41 ms·

That's not what it says (relevant section): 3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occu

That's not what it says (relevant section): 3. 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.

olliej 4y ago
Define that please.
- BizarroLand 4y ago
  "Age appropriate" means "whatever we feel like being uncomfortable at the time of expression to any time afterwards so long as the person we have decided to turn into an offender is still within the system and therefore capable of being punished by it"
  - salawat 4y ago
    Age appropriateness is: that quality by which a topic is delved or addressed at a stage when an individual is most readily going to be receptive to it. To whit: development of sexual appetites, or sensitivity to sexual characteristics/behaviors in post-pubescent individuals that did not exist or have personal precedent pre-puberty. Look, I'm one of the most sensitive people to legislative generality and ambiguity to attempt to exploit, but this one isn't that tough to connect the dots on. People are uncomfortable with adult life choices taking center stage in early phases of education. Cis-hetero is not remotely emphasized at that point as anything more than the "historically traditional default by accident of being how biology mechanically works", and even then, adoption, and many other accidents of life can lead to the same awkwardness introduced by other lifestyles or orientations. And that's all okay, but all the more reason to just pass over the tordid messiness of human social relationships in general until at least maybe algebra has a snowball's chance in hell of being absorbed, because at least then the student should be acclimatized to receiving things that seem as arbitrary and pernicious as the awful things we adults foist on each other. It's not a conspiracy. It's just, trying to deal with matters with the least awkwardness all around.
    - olliej 4y ago
      Cool, if that were the case why does this bill specifically victimize lgbtq people? Discussion of orientation is only age inappropriate because of bigots who consider discussion of straight relationships to be “normal” and so acceptable. The stated intent in the bill’s preamble, is to target lgbtq kids. The stated intent of the law makers voting for it was to criminalize acknowledging lgbtq people are humans. If the bill wanted to not be an obvious attempt to dehumanize lgbtq people it could have removed the discriminatory language: ban discussion of gender and relationships. Ban those young kid faux-“home coming”s, etc But that is not what this is about. The stated view of the Republican Party, and the Conservative movement in general, is that lgbtq people are not people. That their orientation or gender identity is wrong. That lgbtq people are inherently less deserving of human rights, and that acknowledging there existence is inherently a matter of “adult” sexual perversions.
heavyset_go 4y ago
Here's what the first page of the bill says[1]: > An act relating to parental rights in education requiring district school boards to adopt procedures that comport with certain provisions of law... prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels or in a specified manner; It very explicitly states that the bill prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels. There are plenty of parents, politicians and government employees who think that acknowledging that LGBT people exist, and should be respected as people, is not age appropriate. There are parents that are convinced that acknowledging their kids' trans peers' existence will convince them to be trans, too, and that "Timmy has two mommies" isn't age appropriate, either. I've also heard supporters of the legislation claim that it's meant to prevent kids from being taught about sex, despite it already being illegal in Florida to teach kids in that age group about it. Inspired by Florida's bill, HB 800 was introduced in Tennessee, which is very explicit about prohibiting educators from using any materials or lessons that normalize, address or support LGBT issues and lifestyles[2]: > The state board is prohibited from approving for local adoption or granting a waiver for, and LEAs and public charter schools are prohibited from locally adopting or using in the public schools of this state, textbooks and instructional materials or supplemental instructional materials that promote, normalize, support, or address lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, or transgender (LGBT) issues or lifestyles. Nearly a dozen states have proposed similar legislation that aren't afraid of saying the quiet part out loud. [1] https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/... [2] https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0800 https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillN...
- molbioguy 4y ago
  That's the preamble to the bill, not the the articles of the bill.
  - heavyset_go 4y ago
    Spirit of the law is just as important as the letter of the law, and court decisions, including Supreme Court decisions, have been reached via the spirit of the law versus laws' exact wording. Those who wrote this bill and voted for it were explicit about how they interpret the bill.
daveoc64 4y ago
I'm not from the US, but this whole situation has become international news as Florida's approach with this has been seen as a big backwards step in Europe. The UK had similar legislation in the 80s and 90s, and it just meant that teachers and others were afraid to talk about these issues at all and ultimately, kids suffered: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28 There's now very little support for that kind of legislation in the UK.

olliej 4y ago

Define that please.

BizarroLand 4y ago
"Age appropriate" means "whatever we feel like being uncomfortable at the time of expression to any time afterwards so long as the person we have decided to turn into an offender is still within the system and therefore capable of being punished by it"
- salawat 4y ago
  Age appropriateness is: that quality by which a topic is delved or addressed at a stage when an individual is most readily going to be receptive to it. To whit: development of sexual appetites, or sensitivity to sexual characteristics/behaviors in post-pubescent individuals that did not exist or have personal precedent pre-puberty. Look, I'm one of the most sensitive people to legislative generality and ambiguity to attempt to exploit, but this one isn't that tough to connect the dots on. People are uncomfortable with adult life choices taking center stage in early phases of education. Cis-hetero is not remotely emphasized at that point as anything more than the "historically traditional default by accident of being how biology mechanically works", and even then, adoption, and many other accidents of life can lead to the same awkwardness introduced by other lifestyles or orientations. And that's all okay, but all the more reason to just pass over the tordid messiness of human social relationships in general until at least maybe algebra has a snowball's chance in hell of being absorbed, because at least then the student should be acclimatized to receiving things that seem as arbitrary and pernicious as the awful things we adults foist on each other. It's not a conspiracy. It's just, trying to deal with matters with the least awkwardness all around.
  - olliej 4y ago
    Cool, if that were the case why does this bill specifically victimize lgbtq people? Discussion of orientation is only age inappropriate because of bigots who consider discussion of straight relationships to be “normal” and so acceptable. The stated intent in the bill’s preamble, is to target lgbtq kids. The stated intent of the law makers voting for it was to criminalize acknowledging lgbtq people are humans. If the bill wanted to not be an obvious attempt to dehumanize lgbtq people it could have removed the discriminatory language: ban discussion of gender and relationships. Ban those young kid faux-“home coming”s, etc But that is not what this is about. The stated view of the Republican Party, and the Conservative movement in general, is that lgbtq people are not people. That their orientation or gender identity is wrong. That lgbtq people are inherently less deserving of human rights, and that acknowledging there existence is inherently a matter of “adult” sexual perversions.

heavyset_go 4y ago

Here's what the first page of the bill says[1]: > An act relating to parental rights in education requiring district school boards to adopt procedures that comport with certain provisions of law... prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels or in a specified manner; It very explicitly states that the bill prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels. There are plenty of parents, politicians and government employees who think that acknowledging that LGBT people exist, and should be respected as people, is not age appropriate. There are parents that are convinced that acknowledging their kids' trans peers' existence will convince them to be trans, too, and that "Timmy has two mommies" isn't age appropriate, either. I've also heard supporters of the legislation claim that it's meant to prevent kids from being taught about sex, despite it already being illegal in Florida to teach kids in that age group about it. Inspired by Florida's bill, HB 800 was introduced in Tennessee, which is very explicit about prohibiting educators from using any materials or lessons that normalize, address or support LGBT issues and lifestyles[2]: > The state board is prohibited from approving for local adoption or granting a waiver for, and LEAs and public charter schools are prohibited from locally adopting or using in the public schools of this state, textbooks and instructional materials or supplemental instructional materials that promote, normalize, support, or address lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, or transgender (LGBT) issues or lifestyles. Nearly a dozen states have proposed similar legislation that aren't afraid of saying the quiet part out loud. [1] https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/... [2] https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0800 https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillN...

molbioguy 4y ago
That's the preamble to the bill, not the the articles of the bill.
- heavyset_go 4y ago
  Spirit of the law is just as important as the letter of the law, and court decisions, including Supreme Court decisions, have been reached via the spirit of the law versus laws' exact wording. Those who wrote this bill and voted for it were explicit about how they interpret the bill.

daveoc64 4y ago

I'm not from the US, but this whole situation has become international news as Florida's approach with this has been seen as a big backwards step in Europe. The UK had similar legislation in the 80s and 90s, and it just meant that teachers and others were afraid to talk about these issues at all and ultimately, kids suffered: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28 There's now very little support for that kind of legislation in the UK.