Flash Flash Revolution

Flash Flash Revolution (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/index.php)
-   Chit Chat (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showthread.php?t=154302)

DossarLX ODI 02-28-2023 08:19 PM
Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Recently there has been a wave of anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation being filed in several states in the U.S. specifically attacking the rights of not only those people, but also potentially having a ripple effect in general.

Just today, Florida House filed a bill (HB 1223: Public PreK-12 Educational Institution and Instruction Requirements) to prohibit use of preferred pronouns. I was apparently the first person to save an archive link of this page.

Archive Screenshot
Page Screenshot
Bill PDF page about prohibiting use of preferred pronouns

The specific text:
Quote:
(3) An employee or contractor of a public K-12 educational
institution may not provide to a student his or her preferred
personal title or pronouns if such preferred personal title or
pronouns do not correspond to his or her sex.
(4) A student may not be asked by an employee or
contractor of a public K-12 educational institution to provide
his or her preferred personal title or pronouns or be penalized
or subjected to adverse or discriminatory treatment for not
providing his or her preferred personal title or pronouns.
This is just going to make the situation worse for students and teachers.

And it doesn't stop there: Tennessee has also been on the move to ban drag shows, and some other states like Texas are trying to follow suit.

Tennessee Drag Race queens slam state's 'blatantly unconstitutional' drag ban bill: 'Drag brings joy'
Republican legislators introduce new laws to crack down on drag shows

This has been on the rise after numerous story hours have happened about drag.

You can see the Tennessee Bill here.

Quoted text of the bill in below spoiler.

Quote:
BILL SUMMARY
This bill creates an offense for a person who engages in an adult cabaret performance on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult. The bill defines an "adult cabaret performance" to mean a performance in a location other than an adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration.

A first violation of this offense is a Class A misdemeanor, and a second or subsequent violation of this offense is a Class E felony.

This bill also expressly:

(1) Preempts an ordinance, regulation, restriction, or license that was lawfully adopted or issued by a political subdivision prior to July 1, 2023, that is in conflict with this bill; and

(2) Prevents or preempts a political subdivision from enacting and enforcing in the future other ordinances, regulations, restrictions, or licenses that are in conflict with this bill.

ON FEBRUARY 9, 2023, THE SENATE ADOPTED AMENDMENT #1 AND PASSED SENATE BILL 3, AS AMENDED.

AMENDMENT #1 rewrites this bill and creates an offense for a person who engages in adult cabaret entertainment on public property or in a location where the adult cabaret entertainment could be viewed by a person who is not an adult. This amendment defines "adult cabaret entertainment" as adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors, as such term is defined under present law; feature go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators, or similar entertainers; and include a single performance or multiple performances by an entertainer. An "entertainer" means a person who provides:

(1) Entertainment within an adult-oriented establishment, regardless of whether a fee is charged or accepted for entertainment and regardless of whether entertainment is provided as an employee, escort, or an independent contractor; or

(2) Adult cabaret entertainment, regardless of whether a fee is charged or accepted for entertainment and regardless of whether entertainment is provided as an employee or an independent contractor.

Present law defines "harmful to minors" as that quality of any description or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse when the matter or performance:

(1) Would be found by the average person applying contemporary community standards to appeal predominantly to the prurient, shameful, or morbid interests of minors;

(2) Is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable for minors; and

(3) Taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific values for minors.

A first violation of this offense is a Class A misdemeanor, and a second or subsequent violation of this offense is a Class E felony.

This amendment also expressly:

(1) Preempts an ordinance, regulation, restriction, or license that was lawfully adopted or issued by a political subdivision prior to April 1, 2023, that is in conflict with this amendment; and

(2) Prevents or preempts a political subdivision from enacting and enforcing in the future other ordinances, regulations, restrictions, or licenses that are in conflict with this amendment.

ON FEBRUARY 23, 2023, THE HOUSE SUBSTITUTED SENATE BILL 3 FOR HOUSE BILL 9. ADOPTED AMENDENT #1, AND PASSED SENATE BILL 3, AS AMENDED.

AMENDMENT #1 incorporates the changes made by Senate Amendment #1 with the following differences:

(1) This amendment restores language specifying that adult-oriented entertainment featuring topless dancers is a form of adult cabaret entertainment; and

(2) This amendment revises part of the definition of "entertainer" by replacing provision of adult cabaret entertainment with provision of a performance of actual or simulated specified sexual activities regardless of whether a fee is charged or accepted for the performance and regardless of whether the performance is provided as an employee or an independent contractor.


The Florida one I mentioned was literally just from today, and these bills can sneak their way without much attention. But these attacks are real and happening.

Please keep LGBTQIA+ people in mind during these times, and be supportive as you can.

sff_writer_dan 02-28-2023 09:00 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
I was amused to see one of the anti-drag bills actually being opposed by a republican, and wondering why on Earth that might happen, and then it turned out they own a promotion company that, among other things, does Pro Wrestling, which -very often- would fall afoul of how absurdly broad and vague those laws are.

mi40 02-28-2023 09:58 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
cool

M0nkeyz 03-1-2023 07:52 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi40 (Post 4786237)
cool
what?

Lights 03-1-2023 12:27 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
:c Eat a butt, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas.

Black_Shield 03-1-2023 01:52 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
quite shitty.

Hateandhatred 03-1-2023 03:03 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
I'd be very curious to see the flipside of these. Like... What was their motive?

Surely they didn't just think it was a society problem. I mean, I'm sure a lot of uber conservative politicians do think that, but actually acting on it also sounds like PR suicide.

I feel sorry for people who are going to be affected by this.

DossarLX ODI 03-1-2023 04:10 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Iowa attempted to put forward a bill to ban same-sex marriage.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...s/69958038007/

Link to the bill.
https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislati...?ba=HJR8&ga=90

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hateandhatred (Post 4786250)
actually acting on it also sounds like PR suicide.
Not when you have a supreme court that overturned Roe v. Wade with no concern about privacy, providing prenatal care, or improving sexual health.

radioamor 03-1-2023 05:35 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hateandhatred (Post 4786250)
I'd be very curious to see the flipside of these. Like... What was their motive?

Surely they didn't just think it was a society problem. I mean, I'm sure a lot of uber conservative politicians do think that, but actually acting on it also sounds like PR suicide.

I feel sorry for people who are going to be affected by this.
You could reasonably infer the origin of this legislation to be severely out-of-touch politicians trying desperately to appeal to their militantly right-wing constituents as a means to remain in office and, therefore, in power, but that sounds convenient and simple.
This is speculation insofar as I haven't bothered to do any research on the topic (and, since this is a casual forum and not a political journal, I'm not going to perform that step right now), but the average constituent awareness of LGBTQIA+ existence and especially drag shows seemed limited until recently. Then you get a gamut of cable/broadcast news networks cherry-picking isolated incidents and spinning the veritable fuck out of otherwise inconsequential realities like drag shows and trans athletes to their viewers and, suddenly, you have a useful contingent of Very Angry People. That stratum of people proceeds to get loud on social media and in the general direction of their local government, and bonkers legislation like this is put on the table.
Motives for this brand of nonsense remain obfuscated, although "white male evangelicals trying to establish a white male evangelical state" doesn't seem terribly outlandish. Advertisement-based news programming has shredded journalism into an embarrassing deluge of reactionary content, and while all of it is editorialized propaganda, the networks supporting this drivel (FOX, OANN, Newsmax) appear to be especially sensationalist.

Unfortunately, there is a large volume of people that remains vehemently anti-LGBTQIA+, so for any politician who seeks to perfunctorily expand their rapport with their constituents, simply showing minority populations the legislative middle finger is enough to get them cheering. The antonym of PR suicide, if you will.

Matthia 03-1-2023 07:22 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
politicians try to mind their own business impossible challenge

Pizza69 03-1-2023 07:38 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DossarLX ODI (Post 4786251)
Iowa attempted to put forward a bill to ban same-sex marriage.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...s/69958038007/

Link to the bill.
https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislati...?ba=HJR8&ga=90



Not when you have a supreme court that overturned Roe v. Wade with no concern about privacy, providing prenatal care, or improving sexual health.
bit more than just same-sex marriage--it also specifies biological male and biological female, so there's a dollop of transphobia in there too

_choof 03-1-2023 07:48 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by M0nkeyz (Post 4786244)
what?
psst mi40 has always been homophobic

Funnygurl555 03-1-2023 07:49 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lights (Post 4786248)
:c Eat a butt, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas.
don't threaten them with a good time

Jade5_ 03-1-2023 07:51 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lights (Post 4786248)
:c Eat a butt, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas.
cool

gold stinger 03-2-2023 12:05 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Just let people do whatever the fuck they want to do behind closed doors, jesus christ. As long as it's not hurting anyone.

The problem with the whole ordeal imo, is that it's a general expectation of respect 'outside of closed doors', to get someone's preferred pronouns correct. Start mis-gendering intentionally because of beliefs, and you're kind of validating yourself as an asshole wanting to stir shit. Same the other way around, they get emotional and defensive from mis-gendering accidentally and all of a sudden, they're the asshole here.

Stuff regarding drag is VERY unfortunate. That is more than just something people enjoy or are more comfortable with, and is sometimes a job.

DossarLX ODI 03-2-2023 12:36 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gold stinger (Post 4786261)
Just let people do whatever the fuck they want to do behind closed doors, jesus christ. As long as it's not hurting anyone.
"They didn't vote for us so make them suffer financially and mentally. And physically if legally possible."

Hakulyte 03-2-2023 03:20 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Code:
(3) An employee or contractor of a public K-12 educational
institution may not provide to a student his or her preferred
personal title or pronouns if such preferred personal title or
pronouns do not correspond to his or her sex.
(4) A student may not be asked by an employee or
contractor of a public K-12 educational institution to provide
his or her preferred personal title or pronouns or be penalized
or subjected to adverse or discriminatory treatment for not
providing his or her preferred personal title or pronouns.

All I see here is the educational institution wanting to protect its employees/contractors and the students by not providing their pronouns to each other so they do not become accountable from that specific direct interaction. I think the goal here was just to avoid potential conflicts of interest within the context of a school environment. I don't think it's as bad as it sounds on a quick read. It's just a professional vs student scenario. That being said, I can already see that if this stays, there could be an attempt at expanding these laws to more than just schools. This is where it gets controversial imo. It really feels like these states are just testing the waters with what to do. The joke here is that this just highlight how education could be better in regards of how to deal with people in general. If education doesn't educate about that, who will ? Accountability sure is an underrated topic.

tldr; I hope you guys like backpedaling because I'm predicting you're gonna see more back and forth like this for a while.

Mollocephalus 03-2-2023 05:06 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
This has been brewing for a while and it's effectively a way to sneak in some (in the grand scheme of things) low impact legislation to pave the way for more reactionary repression of the rights we've got so far. It's pretty sad tbh, and even if you're not directly touched by any of it, what will follow might. But it's also not shocking considering the western world has been in a trend of polarization of ideals thanks in great part to social media algorhytms and targeted advertising (political and not)

Lights 03-2-2023 09:27 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakulyte (Post 4786263)
Code:
(3) An employee or contractor of a public K-12 educational
institution may not provide to a student his or her preferred
personal title or pronouns if such preferred personal title or
pronouns do not correspond to his or her sex.
(4) A student may not be asked by an employee or
contractor of a public K-12 educational institution to provide
his or her preferred personal title or pronouns or be penalized
or subjected to adverse or discriminatory treatment for not
providing his or her preferred personal title or pronouns.

All I see here is the educational institution wanting to protect its employees/contractors and the students by not providing their pronouns to each other so they do not become accountable from that specific direct interaction. I think the goal here was just to avoid potential conflicts of interest within the context of a school environment. I don't think it's as bad as it sounds on a quick read. It's just a professional vs student scenario. That being said, I can already see that if this stays, there could be an attempt at expanding these laws to more than just schools. This is where it gets controversial imo. It really feels like these states are just testing the waters with what to do. The joke here is that this just highlight how education could be better in regards of how to deal with people in general. If education doesn't educate about that, who will ? Accountability sure is an underrated topic.

tldr; I hope you guys like backpedaling because I'm predicting you're gonna see more back and forth like this for a while.
The problem with this is that pronouns are pretty integral to day to day communication. If I'm a teacher in that school and I'm not allowed to say to use she / her pronouns im like... quitting that job that day. I'm not about to sit there and be misgendered constantly on a daily basis while being underpaid to teach. I'd imagine the majority of trans teachers out there would be in a similar boat- deal with stressful interactions all day or find a new career path. And then you end up with trans people being gradually pushed out of teaching as a result... why?

Imo, its exactly as bad as it reads. The students simply can't be asked to provide their pronouns- dumb, but nothing about them providing them on their own free will. Teachers, however, are outright not allowed to use pronouns that don't align with their birth sex. Which is unacceptable. Teachers are people too.

DossarLX ODI 03-3-2023 12:22 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Adding on to what Lights said, this has real impact on teachers. In Florida what's colloquially known as the "Don't Say Gay Bill" actually can make teachers lose their license to teach.

Quote:
How in the world are teachers supposed to navigate this? The answer is, in constant fear of getting fired for failing to discriminate as much as the Florida government wants. For the first time in my nine-year career as a public school teacher, I’m seriously thinking about quitting. And I am not alone: hundreds of thousands of Florida students started school last year without a permanent teacher while the state has struggled to fill thousands of openings.
Here's a Florida teacher that got fired shortly after she put up artwork from her students that related to pride flags.

This is effectively a way of violating the first amendment without explicitly saying it. You'll hear justifications like "protecting the innocence of children" or "not indoctrinating our youth" or "not following the state mandated curriculum".

However, these policies are making these topics to be impossible for teachers to discuss without risk of losing their jobs.

Say boys like girls, girls like boys, that's good. But some boys like boys, or some girls like girls, and explain the term straight, bisexual, and gay? Say goodbye to your teaching license.

And with pronouns, well... that's forcing the school to adopt "there are only two genders" and "trans people don't exist/are mentally ill".

Even if someone claims this is unconstitutional, the court system in the U.S. is very slow. So even if a bill is deemed unconstitutional, it can still remain in place for years.

All this does is create an atmosphere of fear and shame for teacher and students. Being someone that myself works in the education industry, this is entirely backwards and stifles free speech.

PBR420 03-3-2023 12:31 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
^There should be teachers that specialize in what you're talking about so all the other teachers can just relax and teach their own subject without having to worry about anything.

Hakulyte 03-3-2023 12:57 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lights (Post 4786266)
The problem with this is that pronouns are pretty integral to day to day communication. If I'm a teacher in that school and I'm not allowed to say to use she / her pronouns im like... quitting that job that day. I'm not about to sit there and be misgendered constantly on a daily basis while being underpaid to teach. I'd imagine the majority of trans teachers out there would be in a similar boat- deal with stressful interactions all day or find a new career path. And then you end up with trans people being gradually pushed out of teaching as a result... why?

Imo, its exactly as bad as it reads. The students simply can't be asked to provide their pronouns- dumb, but nothing about them providing them on their own free will. Teachers, however, are outright not allowed to use pronouns that don't align with their birth sex. Which is unacceptable. Teachers are people too.
First reflex as a teacher would be to use "they" and/or dodge the use of pronouns in the first place to avoid potential issues. I would expect students to do the same.The topic would be avoided. Still a decent chance of getting fired from using they instead of he/she. I wonder where's the line. I feel like depending where it is this could go from acceptable to completely unjustified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DossarLX ODI (Post 4786268)
Adding on to what Lights said, this has real impact on teachers. In Florida what's colloquially known as the "Don't Say Gay Bill" actually can make teachers lose their license to teach.



Here's a Florida teacher that got fired shortly after she put up artwork from her students that related to pride flags.

This is effectively a way of violating the first amendment without explicitly saying it. You'll hear justifications like "protecting the innocence of children" or "not indoctrinating our youth" or "not following the state mandated curriculum".

However, these policies are making these topics to be impossible for teachers to discuss without risk of losing their jobs.

Say boys like girls, girls like boys, that's good. But some boys like boys, or some girls like girls, and explain the term straight, bisexual, and gay? Say goodbye to your teaching license.

And with pronouns, well... that's forcing the school to adopt "there are only two genders" and "trans people don't exist/are mentally ill".

Even if someone claims this is unconstitutional, the court system in the U.S. is very slow. So even if a bill is deemed unconstitutional, it can still remain in place for years.

All this does is create an atmosphere of fear and shame for teacher and students. Being someone that myself works in the education industry, this is entirely backwards and stifles free speech.
Logically, it makes sense they would need a lack of transparency for making this work. It just looks so silly from an outside perspective. It just makes me feel like they're out of touch with the topic and don't want to be accountable for it. So, they simply create the tools to be able to continue doing so and you get this. That's pretty impressive in a bad way. I kind of get why this is happening, but I feel like they should have been more transparent about it. Maybe they're not ready to be ?

_choof 03-3-2023 03:25 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBR420 (Post 4786269)
^There should be teachers that specialize in what you're talking about so all the other teachers can just relax and teach their own subject without having to worry about anything.
how can teachers specialize in this when states are criminalizing the discussion of it in the first place

mi40 03-3-2023 08:25 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by _choof (Post 4786257)
psst mi40 has always been homophobic
by ur definition then all schools have been homophobic prior to like 2010 lol
i dont expect teachers to know everyone's pronouns on a case by case basis unless it's specifically a part of one's official documentation
it's like expecting airport security to refer to you by your pronouns without said pronouns being a part of your passport
that being said the drag shows and whatever being banned is dumb with no logic behind it cuz like ppl said it's stuff being done behind closed doors, who cares

mi40 03-3-2023 08:30 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
if u truly wish to make pronouns a universally accepted thing, make it a part of official documentation like ur citizenship, driver's license etc so that everyone's on the same page, obviously that's probably a near impossible task but that's what needs to be done if u wanna stop seeing all the back and forth regarding lgbtq acceptance

Lights 03-3-2023 08:47 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi40 (Post 4786278)
by ur definition then all schools have been homophobic prior to like 2010 lol
i dont expect teachers to know everyone's pronouns on a case by case basis unless it's specifically a part of one's official documentation
it's like expecting airport security to refer to you by your pronouns without said pronouns being a part of your passport
that being said the drag shows and whatever being banned is dumb with no logic behind it cuz like ppl said it's stuff being done behind closed doors, who cares
If you walk up to me and you misgender me out of nowhere, not knowing anything about me- im not going to be thrilled about it, but im not going to hold it against you. The response would be to correct it afterwards and now hey- we're on the same page, conversation can resume. If airport security or any other random stranger makes that mistake, its not going to be the end of the world (so long as they're not going out of there way to be jerks about it). In a teacher-student dynamic where youll both be seeing eachother every day for the greater part of a year, I believe teachers should be able to learn how to refer to their students within the first week or two. being able to remember details like that about your students is just like... part of being a good teacher. After a couple corrections, thats going to stick with you.

Believe me, if things like legal name changes / sex changes weren't prohibitively expensive and complicated to perform, I'd love to get my own personal documentation updated. But unfortunately, some places can tend to make that rather hard to do. This is something that I personally believe should be addressed, but in the meantime- it doesn't hurt to take the time to remember the pronouns of someone you're going to see more than once. paperwork or not.

Funnygurl555 03-4-2023 04:12 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi40 (Post 4786278)
by ur definition then all schools have been homophobic prior to like 2010 lol
i dont expect teachers to know everyone's pronouns on a case by case basis unless it's specifically a part of one's official documentation
it's like expecting airport security to refer to you by your pronouns without said pronouns being a part of your passport
that being said the drag shows and whatever being banned is dumb with no logic behind it cuz like ppl said it's stuff being done behind closed doors, who cares
the legislation's tryna ban teaching about pronouns or providing one's pronouns or asking kiddos what their pronouns are. it's not about requiring teachers to know kids' pronouns

Quote:
Originally Posted by mi40 (Post 4786280)
if u truly wish to make pronouns a universally accepted thing, make it a part of official documentation like ur citizenship, driver's license etc so that everyone's on the same page, obviously that's probably a near impossible task but that's what needs to be done if u wanna stop seeing all the back and forth regarding lgbtq acceptance
considering iowa's tryna ban gay marriage i doubt even this would make people accept pronouns

mi40 03-4-2023 05:37 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Funnygurl555 (Post 4786286)
the legislation's tryna ban teaching about pronouns or providing one's pronouns or asking kiddos what their pronouns are. it's not about requiring teachers to know kids' pronouns



considering iowa's tryna ban gay marriage i doubt even this would make people accept pronouns
okay then it's my fault for not understanding the legislation completely, i thought it was to be mandated, prohibiting asking completely is a whole another story

PBR420 03-4-2023 03:49 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
What's wrong with just using the kids name instead of pronouns? If the kid doesn't like their name they can just provide a nickname or something that the teacher can use instead. And if there is a situation where a pronoun must be used no matter what "they" works for everyone.

_choof 03-4-2023 04:02 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
lol

sff_writer_dan 03-4-2023 04:08 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBR420 (Post 4786291)
What's wrong with just using the kids name instead of pronouns? If the kid doesn't like their name they can just provide a nickname or something that the teacher can use instead. And if there is a situation where a pronoun must be used no matter what "they" works for everyone.
Virtually every piece of legislation on this also forbids you using "not their legal name" as part of anti-trans policymaking. They're sometimes written so vaguely that technically calling somebody named Michael "Mike" would actually be a violation, but the extremely obvious intention is to forbid trans and gender non-conforming kids to use a name that doesn't match society's assumptions of the masculinity or femininity of a name relative to the sex assigned at birth of the kid.

Also imagining how ridiculous "just use the kid's name" is in practice. "Okay class, Dan is going to present Dan's project now. Let's all give Dan our attention, and then when Dan's finished, if anybody has any questions for Dan about Dan's work, they can ask Dan."

Also, the thing about using 'they' is that once you know somebody's pronouns, if they're not "they/them" you're now misgendering them. And while your average cis kid mostly doesn't really care if you say 'them' or not (but see how many average boys would be fine with 'she/her' funny how some pronouns are "fine" and some "aren't" even for cis people) but trans kids deal with enough garbage from every direction that the misgendering might be less painful when it's 'them' it's still shitty for no necessary reason.

A kid at my nephew's school told everybody that his name was going to be (Not going to say the actual one, just in the bizarre case that it somehow allows people to identify the kid) but something like "Duderino" and everybody was like "Okay" and they just...called him Duderino for a while, students, teachers, parents, and it was fine. He eventually decided to go back to using his birth name, but it was a couple months of just calling him what he wanted, and nothing bad happened. What's wrong with just talking to people how they want?

PBR420 03-4-2023 04:19 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
^I didn't know nicknames are illegal too jeez wtf. fair point on the pronoun thing but there should be some loopholes... i'm just spit ballin here ya'll so don't take me too seriously lol.

sff_writer_dan 03-4-2023 04:22 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBR420 (Post 4786296)
I didn't know nicknames are illegal too jeez wtf. fair point on the pronoun thing but there should be some loopholes... i'm just spit ballin here ya'll so don't take me too seriously lol.
It's not "nicknames are illegal" it's "in the name of being anti-trans, they've said you can't call a kid a preferred name unless it matches the one in the school's documents" and in their haste to stop you calling a trans guy a boy's name, they didn't bother realizing that technically 'nicknames' are also a preferred name that isn't the one in the school documents.

That's not intentional on their part, they're happy for Richards to be Rick and Jennifers to be Jenny, but they are so bad at their jobs, that to stop somebody whose legal name is Richard from being Jennifer, they've screwed it up.

PBR420 03-4-2023 04:45 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
^I get what you're sayin. Isn't it crazy how such a small number of people can just be like "yo here's some new bs laws and we expect you all to follow them" which most people will because control by fear works pretty good (sadly).

sff_writer_dan 03-4-2023 04:51 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBR420 (Post 4786298)
I get what you're sayin. Isn't it crazy how such a small number of people can just be like "yo here's some new bs laws and we expect you all to follow them" which most people will because control by fear works pretty good (sadly).
These are the same people proposing laws to forbid trans girls from playing girl's sports when there are literally 0-1 actual trans girls playing girls sports in the whole state. Millions of dollars of tax money going into paying the people who want to keep one or in some cases zero kids away from something that literally does not matter at all.

Black_Shield 03-4-2023 05:42 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
they could bring back co-ed sports for high school.

diddleysquin 03-6-2023 07:34 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lights (Post 4786281)
If you walk up to me and you misgender me out of nowhere, not knowing anything about me- im not going to be thrilled about it, but im not going to hold it against you. The response would be to correct it afterwards and now hey- we're on the same page, conversation can resume. If airport security or any other random stranger makes that mistake, its not going to be the end of the world (so long as they're not going out of there way to be jerks about it). -///- After a couple corrections, thats going to stick with you.

Believe me, if things like legal name changes / sex changes weren't prohibitively expensive and complicated to perform, I'd love to get my own personal documentation updated. But unfortunately, some places can tend to make that rather hard to do. This is something that I personally believe should be addressed, but in the meantime- it doesn't hurt to take the time to remember the pronouns of someone you're going to see more than once. paperwork or not.
This, exactly and all of this is precisely what I wanted to add to this conversation.

sff_writer_dan 03-8-2023 09:08 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
A trans friend of mine, in addition to the cost of application for a legal name change, also had to appear in court and tell a judge exactly why she wanted to change her name, and he had the power to just go "no" if he wanted to.

And when you look at the state of the court system in most places in the US, I don't think that's necessarily a given that they'll approve it.

drizzleRomanceGirl 03-8-2023 11:04 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
it's so sad about all the trans youth these kind of bills affect and how many more children might fall into depression and not be able to get the care they need :(

salAndy 03-11-2023 02:13 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Country of freedom, huh? WHERE'S THE FUCKIN FREEDOM??

DossarLX ODI 03-11-2023 06:01 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
Texas trying to put a $5,000 bounty drag ban.

https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup...8R&Bill=HB4378
https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88...pdf#navpanes=0

Quote:
Sec.A100B.004.DAMAGES. If a claimant prevails in an action
brought under this chapter, the court shall award:
(1)actual damages, including damages for
psychological, emotional, economic, and physical harm;
(2)reasonable attorney ’s fees and costs incurred in
bringing the action; and
(3)statutory damages of $5,000

ToonE156 03-13-2023 06:35 AM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
one of my good friends IRL is a socially transitioned male so I kinda feel bad for him seeing these bills. I really hope that none of these actually go through cause they are stupid.

XCV 03-13-2023 07:07 PM
Re: Anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation staying lowkey but with big impact
 
People have been using Christianity as a realpolitik delivery mechanism going back all the way to Constantine. I've sort of become desensitized to it --- just business as usual, people hating us for no definable reason. It sounds bad, but after your own parents kick you out and find you disgusting there's not much to do but get used to it.

If you, like me, are a trans person in the US you should strongly consider learning how to shoot in case it ever comes up. I think if we have to conceal-carry then things have gotten quite bad indeed, but given the slope we're rolling down (my home state of Kentucky recently introduced the mother of all anti-trans bills, which I'm not going to look up because I don't want to think about it right now) you have to figure there's a good chance we'll get there.

Some time ago I posted in the fiffer Discord about my fear of getting lynched in public and a friend I won't name was like, "yeah that's the same thing non-white people negotiate every day." Food for thought.

Solidarity, y'all.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution