4 ms·

The best response I have seen to this thus far is Florida teachers who plan to stop referring to anyone by gender in the classroom.

by mike_d 5y ago

KerrAvon 5y ago
It is also technically the correct response. The best kind of correct.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  >> The best response I have seen to this thus far is Florida teachers who plan to stop referring to anyone by gender in the classroom. > It is also technically the correct response. The best kind of correct. Actually, reading the bill text (https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/...), I don't think that's technically correct: > Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards. I don't think "referring to" someone could be properly understood as "classroom instruction," unless those words are willfully misinterpreted to mean "anything done or said by a teacher in a classroom."
  - dariusj18 5y ago
    This bill is created to be vague. If it wasn't vague it would most likely be shot down instantaneously in courts.
avs733 5y ago
And the reaction is telling… the vagueness and the double meaning is the point not an accidental side effect
vecplane 5y ago
This is a deranged and nonsensical response. We all knew what boys and girls where until yesterday. Leave the kids alone.
- countvonbalzac 5y ago
  Or just let the kids be kids, stop mandating at a state level who they have to be.
  - raxxorraxor 5y ago
    I think objective sexual education is not only under attack by religious reservations anymore, there are also ideological elements. Having two dads is not normal. It is ok and it is nobodies business to judge it. But there is a difference and it obviously does not align with biological realities. So some people (not just the kids, they tend to not judge on these topics) need to accept realities that are not the usual case. Not being the the normal case is nothing intrinsically objectionable. But it is irrefutable that procreation between two men is not possible and it is not objectionable to teach that. On the contrary you would just obscure education like religious elements tried before.
- imode 5y ago
- stusmall 5y ago
  "This is a deranged and nonsensical response. We all knew what gay people where until yesterday. Leave the kids alone." You see where people are coming from now?
- Gigachad 5y ago
  It's more just an advancement on English really. Gendered terms aren't really useful. Especially with most written English being online now where no gender is known, it just becomes natural to use a non gendered term in all cases.
- s5300 5y ago
  > We all knew what boys and girls where until yesterday. Something like 200 or less years ago boys were called girls until they went through puberty (or close to puberty) - speaking of puritanical England that is. Not sure about the rest of the world/continents. They also wore dresses, typically blue I believe. As always, the people butthurt and complaining know literally nothing about what they speak.
fundad 5y ago
When I was in high school, the straight English teacher married the straight gym teacher. It was discussed so openly that it probably had something to do with me eventually marrying a straight woman.
lr4444lr 5y ago
Referring to children by gender is not instructional content. It's working within their level of development.
MatteoFrigo 5y ago
They can just call everybody "comrade". Problem solved. "Comrade" is gender-neutral.
- crackercrews 5y ago
  If you're thinking this would be a win for the D's then you're not thinking about the PR win it would give to the R's. Especially with Russia's recent invasion of Ukraine.

The best response I have seen to this thus far is Florida teachers who plan to stop referring to anyone by gender in the classroom.

by mike_d 5y ago

The best response I have seen to this thus far is Florida teachers who plan to stop referring to anyone by gender in the classroom.

KerrAvon 5y ago

It is also technically the correct response. The best kind of correct.

tablespoon 5y ago
>> The best response I have seen to this thus far is Florida teachers who plan to stop referring to anyone by gender in the classroom. > It is also technically the correct response. The best kind of correct. Actually, reading the bill text (https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/...), I don't think that's technically correct: > Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards. I don't think "referring to" someone could be properly understood as "classroom instruction," unless those words are willfully misinterpreted to mean "anything done or said by a teacher in a classroom."
- dariusj18 5y ago
  This bill is created to be vague. If it wasn't vague it would most likely be shot down instantaneously in courts.

avs733 5y ago

And the reaction is telling… the vagueness and the double meaning is the point not an accidental side effect

vecplane 5y ago

This is a deranged and nonsensical response. We all knew what boys and girls where until yesterday. Leave the kids alone.

countvonbalzac 5y ago
Or just let the kids be kids, stop mandating at a state level who they have to be.
- raxxorraxor 5y ago
  I think objective sexual education is not only under attack by religious reservations anymore, there are also ideological elements. Having two dads is not normal. It is ok and it is nobodies business to judge it. But there is a difference and it obviously does not align with biological realities. So some people (not just the kids, they tend to not judge on these topics) need to accept realities that are not the usual case. Not being the the normal case is nothing intrinsically objectionable. But it is irrefutable that procreation between two men is not possible and it is not objectionable to teach that. On the contrary you would just obscure education like religious elements tried before.
imode 5y ago
stusmall 5y ago
"This is a deranged and nonsensical response. We all knew what gay people where until yesterday. Leave the kids alone." You see where people are coming from now?
Gigachad 5y ago
It's more just an advancement on English really. Gendered terms aren't really useful. Especially with most written English being online now where no gender is known, it just becomes natural to use a non gendered term in all cases.
s5300 5y ago
> We all knew what boys and girls where until yesterday. Something like 200 or less years ago boys were called girls until they went through puberty (or close to puberty) - speaking of puritanical England that is. Not sure about the rest of the world/continents. They also wore dresses, typically blue I believe. As always, the people butthurt and complaining know literally nothing about what they speak.

fundad 5y ago

When I was in high school, the straight English teacher married the straight gym teacher. It was discussed so openly that it probably had something to do with me eventually marrying a straight woman.

lr4444lr 5y ago

Referring to children by gender is not instructional content. It's working within their level of development.

MatteoFrigo 5y ago

They can just call everybody "comrade". Problem solved. "Comrade" is gender-neutral.

crackercrews 5y ago
If you're thinking this would be a win for the D's then you're not thinking about the PR win it would give to the R's. Especially with Russia's recent invasion of Ukraine.