01-23-2024, 11:12 PM
(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?
