Is it about parental rights?

[Belsnickel]

So, we have all seen the movements across the country where the astroturf movements have been getting school boards to ban books and implement policies under the guise of "parents' rights." This situation is one that I think of a lot because it was one big components of Youngkin's win in 2021 and it was what he and the state GOP really ran on last year. While the statewide GOP lost in November in their efforts use the Koch money to push them into office, the county in which I live did succumb to this movement on the local school board (that and one of the longtime board members who is a moderate Democrat retired over exhaustion from death threats and other abuses from local conservatives).

Not only has this effort been aimed at the dystopian move to ban books that would possibly be concerning to more parents if they read the books they challenged, but they have also taken aim at trans rights. Again claiming it is about parental rights, policies have been enacting calling for educators to report any names not a common nickname for a student's given name. There has been a lot of conversation about all of this and many educators I know have stated that they will not comply. In a state and local area where teachers are not compensated very well, they would not be able to lose all of those they would if they really took action. However, the movement has shown their true colors in a way they don't realize, maybe it was the whole reading issue again.

In December, the Virginia Supreme Court issued an opinion on Vlaming v. West Point School Board ruling in favor of a teacher who had been disciplined for refusing to use a student's preferred name/pronouns. You can imagine the celebrations that have occurred in the "parents' rights" camp over this decision. They have thwarted the liberal educated establishment and won one for the parents! Well, not exactly. An overlooked part of this case is that the parents of the student in question were aware of their child's situation and had given permission for them to go by their preferred name/pronouns. With the celebration of this win by an educator in the courts over this issue it exposes the "parents' rights" movement for what it is, and that is seeking approval for assholish behavior.

I say this because calling someone by their preferred name is really just respectful. I work in academia. I interact with many professors on a peer level and sometimes have to chastise them for doing things wrong (faculty not following the rules!?). I am on a first-name basis with many, but not all. I start every conversation, whether work related, as a grad student, or out in the community with the polite way of addressing them using their title because that is respect. I think professors who insist on using their titles are pretentious twats, but I show them respect based on what they want to be called. I do the same with everyone, whether it be titles, names, what have you. "Why?" you might ask. Well, simply put, because as much as I like to play one on television, I am not an asshole.

Now, I am choosing to say asshole here instead of bigot, homophobe, transphobe, or any of the other options available in this scenario. You can place whatever descriptor you would like in its place. The point here is that by celebrating Vlaming v. West Point School Board, this movement has shown their true colors. It isn't about parental rights at all, it is about imposing their views on others.

[XenoMorph]

(01-23-2024, 08:57 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Now, I am choosing to say asshole here instead of bigot, homophobe, transphobe, or any of the other options available in this scenario. You can place whatever descriptor you would like in its place. The point here is that by celebrating Vlaming v. West Point School Board, this movement has shown their true colors. It isn't about parental rights at all, it is about imposing their views on others.

Isnt that whats being forced on everyone else? the views of the few.

[SunsetBengal]

(01-23-2024, 09:20 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Isnt that whats being forced on everyone else? the views of the few.

Oh boy, here come the torches and pitch forks..

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2024, 09:20 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Isnt that whats being forced on everyone else? the views of the few.

Nope. You can believe whatever you want. Just don't be a dick.

[GMDino]

(01-23-2024, 09:28 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Nope. You can believe whatever you want. Just don't be a dick.

Yep.  But a "few" (to borrow that term) don't even want to know about it...or you if you are "different" from them.  

What I hear is "You can be gay, trans, whatever...just don't you DARE be that way around me!  *I* will decide how you should act so that you fit into MY world view."

Throw in "You're going to hell" occasionally.

[masonbengals fan]

(01-23-2024, 09:28 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Nope. You can believe whatever you want. Just don't be a dick.

That reads like believe what you want as long as you go along with it. 

[*pally*]

The "parent's rights" movement only cares about the rights of conservative parents. It is not enough for them to stop their own child from hearing or reading something, they have to stop that idea for every child regardless of their parent's beliefs.

These days the culture war is based around the anti-freedom idea of

-If I don't like it no one can -vs- If I don't like it I won't do it

Respect towards others is lost in this battle because it is centered around personal beliefs and politics. A generation of children are being taught that it is ok to dehumanize, demonize, and disrespect those who may be different from themselves

You can disagree with someone and still treat them with dignity and respect which includes calling them by their preferred name and title.

[XenoMorph]

(01-23-2024, 11:05 AM)pally Wrote: The "parent's rights" movement only cares about the rights of conservative parents. It is not enough for them to stop their own child from hearing or reading something, they have to stop that idea for every child regardless of their parent's beliefs.  

These days the culture war is based around the anti-freedom idea of

-If I don't like it no one can -vs- If I don't like it I won't do it

Respect towards others is lost in this battle because it is centered around personal beliefs and politics.  A generation of children are being taught that it is ok to dehumanize, demonize, and disrespect those who may be different from themselves

You can disagree with someone and still treat them with dignity and respect which includes calling them by their preferred name and title.

works both ways....  You can pretend be whatever perferred title you want but you cant force others to use it.

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2024, 10:48 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: That reads like believe what you want as long as you go along with it. 

That reads like "I just want an excuse for my dickish behavior."

[masonbengals fan]

(01-23-2024, 11:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: That reads like "I just want an excuse for my dickish behavior."

Can't truthfully relate to the situation you described but believe me I've been called worse.

Sometimes I've earned it. 

[GMDino]

(01-23-2024, 10:48 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: That reads like believe what you want as long as you go along with it. 

(01-23-2024, 11:12 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: works both ways....  You can pretend be whatever perferred title you want but you cant force others to use it.

Exactly.  But people can be respectful.

One of our employee's name is James.  He goes by his middle name Tom. We call him Tom because it doesn't hurt anything.

We had a kid in my son's class who changed his name and gender.  Went from Chrissy to Chris.  So we called him Chris.

I have a friend who found god after his divorce.  We engage in spirited debates.  But in the end I won't tell him he can't believe what he wants and they he can't force others to believe the way he does.

Go about your lives and don't hurt others.  

[masonbengals fan]

(01-23-2024, 11:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: That reads like "I just want an excuse for my dickish behavior."

Do you think Mr. Vlaming was just being a dick? 

Calling the student by their preferred name wasn't enough? 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

This issue is pretty much n par with many of the "culture war" topics. The loudest voices for, or against, something tend to be extremists and bad faith actors with an agenda. The problem, and this is absolutely true in this case, is that they have enough of a point that your more ordinary people can feel comfortable joining in.

[*Nately120*]

Can't parents who don't like this progressive stuff just send their kids to schools where they don't do this?  I say this as someone who had parents who worked a little harder so they could send me to a school where I was forced to pray and go to church and sing in church and develop a nun fetish.

Oh I also remember in sex ed one of the boys in my class asked if to men or two women could have sex and the answer was an immediate NO.

[*pally*]

(01-23-2024, 11:12 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: works both ways....  You can pretend be whatever perferred title you want but you cant force others to use it.

But laws forbidding people, as in Florida and other places, from calling others by their preferred name take the choice out of the equation.  They actually force people to call other people by names and pronouns the government has decided are appropriate.  Isn't that the opposite of freedom?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-23-2024, 02:22 PM)pally Wrote: But laws forbidding people, as in Florida and other places, from calling others by their preferred name take the choice out of the equation.  They actually force people to call other people by names and pronouns the government has decided are appropriate.  Isn't that the opposite of freedom?

For the sake of discussion, how is this different than having a dress code?  You're taking away their choice of what to wear.  Isn't that the opposite of freedom?  How about letting the teacher teach that the holocaust never happened?  That's a choice right?  The curriculum is decided upon by the same government, aren't they restricting your freedom to teach whatever you want, however you want?

[*pally*]

(01-23-2024, 02:50 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: For the sake of discussion, how is this different than having a dress code?  You're taking away their choice of what to wear.  Isn't that the opposite of freedom?  How about letting the teacher teach that the holocaust never happened?  That's a choice right?  The curriculum is decided upon by the same government, aren't they restricting your freedom to teach whatever you want, however you want?

Speech is constitutionally protected.  Not calling someone by their preferred name or title because you don't want to makes you a jerk.  Not calling someone by their preferred name or title because the government-made laws preventing you from doing so is censorship.

We are dangerously close to the holocaust denying scenario except right now it is coached in requiring "neutral" language concerning the subject as well as things such as slavery and civil rights (can't have the kiddies learning that there were actual discriminatory laws}

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-23-2024, 08:04 PM)pally Wrote: Speech is constitutionally protected.  Not calling someone by their preferred name or title because you don't want to makes you a jerk.

I see you chose not to answer my question.  I will respond regardless.  Being a jerk isn't against the law.

Quote:Not calling someone by their preferred name or title because the government-made laws preventing you from doing so is censorship.

I don't believe that the law prevents anyone from calling you anything.  As for the teacher themselves, they have a wide range of things they cannot say in class without repercussion.  Should a teacher be able to say they believe that Black people are inferior without consequence?  Can a teacher call a student a little A-hole without consequence?  Can a teacher describe their weekend sexual escapades in graphic detail to their class and face no discipline?

You'll note that I am not comparing any of these things to stating your preferred pronouns in terms of severity.  I am illustrating that the logic you are using as the foundation of your argument is faulty.

Quote:We are dangerously close to the holocaust denying scenario

Hyperbole.  Although it appears todays youth are already trending that way.

https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4349815-poll-americans-holocaust-myth/

Quote:except right now it is coached in requiring "neutral" language concerning the subject as well as things such as slavery and civil rights (can't have the kiddies learning that there were actual discriminatory laws}

I am always in favor of teaching the truth, in an age appropriate and unbiased manner.

[Matt_Crimson]

(01-23-2024, 08:57 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, we have all seen the movements across the country where the astroturf movements have been getting school boards to ban books and implement policies under the guise of "parents' rights." This situation is one that I think of a lot because it was one big components of Youngkin's win in 2021 and it was what he and the state GOP really ran on last year. While the statewide GOP lost in November in their efforts use the Koch money to push them into office, the county in which I live did succumb to this movement on the local school board (that and one of the longtime board members who is a moderate Democrat retired over exhaustion from death threats and other abuses from local conservatives).

Not only has this effort been aimed at the dystopian move to ban books that would possibly be concerning to more parents if they read the books they challenged, but they have also taken aim at trans rights. Again claiming it is about parental rights, policies have been enacting calling for educators to report any names not a common nickname for a student's given name. There has been a lot of conversation about all of this and many educators I know have stated that they will not comply. In a state and local area where teachers are not compensated very well, they would not be able to lose all of those they would if they really took action. However, the movement has shown their true colors in a way they don't realize, maybe it was the whole reading issue again.

In December, the Virginia Supreme Court issued an opinion on Vlaming v. West Point School Board ruling in favor of a teacher who had been disciplined for refusing to use a student's preferred name/pronouns. You can imagine the celebrations that have occurred in the "parents' rights" camp over this decision. They have thwarted the liberal educated establishment and won one for the parents! Well, not exactly. An overlooked part of this case is that the parents of the student in question were aware of their child's situation and had given permission for them to go by their preferred name/pronouns. With the celebration of this win by an educator in the courts over this issue it exposes the "parents' rights" movement for what it is, and that is seeking approval for assholish behavior.

I say this because calling someone by their preferred name is really just respectful. I work in academia. I interact with many professors on a peer level and sometimes have to chastise them for doing things wrong (faculty not following the rules!?). I am on a first-name basis with many, but not all. I start every conversation, whether work related, as a grad student, or out in the community with the polite way of addressing them using their title because that is respect. I think professors who insist on using their titles are pretentious twats, but I show them respect based on what they want to be called. I do the same with everyone, whether it be titles, names, what have you. "Why?" you might ask. Well, simply put, because as much as I like to play one on television, I am not an asshole.

Now, I am choosing to say asshole here instead of bigot, homophobe, transphobe, or any of the other options available in this scenario. You can place whatever descriptor you would like in its place. The point here is that by celebrating Vlaming v. West Point School Board, this movement has shown their true colors. It isn't about parental rights at all, it is about imposing their views on others.

I would argue that naturally, if you want your rights to be included within the sphere of the general public, then you by default are imposing your views on the public. They can't be mutually exclusive.

The moment you say you want control of something you then have to define what control means in that instance, and if what you want to control involves the public participating within your sphere of control, then you will be imposing your views. That's not a conservative nor liberal problem. Everyone is playing chess in that regard.

You can't simply say "I have the right to decide what my child is taught by someone else" but then not define what your child is taught without imposing your views on the public.

You can't say "I have the right to an abortion" and want that right without imposing your views on the public.

There are agendas everywhere and the "parental rights issue" is no different than any other of these "rights" issues.

I'm less concerned about the agenda and more so about the truth/morality behind it, because to me thats what really matters..

Just as another example, someone might say, "Trans people have the right to live freely as they are". Okay, well let's break that down then. Define it for me . Do you mean trans people have the right to live freely in the privacy of their own home? To that, many will say, that's fine. Do whatever you want in your own home.

Or..... do you mean trans people have the right to live freely in public? Alright, define that for me then. Does that mean trans people have to be called by their preferred pronouns? Nope, can't do that without imposing your views.

Do they deserve the right to use any bathroom they want? Nope, sorry but that's assholish behavior again. Stop imposing your views.

Do they deserve the right to play in a sport composed of individuals who are opposite of their sex? Nope, imposing again.

Do they deserve the rights to the same health care the opposite sex gets? Not so fast there mr. imposer of views.

Wanting rights that influrnces public behavior, and imposing them go hand in hand. It is the very definition of having your cake and eating it too. If you aren't imposing them then you aren't fighting for your rights. And if you aren't fighting for your rights, then what are you wasting your breath for?

[Luvnit2]

(01-23-2024, 11:05 AM)pally Wrote: The "parent's rights" movement only cares about the rights of conservative parents. It is not enough for them to stop their own child from hearing or reading something, they have to stop that idea for every child regardless of their parent's beliefs.  

These days the culture war is based around the anti-freedom idea of

-If I don't like it no one can -vs- If I don't like it I won't do it

Respect towards others is lost in this battle because it is centered around personal beliefs and politics.  A generation of children are being taught that it is ok to dehumanize, demonize, and disrespect those who may be different from themselves

You can disagree with someone and still treat them with dignity and respect which includes calling them by their preferred name and title.

My question is why don't the parents change their child's name on their child's birth certificate. Wouldn't that solve the issue of the child being called their preferred name and title? This would tell the world the child's new name, the old would be erased.