California is 1st state to ban school rules requiring parents get notified of child’s pronoun change

[Engorgeous George 2,124]

15 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

How can it be an “absolutist cult” if I am relying on medical experts? And I know, you say I’m relying on American experts who are influenced by woke and that British experts disagree; we’ve been through all that. But the fact remains that I am still trusting the scientists here the way I would a car mechanic or an airline pilot. It’s not some religious guru telling me that trans is not a mental illness. So it isn’t a cult. 

Social Scientist call themselves that to try to cloak themselves in an aura of scientific legitimacy, but they are not scientists.  They strive to use the scientific method in their infinitely multivariate  analysis but one cannot control infinite variables in the social milieu.  They are a mockery of actual science.  They work with what they have, and I agree trying to use the scientific method is the best cahnce of coming to understanding, but believing that they actaully have done so is nothing short of ignorant.  Keep arguing from authority if you like but your authorities are extremely flawed, so flawed as to have no real relevance.  Cite authority on physics, math, chemistry, but not on sociology. Sociologists and physchologists are the lsot and confused grasping at explanations for their own behaviors and then trying to apply them universally so that they, themselves, can understand thier individual experience.

[JuneJuly 193]

15 hours ago, squistion said:

As I suspected.

I knew they misstated or misinterpreted these stats because I have yet to see anything that proves that sexual or physical abuse is a cause of being LGBTQ - there are no credible stats or studies to back up that claim.

Haven't seen anything?   Look in the mirror.  

[Engorgeous George 2,124]

Also, denying the majority of great and concerned parents vital information on the developmental and mental health and well being of their child on the chance that a minority of parents may not react well to the information is ludicris.  We are allowing school teachers to conspire with children, by definition the immature who do not have any idea what is best for them, to keep vital information from parents who generally have their best interests at heart.

 

If the state wants to pass a law they could insist that the information is passed on after connecting the child to relevant resources so that the state can monitor those few situations where the child may be in need of help from a parental bad reaction, but to deny the parents the right to know what is going on with their kid becasue an agent of the state feels they know better, well that is frankly where totalitarianism starts and lives.  My children are mine and my wife's and their grandparents and aunts' uncles' and cousins.  They are not the States.

[RLLD 4,143]

1 minute ago, Engorgeous George said:

Also, denying the majority of great and concerned parents vital information on the developmental and mental health and well being of their child on the chance that a minority of parents may not react well to the information is ludicris.  We are allowing school teachers to conspire with children, by definition the immature who do not have any idea what is best for them, to keep vital information from parents who generally have their best interests at heart.

 

If the state wants to pass a law they could insist that the information is passed on after connecting the child to relevant resources so that the state can monitor those few situations where the child may be in need of help from a parental bad reaction, but to deny the parents the right to know what is going on with their kid becasue an agent of the state feels they know better, well that is frankly where totalitarianism starts and lives.  My children are mine and my wife's and their grandparents and aunts' uncles' and cousins.  They are not the States.

This notion that now the government want to "parent" is of course sinister, and then also just laughable.  There is no institution less capable than the government.

It is the interference of government into the family that has caused the most harm to society, notably to the AA community.  We should, collectively, oppose government intervention at every turn.  Government is NEVER....the answer....to ANYTHING

Allowing teachers to hold some ownership at all is just.....absolutely galactically stupid

[GutterBoy 2,898]

7 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Also, denying the majority of great and concerned parents vital information on the developmental and mental health and well being of their child on the chance that a minority of parents may not react well to the information is ludicris.  We are allowing school teachers to conspire with children, by definition the immature who do not have any idea what is best for them, to keep vital information from parents who generally have their best interests at heart.

 

If the state wants to pass a law they could insist that the information is passed on after connecting the child to relevant resources so that the state can monitor those few situations where the child may be in need of help from a parental bad reaction, but to deny the parents the right to know what is going on with their kid becasue an agent of the state feels they know better, well that is frankly where totalitarianism starts and lives.  My children are mine and my wife's and their grandparents and aunts' uncles' and cousins.  They are not the States.

This is an odd take to me.  Allowing the teachers to conspire with children.  In order to come to this conclusion you would have to assume that the teachers are trying to "turn the kids trans" or at the very least "allowing it to happen".  You would have to assume that all teachers have a trans agenda.  That is Ludacris (LUDA) to me.

If your position is that teachers have to divulge pronoun usage to parents, what about other information?  What if the see the child doodling a pentagram?  Or they overhear the child talking about climate change?  Why are we focused on pronouns?

[TBayXXXVII 2,482]

27 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

This is a nonsensical sentence, but I'll try and interpret it.

I think what you're trying to say is that a teacher is only allowed to keep information from the parent if it relates to being trans.  If so, no, that's not the case.  If a parent sees a boy wearing a dress, they don't have to tell the parents.  If a teacher sees a girl kissing another girl, they don't have to tell the parents.  If a kid tells a teacher they are gay, teacher doesn't have to tell parent.  But for some reason kid asks teacher to call them "them" instead of "him", then the school requires the teacher to tell the parent.  Odd isn't it?  Why only that?  So the law changes that to give the teacher discretion to tell the parent, just like anything else, just like it was before.

Right, that's authoritarianism.  The government is giving the education system the leash to withhold information from parents that a parent could feel they have a right to.  Also, this legislation also protects the school/teachers/entire education system, when they lie to the parent if said parent asks them a direct question.

I'm curious.  Let's say a kid who is going through this and said information is kept from the parents, and because this information is withheld, they are out of the loop.... and said kid commits suicide.  Can the school, teacher/therapist, government be held responsible for being complicit in withholding information that could've saved that kids life?

[Hardcore troubadour 14,918]

9 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

This is an odd take to me.  Allowing the teachers to conspire with children.  In order to come to this conclusion you would have to assume that the teachers are trying to "turn the kids trans" or at the very least "allowing it to happen".  You would have to assume that all teachers have a trans agenda.  That is Ludacris (LUDA) to me.

If your position is that teachers have to divulge pronoun usage to parents, what about other information?  What if the see the child doodling a pentagram?  Or they overhear the child talking about climate change?  Why are we focused on pronouns?

Aren’t trans kids in a higher suicide cohort? 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

4 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Right, that's authoritarianism.  The government is giving the education system the leash to withhold information from parents that a parent could feel they have a right to.  Also, this legislation also protects the school/teachers/entire education system, when they lie to the parent if said parent asks them a direct question.

I'm curious.  Let's say a kid who is going through this and said information is kept from the parents, so they're kind of out of the loop on this.... and said kid commits suicide.  Can the school, teacher/therapist, government be held responsible for being complicit in withholding information that could've saved that kids life?

From a criminal standpoint?  Doubt it, but I'm no lawyer.  From a civil standpoint, sure I could see parents suing everyone.  SUE EVERYBODY!

Also I love that this is authoritarianism in your eyes, but replacing tens of thousands of govt employees and replacing with sycophants is democracy.  You might want to consult a dictionary.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Aren’t trans kids in a higher suicide cohort? 

They are, and if a student tells a teacher they are suicidal or if a teacher suspects suicide risk, the teacher has obligation to alert the authorities, regardless of the pronouns they use,

[Hardcore troubadour 14,918]

6 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

They are, and if a student tells a teacher they are suicidal or if a teacher suspects suicide risk, the teacher has obligation to alert the authorities, regardless of the pronouns they use,

But if the kid is at increased risk for suicide, the parents should know. That kind of info should not be kept from them. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

But if the kid is at increased risk for suicide, the parents should know. That kind of info should not be kept from them. 

if a student tells a teacher they are suicidal or if a teacher suspects suicide risk, the teacher has obligation to alert the authorities

[Hardcore troubadour 14,918]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

if a student tells a teacher they are suicidal or if a teacher suspects suicide risk, the teacher has obligation to alert the authorities

The student is informing the teacher that when they move towards transitioning that they are in a higher suicide cohort. It goes hand in hand.  But this info is kept from parents, and for some reason you support it. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

The student is informing the teacher that when they move towards transitioning that they are in a higher suicide cohort. It goes hand in hand.  But this info is kept from parents, and for some reason you support it. 

Only if it puts the student at greater risk of abuse.  For some reason you support that.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,918]

7 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Only if it puts the student at greater risk of abuse.  For some reason you support that.

If the kid is at risk for abuse, then I fully support informing child services.  And it’s not certain that a child will be abused, but it is certain that the child has now informed the teacher they are at a higher risk for suicide. Parents should know that. It could save the kids life. 

[squistion 1,944]

54 minutes ago, JuneJuly said:

Haven't seen anything?   Look in the mirror.  

JuneJuly?

Another new alias. Amazing how they always seem to find this forum. 

[Fireballer 2,639]

New rule…schools shouldn’t tell parents when kids get in trouble at school.  Their families could react negatively. 

[RLLD 4,143]

17 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

New rule…schools shouldn’t tell parents when kids get in trouble at school.  Their families could react negatively. 

Can't tell parents what grades the kids have either I guess.....

[Engorgeous George 2,124]

6 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

This is an odd take to me.  Allowing the teachers to conspire with children.  In order to come to this conclusion you would have to assume that the teachers are trying to "turn the kids trans" or at the very least "allowing it to happen".  You would have to assume that all teachers have a trans agenda.  That is Ludacris (LUDA) to me.

If your position is that teachers have to divulge pronoun usage to parents, what about other information?  What if the see the child doodling a pentagram?  Or they overhear the child talking about climate change?  Why are we focused on pronouns?

Why is the law focused on pronouns.  Itf the law was focused on other information I would address that.  My point is that parents are entitled to know what their kids are up to and thinking, or at least outwardly expressing while they are kids and teachers should not be in the business of hiding information from parents about a parents child.  The law presumes parents are troglodytes, that the law knows more about a situation than does the parent.  It is a dangerous step towards making children custodians of the state rather than the parents.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

42 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Why is the law focused on pronouns.  Itf the law was focused on other information I would address that.  My point is that parents are entitled to know what their kids are up to and thinking, or at least outwardly expressing while they are kids and teachers should not be in the business of hiding information from parents about a parents child.  The law presumes parents are troglodytes, that the law knows more about a situation than does the oaprent.  It is a dangerous step towards making children custodians of the state rather than the parents.

And the law really only applies to parents that are troglodytes.  If you have a good relationship with your child then your child will talk to you about what they're feeling, as opposed to going to a teacher and saying "Don't tell my parents"

[Fireballer 2,639]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

And the law really only applies to parents that are troglodytes.  If you have a good relationship with your child then your child will talk to you about what they're feeling, as opposed to going to a teacher and saying "Don't tell my parents"

Thank you! Why hasn’t anyone thought about this?  It’s plain to see that a group of kids, who are overly represented with autism and mental health issues, would simply go talk to their parents where the mothers are 10x more likely to have personality disorders.  Great idea, bud. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

20 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Thank you! Why hasn’t anyone thought about this?  It’s plain to see that a group of kids, who are overly represented with autism and mental health issues, would simply go talk to their parents where the mothers are 10x more likely to have personality disorders.  Great idea, bud. 

So you don't think that kids should talk to their parents?

[TBayXXXVII 2,482]

4 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

From a criminal standpoint?  Doubt it, but I'm no lawyer.  From a civil standpoint, sure I could see parents suing everyone.  SUE EVERYBODY!

Also I love that this is authoritarianism in your eyes, but replacing tens of thousands of govt employees and replacing with sycophants is democracy.  You might want to consult a dictionary.

You think the Biden administration isn't filled with sycophants?  I think you need to consult the real world.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

2 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

You think the Biden administration isn't filled with sycophants?  I think you need to consult the real world.

The administration, sure.  But not the 50k civil servants that Trump wants to fire and replace sycophants.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,918]

There isn’t one attempt at normalizing these perversions that Gutterboy and Tim and others are against. Also, there isn’t any attempt to stem grooming opportunities for predators that they support. Sick.  

[Gladiators 1,963]

11 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

There isn’t one attempt at normalizing these perversions that Gutterboy and Tim and others are against. Also, there isn’t any attempt to stem grooming opportunities for predators that they support. Sick.  

It's bizarre but not surprising.

[Alias Detective 1,389]

On 7/16/2024 at 10:32 PM, Hardcore troubadour said:

plans on moving to Pennsylvania because of blue state New Jersey policy.   

Stay out of here.  Nobody wants Jersey @ssholes.  Nobody.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,918]

Just now, Alias Detective said:

Stay out of here.  Nobody wants Jersey @ssholes.  Nobody.

Lol. 

[Alias Detective 1,389]

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

How in the world is not notifying a parent of a child's pronoun change grooming or a perversion? 

What if he/she wanted to be referred to as dicklips.  Is that good in your book?

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 minute ago, Alias Detective said:

Stay out of here.  Nobody wants Jersey @ssholes.  Nobody.

I'm not planning on moving to PA.

[squistion 1,944]

Just now, Alias Detective said:

What if he/she wanted to be referred to as dicklips.  Is that good in your book?

Fun Fact:"dicklips" is not considered a pronoun 

[Alias Detective 1,389]

2 minutes ago, squistion said:

Fun Fact:"dicklips" is not considered a pronoun 

Why stop at pronouns?

[Alias Detective 1,389]

5 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

I'm not planning on moving to PA.

[squistion 1,944]

Just now, Alias Detective said:

Why stop at pronouns?

That is what we are discussing per the thread title and that is what the new rule is requiring. 

[Engorgeous George 2,124]

7 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

And the law really only applies to parents that are troglodytes.  If you have a good relationship with your child then your child will talk to you about what they're feeling, as opposed to going to a teacher and saying "Don't tell my parents"

I disagree.  Teachers may be confided in, but more often they are going to learn of this by observing a child interact with friends and classmates.  They should be the eyes and ears of parents.  Also just because children are reluctant to have hard conversations with those they love and who love them back more than life itself does not mean a child's reluctance is due to bad or abusive parenting, but rather a child's natural reluctance to disappoint a parent.  For evey child supposedly protected from an abusive parent you are going to have many, many chjildren who put off extremely valuable parental support.  Again, the children do not belong to the State, they belong to the parents and to their families.  If the State can take the right to parent, to counsel, to guidance, to teach it can take away anything.  We are individuals, not a collective which is what you are advocating.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

5 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I disagree.  Teachers may be confided in, but more often they are going to learn of this by observing a child interact with friends and classmates.  They should be the eyes and ears of parents.  Also just because children are reluctant to have hard conversations with those they love and who love them back more than life itself does not mean a child's reluctance is due to bad or abusive parenting, but rather a child's natural reluctance to disappoint a parent.  for evey child supposedly protected from an abusive parent you are going kto have many, many chjildren who put off extremely valuable parental support.  Again, the children do not belong to the State, they belong to the parents and to their families.  If the State can take the right to parent, to counsel, to guidance, to teach it can take away anything.  We are individuals, not a collective which is what you are advocating.

The state isn't taking any of those rights away from parents.  Parents still have the right to parent, counsel, guide, etc.

Your last line is confusing.  We are a society, we are all supposed to function together.  You said it yourself, sometimes a trusted adult is confided in by a child when they don't feel comfortable confiding in the parent or when they don't want the parent to know.  If you're advocating for a society where any conversation with a teacher, pastor, therapist, aunt, cousin, friend must be relayed back to the parents, well that's not any society I want to be a part of.

[Engorgeous George 2,124]

3 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

The state isn't taking any of those rights away from parents.  Parents still have the right to parent, counsel, guide, etc.

Your last line is confusing.  We are a society, we are all supposed to function together.  You said it yourself, sometimes a trusted adult is confided in by a child when they don't feel comfortable confiding in the parent or when they don't want the parent to know.  If you're advocating for a society where any conversation with a teacher, pastor, therapist, aunt, cousin, friend must be relayed back to the parents, well that's not any society I want to be a part of.

I am advocating for a society where teachers do not conceal essential facts from parents ablout their children on the presumption that parents do not have thier child's best interests at heart or may not.  I did not speak to pastors or therapists as I believe there to be legitimate reasons for those privileges.  As for friends and cousins I leave that matter to their consciences.  i do not want the state interjecting itself there either.

 

The Stadte has gone too far here.  Sheep will accept this, men will not.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

4 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I am advocating for a society where teachers do not conceal essential facts from parents ablout their children on the presumption that parents do not have thier child's best interests at heart or may not.  I did not speak to pastors or therapists as I believe there to be legitimate reasons for those privileges.  As for friends and cousins I leave that matter to their consciences.  i do not want the state interjecting itself there either.

 

The Stadte has gone to far here.  Sheep will accept this, men will not.

How does the teacher know what's essential and what's not?  Maybe essential to one parent but not another.  Safest bet is that all conversations between teacher and child should be recorded and sent to parents I guess.  And you're OK with the therapist and pastor, but not teacher?  Because they work for the state?  What about a govt therapist?

Also when you start talking about "men not accepting" this, you're losing.

[Fireballer 2,639]

5 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

How does the teacher know what's essential and what's not?  Maybe essential to one parent but not another.  Safest bet is that all conversations between teacher and child should be recorded and sent to parents I guess.  And you're OK with the therapist and pastor, but not teacher?  Because they work for the state?  What about a govt therapist?

Also when you start talking about "men not accepting" this, you're losing.

You’re struggling to comprehend logic because your ideation of what schools should provide to a family is warped.  An extension of government has no right to be so invasive literally based on nothing.  You’re displaying typical libtard logic by gobbling up government overreach and accepting it as moral superiority.  

[GutterBoy 2,898]

Just now, Fireballer said:

You’re struggling to comprehend logic because your ideation of what schools should provide to a family is warped.  An extension of government has no right to be so invasive literally based on nothing.  You’re displaying typical libtard logic by gobbling up government overreach and accepting it as moral superiority.  

No I'm just saying a student should be able to have a conversation with a teacher.

[Alias Detective 1,389]

Yikes. Not keeping score but Gutternuts is batting below the Mendoza line in this thread.