Isn't it? The parebnts from this case wanted to control the pronouns that were used to refer to their kids. They chose to let their kid go to this school. Would the parents have gotten what they wanted if they HADN'T made that choice? If they hadn't given their kid enough leway to have a life outside of their knowledge?
Discussion
Funny how so many trans kids are getting literally abused by their parents and you are trying to spin it like it's those very parents are the victims. Stop. Treating. Kids. As objects. As someone with literal pedophilic tendencies, it's VERY important for you to do that. Kids are not a toy you can have "dibs" on.
I don't have "pedophilic tendencies." I'm a pedophile. There's a difference. I have free will. Every action I have ever taken has been my own. Everything I will ever do will be because I willed it.
You dodged my question earlier when I asked whether the school's protocol is sustainable, and now you dodge a question again, this time about exactly what would have happened if the parents didn't give so much leway to their kid and the school.
You said that the school's actions aren't punishing parents for giving their kid too much freedom, and now you say that kids aren't a toy you can have dibs on. If you really believe these things then are my questions not relevant to this discussion? If a school's actions aren't punishing parents for giving their kid too much freedom then what would happen if they stopped sending their kid to this school? If you really believe children aren't objects then what would happen if a parent really did try to call dibs?
Have you even considered the child's own autonomy when hearing these questions? Do you think the kid even has free will? Do you believe that the parents have free will? Yes, yes, I hear you, the parents aren't victims. But are the parents so incapable of critical thought that the school never has to worry about the parents withdrawing their kid? Are you unable to think of alternatives, or do you genuinely believe that my questions aren't worth answering?
Yes, the school's approach is sustainable. Also what leeway? I don'tnsee any leeway. I see them try to give even less leeway that already isn't there.
What would happen if they stop sending thebkid to that school is called "homeschool". That's an option for them, but they would rather sue the school over pronouns.
The child's autonomy is what matters and the child is saying "these are my pronous, but don't tell my parents because they would abuse me for coming out as trans"
This ain't rocket sciece, buddy. I don't know why I'm even arguimg with a literal pedophile who views kids as objects.
It’s not the teachers choice, plain and simple. mind your own business. You’re a teacher, shut your mouth and teach math. A teacher shouldn’t be discussing pronouns with the kids, period. How parents want to deal with their kids is their choice, if there’s abuse that should be dealt with separately. Teachers discussing this mental illness inducing gender crap is abuse. Sorry, not sorry.
I appreciate that you are taking the time to argue with a pedophile who advocates for treat children like objects in certain circumstances. I think it's very confident of you, and I am interested in your perspective.
Yes, there's homeschool, private school, and it is also possible to take one's kids to a different public school. I know that many parents care quite a bit about their kids education, to the point where they will move to a different school district if they think it will mean their kids get a better education.
In this court case, the parents sent messages to the school ahead of time requsting them not to provide mental health treatment without approval, they were willing to sue the school, and yes, they almost certainly withdrew their kid from the school. Because of cases like these, how many other transphobic parents chose not to send their kids to public schools in the first place?
You say that the policy is sustainable and that the child's autonomy is what's most important, but in this case it seems pretty clear to me that it wasn't. There were numerous information leaks, including one of the teachers snitching completely. You say that the school is just respecting a student with abusive parents, and that the parents are already not giving their kid any leway, but the end result is that the student ends up with more supervision less progressive teachers. If the goal was to increase the kid's autonomy, then trying to provide it by exploiting the parents' trust seems like it had the opposite effect. If you don't consider that to be "less leway" then I'm curious to hear what term you'd use.
If the hope is that the parents will be total pushovers then I think the school shouldn't have been so afraid to rub it into the parents' faces that they were using different pronouns with the kid. If the kid agrees to the whole scenario then that's what I would have done in the school's shoes. It's not snitching if the kid knows the parents will find out and chooses to ask for it anyway.
It's up to the kid on what and how much risk they choose to take regarding this. The very fact that the mental health trearment was provided could have been worth it. Shit, the kid could be alive now because if that.
Regarding sustainability, I think we are dealing with a form of survival-bias: we only know about the cases where the parents did find out and make a stink about it. If something is successfully kept secreat, it's excluded from "statistics" by its very nature.
Is it up to the kid? What if the parents never chose to send their kid to that school in the first place? What would you have done in the parents' shoes if you thought there was a chance the school would treat your kid in a way that you viewed as manipulative and harmful?
Bruh. We've been over this. Homeschool and privare school are all options. There are parents here in the state who don' want their kid taught evolution. They tried to suethe school. The courtstold them to go fuck themselves (as they should have). Now there are parents who either homeschool or use private school. But thry don't get to tell public schools to stop teaching science and toteach religious fiction instead.
Yes, I know. I'm just trying to understand, if that's the case then where exactly do you get the idea that it's up to the kid?
You realize that that was an answer to a completely different question, right. Just scroll up. Not only are we going in circles now, you are also losing the track of the conversation.