Bob Chapek's response to Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

[Disney Analyst]

EDIT:

Well since the Mods have moved this to its own thread, let me make my post which is now the OP, more relevant to the thread title:

Disney Boss Bob Chapek Says Company Won’t Slam Florida’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill Directly, But Still Committed To Inclusion

Facing rising outcry, Disney CEO Bob Chapek has decided to play a political and cultural version of a church mouse when it comes to Florida’s new ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill. With the openly discrimatory …

deadline.com

These tweets show some of the discussion in the senate, and point out the harmful aspects of this bill that Chapek and Disney have refused to denounce.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

The article I originally read (a week or two ago) said the bill prevented schools from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity in primary grade levels and limited discussions to age-appropriate students. I don’t really see the controversy in that, have they added to it over the last few weeks?

A bunch of times...it barely represents what the bill was originally. I thought the same as you, but it offers the ability to sue teachers if a parent becomes upset, they aren't to discuss anything relating to LGBTQ (should be interesting when a child has to do an "about me" project and has gay parents), and if teachers learn that a student is gay and hasn't told their parents, the teacher is required to out the student to the parents, with no protections or exemptions if there is a risk of abuse.

 

[JoeCamel]

This is hopefully not viewed as political... but probably will be.

The bill is intentionally vague, only singles out sexual identity and orientation as inappropriate topics, when it could list a WHOLE host of topics that could be treaded carefully for ages k-3, or provides more guidances to schools on how to tread those topics if they came up. During the senate session today related to the bill, the co-author even admitted this could be applied to any grade, as the caveat "or where age appropriate" has no limits.















If I was being forced to move to Florida, and I was a same gendered parent... I would not be making the move, and I would be very much angry at Disneys silence.

I'm wondering if these "legislators" did intro 101 to drafting legislation where it points out the supremes have ruled a law cannot be overly broad and must be narrowly drawn.
It shouldn't be proposed and certainly shouldn't stand a challenge in any court. Waste of time to PO most of the population

 

[TrojanUSC]

I'm not smart enough to know what Disney's role here should be. It's entirely conceivable that Bob Chapek keeping the company from releasing a statement condemning this is the right move, despite it going against what he and the company believes. His comment on those comments being "weaponized" very well may be true.

Having said all that, this seems to be a very easy thing to condemn and I think it looks far worse for them to not condemn it.

Disney and other entertainment companies have absolutely taken stands on these kinds of bigoted laws in the past and they should continue to do so. This is a pandering law in search of a problem that does not exist. Nobody is teaching grade schoolers about inappropriate things, but this law singles out LGBT persons as something that can not be discussed. What about the teacher who now has her hands tied when a little girl is being bullied for having two moms? Or the kid who comes from a brutally homophobic household and is outed by their school, putting their well being in danger?

This is the company that risked a boycott from the right in the 90s when it became one of the first Fortune 500 companies to offer same sex partner benefits and that makes millions every year selling pride merchandise. Please. They should condemn this hurtful, bigoted law.

 

[TalkingHead]

A bunch of times...it barely represents what the bill was originally. I thought the same as you, but it offers the ability to sue teachers if a parent becomes upset, they aren't to discuss anything relating to LGBTQ (should be interesting when a child has to do an "about me" project and has gay parents), and if teachers learn that a student is gay and hasn't told their parents, the teacher is required to out the student to the parents, with no protections or exemptions if there is a risk of abuse.

I believe I read that the third point here about teachers having to contact the parents wasn’t included in the House bill; not sure if it’s in the Senate bill.

As I understood it, the House bill specified the ban for K-3; the Senate bill apparently still includes the “primary grades” language.

Needless to say, Chapek’s statement today was abysmal, strategically tone-deaf and worse than saying nothing. Lucky for him the fan base can’t kick their Disney habit but they sure will need to Tweet through it.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

I believe I read that the third point here about teachers having to contact the parents wasn’t included in the House bill; not sure if it’s in the Senate bill.

As I understood it, the House bill specified the ban for K-3; the Senate bill apparently still includes the “primary grades” language.

Needless to say, Chapek’s statement today was abysmal, strategically tone-deaf and worse than saying nothing. Lucky for him the fan base can’t kick their Disney habit but they sure will need to Tweet through it.

From what I saw, there originally was an "in the case a reasonable person would be wary of abuse" line, but it was removed. I believe it's the House bill.

ETA: Regardless...this should never have even been written, IMO. This is just politicians victimizing children to appeal to bigots and homophobes.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I'm wondering if these "legislators" did intro 101 to drafting legislation where it points out the supremes have ruled a law cannot be overly broad and must be narrowly drawn.
It shouldn't be proposed and certainly shouldn't stand a challenge in any court. Waste of time to PO most of the population

I can’t imagine being a teacher facing a lawsuit over such a vague concept. I generally agree that sex, sexuality, etc should be avoided in elementary schools (stick to the 3 Rs) but as others have mentioned even with a defined age limit it would still be impossible to enforce, you’ll inevitably have some students with gay parents, siblings, etc that will make it impossible to not discuss it. In a perfect world the teacher would just discuss it in a non biased way but as Americans we struggle not to let our politics and biases influence everything we say, and that means roughly half will end up disagreeing.

 

[WDWJoeG]

Disney and other entertainment companies have absolutely taken stands on these kinds of bigoted laws in the past and they should continue to do so. This is a pandering law in search of a problem that does not exist. Nobody is teaching grade schoolers about inappropriate things, but this law singles out LGBT persons as something that can not be discussed. What about the teacher who now has her hands tied when a little girl is being bullied for having two moms? Or the kid who comes from a brutally homophobic household and is outed by their school, putting their well being in danger?

This is the company that risked a boycott from the right in the 90s when it became one of the first Fortune 500 companies to offer same sex partner benefits and that makes millions every year selling pride merchandise. Please. They should condemn this hurtful, bigoted law.

And yet they film their biggest movies at the studios in Atlanta owned by the person who funded Prop 8 (Dan Cathay at Trilith) -they're complete hypocrites so don't buy into their spin for woke suckers.

They laugh at you.

 

[DonaldDoleWhip]

In a perfect world the teacher would just discuss it in a non biased way but as Americans we struggle not to let our politics and biases influence everything we say, and that means roughly half will end up disagreeing.

LGBT+ people existing shouldn't be a political bias, yet I see toxic posts every day dismissing at least one of the letters.

This law gives those deniers carte blanche to go after teachers for acknowledging the mere existence of something (or someone) they don't like.

That's messed up, even for Florida. Also, as others have noted, it will make the state that much less appealing to many potential transplants who were otherwise happy in LA.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

As a Floridian, I support this bill. Keep those topics out of our schools. Parents should have more say in their children’s education.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

That's messed up, even for Florida. Also, as others have noted, it will make the state that much less appealing to many potential transplants who were otherwise happy in LA.

The people who support this bill will probably see it as a win if it encourages the people who don’t support it to stay in Cali.

 

[DonaldDoleWhip]

The people who support this bill will probably see it as a win if it encourages the people who don’t support it to stay in Cali.

Sure, but that doesn’t make it right.

Nor does it justify harming millions of Floridian kids (and many of the adults in their community).

 

[TrojanUSC]

As a Floridian, I support this bill. Keep those topics out of our schools. Parents should have more say in their children’s education.

I hate to break this to you, but "those topics" are indeed a fact of life and sometimes they need to be addressed.

According to you it's a-ok that when a little girl is being bullied for having two moms and the teacher explains that she shouldn't be bullied, some kids just have two moms or two dads, and some parent takes offense to this fact of life and sues the teacher under this new law, you're okay with that? How does that help the little girl being bullied?

What about a child that comes from a fundamentalist home and the school discovers they are LGBT, obligating the school to "out" them to their parents? How is that acceptable? What good does that do for anyone except put the child's physical and mental health in danger, by taking away their one outlet they may have to discuss with a trained professional (guidance counselor, school psychologist, trusted teacher, etc)? Or even worse, other students outing kids to the school, with photos and text "evidence," as a form of revenge?

Where do you draw the line, personally? Are you okay with teachers telling students that some parents are different races, when a little girl is being bullied for being mixed race? A school being forced to report to the parents of a white boy who was seen holding hands with a black girl, for no actual reason, even if those parents are KKK members? If you're not okay with either of the above, you should rethink your support, because it's just singling out LGBT as a reason for discrimination.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

The people who support this bill will probably see it as a win if it encourages the people who don’t support it to stay in Cali.

I'm sure that's true, but I do think Disney as an employer that is forcing people to move to the state or look for another job should be sending a different message. It is quite possible/probable that the legislation would directly affect individuals or their families being asked to move, and for Disney to just shrug and say they will look into whether they want to continue funding the campaigns of people who support this type of legislation going forward does send a clear message that they are indifferent to any such impacts. It certainly doesn't send the message that the company wants to keep those employees.

 

[Ayla]

I'm sure that's true, but I do think Disney as an employer that is forcing people to move to the state or look for another job should be sending a different message. It is quite possible/probable that the legislation would directly affect individuals or their families being asked to move, and for Disney to just shrug and say they will look into whether they want to continue funding the campaigns of people who support this type of legislation going forward does send a clear message that they are indifferent to any such impacts. It certainly doesn't send the message that the company wants to keep those employees.

Disney donated money to every single sponsor of this particular bill. Maybe Chapek donated personally, I have not looked into it. He's a well-known right wing conservative.

Iger has spoken out against this bill multiple times.

 

[Disneyson]

In order to re-center the conversation from personal views to harder facts, I just want to mention that, in all likelihood, Bob Gurr would have separated from the company if he had to live and work in Florida under this law. That means no monorail and no Haunted Mansion as we know it today. Huge merchandise loss for the company. Huge brain drain.

 

[TikibirdLand]

Sure, but that doesn’t make it right.

Nor does it justify harming millions of Floridian kids (and many of the adults in their community).

Really, MILLIONS? Seems to be a bit over the top, don't you think? I think tolerance and respect for both sides of the issue need to be expressed. This thread has gotten quite political and I'll start ignoring it. Just wanted to say, the tone here has gotten very uncivil. Have any of you actually read the bills in question? If not, here's the links:
Senate Bill 1834, House Bill 1557
Here's an excerpt:
A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students,

It doesn't say LGBQ+ topics can't be discussed. It simply says that schools may not encourage discussion about it. Other portions state that parents should be notified when topics like this come up so they can follow up appropriately with their son or daughter.

 

[TikibirdLand]

In order to re-center the conversation from personal views to harder facts, I just want to mention that, in all likelihood, Bob Gurr would have separated from the company if he had to live and work in Florida under this law. That means no monorail and no Haunted Mansion as we know it today. Huge merchandise loss for the company. Huge brain drain.

Didn't know his orientation (nor did I want to know). Had to look it up. To re-center this. How would this bill have caused him to separate from the company due to this bill? It's not a "ban on gays"... Does anyone look at the monorail and ask, "what's the sexual orientation of the person that designed it?" I know I didn't. And, I'm a big fan of Bob.

 

[TalkingHead]

Here's an excerpt:
A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students,

It doesn't say LGBQ+ topics can't be discussed. It simply says that schools may not encourage discussion about it.

My understanding is the language is intentionally vague so that different districts can enforce it in different ways. It’s not a sign of well-considered legislation.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

I hate to break this to you, but "those topics" are indeed a fact of life and sometimes they need to be addressed.

According to you it's a-ok that when a little girl is being bullied for having two moms and the teacher explains that she shouldn't be bullied, some kids just have two moms or two dads, and some parent takes offense to this fact of life and sues the teacher under this new law, you're okay with that? How does that help the little girl being bullied?

What about a child that comes from a fundamentalist home and the school discovers they are LGBT, obligating the school to "out" them to their parents? How is that acceptable? What good does that do for anyone except put the child's physical and mental health in danger, by taking away their one outlet they may have to discuss with a trained professional (guidance counselor, school psychologist, trusted teacher, etc)? Or even worse, other students outing kids to the school, with photos and text "evidence," as a form of revenge?

Where do you draw the line, personally? Are you okay with teachers telling students that some parents are different races, when a little girl is being bullied for being mixed race? A school being forced to report to the parents of a white boy who was seen holding hands with a black girl, for no actual reason, even if those parents are KKK members? If you're not okay with either of the above, you should rethink your support, because it's just singling out LGBT as a reason for discrimination.

You can come up with all the worst hypotheticals you want but the reality is different. Teachers should focus on teaching, not indoctrinating their students with their political beliefs.

No, they shouldn't...unless they have a degree in childhood development or education...because that's how you'll end up with children being taught that the Earth is flat.

People need to keep their bigotry and homophobia OUT of schools.

Parents shouldn’t have more say in their child’s education unless they have a degree? LOL! This doesn’t even dignify a response.