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

[CaptainAmerica]

If the bill doesn't do what people say it does, then why is it necessary at all? Nothing sexual was taught in grades k-3 prior to the bill being passed.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

View attachment 626535

What do you think this graphic proves?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

What about that statement is untethered from reality?

Banning gender identity curriculum in K-3 classrooms is not an attack on kids with 2 dads. Nor, I might add, does it have a single even tenuous connection to The Walt Disney Company.

What do you think this graphic proves?

This graphic is being taught in elementary schools. Not all of them, and probably not very many of them. But not zero, either.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Banning gender identity curriculum in K-3 classrooms is not an attack on kids with 2 dads.


This graphic is being taught in elementary schools. Not all of them, and probably not very many of them. But not zero, either.

Proof?

Seriously...show me ONE school in which this is being taught under 5th grade - which is 10 and 11-year-old kids (I seriously doubt it's being taught in 5th grade, either, as the discussions in that grade are introductory and limited to the reproductive organs of the human body and their locations).

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Proof?

Seriously...show me ONE school in which this is being taught under 5th grade - which is 10 and 11-year-old kids (I seriously doubt it's being taught in 5th grade, either, as the discussions in that grade are introductory and limited to the reproductive organs of the human body and their locations).

'Gender Unicorn' Poster at Elementary School Causing Controversy

Posters of a cartoon unicorn in Mission View Elementary in Wenatchee are creating quite the stir. Dozens of parents and citizens are complaining of posters

www.kpq.com

Regardless, your argument is puzzling to me.

"Nobody is doing X. But also, I am very upset that they want to ban X."

 

[Angel Ariel]

Banning gender identity curriculum in K-3 classrooms is not an attack on kids with 2 dads. Nor, I might add, does it have a single even tenuous connection to The Walt Disney Company.


This graphic is being taught in elementary schools. Not all of them, and probably not very many of them. But not zero, either.

the bill doesn’t just ban gender identity - from the bill itself:

”prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels”

as already covered in discussion with @Vegas Disney Fan , discussion of family makeup is common in family life curricula in k-3, and this bill is vague enough that a child asking a question about why a family would have 2 moms or 2 dads could absolutely be considered to be banned under this law. that is the problem with poorly worded, vague legislation.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

No, I'm saying nobody is being oppressed. If this bill actually did what you seem to think it does, I'd be right there with you. But it doesn't.

Dismissing the bill as being toothless misses a lot of the point. Even if it's just "virtue signaling" that's still a problem. By signaling out the LGBT aspect in terms of school content it's saying that LGBT = bad.

It's just like back in the day when Bush was beating the drums for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. It didn't matter that it was never going to happen, and that this was basically dropped the moment he was elected. It turned people against the LGBT community.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

'Gender Unicorn' Poster at Elementary School Causing Controversy

Posters of a cartoon unicorn in Mission View Elementary in Wenatchee are creating quite the stir. Dozens of parents and citizens are complaining of posters

www.kpq.com

Did you even read the article?

#1 - it's NOT part of the curriculum, and therefore is NOT used as teaching materials.
#2 - the article doesn't specify the grades of the classrooms in which the poster was hung up.
#3 - Attempting to use posters that a few teachers hung up (in an entirely different state, by the way) to represent something as being part of the curriculum or a subject being taught - and especially as a widespread issue in the state of Florida - is disingenuous.


The statement from the school administration:

We have reviewed materials and looked into the origin and use of these materials in classrooms within the District.

The poster is not part of any district-adopted curriculum or instruction; therefore, our staff are not using this poster as teaching material. These materials were placed in some classrooms by staff members for the purpose of promoting an inclusive environment for all students. Staff commonly decorate classrooms with posters and other messaging intended to build rapport with students and to promote the District’s mission and values. In this instance, the poster chosen by staff appears to be reasonably intended to further those legitimate purposes. The posters do not advocate or encourage bias or prejudice. Instead, they are aimed at promoting an environment of inclusion and understanding at the school. As reflected in its recently adopted strategic plan framework, and consistent with state law and OSPI guidance, one of the District’s priorities is to create “welcoming spaces where all individuals flourish, are seen and valued, feel safe, and know they belong.” This priority applies across all District schools and classrooms. For all these reasons, at present these posters do not appear to violate any applicable, pre-existing policy.

'Gender Unicorn' Poster at Elementary School Causing Controversy

Posters of a cartoon unicorn in Mission View Elementary in Wenatchee are creating quite the stir. Dozens of parents and citizens are complaining of posters

www.kpq.com

Regardless, your argument is puzzling to me.

"Nobody is doing X. But also, I am very upset that they want to ban X."

What is the purpose of the law if it is targeting something that isn't happening? Explain it. There are already laws on the books regarding parental rights. There are also laws on the books regarding sex-ed. There are laws on the books regarding sex-ed AND parental rights regarding sex-ed. This law wasn't needed at all, so what is it's purpose, specifically?

Why does it single out LGBTQ+ issues specifically? (Which, by the way, is discrimination.)

Why is it worded so vaguely even after many additions and subtractions were made? (There IS a reason - and it's not a good one.)

 

[Angel Ariel]

Furthermore, teaching children to be respectful of how others want to be addressed is absolutely a reasonable part of a k-3 curriculum. it is fully reasonable to say this bill could iresult in banning a school from even simply sharing just that some students may use “they/them” pronouns and students should respect what their classmates request. I personally know a family whose elementary aged child uses they/them - I believe the child was in 2nd grade at the time I learned this.

thats not “teaching gender identity” - that’s teaching basic respect for other human beings and is absolutely not reasonable to ban.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

this bill is vague enough that a child asking a question about why a family would have 2 moms or 2 dads could absolutely be considered to be banned under this law. that is the problem with poorly worded, vague legislation.

This is indeed poorly worded, vague legislation. But I don't think it's vague enough to even remotely encompass the hypothetical you proposed.

Dismissing the bill as being toothless misses a lot of the point. Even if it's just "virtue signaling" that's still a problem. By signaling out the LGBT aspect in terms of school content it's saying that LGBT = bad.

It's just like back in the day when Bush was beating the drums for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. It didn't matter that it was never going to happen, and that this was basically dropped the moment he was elected. It turned people against the LGBT community.

Did you even read the article?

#1 - it's NOT part of the curriculum, and therefore is NOT used as teaching materials.
#2 - the article doesn't specify the grades of the classrooms in which the poster was hung up.
#3 - Attempting to use posters that a few teachers hung up (in an entirely different state, by the way) to represent something as being part of the curriculum or a subject being taught - and especially as a widespread issue in the state of Florida - is disingenuous.


The statement from the school administration:



What is the purpose of the law if it is targeting something that isn't happening? Explain it. There are already laws on the books regarding parental rights. There are also laws on the books regarding sex-ed. There are laws on the books regarding sex-ed AND parental rights regarding sex-ed. This law wasn't needed at all, so what is it's purpose, specifically?

Why does it single out LGBTQ+ issues specifically? (Which, by the way, is discrimination.)

Why is it worded so vaguely even after many additions and subtractions were made? (There IS a reason - and it's not a good one.)

I think you guys are very head-in-the-sand about what activist teachers are pushing in classrooms when it comes to gender identity. To the extent that this is a "don't say ___________" bill, it's closer to a "don't say trans" bill than a "don't say gay" bill. There are absolutely activist teachers trying to push prepubescent kids to "come out" as trans when there's no indication that they are or ever will be.

I know somehow "trans" and "gay" and a thousand other things that don't really have anything to do with one another have gotten lumped together under the umbrella of LGBTQ+, but they're separating things. An activist teacher or even a permissive curriculum isn't going to turn kids gay, of course that's ridiculous and anyone suggesting it is ridiculous. But they absolutely can plant the seeds of gender dysphoria in kids who wouldn't otherwise experience it and, in effect, "turn kids trans."

I personally know a family whose elementary aged child uses they/them - I believe the child was in 2nd grade at the time I learned this.

No seven year old has ever "chosen new pronouns" without being pushed into it.

And that's what we're talking about here. It's not about the delegitimization of ACTUAL trans people. It's about the delegitimization of trans-as-a-fad. My cousin (early 20s) was trans on three different occasions in high school. She was also a lesbian at several points and now she's a cis woman engaged to a man. She was never ACTUALLY trans or a lesbian, but being transgressive with your sexual identity and sexual orientation is just a thing kids do these days. Twenty years ago, these would have been the emo or goth kids.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

This is indeed poorly worded, vague legislation. But I don't think it's vague enough to even remotely encompass the hypothetical you proposed.




I think you guys are very head-in-the-sand about what activist teachers are pushing in classrooms when it comes to gender identity. To the extent that this is a "don't say ___________" bill, it's closer to a "don't say trans" bill than a "don't say gay" bill. There are absolutely activist teachers trying to push prepubescent kids to "come out" as trans when there's no indication that they are or ever will be.

I know somehow "trans" and "gay" and a thousand other things that don't really have anything to do with one another have gotten lumped together under the umbrella of LGBTQ+, but they're separating things. An activist teacher or even a permissive curriculum isn't going to turn kids gay, of course that's ridiculous and anyone suggesting it is ridiculous. But they absolutely can plant the seeds of gender dysphoria in kids who wouldn't otherwise experience it and, in effect, "turn kids trans."

The answer to teachers behaving inappropriately is to deal with the teachers themselves - not to target specific children and families, which this bill absolutely does.

If you don't think there are conservatives that will weaponize this law against the LGBTQ+ community - especially with the potential of a lawsuit and monetary reward, then it's pretty hypocritical of you to accuse others of having their heads in the sand.

 

[Angel Ariel]

This is indeed poorly worded, vague legislation. But I don't think it's vague enough to even remotely encompass the hypothetical you proposed.

watching what is getting banned in classrooms in my state, we will agree to disagree here. It’s absolutely vague enough For that.

I think you guys are very head-in-the-sand about what activist teachers are pushing in classrooms when it comes to gender identity.

I am very active in our large school district. I’m not head in the sand at all. My child is in elementary school and nothing has been pushed on her regarding gender identity.

No seven year old has ever "chosen new pronouns" without being pushed into it.

Their family didn’t push anything, but way to go for assumptions.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

This is indeed poorly worded, vague legislation. But I don't think it's vague enough to even remotely encompass the hypothetical you proposed.




I think you guys are very head-in-the-sand about what activist teachers are pushing in classrooms when it comes to gender identity. To the extent that this is a "don't say ___________" bill, it's closer to a "don't say trans" bill than a "don't say gay" bill. There are absolutely activist teachers trying to push prepubescent kids to "come out" as trans when there's no indication that they are or ever will be.

I know somehow "trans" and "gay" and a thousand other things that don't really have anything to do with one another have gotten lumped together under the umbrella of LGBTQ+, but they're separating things. An activist teacher or even a permissive curriculum isn't going to turn kids gay, of course that's ridiculous and anyone suggesting it is ridiculous. But they absolutely can plant the seeds of gender dysphoria in kids who wouldn't otherwise experience it and, in effect, "turn kids trans."


No seven year old has ever "chosen new pronouns" without being pushed into it.

And that's what we're talking about here. It's not about the delegitimization of ACTUAL trans people. It's about the delegitimization of trans-as-a-fad. My cousin (early 20s) was trans on three different occasions in high school. She was also a lesbian at several points and now she's a cis woman engaged to a man. She was never ACTUALLY trans or a lesbian, but being transgressive with your sexual identity and sexual orientation is just a thing kids do these days. Twenty years ago, these would have been the emo or goth kids.

So in other words, because some kids have a hard time figuring out who they are and thus experiment a lot, the LGBTQ+ community should be punished and targeted.

 

[Lilofan]

Stop doing business in China and bowing to their demands..that'd be a start

Where then do we get the approx 70% of our meds from? Currently coming from you know where. This was also typed by a device made in China.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

The answer to teachers behaving inappropriately is to deal with the teachers themselves - not to target specific children and families, which this bill absolutely does.

Easier said than done, in the Washington example provided the parents complained to the school and the school said it didn’t violate any laws so they let the posters stay.

That’s how we end up with legislation like this, a couple teachers push the limits by going outside approved curriculum, parents complain, the school districts say there’s no law against it, and the parents start the process of implementing laws to address what should have been handled on an individual level.

When parents feel they don’t have a voice at the school the only recourse is going above the schools.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Based on your past posts, I can only assume that this is sarcasm.

You assume wrong Sir.

 

[CaptinEO]

This statement is completely untethered from reality.

That's why this whole "rebellion" is silly. It's based on Bob Chapek supporting a bill that he doesn't support, which doesn't do what people say it does.

The anger isnt about what Bob supports.

It's about a company acting like a company and giving bribes to politicians, but in this case the politicians views are directly against Disney's (phony) marketing campaigns about claiming to love gay people and inclusion.

Now Disney is just doing what any big company does, donate to the campaign of any popular politician to get favors.

I doubt they want this Florida legislation just like I doubt they want concentration camps in China. But their endorsements of China and Florida associate them with these things.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Easier said than done, in the Washington example provided the parents complained to the school and the school said it didn’t violate any laws so they let the posters stay.

That’s how we end up with legislation like this, a couple teachers push the limits by going outside approved curriculum, parents complain, the school districts say there’s no law against it, and the parents start the process of implementing laws to address what should have been handled on an individual level.

When parents feel they don’t have a voice at the school the only recourse is going above the schools.

As asked earlier, who gets to decide on a topic by topic basis what is okay and what isn't? For every parent opposed to a book about a child having two dads, there will be one in favour.

Parents specifically aren't the arbitrators of content either. If parents want to dictate specific educational content for their kids, home schooling or private schools are options.

Schools need to educate students in a fulsome way preparing them to live and work in a larger society. Leaving things out to bend to the wishes of specific parents is neither a good nor a realistic goal.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Easier said than done, in the Washington example provided the parents complained to the school and the school said it didn’t violate any laws so they let the posters stay.

That’s how we end up with legislation like this, a couple teachers push the limits by going outside approved curriculum, parents complain, the school districts say there’s no law against it, and the parents start the process of implementing laws to address what should have been handled on an individual level.

When parents feel they don’t have a voice at the school the only recourse is going above the schools.

I come from another country and school system in a different time, so maybe none of this applies. Reading all of this outrage, though, I must say that I don't remember there ever being an issue with something being said in the classroom with which my parents disagreed or being confused when my parents said something at home that was different to what my teachers might have said. My parents were fairly conservative and thought teachers were generally very left-leaning and said so to me even as a little child. Children aren't stupid and can deal with hearing different things. Being taught to be respectful of different perspectives in school from a young age, though, shouldn't be controversial.

We're living in such a weird time where so many people across the political spectrum seem to want to control what people can say and hear. This, to me, just seems like a massive dog whistle to whip up a moral panic among parents about gay and trans people brainwashing (or 'recruiting') their children. It's a very old trick, including in Florida where a friend of our little Orange Bird in the Sunshine Tree made quite a name for herself lobbying on this issue.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Easier said than done, in the Washington example provided the parents complained to the school and the school said it didn’t violate any laws so they let the posters stay.

The teachers didn't go outside the curriculum...what's on the poster isn't being actively taught nor is it being used as teaching materials. It's also an issue in Washington, NOT Florida.

If people really think a poster is going to suddenly churn out hundreds of gay kids, then they need to go back to school themselves.

That’s how we end up with legislation like this, a couple teachers push the limits by going outside approved curriculum, parents complain, the school districts say there’s no law against it, and the parents start the process of implementing laws to address what should have been handled on an individual level.

#1 I didn't see attending a school board meeting mentioned anywhere in the article about the posters.

#2 This law isn't to address a few rogue teachers - not a single person has shown evidence of anything untoward occurring in Florida schools. This law is specifically pandering to bigots and homophobes by targeting LGBTQ+ students and families - and expanding laws that were already in existence to trample on their rights.

When parents feel they don’t have a voice at the school the only recourse is going above the schools.

Show me the school board meetings that have taken place in Florida about activist teachers...or about gender identity or issues of sex being taught in grades k-3.