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

[TrojanUSC]

No analogy is perfect of course. I don't think yours was well thought-through as it misses a key distinction (a distinction that I made several pages back).

In your analogy not everyone sleeps outside and not everyone sleeps inside. So barring something that only SOME people do can be discriminatory.

This is not the case with either "sexual orientation" or "gender identity". EVERY human being has a sexual orientation and EVERY human being has a gender identity. Therefore, barring discussions of "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" applies to EVERYONE and is NOT discriminatory.

Have you watched the video where the creator of the bill explicitly says he did this because he feels there's too many gay kids? That should say everything you need to know.

 

[ParkPeeker]

Have you watched the video where the creator of the bill explicitly says he did this because he feels there's too many gay kids? That should say everything you need to know.

They’re aware about the creator, and as I recall they just said it doesn’t matter about the stance of the actual person or people who created it, what matters is the actual text. Something like that. But the text is also clearly trying to discriminate, I mean talking casually, come on let’s be real, what is that supposed to be used against? Who is it actually useful for?

 

[maxairmike]

You'd have to ask each individual legislator why they voted against any amendment. The analysis of their answer would have to include the text of the amendment (and how that amendment affected the rest of the bill).

If a legislator rejected replacing the text "sexual orientation" in paragraph 3 with "sexual orientation including but not limited to the heterosexual and homosexual orientations" thinking that with the original text judges (including appellate and supreme court justices) would just apply the ban to instruction on homosexuality, they'd be a fool.

The author himself rejected such specific language amendments by saying it would "gut" the bill. I'll leave you to figure out why such specificity would "gut" the bill in his view.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I may have misunderstood your previous point. Upon re-reading it, it seems like you are saying that some people hold that "sexual orientation" = "homosexuality"?!

I find that very hard to believe.

Does that mean that some think that "gender identity" = "transgender" too?!

No person involved with the application of this law thinks that the text in the bill that says "Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3" means the exact same thing as "Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on homosexuality or transgenderism may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3".

I’m saying that you’re not going to find anyone who thinks it is age inappropriate for first graders to talk about their mommy and daddy but that there are people who think it is inappropriate for teenagers to mention someone having two daddies.

You'd have to ask each individual legislator why they voted against any amendment. The analysis of their answer would have to include the text of the amendment (and how that amendment affected the rest of the bill).

If a legislator rejected replacing the text "sexual orientation" in paragraph 3 with "sexual orientation including but not limited to the heterosexual and homosexual orientations" thinking that with the original text judges (including appellate and supreme court justices) would just apply the ban to instruction on homosexuality, they'd be a fool.

The text of the amendments is available as well as statements regarding their rejection. You refuse to acknowledge them because they are incredibly problematic your entire premise of neutrality is based on convenient claims of ignorance.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Have you watched the video where the creator of the bill explicitly says he did this because he feels there's too many gay kids? That should say everything you need to know.

It's plain that he doesn't understand that being LGBTQ+ is akin to having a specific eye color or being tall - it's not a choice - one either is or one isn't. That he thinks schools are "turning" children LGBTQ+ illustrates the depth of his misunderstanding, so it's extremely likely that he sees "sexual orientation and gender identity" as being related only to the LGBTQ+ community, especially if you take into account that unless he knows an LGBTQ+ person either directly or indirectly, "sexual orientation and gender identity" likely don't get brought up in conversation unless he and those he's speaking with are specifically referring to the LGBTQ+ community.

 

[crawale]

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.

Small children who are the intended focus of the bill should be going to school to be educated in reading and math. Our low scores compared to other nations proves that teachers obviously do not have the time to teach anything else. If you as a parent wish to share ography and explicit photos of homosexual activities then that is your right. The bill gives the parents who do not think a five year old need to be forced to view such materials the right to not have it forced fed by activists. Let children be children. They are not mature enough to process this type of information. A five year old is not old enough to be labeled as anything but a child and if left alone is pretty tolerant of others unless differences are pointed out as either superior of inferior.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Small children who are the intended focus of the bill should be going to school to be educated in reading and math. Our low scores compared to other nations proves that teachers obviously do not have the time to teach anything else. If you as a parent wish to share ****ography and explicit photos of homosexual activities then that is your right. The bill gives the parents who do not think a five year old need to be forced to view such materials the right to not have it forced fed by activists. Let children be children. They are not mature enough to process this type of information. A five year old is not old enough to be labeled as anything but a child and if left alone is pretty tolerant of others unless differences are pointed out as either superior of inferior.

What makes you think DeSantis was about to add this to the curriculum? Since Florida law requires sexual education content to be posted on district websites it should be easy for you to provide us with links to such content.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Small children who are the intended focus of the bill should be going to school to be educated in reading and math. Our low scores compared to other nations proves that teachers obviously do not have the time to teach anything else. If you as a parent wish to share ****ography and explicit photos of homosexual activities then that is your right. The bill gives the parents who do not think a five year old need to be forced to view such materials the right to not have it forced fed by activists. Let children be children. They are not mature enough to process this type of information. A five year old is not old enough to be labeled as anything but a child and if left alone is pretty tolerant of others unless differences are pointed out as either superior of inferior.

Not a single person here is advocating what you suggest. Please read the entire thread.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Please do a bit of research before you start repeating that fictitious tale concerning Amonute of the Pamunkey tribe. It's a story that's lived far too long and it's just a story without a basis, in fact, just kept alive because it flattered the English settlers. Now this fictitious representation is being attacked as a strawman.

Hi, I am not sure which of us this comment is for. The reason why I commented in the first place is that I am a Native woman who is part of the same language group the Pamunky people are in, who thought that bringing her up in this context was sort of gross. I specifically stated that the English settler version of the story was false and that she was a real person, so I honestly don't know what you are getting at.

 

[Disney Analyst]

One thing that is left out of this conversation seems to be teachers.

Teachers are heroes. Why is there such little trust towards teachers?

If I was a teacher right now, I’d be considering if I was in the right state.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

One thing that is left out of this conversation seems to be teachers.

Teachers are heroes. Why is there such little trust towards teachers?

If I was a teacher right now, I’d be considering if I was in the right state.

Because there's a political advantage to a lesser educated public.

And I agree with you 100%. The last thing we can afford to lose is good teachers...yet here we are with states literally chasing them away.

 

[networkpro]

Hi, I am not sure which of us this comment is for. The reason why I commented in the first place is that I am a Native woman who is part of the same language group the Pamunky people are in, who thought that bringing her up in this context was sort of gross. I specifically stated that the English settler version of the story was false and that she was a real person, so I honestly don't know what you are getting at.

So today isn't 400 years ago, nor are societal norms the same. Even in John Smiths' own accounting of 1608 "A True Relation of such Occurences and Accidents of Noate as hath Happened in Virginia" you don't get anything like the myth that Disney made a cartoon about nor your "Human trafficking" claims. People like to toss in random associations believing it adds a certain gravitas to their arguments. The original linkage of the Arial character to "Pocahontas" for age comparison was a bit of misdirection as both were referred to in the context of being fables, not people.

 

[Dear Prudence]

So today isn't 400 years ago, nor are societal norms the same. Even in John Smiths' own accounting of 1608 "A True Relation of such Occurences and Accidents of Noate as hath Happened in Virginia" you don't get anything like the myth that Disney made a cartoon about nor your "Human trafficking" claims. People like to toss in random associations believing it adds a certain gravitas to their arguments. The original linkage of the Arial character to "Pocahontas" for age comparison was a bit of misdirection as both were referred to in the context of being fables, not people.

I'm done here.

 

[Disney Analyst]

 

[ParkPeeker]

I was googling about this high school trans teacher who made an inappropriate sexual joke in her chemistry class, because it was posted on here yesterday. All I’ll say about that is that I think it’s irrational to look at that case and think that teachers are going to be talking to kindergartners about sex.

Anyways I came across an article that linked me to a Twitter account that broke the story named libs of tiktok. I scrolled down the profile to see the types of posts it had and so much of it was just bashing lgbt and lgbt allied teachers on tiktok, no matter how non sexual it is.

I’ll put some examples here, the Twitter page was upset by a teacher who had the classroom decorated with different lgbtq+ flags due to this bill. It was 4th grade I believe. I can see how those flags can evoke “inappropriateness” to an adult who has seen them in adult settings etc, it sucks but I can see how someone can view them as sexual. But the flags decorating the classroom doesn’t mean the teacher will talk about anything sexual. And there was an even milder tik tok about a teacher coming out as gay to his kids, that’s it. And the comments really illustrate the fact that people view something like this as sexual, or doing it for the clout. There was a comment thread that even illustrated how people aren’t able to see that, in terms of how non sexual this is, it is akin to a teacher telling her kids she’s pregnant.

EDIT: I watched the coming out one again and he did seem to joke about it being a “fun conversation if it comes to that” which I totally missed how that could sound sexual after watching it the first time around, so I will admit this isn’t a good example oops! Though my following point still stands

So at this point I come to the conclusion that a lot of people draw the sex line at just the mention of anything lgbt at all. So like many of us have said, to alot of people lgbt=Inherently sexual, automatically has to do with genitalia, automatically about your private sex life.

There was also this trans teacher coming out to their kids and in the video you can audibly hear a student being validated by the teacher’s coming out, saying “that’s literally me.”

 

[ParkPeeker]

Wow this is big

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

One thing that is left out of this conversation seems to be teachers.

Teachers are heroes. Why is there such little trust towards teachers?

If I was a teacher right now, I’d be considering if I was in the right state.

Teaching is just like every profession, some are exceptional, the vast majority are good, and unfortunately some are bad.

Reminds me of the police in many ways, they have a very strong union, the good ones often protect the bad ones, administration usually works to protect the bad ones, and it’s nearly impossible to fire the bad ones.

The good ones end up being watched like a hawk because of the bad ones.

 

[Prince-1]

the good ones often protect the bad ones,

If they are protecting the bad ones then they stop being good.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Disney Imagineers Demand Halt of Mass Move to Florida After ’Don’t Say Gay’ Blow-Up (Exclusive)​

by Drew Taylor and Sharon Waxman | March 18, 2022 @ 6:00 AM
In the wake of the controversy at Disney over its response to Florida’s ”Don’t Say Gay” bill, a group of Imagineers — the legendary creative team behind theme parks, attractions, cruise ships and retail outposts — have asked embattled CEO Bob Chapek to reverse a decision to move their entire division to Florida, a move they consider unreasonable given what they have called the state’s “hateful legislation.”

In an open letter to Disney leadership this week, LGBTQ+ activists inside the company announced plans for a number of walk-outs and also demanded that the company stand down from the planned move of the division to Florida after the state passed legislation barring schools from discussing “sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The letter demanded that Disney cease “any efforts to move employees to Florida office locations… Guaranteeing no employee will be terminated when denying relocation to Florida.”

The requirement to move, retire or quit has decimated the ranks of Disney’s storied creatives. Several told TheWrap that the Imagineers team — which they said numbered as many as 1,800 before the pandemic — has been reduced by more than half since last fall as a result of the relocation decision.

A Disney spokesperson told TheWrap: ”We understand relocating is always a big decision and deeply personal one and we have been committed to approaching this project and all who are impacted with the utmost care and compassion.”


The executive said that “not all decisions have been made,” around the move to Florida, and “the vast majority of senior leaders have already committed to moving with relocations taking place over the next several years.”

Those views are disputed by current and former Imagineers who spoke to TheWrap. Indeed, when the move was announced last summer, it was under the condition that employees commit to be in Florida in the next 18 months, which would put the deadline at early 2023.

The move to Florida had been roiling the Imagineering division since it was first announced and edicts were handed down from corporate offices in September. Imagineers and other members of the Disney Parks Experiences and Products (DPEP) umbrella — which includes publishing, consumer products, Shop Disney and games — were given just 90 days to decide whether they’d move to Florida.

Imagineers could refuse the transfer and lose their job at some time in the future, with severance; quit; or agree to move to Florida. More than one Imagineer told TheWrap that many people agreed to stay without any actual intention of moving. Luminaries like Joe Rohde and Jim Shull opted for retirement, and younger Imagineers like Kevin Lively chose to leave when given the 90-day ultimatum, according to Imagineers interviewed by TheWrap.

The policy move was largely informed by a $580 million tax break issued by the state of Florida, although Chapek surely noticed that California forced the closure of Disneyland in Anaheim for more than 400 days during the pandemic, when the company was badly hemorrhaging money. By comparison, Walt Disney World in Florida was only closed for a few months during the pandemic.


The Imagineers include a significant number of LGBTQ+ individuals who find the idea of moving to Florida an insult to their dignity, and an undue reward to a state that has rejected them.

“I feel like the move of California staff to Florida is a mistake. Not only because of attrition — we are losing tons of talent,” said a leading Imagineer who is gay and declined to be identified, noting that much of the talent being lost is diverse, minority and female, three groups historically underrepresented within Imagineering. “But it’s also interconnected to the culture of Florida.”

“I would love for Bob (Chapek) to see that this is a chance to come out and reverse something. This is his decision,” this Imagineer continued. “But it’s one where he would get a lot of credit for backtracking on a business decision and to say to Florida, ‘You can’t behave in one direction and expect to reap the benefits of the value we bring to the state.’ That’s what they deserve.”

A new corporate complex is being built in Lake Nona, just east of the Orlando International Airport. Previously, Imagineering had an outpost behind the Wonders of Life pavilion at EPCOT, which was built during the construction of EPCOT and has continued, to this day, to be a home for Imagineers working on various projects, including the updating of EPCOT.

Disney’s largest domestic theme park operation, Walt Disney World, with its four theme parks, two water parks and countless resort hotels, is located just outside Orlando, with a hub of its Disney Cruise Line in Port Canaveral (a little more than an hour from the theme parks).

The Disney spokesperson told TheWrap: “The roles moving to Lake Nona represent a small portion of the total roles at Imagineering (less than 30%).”


One former Imagineer disputed that this was possible, saying the move requires relocating headquarters, which has never been done before. The former Imagineer disputed the suggestion that there were more full-time Imagineers in Florida currently than in Glendale: “You’d have to be a contortionist to make that stick.”

The Disney spokesperson declined to say how many Imagineers currently remain at Disney, and how many have retired or quit as a result of the requirement to move to Florida.

TheWrap spoke to three individuals with knowledge of the Imagineering division who estimated the total number of Imagineers who chose to move to Florida to be around 300. The pre-COVID staff of around 1,800 was reduced by half due to canceled projects and furloughs during the pandemic. In a layoff of 28,000 employees during the summer of 2020, Disney announced 411 of them were Imagineers.

According to one former Imagineer, a manager said during the termination process that “80% of people in creative” would be dismissed. That would put the number of those remaining below 100.

This former Imagineer lamented that with all of the senior employees leaving, the “tribal knowledge” of Imagineering will be lost forever.

Disney Imagineers are a near-mythological group within Disney, a community of highly creative people, many with multidisciplinary backgrounds, who are responsible for all of the theme parks and the rides, shows, and attractions therein, as well as the Disney Cruise Line ships.


Walt Disney Imagineering is a division of the company that was started by Walt himself on the Disney lot in 1952, before moving to Glendale. The term Imagineer described the people who work for what was first known as WED Enterprises (named after Walt’s initials) and, in 1986, Walt Disney Imagineering or WDI. The Imagineers were immortalized in Leslie Iwerks’ six-part Disney+ documentary series “The Imagineering Story.”

Imagineering has historically had a history of prominent figures who have been a part of the LGBTQ+ community, notably first-generation Imagineer Bob Gurr, who designed the monorail and PeopleMover for Disneyland; second-generation Imagineer Tony Baxter and current Imagineers like Zach Riddley, who’s leading the “Project Gamma” overhaul of EPCOT.

When Josh D’Amaro, chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Products Division, outlined the move in a letter to staff last July, he said the Florida campus would be the home base for “more than 2,000 Cast, Imagineers and employees.” This number includes all of DPEP, and newly hired Imagineers. (Currently all staff vacancies are meant to be back-filled by Florida candidates.)

The move to Florida was the final straw in a very contentious couple of years at Walt Disney Imagineering, starting with the COVID pandemic, which led to a historic global shutdown of the theme parks, followed by the Imagineers being furloughed and then many asked to resign or retire.


Chapek’s bungled response to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” legislation — first by not saying anything, then by explaining that the content the company produces is more important than any direct lobbying against the legislation, followed by sheepish apologies and commitments to listen and learn — reinvigorated a demand to reexamine and potentially reverse the decision to move Imagineering to Florida.

Moving Imagineering and DPEP to Florida puts the company back in the crosshairs of the ongoing culture war. Last week, California Governor Gavin Newsom tweeted at Chapek to keep DPEP here.


And the ongoing uproar over the company’s response to the Florida legislation gives these employees unexpected leverage. One Imagineer told TheWrap that he was happy with the progress they’ve already made. And while Chapek hasn’t responded yet, Imagineering is hopeful that he will.

“He’s listening,” the Imagineer told TheWrap.

 

[Quinnmac000]

That's gonna hurt Florida more than Disney and I'm for it. ....