parents coming in at next week's drop off, inspecting whether I had the book prominently displayed. I played all kinds of tricks, moving the books to the closet after the parents left. For some reason, the books about "two dads" always had quasi-sex scenes in the pictures. I taped those pages together, skipped them, so the child could go home and say I read it.
Not to stereotype but did a parent in a female-anyone relationship ever bring you a two dads book with a quasi sex scene? Sounds like a joke is in the making--the two moms book might feature a u-haul. All jokes told by my own gay friends aside, book authors know their audience or write what they know, so what's up?
Thank you for doing what you do, as is said in activist land. Oh I know. But moving those books to the closet was the right thing to do.
Sexual exploration has to come from inside a kid, not from outside imposed on them. I will die on that hill. Also part of the hill: for them to feel discomfort or uncertainty is fine and good. Nowhere is it written they have to train for this part of life like it's a badge to earn.
In the years before I retired in 2016, there was a quite good series of trainings for early childhood teachers on how to help children give their opinion and back it up with logical observations. I believe the educational complex in the US, mostly left-leaning, went overboard after Trump banned transsexuals in the military in 2017. I grew up protesting (peacefully and actually often in silence) the Vietnam War in early 1970s. My parents and family all denounced the violent bomb makers in the SDS. They wrecked my town, Madison, Wisconsin. And the plate glass windows they shattered were stores owned by independent merchants on State Street. The trans movement fulfills the Left's desire for a Vietnam to protest. Additionally, I'll say that I carefully directed the activities in my classrooms such that there were no "boys' toys" or activities segregated by sex. At the beginning of the year, I assigned the activity groups, to avoid cliques and sex stereotyping. I did not have "dress up" and used the lice problems in Brooklyn schools as my excuse. Oddly, a few "feminist" moms asked me why I didn't have the dolls and dress up stuff they remembered from their Kindergarten experience. My Pretend Play area was Farmers Market, Veterinarian's Office, Space Station and Jane Goodall's nature center. These young early childhood teachers pretending to be psychiatrists looking for the "trans kids to affirm" are out of their minds, riddled with sexism. I cannot be more disgusted with Cynthia Nixon, who basically admits the social contagion in her family.
Agree that "making sure that nobody beats the crap out of them" is a low bar. The problem of how to protect and support kids already caught in this pseudoscientific cult without legitimizing it further (I don't think we ultimately want to remain "neutral" on this, as the stakes of the path to medicalization are too high) is real, and I don't have an answer. If kids who are only socially transitioned are moved to desist, it will be a good thing, but what about the kids who are already medically damaged, possibly irreversibly so, and whose parents have also bought into the cult and will have a very hard time admitting they made a huge mistake? Schools should certainly refrain from teaching ideology and pseudoscience, but they also cannot put kids already on the trans train in a position where their identity (however fictional and dangerous in the long run) is going to be mocked.
I cannot imagine how kids already on the trans train can avoid being further confused and demoralized. If adults have told children that they are something that objectively they are not, whether it is that they were born in the wrong body or that they are the smartest/fastest/whatever children in the world, being brought back in touch with reality is going to be tough. These children are going to need exploratory therapy more than ever to assist them in untangling their feelings and becoming moored to reality again. As for being mocked, this is exactly why schools need to educate students about social contagions, so that all students come to understand how social media and peer pressure have affected some students.
I taught in public schools in Brooklyn for 17 years. We are trained to teach children not to bully and harass others. The 4 children I taught who ideated being the opposite sex all stopped after a few weeks, or for one, about 6 months. There were causes such as desire to differentiate from a same sex sibling or parents going through a high conflict divorce. I got away with saying I can't remember new names and I can't let girls stand on the toilet, trying to urinate standing up. With young children, its not that hard to change the subject. However, in liberal cities we have to deal with the mass brainwashing that started in Pre-K. I don't know what I'd do if I wasn't retired. We simply do not have the instructional time to have incessant classroom discussions on this. The psychologists let this get completely out of control. As a trans widow, I saw my then husband do all kinds of panicking and manic behaviors. At least confident teachers can cite the executive orders. I've heard that Kindergarteners at PS 107 change their names and pronouns all over the place, week to week. I can't stand how the teachers unions embraced this.
I love your letter. I wish we could just be blunt though:
No child is born with the need to be chemically and surgically altered to appear the opposite sex in order to have any semblance of happiness or peace of mind or avoid torment. This is an unprovable, unfalsifiable, extreme notion that requires blind faith, and has no place being taught in public schools.
Lying to children by telling them they are the opposite of the sex they are is wrong and abusive.
Policies that encourage children as young as 11 to be chemically and surgically altered to appear the opposite sex, but be less healthy, are also wrong and abusive.
You don't have to be a Trump fan (I am not) to know that children should not be lied to, drugged and have healthy body parts removed simply because they express distress.
Let all of the non-conforming, sensitive autistic, traumatized, anxious, troubled and quirky children live in their healthy bodies, and help them cope with the difficulties of life through encouragement, emotional support and policies that prevent bullying by others and encourage acceptance of all types of people.
For example, if boys feel uncomfortable playing sports with other boys, help all boys to be more accepting and welcoming and help the unique boys have confidence to deal with criticism and ignorance. Don't put those boys on girls sports teams.
Detransitioners are proof that it is wrong to push children into thinking of themselves as the opposite sex, and more wrong to medically alter their bodies to appear the opposite sex.
What's happening to children our public schools is a medical and social scandal of epic proportions and, frankly, all of those who believe children can "be trans" have been indoctrinated into a cult.
-- But I guess this wouldn't go over too well. Maybe I'll say it at the next CEC2 Meeting. They don't listen to my words anyway. Maybe it will wake one person up from all this!
In some ways, I think it doesn't matter what the text of the letters are. The recipients project their own version of your "hate speech" onto it. I'd send pictures of the scars and say, "really? you want children to scarify their bodies?"
Lisa, gonna be harsh here: your letter is incoherent. What is the action item? What do you want the recipient to DO (or NOT DO)? That should be in the first sentence, which should be a paragraph by itself (and the subject of the email, if emailed).
Then, supporting arguments for your case. As short as possible.
Because the recipient, if you're lucky, will devote a maximum of one minute to trying to understand what you want. They're paid (if at all) by the month, not by how slowly and carefully they read letters.
If they don't shout her down. I think the parents who know this is a cult and social contagion have to protect their kids. I remember counseling my sons not to be upset about the Catholic peers who tell them they need to learn about Jesus. I'd tell them, well, we have the same God, but no messiah. Kindly tell them we have our own traditions, thanks for your concern.
As an eighty year old gay man, who had his own struggles, growing up in mid-1950s Texas, to make sense of sex and sexuality at age twelve or so, I can't help but wonder how did countless generations of gay and lesbian kids somehow grow up to be reasonably sensible, mature, productive adults, i.e., "normal", without once hearing the word "homosexual" in school. Sure, there were lots of seriously hurtful messages resulting in real emotional confusion and pain. Often silent or implied rather than explicit, these messages were mainly from parents, peers, religious figures, or entertainment. (The gay character always had to die before the end of the movie or novel.) I really don't think anything that might have come from school would have made the least bit of difference.
The one thing that might make a difference is for parents to make it clear to non-conforming kids that God loves them the way they are. He made them the way they are, and He doesn't make mistakes, much less make junk. And their parents do, too. Anyone who tells them any different is an ignorant moron.
I am 77 and a lesbian. There was almost no mention of homosexuality at my Chicago public high school, except I do remember reading in an honors English class the short story "In Greenwich, There are Many Gravelled Walks", and how no one in the class picked up on the fact that the male protagonist was gay, which made our female English teacher express gentle (kind!) amusement at how sheltered we all were. Everyone did realize that two of the women PE teachers were gay, and that was just accepted. Nowadays virtually all high school kids have some idea that homosexuality exists, and are aware that some of their classmates are or likely are homosexual.
As a parent I would want my child’s teacher to stick to the subject matter, and if a child needs counseling then see the counselor and maybe speak to the parents. Teachers are not therapists. They have enough to do and they do not have the training or credentials to address children’s emotional problems. It is natural to care about students wellbeing and want to comfort them but that risks shortchanging other students and can lead to burnout. Student mental health is not the teacher’s responsibility or bailiwick. And I see a disturbing number of teachers who identify with students. You are the adult in loco parentis, not a peer.
I love your letter, and especially the last few lines, and while sadly, infuriatingly, tragically...you are probably wasting your time, it all needs to be said, unfortunately on eternal repeat, until sanity returns. Why this is so, why this has been allowed to happen, why so many have lost all critical thinking, I will never fully understand no matter how much I continue to study it.
I would like DOEs & all humans responsible & blessed with the opportunities to educate, protect, & nourish children to understand that the social engineering of creating more than a generation of disassociated, disconnected, dysfunctional, dis regulated humans is a crime against humanity. It’s been an enormous win for the 20 or so global transhumanists who own 99% of our resources. Congratulations you turds on a stick.
Great Leadership and planned ignoring in school setting .. the TRAs are not the only ones who can call no debate and refuse to engage or shout the loudest to drown others out … if some kids are so far gone they need therapeutic help this is not a schools job … if schools are great places of learning kids will want to learn .. parents will want their kids there and good teachers will want jobs there … maybe for a while there will be two tiers .. those schools which teach material reality and respect single sex spaces and those that don’t .. I know which one I’d be sending my kids too
Great use of your impeccable communication skills. Thank you for keeping on! You are a tremendous value to parents and children who do not have the platform and voice you have. Greatly appreciated!
I'm curious, Lisa, if you have any concrete ideas on how schools can avoid conditioning students one way or another when they each come from a family with a different view. Those views may be slightly or radically different. But as the "parents' rights" movements have pushed for each of these families to have more of a say in the details of what and how their kids learn, two questions emerge:
1. How should a school determine how to educate kids to be employable critical thinkers when their parents have very different views on how this should happen AND are becoming less and less tolerant for any deviation by classroom teachers from the parent's personal philosophy; and
2. How is it possible to "leave [kids] alone" when they, the students, are together in a semi-closed setting for hours each day? The bathroom issue is a good example. How to accommodate each family's view of how to leave their student alone when one wants their student to live as the other sex and be referred to as such and another wants their student to have no exposure to such people or ideas at all?
Your letter isn't wrong or bad, but I am struggling to imagine a way for a public school district, especially a large one with significant diversity, to actually implement this. The old adage "your rights end where mine begin" becomes useless when each person has a different idea of what rights even are, how to interpret them, and what is "truth". I am curious if you have any ideas yourself, or if you have seen any successful models in action, of how to resolve these conflicts when families disagree without being accused of "indoctrinating" somebody but also without separating children based on the religious and political and social views of their families (and even that, I think, wouldn't be possible as I don't think most families would fit neatly into the same category on everything).
Finally, I would posit that given the blatantly religious and scientifically imprecise if not completely incorrect language in the EO on transgender issues, I see no way for schools to implement political policies like that without taking a stand-whether for or against-that is, well, political. I have already commented at some length on the way the administration shot arguments about truth and precision in the foot by adding fetal personhood language (and possibly by failing to research the embryonic sex differentiation progress before doing so) so will not do so again. I will say, though, that when the policy is nakedly and intentionally political, there is no way I can think of for schools to avoid being equally political in implementing them, since even a word for word agreement is still...Political.
Tl,dr is, I guess, that your letter might as well ask schools to prepare grads to implement world peace in the next year. Great idea, but also probably impossible.
Libs of Tik Tok have caught some evidence suggesting that school leaders don't yet feel the need to respond to any pressure applied by parents who aren't happy about the curriculum for Kindergarteners reportedly containing depictions of bondage gear . . . https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1889762521701130349/video/1 I just couldn't believe my ears (and Tik Tok has been guilty of exaggerated claims and lies before), but apparently the book exists and is as described: https://thecoronadonews.com/2023/09/coronado-public-library-faces-culture-war-over-books-pride-event/ How can they possibily think responding to these parents concerns in this dismissive way is going to make anything better, let alone reduce the possibility of resentments being vented against children and families who believe in transgender ideology?
I have another perspective on the phobia indoctrination. It just came to me today. So many of the AGP later "transitioners" go on and on about safety when they're out crossdressing, violating boundaries in women's lavatories. So many also were abused in early life. It occurs to me the older ones have promoted this indoctrination, which stems from an unconscious memory of being physically or sexually abused.
All religious parents should be writing to the school boards to say this "training" promotes disrespect of religious freedom.
I would send this letter exactly as is to my school board and State Department of Education. DEI is wildly popular in our local lefty district, with large pep rallies occurring on occasion at board meetings. Needless to say, the board contains not a single white person for the first time ever, and are here to stay… Nevertheless, the African American school librarian who I voted for in ‘22 was passed over by the electorate for a self-styled literal man in black (shirt & pants w/ white tie type of uniform) who organized groups to stand on street corners to recall our Democratic mayor while trump flag truck convoys were driving around town.
Yes, I will keep writing. Here, we’re beholden to admirers of California government and policy, and the opposite camp features a bunch of… ahem… goobers like Tom Horne.
I think there's another angle of this that needs to be considered. Go back to what Eliza was talking about in the last Informed Dissent podcast and her most recent substack post on the extreme fear young trans-identified young people are feeling due to a combination of the phobia indoctrination created by gender activists and orgs, online spaces, and the language of the Trump EOs. Now imagine you're a teacher with 2 or 3 panicking trans-identifying students, kids you genuinely like or are concerned about even if you completely disagree with what they believe about themselves or their ideas about sex and gender. Or panicking parents coming to you who have been manipulated and terrified into believing that their child's life is now at risk. It's not the school board or their policy - whatever that policy is - in the classroom trying to manage this day in and day out. What message and support can be sent to teachers wanting to emotionally support these children without feeding into the hysteria and phobia indoctrination or saying things about gender they know aren't true? You can agree with the content of the executive orders and completely disagree with parents and schools affirming gender confusion while still recognizing the deep distress and fears of these kids and their families and want to respond in a sensitive and careful way so they feel safe in your classroom even if their fears are based on complete misinformation. It's an incredibly challenging position for teachers to be in.
We plan to talk about that this week! But, yeah, someone needs to put out some official messaging about this. I guess that should be us. Very hard to get the book done with all this constantly breaking news and adjustment.
Speaking as a reader and ID listener, I'm excited read your book when it is ready, however much time that takes. For now though, given how fast things are moving, I'm very glad that you and the other writers in this area are focusing on helping us understand what's happening now.
Please consider looking up the NIH page on Piaget's 4 stages of child development so the discussion can include the fact that "wrong body since birth" does not fit anywhere into long accepted child development.
This is so thoughtful and important. I, too, was really struck by what Eliza said and wrote. I am very worried about the punitive nature of implementation, too. Thank you for weighing in.
Same here..
100%!
"I should have added that the way to support these kids is to leave them alone. Make sure nobody beats the crap out of them, but also don’t call attention to them. They’re just variations of boys and girls. They’re fine."
So, it's been a long time since I've been in public schools. But, I have a couple questions on this:
1. Is it adequate to simply ensure kids aren't being beaten half to death? Is it okay or desirable to allow relentless bullying when it doesn't get physical? And if not how do we intervene without taking a stand on the issue at the heart of the conflict? When those kids threaten suicide because of how miserable they are, how then do we go about "leaving them alone" without, again, taking some kind of a position on what they believe to be the cause of their distress?
2. How do the rights of parents fit in here? If one parent demands their child be allowed to live as the other sex (let's keep things simple and assume this is a social transition only AND that the student prefers to use a private restroom and changing area) when another parent demands that their child not be forced to call that student by their preferred pronouns and nickname, even if legally changed? When there is substantial concern about a social contagion, how can a school avoid other students catching it without excluding those students who already have?
This is such a complex issue. But looking back on my own school years, I see many kids who were "left alone" to deal with a whole variety of things (though not really with this one, since it wasn't a "thing" then). Many did well. A significant minority did not, and ended up incarcerated, addicted, or chronically mentally ill. Are those lives just the price that must be paid so others can live? If not, how can we possibly meet each person where they are AND remain totally neutral?
You have many excellent questions--which can't be addressed in a three paragraph email to the superintendents who ignore me anyway. How do we exist in a world in which many people have come to accept beliefs and demand cultural changes that are based on a fantastical idea not shared by others? We don't get to find out because instead we're getting the thunderous wrath of Trump. In the meantime, though, we can create politically-neutral zones, and those of us writing about the subject can explain ways to help kids feel safe and secure in the midst of an environment that they're being told is putting them at risk of suicide. That's the number one thing that has to stop.
The available statistics show that it is the children who "transition" by taking hormones and having healthy body parts amputated who have a greater risk of attempting or committing suicide going forward. There is nothing that schools can do to stop children from being told by various actors that if they do not "transition", they will likely kill themselves. Some detransitioners have said that they never thought of suicide until their therapists told them they needed to "transition" or they would likely kill themselves!
She is not parroting that claim.
Quick other note that I don't think the schools are generally the main ones telling kids they are at risk of suicide. My feeling is that the main problems there are peers and advocacy orgs. Often this happens online first and then comes into the school via peers. So then the school is seeing kids who are at the point of threatening or even attempting suicide. As a mental health worker I feel I need to point out here that, while we often believe we can see some of these treats or attempts as attention-seeking, or unserious, the fact is that a large of evidence shows that even us pros are notoriously bad at determining who is actually at risk of completed suicide and when. So, even "unserious" talk or attempts must be addressed. Because two of the biggest risks for completed suicide are prior threats and prior attempts regardless of percieved severity, even though most people who threaten or attempt won't die from suicide. So, then, the schools are placed in the position of dealing with students who come in at risk for suicide AND who attribute it to gender AND tell their peers. We know that both gender dysphoria and suicidality are social contagions. So even if the school says and does nothing, these things will spread in any place where kids are exposed to other kids. I think sometimes schools actually get an unfair share of blame for this social spread. Regardless, again, there will certainly be kids, at least for the next decade plus, who will come to school already at higher suicide risk and already attributing that to gender dysphoria. And it seems like a giant lawsuit waiting to happen for a school to simply ignore it. But, of course, their interventions can also feed the disorder.
So now again I'm at this point: we desperately need more research in order to find a legitimate evidence-based gold standard for gender dysphoria (and all the associated mental health concerns bpd traits, suicidality, eating disorders, complex trauma...) so that there is some solid guidance we can offer on how to help. In the meantime, though, we are left with trying to find what's best for the individual, and probably with more deference to parent preference than we otherwise would. So how to deal with this when the fact is that there is NO strong evidence-based, apolitical guidelines for schools or treaters to follow?
Understood, and I do so agree on the importance of explaining and politically neutral zones of expression. Although it seems increasingly difficult to separate politics from morals, science, culture, etc. (I noticed this with the increase in reports of estrangement around this election. At this point more than any other in my lifetime, politics is a proxy for overall worldview and view of other people, as well as moral views and acceptance of science.) I guess I do wonder, when trying to picture myself as a thoughtful school admin receiving such a letter, if one reason for silence (though certainly not the only one) is that it does seem like you might as well be nicely asking them to please consider having no chronic absenteeism in their district and having every child graduate and each child have above-average test scores. Because, you see, we know those are all associated with better outcomes. So why haven't you done this yesterday, you silly school person? Just have every student show up and do well! I can imagine that I wouldn't respond to such a request because as you noted it's complex and too much for a few paragraphs.
Beautifully stated, Lisa. Thank you.
I feel like you have valid concerns/questions here. It is such a complex issue, as you say. I do think that's why we need an unyielding baseline reality to work with, which is, and always has been, that sex is real and it matters. The bottom line can't keep moving around and be in question, or we will not be able to help the vulnerable. It's so important to keep on insisting on reality.
School staff do not have the expertise to deal with children who threaten suicide, unless there is a licensed psychotherapist on the staff who can counsel such students. What do school staff do with other students who threaten suicide?
Under the two relevant Executive Orders, it is not up to parents to consent to having their children treated by school staff as if they were of the opposite sex, except arguably parents could consent to their child being referred to by a nickname rather than the child's legal name. Under Title IX, sex, not gender identity, is the criterion for all school policies and practices relating to the sex of children (and of staff!).
Parents of a distressed child do not have the right to dictate what other people (students or staff) do, if it would compel the speech of other children and staff, or violate the rights of children and staff to single-sex intimate spaces, single-sex athletics, and equal opportunities to access school services without regard to sex. That's what Title IX is all about!
No bullying of any kind of any child for any reason should be tolerated by school staff. In some schools it is the kids who refuse to use other kids' "preferred pronouns" who get bullied by other kids and "reprimanded" by school staff -- in effect, bullied by school staff.
If they comply with the relevant executive orders and federal civil rights laws such as Title IX, schools cannot "remain totally neutral" if they receive any federal funding, which virtually all public schools do, and which some private schools do. School districts will have to decide whether to comply or whether to not comply and thereby lose federal funding. The power of the federal purse is going to convince most school districts, even in the bluest localities, to comply with the requirements of the executive orders. It will not happen overnight. We are going to see a very serious game of chicken between some school districts and several agencies of the federal govt that provide different types of funding to schools.
It is going to take months and even years for details to get sorted out by court cases which no doubt will be brought, but
You have some excellent points about the EO and Title IX. I would add, though, that your first line about how schools do not have the expertise to deal with psychiatric problems, is an issue with Title 1 and IDEA, and Sec 504-all of which are legislation passed by Congress that cannot be overruled with EOs. And any substantial Congressional action looks unlikely right now, to say the least.
The issue here is this: if in fact gender dysphoria is a psychiatric illness, as I believe it to be, then it must qualify as a disability under the ADA, IDEA and so on. And if it qualifies as a disability, schools (and employers, and public accommodations of all kinds) are required by law to provide reasonable accommodation. I am not a legal expert but am not aware of any current SC cases (since this SC is clearly willing and eager to throw out precedent, I don't think we can count on old rulings for guidance) in which the extent of what is reasonable in this case is directly tested against the Trump interpretation of Title IX and certainly the EOs.
The other glaring problem I see here is one that we often gloss over in this debate because it's prevalence is overstated. But it is very relevant here. And that is the fact that genuinely intersex children do actually exist and must also be accommodated. And that fact makes the administration's unscientific and unclear definition of sex (who produces which gamete "from the moment of conception") a big problem. Since gonads are non-existent at conception, the only way I can make that definition make any sense would be that they are thinking of sex chromosomes since those are the only things that differentiate sexes at conception. But, of course, sex chromosomes do not always line up with secondary sex characteristics, and some individuals with chromosomal variations (xxy, etc) do not have functional gonads and so do not produce gametes at all. So, they must be accommodated in public spaces. And then that accommodation will complicate the accommodation of kids with psychiatric illness affecting gender identity, and with a variation of gender presentations.
The final big problem I see, highlighted by the comments here about child development and also about "malpractice" in gender affirming care, is that, inconvenient though this may be for all of us, there is no "gold standard" for gender dysphoria. That is, while gender affirmation is clearly not evidence based, neither is ANY approach to gender dysphoria. This was highlighted in the Cass Review and unfortunately often overlooked. For schools, that leads to another thorny problem: if there is no evidence based, consensus recommendation, then it becomes quite difficult for them to have any leg to stand on in refusing to implement the recommendations of ANY licensed professional. As you pointed out, schools are generally not psychology pros. So, without a strong evidence based consensus, they are in very dicey territory by denying the recommendations of professionals for any given child.
My point isn't that Lisa is wrong, at all. But I do wonder if part of the reason stuff like this is ignored-though I don't deny there are other big reasons-is that the implementation is far less simple than Lisa's letter would suggest.
The doctors and psychologists have to take responsibility and admit this is malpractice. The EO effects on hospitals will cause doctors to do some thinking.
That is highly unlikely unless and until there is some proven treatment for gender dysphoria that actually works. Until then, "malpractice" is going to be pretty hard to get consensus around. This is a common problem with psych disorders that are under-researched and generally not popular causes with the public. There IS no gold standard, so any attempts to help, no matter how misguided, are seen as equally valid or invalid. This is a big problem with the treatment of addiction as well. Even opioid addiction treatment, for which medication is the gold standard is still held back by this problem. And like addiction, gender dysphoria is even more complicated because (as with all psych diagnoses) it is a rather arbitrary categorization that includes people who share certain characteristics but who also have a wide variety of other psych issues, trauma, social and environmental concerns and so on that all affect the treatment success of any approach for any given individual.
Kids can be taught about subcultures. In years past they would have learned about this without demanding, or being told, that their subculture would conquer all.
In years past, not all kids who didn't do well, did so because of bullies. Not all issues or problems are due to other people. Even if other people are a problem, or are perceived as such, learning that there are limits to what one can force them to do is a useful lesson for a non-coercive adulthood.
K-12 really is too young to introduce kids to the idea of sexual subcultures, but it's been forced upon us by the people these kids encountered online, and by the badly educated activists who were given access to teacher ed programs some years back.
Kids may be distraught to learn they've joined a subculture. They are small in numbers compared to the numbers we'll see if we coddle people today as to what their situation is.
High school students could be taught about social contagions. Also, about sex stereotypes and how no one does completely or should conform to them. Health classes and classes on sex would be the best place for that. I disagree that high school students are too young to be taught about sexual subcultures, although there is the danger that some teachers will in effect promote BDSM or inject their personal biases against homosexuality (or even against heterosexuality) into such a discussion. It is difficult to teach about "safe sex" without discussing sexual subcultures.
Yes the BDSM risk is exactly what I mean but in truth the transing issue is already part of that. In men it's coming from sissy porn and that's a sub/dom subculture.
So if students are going to be taught in a neutral way, not a way that has teachers responsible for figuring out who "needs" to know, then they'd all be told about this ... and it just feels like a bit too much sexualization.
The trans-ing problem is already one of oversexualization. The solution to helping kids understand what they've been caught up in doesn't seem much better to me, but truth is truth.
Unfortunately, its also been forced on teachers by activist parents. I dealt with all sorts of inappropriate material being brought to me with the expectation I was going to read it to the class, and parents coming in at next week's drop off, inspecting whether I had the book prominently displayed. I played all kinds of tricks, moving the books to the closet after the parents left. For some reason, the books about "two dads" always had quasi-sex scenes in the pictures. I taped those pages together, skipped them, so the child could go home and say I read it.
yikes.
Not to stereotype but did a parent in a female-anyone relationship ever bring you a two dads book with a quasi sex scene? Sounds like a joke is in the making--the two moms book might feature a u-haul. All jokes told by my own gay friends aside, book authors know their audience or write what they know, so what's up?
Thank you for doing what you do, as is said in activist land. Oh I know. But moving those books to the closet was the right thing to do.
Sexual exploration has to come from inside a kid, not from outside imposed on them. I will die on that hill. Also part of the hill: for them to feel discomfort or uncertainty is fine and good. Nowhere is it written they have to train for this part of life like it's a badge to earn.
In the years before I retired in 2016, there was a quite good series of trainings for early childhood teachers on how to help children give their opinion and back it up with logical observations. I believe the educational complex in the US, mostly left-leaning, went overboard after Trump banned transsexuals in the military in 2017. I grew up protesting (peacefully and actually often in silence) the Vietnam War in early 1970s. My parents and family all denounced the violent bomb makers in the SDS. They wrecked my town, Madison, Wisconsin. And the plate glass windows they shattered were stores owned by independent merchants on State Street. The trans movement fulfills the Left's desire for a Vietnam to protest. Additionally, I'll say that I carefully directed the activities in my classrooms such that there were no "boys' toys" or activities segregated by sex. At the beginning of the year, I assigned the activity groups, to avoid cliques and sex stereotyping. I did not have "dress up" and used the lice problems in Brooklyn schools as my excuse. Oddly, a few "feminist" moms asked me why I didn't have the dolls and dress up stuff they remembered from their Kindergarten experience. My Pretend Play area was Farmers Market, Veterinarian's Office, Space Station and Jane Goodall's nature center. These young early childhood teachers pretending to be psychiatrists looking for the "trans kids to affirm" are out of their minds, riddled with sexism. I cannot be more disgusted with Cynthia Nixon, who basically admits the social contagion in her family.
Agree that "making sure that nobody beats the crap out of them" is a low bar. The problem of how to protect and support kids already caught in this pseudoscientific cult without legitimizing it further (I don't think we ultimately want to remain "neutral" on this, as the stakes of the path to medicalization are too high) is real, and I don't have an answer. If kids who are only socially transitioned are moved to desist, it will be a good thing, but what about the kids who are already medically damaged, possibly irreversibly so, and whose parents have also bought into the cult and will have a very hard time admitting they made a huge mistake? Schools should certainly refrain from teaching ideology and pseudoscience, but they also cannot put kids already on the trans train in a position where their identity (however fictional and dangerous in the long run) is going to be mocked.
I cannot imagine how kids already on the trans train can avoid being further confused and demoralized. If adults have told children that they are something that objectively they are not, whether it is that they were born in the wrong body or that they are the smartest/fastest/whatever children in the world, being brought back in touch with reality is going to be tough. These children are going to need exploratory therapy more than ever to assist them in untangling their feelings and becoming moored to reality again. As for being mocked, this is exactly why schools need to educate students about social contagions, so that all students come to understand how social media and peer pressure have affected some students.
I taught in public schools in Brooklyn for 17 years. We are trained to teach children not to bully and harass others. The 4 children I taught who ideated being the opposite sex all stopped after a few weeks, or for one, about 6 months. There were causes such as desire to differentiate from a same sex sibling or parents going through a high conflict divorce. I got away with saying I can't remember new names and I can't let girls stand on the toilet, trying to urinate standing up. With young children, its not that hard to change the subject. However, in liberal cities we have to deal with the mass brainwashing that started in Pre-K. I don't know what I'd do if I wasn't retired. We simply do not have the instructional time to have incessant classroom discussions on this. The psychologists let this get completely out of control. As a trans widow, I saw my then husband do all kinds of panicking and manic behaviors. At least confident teachers can cite the executive orders. I've heard that Kindergarteners at PS 107 change their names and pronouns all over the place, week to week. I can't stand how the teachers unions embraced this.
Those couple of sentences really say it all!
I love your letter. I wish we could just be blunt though:
No child is born with the need to be chemically and surgically altered to appear the opposite sex in order to have any semblance of happiness or peace of mind or avoid torment. This is an unprovable, unfalsifiable, extreme notion that requires blind faith, and has no place being taught in public schools.
Lying to children by telling them they are the opposite of the sex they are is wrong and abusive.
Policies that encourage children as young as 11 to be chemically and surgically altered to appear the opposite sex, but be less healthy, are also wrong and abusive.
You don't have to be a Trump fan (I am not) to know that children should not be lied to, drugged and have healthy body parts removed simply because they express distress.
Let all of the non-conforming, sensitive autistic, traumatized, anxious, troubled and quirky children live in their healthy bodies, and help them cope with the difficulties of life through encouragement, emotional support and policies that prevent bullying by others and encourage acceptance of all types of people.
For example, if boys feel uncomfortable playing sports with other boys, help all boys to be more accepting and welcoming and help the unique boys have confidence to deal with criticism and ignorance. Don't put those boys on girls sports teams.
Detransitioners are proof that it is wrong to push children into thinking of themselves as the opposite sex, and more wrong to medically alter their bodies to appear the opposite sex.
What's happening to children our public schools is a medical and social scandal of epic proportions and, frankly, all of those who believe children can "be trans" have been indoctrinated into a cult.
-- But I guess this wouldn't go over too well. Maybe I'll say it at the next CEC2 Meeting. They don't listen to my words anyway. Maybe it will wake one person up from all this!
In some ways, I think it doesn't matter what the text of the letters are. The recipients project their own version of your "hate speech" onto it. I'd send pictures of the scars and say, "really? you want children to scarify their bodies?"
Lisa, gonna be harsh here: your letter is incoherent. What is the action item? What do you want the recipient to DO (or NOT DO)? That should be in the first sentence, which should be a paragraph by itself (and the subject of the email, if emailed).
Then, supporting arguments for your case. As short as possible.
Because the recipient, if you're lucky, will devote a maximum of one minute to trying to understand what you want. They're paid (if at all) by the month, not by how slowly and carefully they read letters.
Good notes for next time! They never respond to me, anyway. But, yeah, I'm not in the marketing business. Brevity is not my specialty. Oh well!
Thoughtfulness is, though, and we need that badly!
I think your communication style is better suited to in-person interaction. So speaking up at a school board meeting would likely be more effective.
If they don't shout her down. I think the parents who know this is a cult and social contagion have to protect their kids. I remember counseling my sons not to be upset about the Catholic peers who tell them they need to learn about Jesus. I'd tell them, well, we have the same God, but no messiah. Kindly tell them we have our own traditions, thanks for your concern.
As an eighty year old gay man, who had his own struggles, growing up in mid-1950s Texas, to make sense of sex and sexuality at age twelve or so, I can't help but wonder how did countless generations of gay and lesbian kids somehow grow up to be reasonably sensible, mature, productive adults, i.e., "normal", without once hearing the word "homosexual" in school. Sure, there were lots of seriously hurtful messages resulting in real emotional confusion and pain. Often silent or implied rather than explicit, these messages were mainly from parents, peers, religious figures, or entertainment. (The gay character always had to die before the end of the movie or novel.) I really don't think anything that might have come from school would have made the least bit of difference.
The one thing that might make a difference is for parents to make it clear to non-conforming kids that God loves them the way they are. He made them the way they are, and He doesn't make mistakes, much less make junk. And their parents do, too. Anyone who tells them any different is an ignorant moron.
I am 77 and a lesbian. There was almost no mention of homosexuality at my Chicago public high school, except I do remember reading in an honors English class the short story "In Greenwich, There are Many Gravelled Walks", and how no one in the class picked up on the fact that the male protagonist was gay, which made our female English teacher express gentle (kind!) amusement at how sheltered we all were. Everyone did realize that two of the women PE teachers were gay, and that was just accepted. Nowadays virtually all high school kids have some idea that homosexuality exists, and are aware that some of their classmates are or likely are homosexual.
As a parent I would want my child’s teacher to stick to the subject matter, and if a child needs counseling then see the counselor and maybe speak to the parents. Teachers are not therapists. They have enough to do and they do not have the training or credentials to address children’s emotional problems. It is natural to care about students wellbeing and want to comfort them but that risks shortchanging other students and can lead to burnout. Student mental health is not the teacher’s responsibility or bailiwick. And I see a disturbing number of teachers who identify with students. You are the adult in loco parentis, not a peer.
I love your letter, and especially the last few lines, and while sadly, infuriatingly, tragically...you are probably wasting your time, it all needs to be said, unfortunately on eternal repeat, until sanity returns. Why this is so, why this has been allowed to happen, why so many have lost all critical thinking, I will never fully understand no matter how much I continue to study it.
I would like DOEs & all humans responsible & blessed with the opportunities to educate, protect, & nourish children to understand that the social engineering of creating more than a generation of disassociated, disconnected, dysfunctional, dis regulated humans is a crime against humanity. It’s been an enormous win for the 20 or so global transhumanists who own 99% of our resources. Congratulations you turds on a stick.
Thanks Lisa for your courage and your clear thinking that cuts through the intimidation and hysteria.
I love this, thank you for what you do!
Great Leadership and planned ignoring in school setting .. the TRAs are not the only ones who can call no debate and refuse to engage or shout the loudest to drown others out … if some kids are so far gone they need therapeutic help this is not a schools job … if schools are great places of learning kids will want to learn .. parents will want their kids there and good teachers will want jobs there … maybe for a while there will be two tiers .. those schools which teach material reality and respect single sex spaces and those that don’t .. I know which one I’d be sending my kids too
Great use of your impeccable communication skills. Thank you for keeping on! You are a tremendous value to parents and children who do not have the platform and voice you have. Greatly appreciated!
I'm curious, Lisa, if you have any concrete ideas on how schools can avoid conditioning students one way or another when they each come from a family with a different view. Those views may be slightly or radically different. But as the "parents' rights" movements have pushed for each of these families to have more of a say in the details of what and how their kids learn, two questions emerge:
1. How should a school determine how to educate kids to be employable critical thinkers when their parents have very different views on how this should happen AND are becoming less and less tolerant for any deviation by classroom teachers from the parent's personal philosophy; and
2. How is it possible to "leave [kids] alone" when they, the students, are together in a semi-closed setting for hours each day? The bathroom issue is a good example. How to accommodate each family's view of how to leave their student alone when one wants their student to live as the other sex and be referred to as such and another wants their student to have no exposure to such people or ideas at all?
Your letter isn't wrong or bad, but I am struggling to imagine a way for a public school district, especially a large one with significant diversity, to actually implement this. The old adage "your rights end where mine begin" becomes useless when each person has a different idea of what rights even are, how to interpret them, and what is "truth". I am curious if you have any ideas yourself, or if you have seen any successful models in action, of how to resolve these conflicts when families disagree without being accused of "indoctrinating" somebody but also without separating children based on the religious and political and social views of their families (and even that, I think, wouldn't be possible as I don't think most families would fit neatly into the same category on everything).
Finally, I would posit that given the blatantly religious and scientifically imprecise if not completely incorrect language in the EO on transgender issues, I see no way for schools to implement political policies like that without taking a stand-whether for or against-that is, well, political. I have already commented at some length on the way the administration shot arguments about truth and precision in the foot by adding fetal personhood language (and possibly by failing to research the embryonic sex differentiation progress before doing so) so will not do so again. I will say, though, that when the policy is nakedly and intentionally political, there is no way I can think of for schools to avoid being equally political in implementing them, since even a word for word agreement is still...Political.
Tl,dr is, I guess, that your letter might as well ask schools to prepare grads to implement world peace in the next year. Great idea, but also probably impossible.
Yes, they can work on viewpoint diversity and open inquiry, in part by working with the Mill Institute to create such environments.
Libs of Tik Tok have caught some evidence suggesting that school leaders don't yet feel the need to respond to any pressure applied by parents who aren't happy about the curriculum for Kindergarteners reportedly containing depictions of bondage gear . . . https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1889762521701130349/video/1 I just couldn't believe my ears (and Tik Tok has been guilty of exaggerated claims and lies before), but apparently the book exists and is as described: https://thecoronadonews.com/2023/09/coronado-public-library-faces-culture-war-over-books-pride-event/ How can they possibily think responding to these parents concerns in this dismissive way is going to make anything better, let alone reduce the possibility of resentments being vented against children and families who believe in transgender ideology?
I have another perspective on the phobia indoctrination. It just came to me today. So many of the AGP later "transitioners" go on and on about safety when they're out crossdressing, violating boundaries in women's lavatories. So many also were abused in early life. It occurs to me the older ones have promoted this indoctrination, which stems from an unconscious memory of being physically or sexually abused.
All religious parents should be writing to the school boards to say this "training" promotes disrespect of religious freedom.
I would send this letter exactly as is to my school board and State Department of Education. DEI is wildly popular in our local lefty district, with large pep rallies occurring on occasion at board meetings. Needless to say, the board contains not a single white person for the first time ever, and are here to stay… Nevertheless, the African American school librarian who I voted for in ‘22 was passed over by the electorate for a self-styled literal man in black (shirt & pants w/ white tie type of uniform) who organized groups to stand on street corners to recall our Democratic mayor while trump flag truck convoys were driving around town.
Yes, I will keep writing. Here, we’re beholden to admirers of California government and policy, and the opposite camp features a bunch of… ahem… goobers like Tom Horne.