Jump to content

Westlake school district faces lawsuit from parent over diversity and inclusion initiative


Monte1076
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BarryLaverty said:

Another lily white district, similar to Southlake Carroll, is under attack for working on promoting diversity? Shocked, I tell ya! 

“Working on and promoting” is drastically different than mandating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

Another lily white district, similar to Southlake Carroll, is under attack for working on promoting diversity? Shocked, I tell ya! 

FAKE diversity.

Convince me otherwise. I'm willing to listen to your arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

I have no real grasp of your concept, truthfully, of 'fake diversity'. Please explain. 

Surface "diversity", but not a real diversity of thought.

An example, and I'll have to find the story:

A white man was FIRED from his job during a "diversity initiative", where they hired TWO women (a white woman and a black woman) to replace him. In the name of "diversity".

Quote

The company replaced him with a white woman and a Black woman as a way to increase racial and gender diversity at the workplace, he said.

https://www.newsweek.com/company-ordered-pay-10-million-firing-white-man-wont-change-diversity-drive-1643697

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/28/us/novant-health-wrongful-termination-white-executive-fired/index.html

Yes, he got $10 million (tentatively) out of it. Do you think that's right? You can say "boo hoo white man" all you want, you KNOW that what the company did was wrong.

How about your favorite sports team? Do you want them to be "diverse", or do you want them to win?

I saw that question asked to college kids who want "diversity" on campus. They want "their type" of diversity, but not actual diversity of thought. When they were asked if they wanted that same kind of diversity on their college's football team (i.e. representative of the population, but not that "diverse thought"), they said "no", they wanted the best players so they could win games.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

Surface "diversity", but not a real diversity of thought.

An example, and I'll have to find the story:

A white man was FIRED from his job during a "diversity initiative", where they hired TWO minority women to replace him. In the name of "diversity".

He's suing, and may actually win. Do you think that's right? You can say "boo hoo white man" all you want, you KNOW that's not right.

How about your favorite sports team? Do you want them to be "diverse", or do you want them to win?

I saw that question asked to college kids who want "diversity" on campus. They want "their type" of diversity, but not actual diversity of thought. When they were asked if they wanted that same kind of diversity (i.e. representative of the population), they said "no", they wanted the best players so they could win games.

I am not sure that you don't have the objectives of diversity training twisted, at least in an education setting. As I have said before, there is definitive proof that when someone is secure and feels understood in their environment, that they learn better and more effectively. So, for most of my education career, the emphasis has been to work toward an understanding of cultural difference, so that there is a commonality or at least a welcoming nature of our campuses, whatever race, religion, socioeconomic status. You also have built in things like free lunch programs and additional tutorial services, before and after school, longer day care, to address the issues that families have. You might want to add Ruby Payne to your reading list. Now, as time has evolved, we also have an approach of being respectful toward those who have differing views on gender identity. Again, that is about the most comfortable setting, so that all might best be educated. 

I have never felt beat up or set aside as a teacher or coach, because I am a white man. In fact, the opposite, and privilege of my status is very real. If there is a hire of a black woman for a position in a district, because they want students to feel they have a role model or someone that relates to them best, why have animosity toward that? It isn't in line with reality, and it is terribly defensive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

I am not sure that you don't have the objectives of diversity training twisted, at least in an education setting. As I have said before, there is definitive proof that when someone is secure and feels understood in their environment, that they learn better and more effectively.

And what sort of "understanding" effort/attempt is there of Republican and Conservative thought to make a student feel "secure" in their environment? What effort do you put forth in those situations?

Quote

So, for most of my education career, the emphasis has been to work toward an understanding of cultural difference, so that there is a commonality or at least a welcoming nature of our campuses, whatever race, religion, socioeconomic status. You also have built in things like free lunch programs and additional tutorial services, before and after school, longer day care, to address the issues that families have.

Now look at it from outside the education bubble. You might want to look up what sorts of "diversity" training are going on elsewhere.

Quote

being respectful toward those who have differing views on gender identity.

And how do you exercise that with someone who believes that there are only two genders? Especially if your school has a "policy" that states that they (the school or district) believes otherwise? Is that student allowed to express that view, if the other view is also expressed? How do you know? What if a teacher expressed that same sentiment? Or a principal? Or any other school faculty?

Quote

If there is a hire of a black woman for a position in a district, because they want students to feel they have a role model or someone that relates to them best, why have animosity toward that? It isn't in line with reality, and it is terribly defensive. 

That's not the point, though. The broader issue (and one I brought up in the articles above) is that a guy was fired purely in the name of diversity. The fact that he won $10 million (tentatively, it's being appealed) bolsters that argument. You can't really defend that, can you? Someone being fired and replaced purely in the name of diversity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Monte1076 said:

And how do you exercise that with someone who believes that there are only two genders? Especially if your school has a "policy" that states that they (the school or district) believes otherwise? Is that student allowed to express that view, if the other view is also expressed? How do you know? What if a teacher expressed that same sentiment? Or a principal? Or any other school faculty?

DISCRIMINATION is prohibited, and that could include harassing speech from any of those in a school setting. You don't have to be accepting as to your beliefs, but your bigotry doesn't get to be voiced without consequence, in a public school setting. You can discriminate all you want in a private school on those grounds and certainly in a home school setting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BarryLaverty said:

DISCRIMINATION is prohibited, and that could include harassing speech from any of those in a school setting. You don't have to be accepting as to your beliefs, but your bigotry doesn't get to be voiced without consequence, in a public school setting. You can discriminate all you want in a private school on those grounds and certainly in a home school setting. 

Stating scientific FACT is not bigotry.......anyone who believes that they are a different gender than the one they were born with is mentally ill and in need of help.....

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RETIREDFAN1 said:

Stating scientific FACT is not bigotry.......anyone who believes that they are a different gender than the one they were born with is mentally ill and in need of help.....

If you feel the need to voice your 'truth' to someone to them or to others in a public school setting, you don't need to work with that student. That's not rocket science. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

DISCRIMINATION is prohibited, and that could include harassing speech from any of those in a school setting. You don't have to be accepting as to your beliefs, but your bigotry doesn't get to be voiced without consequence, in a public school setting. You can discriminate all you want in a private school on those grounds and certainly in a home school setting. 

Ah, I see. so the "diversity" only runs one way. Got it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found this article and sharing it for your reading...or not. I have no direct dog in this hunt. 

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/

Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia

Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary

 

Credit: Getty Images

Antiscientific sentiment bombards our politics, or so says the Intellectual Dark Web (IDW). Chief among these antiscientific sentiments, the IDW cites the rising visibility of transgender civil rights demands. To the IDW, trans people and their advocates are destroying the pillars of our society with such free-speech–suppressing, postmodern concepts as: “trans women are women,” “gender-neutral pronouns,” or “there are more than two genders.” Asserting “basic biology” will not be ignored, the IDW proclaims. “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

The irony in all this is that these “protectors of enlightenment” are guilty of the very behavior this phrase derides. Though often dismissed as just a fringe internet movement, they espouse unscientific claims that have infected our politics and culture. Especially alarming is that these “intellectual” assertions are used by nonscientists to claim a scientific basis for the dehumanization of trans people. The real world consequences are stacking up: the trans military ban, bathroom bills, and removal of workplace and medical discrimination protections, a 41-51 percent suicide attempt rate and targeted fatal violence . It’s not just internet trolling anymore.

Contrary to popular belief, scientific research helps us better understand the unique and real transgender experience. Specifically, through three subjects: (1) genetics, (2) neurobiology and (3) endocrinology. So, hold onto your parts, whatever they may be. It’s time for “the talk.”

BIOLOGICAL SEX: HOW YOU GET IT

Nearly everyone in middle school biology learned that if you’ve got XX chromosomes, you’re a female; if you’ve got XY, you’re a male. This tired simplification is great for teaching the importance of chromosomes but betrays the true nature of biological sex. The popular belief that your sex arises only from your chromosomal makeup is wrong. The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.

Why? Because biological sex is far more complicated than XX or XY (or XXY, or just X). XX individuals could present with male gonads. XY individuals can have ovaries. How? Through a set of complex genetic signals that, in the course of a human’s development, begins with a small group of cells called the bipotential primordium and a gene called SRY.

A newly fertilized embryo initially develops without any indication of its sex. At around five weeks, a group of cells clump together to form the bipotential primordium. These cells are neither male nor female but have the potential to turn into testes, ovaries or neither. After the primordium forms, SRY—a gene on the Y chromosome discovered in 1990, thanks to the participation of intersex XX males and XY females—might be activated.*

Though it is still not fully understood, we know SRY plays a role in pushing the primordium toward male gonads. But SRY is not a simple on/off switch, it’s a precisely timed start signal, the first chord of the “male gonad” symphony. A group of cells (instrument sections) must all express SRY (notes of the chord), at the right time (conductor?). Without that first chord, the embryo will play a different symphony: female gonads, or something in between.

And there’s more! While brief and coordinated SRY-activation initiates the process of male-sex differentiation, genes like DMRT1 and FOXL2 maintain certain sexual characteristics during adulthood. If these genes stop functioning, gonads can change and exhibit characteristics of the opposite sex. Without these players constantly active, certain components of your biological sex can change.

There’s still more! SRY, DMRT1, and FOXL2 aren’t directly involved with other aspects of biological sex. Secondary sex characteristics—penis, vagina, appearance, behavior—arise later, from hormones, environment, experience, and genes interacting. To explore this, we move from the body to the brain, where biology becomes behavior.

THE BRAIN: WHERE STUFF GETS “MADE UP”

When the biology gets too complicated, some point to differences between brains of males and females as proof of the sexual binary. But a half century of empirical research has repeatedly challenged the idea that brain biology is simply XY = male brain or XX = female brain. In other words, there is no such thing as “the male brain” or “the female brain.” This is not to say that there are no observable differences. Certain brain characteristics can be sexually dimorphic: observable average differences across males and females. But like biological sex, pointing to “brain sex” as the explanation for these differences is wrong and hinders scientific research.

Let’s just take the most famous example of sexual dimorphism in the brain: the sexually dimorphic nucleus of the preoptic area (sdnPOA). This tiny brain area with a disproportionately sized name is slightly larger in males than in females. But it’s unclear if that size difference indicates distinctly wired sdnPOAs in males versus females, or if—as with the bipotential primordium—the same wiring is functionally weighted toward opposite ends of a spectrum. Throw in the observation that the sdnPOA in gay men is closer to that of straight females than straight males, and the idea of “the male brain” falls apart.

Trying to link sex, sex chromosomes and sexual dimorphism is also useless for understanding other brain properties. The hormone vasopressin is dimorphic but is linked to both behavioral differences and similarities across sex. Simply put, the idea of a sexual binary isn’t scientifically useful, and nowhere is this more obvious than in the brain. It also happens that transgender people have the brains to prove it.

It’s easy to see sexual dimorphisms and conclude that the brain is binary; easy, but wrong. Thanks to the participation of trans people in research, we have expanded our understanding of how brain structure, sex and gender interact. For some properties like brain volume and connectivity, trans people possessed values in between those typical of cisgender males and females, both before and after transitioning. Another study found that for certain brain regions, trans individuals appeared similar to cis-individuals with the same gender identity. In that same study, researchers found specific areas of the brain where trans people seemed closer to those with the same assigned sex at birth. Other researchers discovered that trans people have unique structural differences from cis-individuals.

THE BODY AND THE BRAIN AND THE HORMONES BETWIXT

As if the brain and body weren’t complicated enough, another biological factor influences the expression of biological sex in an individual: hormones. Anyone who has gone through puberty has felt the power of hormones firsthand. But like all things biology, hormones cannot be limited to the pubescent idea of “estrogen = female and testosterone = male.”

For one thing, all humans possess levels of estrogen, progesterone and testosterone with sex differences not as prominent as is popularly thought. During infancy and prepubescence, these hormones sit in a bipotential range, with no marked sex differences. Through puberty, certain sex hormones like estrogen, progesterone and testosterone become weighted toward one end of a spectrum. But in developed adults, estrogen and progesterone levels are on average similar between males and nonpregnant females. And while testosterone exhibits the largest difference between adult males and females, heritability studies have found that genetics (X vs. Y) only explains about 56 percent of an individual’s testosterone, suggesting many other influences on hormones. Furthermore, measurements of sex hormones levels in any one individual wildly vary across the range of “average” values regardless of how close or spread apart you take the measurements. The binary sex model not only insufficiently predicts the presence of hormones but is useless in describing factors that influence them.

Environmental, social and behavioral factors also influence hormones in both males and females, complicating the idea that hormones determine sex. Progesterone changes in response to typically male-coded social situations that involve dominance and competition. Estrogen, typically linked to feminine-coded behavior, also plays a role in masculine-coded dominance/power social scenarios. Though testosterone levels are different between males and females on average, many external factors can change these levels, such as whether or not a person is raising a child. Differing testosterone levels in both men and women can predict certain parenting behaviors. Even the content of a sexual fantasy can change testosterone levels. The fact is, behavior and environment—like cultural gender norms and expectations—influence sex-related hormones, and the biology of the body and brain itself.

SCIENCE AND SOCIETY: BETTER TOGETHER

While this is a small overview, the science is clear and conclusive: sex is not binary, transgender people are real. It is time that we acknowledge this. Defining a person’s sex identity using decontextualized “facts” is unscientific and dehumanizing. The trans experience provides essential insights into the science of sex and scientifically demonstrates that uncommon and atypical phenomena are vital for a successful living system. Even the scientific endeavor itself is quantifiably better when it is more inclusive and diverse. So, no matter what a pundit, politician or internet troll may say, trans people are an indispensable part of our living reality.

Transgender humans represent the complexity and diversity that are fundamental features of life, evolution and nature itself. That is a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RETIREDFAN1 said:

Stating scientific FACT is not bigotry.......anyone who believes that they are a different gender than the one they were born with is mentally ill and in need of help.....

And, the DSM does have a category for gender identity, and it is called gender dysphoria, as some do have issues considering themselves to be another gender, because of the incongruence it makes them feel, not the actual gender identity itself making them be labeled mentally ill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

If you feel the need to voice your 'truth' to someone to them or to others in a public school setting, you don't need to work with that student. That's not rocket science. 

Scientific FACT ain't my truth.....it's universal TRUTH.........and teaching TRUTH is WHY schools exist in the first place......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

Found this article and sharing it for your reading...or not. I have no direct dog in this hunt. 

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/

Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia

Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary

 

Credit: Getty Images

Antiscientific sentiment bombards our politics, or so says the Intellectual Dark Web (IDW). Chief among these antiscientific sentiments, the IDW cites the rising visibility of transgender civil rights demands. To the IDW, trans people and their advocates are destroying the pillars of our society with such free-speech–suppressing, postmodern concepts as: “trans women are women,” “gender-neutral pronouns,” or “there are more than two genders.” Asserting “basic biology” will not be ignored, the IDW proclaims. “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

The irony in all this is that these “protectors of enlightenment” are guilty of the very behavior this phrase derides. Though often dismissed as just a fringe internet movement, they espouse unscientific claims that have infected our politics and culture. Especially alarming is that these “intellectual” assertions are used by nonscientists to claim a scientific basis for the dehumanization of trans people. The real world consequences are stacking up: the trans military ban, bathroom bills, and removal of workplace and medical discrimination protections, a 41-51 percent suicide attempt rate and targeted fatal violence . It’s not just internet trolling anymore.

Contrary to popular belief, scientific research helps us better understand the unique and real transgender experience. Specifically, through three subjects: (1) genetics, (2) neurobiology and (3) endocrinology. So, hold onto your parts, whatever they may be. It’s time for “the talk.”

BIOLOGICAL SEX: HOW YOU GET IT

Nearly everyone in middle school biology learned that if you’ve got XX chromosomes, you’re a female; if you’ve got XY, you’re a male. This tired simplification is great for teaching the importance of chromosomes but betrays the true nature of biological sex. The popular belief that your sex arises only from your chromosomal makeup is wrong. The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.

Why? Because biological sex is far more complicated than XX or XY (or XXY, or just X). XX individuals could present with male gonads. XY individuals can have ovaries. How? Through a set of complex genetic signals that, in the course of a human’s development, begins with a small group of cells called the bipotential primordium and a gene called SRY.

A newly fertilized embryo initially develops without any indication of its sex. At around five weeks, a group of cells clump together to form the bipotential primordium. These cells are neither male nor female but have the potential to turn into testes, ovaries or neither. After the primordium forms, SRY—a gene on the Y chromosome discovered in 1990, thanks to the participation of intersex XX males and XY females—might be activated.*

Though it is still not fully understood, we know SRY plays a role in pushing the primordium toward male gonads. But SRY is not a simple on/off switch, it’s a precisely timed start signal, the first chord of the “male gonad” symphony. A group of cells (instrument sections) must all express SRY (notes of the chord), at the right time (conductor?). Without that first chord, the embryo will play a different symphony: female gonads, or something in between.

And there’s more! While brief and coordinated SRY-activation initiates the process of male-sex differentiation, genes like DMRT1 and FOXL2 maintain certain sexual characteristics during adulthood. If these genes stop functioning, gonads can change and exhibit characteristics of the opposite sex. Without these players constantly active, certain components of your biological sex can change.

There’s still more! SRY, DMRT1, and FOXL2 aren’t directly involved with other aspects of biological sex. Secondary sex characteristics—penis, vagina, appearance, behavior—arise later, from hormones, environment, experience, and genes interacting. To explore this, we move from the body to the brain, where biology becomes behavior.

THE BRAIN: WHERE STUFF GETS “MADE UP”

When the biology gets too complicated, some point to differences between brains of males and females as proof of the sexual binary. But a half century of empirical research has repeatedly challenged the idea that brain biology is simply XY = male brain or XX = female brain. In other words, there is no such thing as “the male brain” or “the female brain.” This is not to say that there are no observable differences. Certain brain characteristics can be sexually dimorphic: observable average differences across males and females. But like biological sex, pointing to “brain sex” as the explanation for these differences is wrong and hinders scientific research.

Let’s just take the most famous example of sexual dimorphism in the brain: the sexually dimorphic nucleus of the preoptic area (sdnPOA). This tiny brain area with a disproportionately sized name is slightly larger in males than in females. But it’s unclear if that size difference indicates distinctly wired sdnPOAs in males versus females, or if—as with the bipotential primordium—the same wiring is functionally weighted toward opposite ends of a spectrum. Throw in the observation that the sdnPOA in gay men is closer to that of straight females than straight males, and the idea of “the male brain” falls apart.

Trying to link sex, sex chromosomes and sexual dimorphism is also useless for understanding other brain properties. The hormone vasopressin is dimorphic but is linked to both behavioral differences and similarities across sex. Simply put, the idea of a sexual binary isn’t scientifically useful, and nowhere is this more obvious than in the brain. It also happens that transgender people have the brains to prove it.

It’s easy to see sexual dimorphisms and conclude that the brain is binary; easy, but wrong. Thanks to the participation of trans people in research, we have expanded our understanding of how brain structure, sex and gender interact. For some properties like brain volume and connectivity, trans people possessed values in between those typical of cisgender males and females, both before and after transitioning. Another study found that for certain brain regions, trans individuals appeared similar to cis-individuals with the same gender identity. In that same study, researchers found specific areas of the brain where trans people seemed closer to those with the same assigned sex at birth. Other researchers discovered that trans people have unique structural differences from cis-individuals.

THE BODY AND THE BRAIN AND THE HORMONES BETWIXT

As if the brain and body weren’t complicated enough, another biological factor influences the expression of biological sex in an individual: hormones. Anyone who has gone through puberty has felt the power of hormones firsthand. But like all things biology, hormones cannot be limited to the pubescent idea of “estrogen = female and testosterone = male.”

For one thing, all humans possess levels of estrogen, progesterone and testosterone with sex differences not as prominent as is popularly thought. During infancy and prepubescence, these hormones sit in a bipotential range, with no marked sex differences. Through puberty, certain sex hormones like estrogen, progesterone and testosterone become weighted toward one end of a spectrum. But in developed adults, estrogen and progesterone levels are on average similar between males and nonpregnant females. And while testosterone exhibits the largest difference between adult males and females, heritability studies have found that genetics (X vs. Y) only explains about 56 percent of an individual’s testosterone, suggesting many other influences on hormones. Furthermore, measurements of sex hormones levels in any one individual wildly vary across the range of “average” values regardless of how close or spread apart you take the measurements. The binary sex model not only insufficiently predicts the presence of hormones but is useless in describing factors that influence them.

Environmental, social and behavioral factors also influence hormones in both males and females, complicating the idea that hormones determine sex. Progesterone changes in response to typically male-coded social situations that involve dominance and competition. Estrogen, typically linked to feminine-coded behavior, also plays a role in masculine-coded dominance/power social scenarios. Though testosterone levels are different between males and females on average, many external factors can change these levels, such as whether or not a person is raising a child. Differing testosterone levels in both men and women can predict certain parenting behaviors. Even the content of a sexual fantasy can change testosterone levels. The fact is, behavior and environment—like cultural gender norms and expectations—influence sex-related hormones, and the biology of the body and brain itself.

SCIENCE AND SOCIETY: BETTER TOGETHER

While this is a small overview, the science is clear and conclusive: sex is not binary, transgender people are real. It is time that we acknowledge this. Defining a person’s sex identity using decontextualized “facts” is unscientific and dehumanizing. The trans experience provides essential insights into the science of sex and scientifically demonstrates that uncommon and atypical phenomena are vital for a successful living system. Even the scientific endeavor itself is quantifiably better when it is more inclusive and diverse. So, no matter what a pundit, politician or internet troll may say, trans people are an indispensable part of our living reality.

Transgender humans represent the complexity and diversity that are fundamental features of life, evolution and nature itself. That is a fact.

They are mentally ill and need treatment.......and those who spout UNSCIENTIFIC nonsense like the above author need to join them.......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

You aren't allowed to point out your general disagreement with how someone sees themselves, and that is something you think should be allowed? 

This is an example of the "fake diversity" I'm talking about.

If "Person A" believes there are only 2 genders, and "Person B" does not, your argument is that only Person B gets to express that, and it's considered a form of "diversity" to hold one of those beliefs but not another. What happened to "work[ing] toward an understanding of cultural difference, so that there is a commonality or at least a welcoming nature of our campuses, whatever race, religion, socioeconomic status"?

Seems like that only applies to "correct" thought. Didn't you say something earlier along the following lines:

"DISCRIMINATION is prohibited"

And by your logic, someone who holds the belief that there are only two genders would be (and should be, if I'm understanding you correctly) discriminated against. How is that "diversity"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

This is an example of the "fake diversity" I'm talking about.

If "Person A" believes there are only 2 genders, and "Person B" does not, your argument is that only Person B gets to express that, and it's considered a form of "diversity" to hold one of those beliefs but not another. What happened to "work[ing] toward an understanding of cultural difference, so that there is a commonality or at least a welcoming nature of our campuses, whatever race, religion, socioeconomic status"?

Seems like that only applies to "correct" thought. Didn't you say something earlier along the following lines:

"DISCRIMINATION is prohibited"

And by your logic, someone who holds the belief that there are only two genders would be (and should be, if I'm understanding you correctly) discriminated against. How is that "diversity"?

No one is discriminating against you, if you don't believe that someone can be transgender, and no one is saying that as an educator you have to be accepting, but if you want to make an issue of it, by sharing your opinion of it to the student, THAT is crossing the line, and in my opinion, is discrimination. Teach them like any other student and mind your business is my stance on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

No one is discriminating against you, if you don't believe that someone can be transgender, and no one is saying that as an educator you have to be accepting, but if you want to make an issue of it, by sharing your opinion of it to the student, THAT is crossing the line, and in my opinion, is discrimination. Teach them like any other student and mind your business is my stance on it. 

I'm not talking specifically about "sharing [your opinion] with a student". That's why I said look outside of education. What if a teacher held the belief that there were only two genders, and shared that belief with another teacher?

What if an employee in "corporate America" shared that belief?

To further the example, what if one student holds that belief, and one does not, and the student who holds the "two gender" belief says so out loud? Then what happens?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

I'm not talking specifically about "sharing [your opinion] with a student". That's why I said look outside of education. What if a teacher held the belief that there were only two genders, and shared that belief with another teacher?

What if an employee in "corporate America" shared that belief?

To further the example, what if one student holds that belief, and one does not, and the student who holds the "two gender" belief says so out loud? Then what happens?

It's not appropriate to be confrontational or antagonistic in the school setting or the work place about someone's gender identity. Why would it be about their sexuality or their race or their religion? Respecting privacy should include this category, as well, is my strong opinion. Share all you want in a private conversation. Mind your business and be professional is how I heard it emphasized. Err on the side of respect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

It's not appropriate to be confrontational or antagonistic in the school setting or the work place about someone's gender identity. Why would it be about their sexuality or their race or their religion? Respecting privacy should include this category, as well, is my strong opinion. Share all you want in a private conversation. Mind your business and be professional is how I heard it emphasized. Err on the side of respect. 

Alright. So what if a student wants to be referred to by pronouns other than the standard "he/him", "she/her", but you have a student who only believes the two genders? Then what? Could a student "politely decline" to do so? And if they did, what would be the repercussions for that student? Do the beliefs of the person who believes there are only two genders get respected as well? Or, again, is there only one "correct" way of thinking that's marketed as "diversity"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the science is clear and conclusive: sex is not binary, 
 

lunatics. 
 

first teacher that explains trans or gay to one of my kids won’t forget what they experience afterwards. 
 

I will teach them exactly what that is. It’s a mental disorder. Gender dysphoria. End of discussion. They will know they are loons and that will be the end of it lol, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...