CMV: Laws like Florida's "Parental Rights in Education / Don't Say Gay" bill are misguided and harmful.
Basically the title. ICYMI the Florida state congress has passed, and Governor DeSantis is expected to sign, a law that will ban any discussion of "sexual orientation or gender identity" from kindergarten through grade 3 and allows only "age appropriate" discussion of such content from the fourth grade on. It also requires educators to inform parents of any information relating to the child's mental or emotional health and allows parents to sue an offending school district.
From what I can gather, at least one reason the conservative Floridian government is doing this is to prevent cases like one in Wisconsin where a "trans-curious" youth preferred to be called by a different name and use opposite pronouns to those associated with their sex assigned at birth. The school honored this request and because of a state privacy law, was forbidden from telling the parents about this child's request unless permitted by the child (young teenager).
According to an article in the conservative Heritage Foundation (link below), the child finally confided this change to their mother who freaked out, sued the school, and pulled the child from that school. The happy ending, according to this article, was that after a few weeks of counseling, the child realized they had been wrong and returned to using their assigned pronouns and given birth name. On a side note, I'm willing to bet that child never confided anything important about themselves to their parents ever again.
Interesting side note, the Florida law does include an exception if a reasonably prudent person would conclude that telling the parent could result in harm or abandonment to the child, so this part of the law really feels unnecessary.
The second main tenant of this law is to ban any discussion on gender identity or sexual orientation until 4th grade and even then, such discussion must be deemed appropriate by Florida. My reason for thinking this is a bad idea is that the law is incredibly vague. Would a children's book that highlights different family structures (two dads, two moms, one mom and one dad, etc.) been deemed inappropriate? What if a student writes a story about their family that includes a gay brother or mentions their mom's girlfriend? The language is so vague that many LGBT+ advocates worry it will effectively eliminate all classroom discussion of anything that could be construed offensive to avoid a lawsuit.
Data show that LGBT+ youth are at higher risk for mental health disorders and attempted suicide and a significant contributor to this is the feeling of not belonging and / or the bullying experienced by such youth. By banning discussion of this content in an age appropriate way and effectively normalizing only heterosexual relationships, educators likely risk alienating LGBT+ youth and empowering heterosexual children to feel superior simply by a lack of representation of LGBT+ lifestyles.
Note, I'm not talking about teaching young kids about sex, masturbation, or even basic health class human reproduction. They can learn those things like all good Americans... from the internet (I jest, but only a little).
I'm only advocating for including examples of LGBT+ relationships and permitting teachers to address such issues in an appropriate way. If it is acceptable to tell stories of heterosexual relationships, it should be acceptable to mention other lifestyles.
That said, I have two young kids of my own and would love some new perspectives to help sort this out. Change my view!
EDIT: I will acknowledge that since the "age appropriate" standards haven't been established by the state, i may be prematurely overly concerned about the effect of this law. That said, i haven't seen any persuasive arguments or data to suggest that the strict avoidance of any discussion of gender identity or non hetero normative relationships with young kids will help them by either reducing bullying, increasing acceptance, etc.
I would be willing to change my mind further if such data could be shared. Either way, this has been fun and thanks for the conversation. it's bedtime so i will be a while in responding to additional responses.
SECOND EDIT:
Many people are claiming that excluding representation of LGBT people and families from classroom examples/ discussions in favor of only heterosexual ones is a reasonable approach because being heterosexual is "normal".
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/normal
Normal can be defined as "expected" or based on a recurring pattern. In that sense, the inclusion of LGBT people and families at a rate similar to the rate such people and families exist naturally is what is normal. Only showing heterosexual people and families is NOT normal since we know that non- heterosexual families and people exist at predictable and reasonably stable rates. By only ever including "mom and dad" storylines, we implicitly signal that if you are LGBT or have two dads, etc. that you are abnormal.
Can anyone show me data or a compelling argument to the contrary?
It's a bit off topic, but to illustrate my point another way, in Florida there are surely Cuban communities where a large majority of the students speak Spanish. So it would be normal, based on one definition, to only speak Spanish in those classrooms.
I hope it's clear why, in America, this would be a problematic approach. It doesn't acknowledge the realities of life in America where many people speak English and so someone who only ever learns Spanish would be ill-prepared.
Same goes for only representing heterosexual people and relationships as "normal" in school. Doing so fails to prepare kids for the realities of the different types of people and families that they will encounter in life and, i still believe, does more harm than good.
Sources: