Trans

These N.C. Lawmakers Want To Police How Kids Express Their Gender

The latest anti-trans salvo isn't just a treatment ban. It forces school officials to snitch on kids who don't act or dress as their birth sex.

|

A handful of Republican lawmakers in North Carolina want to force school officials to monitor kids for signs of any genderbending and to snitch on them to their parents.

In some ways, Senate Bill 514, titled the Youth Health Protection Act, mimics a recently passed Arkansas bill. It forbids health professionals from providing treatments like hormones or puberty blockers to trans youths who want to suppress or alter the development of their birth sex characteristics. (Republican Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson vetoed the Arkansas bill, but lawmakers then overrode his veto.)

But the North Carolina bill goes a step further. The bill, sponsored by Sens. Ralph Hise (R–Spruce Pine), Warren Daniels (R–Morganton), and Norman Sanderson (R–Minnesott Beach), orders school officials and child welfare workers to notify parents or guardians in writing whenever a minor under their supervision "has exhibited symptoms of gender dysphoria, gender nonconformity, or otherwise demonstrates a desire to be treated in a manner incongruent with the minor's sex."

In other words, the aim here isn't to "protect" struggling teens who have doubts about their gender identities from making life-changing decisions too soon. The bill sets out to police gender conformity. By its very nature, it will target gays and lesbians as well as trans kids—and opens the door to surveilling boys and girls who are neither gay nor trans but simply don't manifest typical masculine or feminine traits.

The law also forbids teachers and other government-employed caregivers from encouraging teens to keep mum about their situation if they're worried that their parents won't react well. Note that this part of the bill doesn't actually specify gender identity issues. It literally just tells government agents that they can't advise ever minors to withhold information from their parents, even if they believe the parent is abusive. Those who violate this part of the law could face discipline, and parents are authorized to sue for civil damages.

As a punchline, the bill includes a section that shields other types of treatments from being banned in the state:

A State office, agency, political subdivision of the State or local government, or any organization with authority to license or discipline the members of a profession may not prohibit, impose any penalty, or take any adverse action against any individual who gives or receives counsel, advice, guidance, or any other speech or communication, whether described as therapy or provided for a fee, consistent with conscience or religious belief.

That part of the law is there to protect therapists who provide "conversion therapy" that purports to "cure" gay or trans people of their same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. So the bill bans therapies that, though controversial in some quarters, are supported by medical professionals as an appropriate treatment in some cases—and the very same bill protects a therapy widely understood to be a scam that causes psychological damage to vulnerable gay and trans kids.

Don't get me wrong: I'm a critic of conversion therapy bans, which in my view violate the First Amendment. But more than that, I'm a critic of getting lawmakers involved in what does and does not qualify as appropriate therapies. That's an issue for the kids, parents, and medical professionals to work out among themselves; the government should only ever think of getting involved when those sides aren't in alignment.

NEXT: Joe Biden Says Trains Will Soon Be Almost as Fast as Planes. That's Ridiculous.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. casual sex sheffield is the best web place for hot chat with UK girls

    1. Signing up now. Although I’m skeptical of any sentence with hot chat/uk girls/Sheffield all in the same sentence.

      1. JOIN PART TIME JOB FOR USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings cc are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

      2. Let us know how it goes. Hopefully the bot didn’t misspell “hot shat.”

    2. Sheffield chicks > Bristol chicks

      1. I know when I think of the world’s sexiest cities, the birthplace of stainless steel is at the top of the list.

        1. they all have crooked teeth and talk like idiots but *some* town has to have the winners

        2. Pittsburg has the hottest girls. Just ask Fist.

    3. That’s a new Ad Bot, and also the first comment

  2. Piss off with your phony rationalizations of child castration and drugging, Shackford.

    1. Why can’t the Libertarian Party and the North American Man Boy Love Association go anyplace politically? I feel like we are just spinning our wheels and not progressing to a future where children can consent to gender confirmation surgery, hormone replacement therapy, and consensual sex with adults?

    2. You’ll capitulate on this eventually, like you capitulated on considering gays normal human beings. Remember that conservatives always lose in the end. It stems from the very definition of the term.

      1. “considering gays normal human beings”

        Fuck off Jeff.

      2. You guys lost big in 1945 and again in 1992. These things are cyclical.

  3. No chix with dix at school.

      1. Not googling that, Rabbi.

        1. No one believes you need to faggot.

  4. I first read that headline as, “These N.C. Lawmakers want the Police to Know How to Express Kids’ Gender”.

    1. I did as well.

    2. Squeeze them really hard? Breast pump?

  5. Teenage Matt Welch in his Bowie phase hardest hit.

    1. I almost left this response blank so you could stew in how unfunny this was, but I just can’t. This was really not funny on any measure.

      1. Aha! You are Matt Welch’s sock puppet!

  6. The latest anti-trans salvo isn’t just a treatment ban. It forces school officials to snitch on kids who don’t act or dress as their birth sex.

    Oh boy…

    1. Unfortunately, these are hamfisted laws which are trying to address a very disturbing trend where minors are being pushed into declaring themselves trans (and subsequently life-altering conversion therapies) by an activist class.

      Reading between the lines, I can kind of see what the lawmakers are attempting to do, but any law which tries to address this stuff at the level the lawmakers are trying are bound to fail and have unintended consequences.

      1. Transphobia will be defeated in your lifetime.

        1. We must recognize everyone’s differences, label them as such, but then not criticize the differences… unless white.

      2. At a glance, seems the same as responsibility to report signs of child abuse.
        It’s just that leftists don’t want imposing transgender delusions on children to be considered abuse.
        But it’s definitely child abuse.

        1. Or reporting other types of mental illness. If a teacher sees evidence that a student is bulimic, should they not notify the parents?

          This is seriously the kind of shit that makes most people think libertarians are a joke.

          1. You mean as in bulimia nervosa, the behavior pattern of stuffing oneself and then vomiting or diarrhea-ing it out? Or true bulimia, i.e. extreme appetite?

            Either way, that’s a situation with medical consequences. In true bulimia, the parent’s going to notice the child getting fat anyway. But cross-dressing, playing with the “wrong” toys, saying you’re the opposite sex…those don’t lead to illness and aren’t signs of illness. So no, I don’t think parents should be notified of such behaviors.

            1. As a parent, I’d want to know. So there’s that.

          2. Some girls identify as a spooky skeleton, bigot!

          3. If parents responded to finding out their child is bulimic by punishing them and sending them to a type of “conversion” treatment that has been proven to not work and also cause harm to the child, then you are absolutely right that the teacher should not notify them.

      3. @Diane Reynolds

        These laws are not attempting to do that. They are attempting to enforce the highly disturbing, and not at all new tendency of bad parents to not respect who their children are. The much smaller trend of some people mistakenly transitioning is just a figleaf.

        It is extremely important that children have a safe space where they can experiment and discover who they are without their parents finding out. Sadly, school is often the only place like this that exists nowadays. No one should want homophobic and transphobic parents to find out about their kids and hurt them.

        If you are actually concerned about people transitioning by mistake you should not support this bill. Since physical transitioning has so many risks it is extra important that people be able to socially transition, so they can see if they like it before they do anything permanent. That means parents should not be given any more opportunities to interfere with their child’s gender presentation than they already do.

        1. Poe’s law.

        2. Pretending it’s not mental illness doesn’t make it not mental illness. I’d want to know if my skinny girl thinks she’s fat, too. Sorry, you have no defense.

      4. Public schools are, by definition, hamfisted in all things.

        As they most certainly are a veritable fountain of unintended consequences. As SoGN intoned below why “can’t schools just teach kids to read, write and do math.”

        As if that was ever a realistic option.

  7. Fuck you Shackford. If the law were the other way, “This law forbids state employees from recognizing teens gender non-conformity and taking any action to minimize the risks associated with such behavior.” you’d be whining that it prevents public officials and healthcare workers from taking care of gays’ and trannies’ psychological needs.

    The normalizing of homosexuality and maligning homophobia specifically to assuage homosexuals’ personal anxieties was the central pillar in the ‘gay marriage’ debate. You can take your “I’m a victim, social engineering should only work in my favor.” cake and shove it up your ass sideways.

  8. “a manner incongruent with the minor’s sex.”

    So, no more girls wearing pants?

    1. I doubt Scott’s interpretting it with this level of dishonestly, ENB’s probably got the list of Republicans she’s sure will use it to forbid women from wearing shoes or leaving the kitchen all teed up.

      1. Word order, much? Scratching my head at women’s “leaving the kitchen all teed up”, eventually I figured out what was meant was, “ENB’s probably got all teed up the list of Republicans she’s sure will use it to forbid women from wearing shoes or leaving the kitchen.”

        1. Do you have an edit button the rest of us don’t?

          1. No, just a dirtier mind. Mmm, women all teed up….

            1. ‘In the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant’ was what I was alluding to.

        2. I understood it just fine.

          1. Well, Roberta’s a moron, so you have an unfair advantage.

            1. Roberta is one of SQRLSY’S sockpuppets. So yeah, what you said.

              1. Boracho is a sock for Chuck or mormon himself.

                Goddamn piece of shit!

    2. Depends on how hot or not they are.

  9. So if a 10 year old identifies as a quadriplegic the state shouldn’t stop a doctor from cutting off his arms and legs?

    1. Don’t be absurd! The surgeon would simply sever the spinal cord at the base of the neck and the kid’s body dysphoria would abate. No need for invasive surgery when a minor procedure has the same effect.

      1. Thank God, someone thwarted that runaway train of apples and oranges

        1. “IT’S DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT MAKES MY PERSONAL OPINION LOOK STUPID!!!”

    2. Again, that’s not even the part of the argument that Scott’s highlighting or principally demonizing. Scott’s effectively saying that if a child in the care of the state identifies as a quadraplegic, the state shouldn’t notify the parents.

      Moreover, he’s doing so because the state apparently refuses intervene in the apparently numerous situations where minors are subjected to comparatively innocuous conversion therapy without their parents’ consent.

      It’s pretty straightforwardly saying that because the state refuses to intervene when parents knowingly send their kids to Sunday School, they shouldn’t intervene, even to the point of simply notifying parents, when children volunteer to become virgin sacrifices.

      1. Nothing says “liberty” like the state taking your kids for 8 hours a day and having them neutered without telling you.

  10. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), one of only 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach then-President Donald Trump this year, recently told the Atlantic why he remains committed to the party: “I’m a Republican because I’ve been a Republican far longer than Donald Trump has. He’s a Republican usurper.… I’m not going to let him take the party. So I will fight. I will fight like hell.”

    It is a decision I have not for a moment regretted, because the GOP has become even more of a horror show than I anticipated. As former House speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) notes in a new memoir, the “crazies” have taken over. There are vanishingly few John McCain-style Republicans left; Kinzinger (a lieutenant colonel in the Air National Guard) is one of the few. The party’s center of gravity has shifted to kooks such as Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (who blamed Jewish space lasers for wildfires) and low-rent hucksters such as Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz (who reportedly shared nude photos of his sexual conquests with his colleagues and is under investigation for possible sex trafficking).

    (Washington Post)

    “Normal” Republicans are disappearing leaving the Trump craazies.

      1. The Lincoln Project is filled with frauds, liars, crooks and child molesters.

    1. Party above all. Sounds “normal”.

    2. Donald Trump still wrecking your brain.

    3. When I want to know what a normal republican is, I too cite WaPo.

      1. Novak and Will = normal

        1. Who democrats say is normal and subservient = normal.

          Fixed it for you buddy.

        2. Big-government, corporatist war-pigs are normal by Buttplug’s estimation. Check.

    4. “John McCain-style Republicans”? Oh, he means assholes.

      1. Entitled assholes. Entitled assholes who are useless to anybody else who isn’t an entitled asshole, and even to most of them.

    5. Like we should listen to you regarding what the Republican Party should be.

    6. The Washington Post??!! Really?? Seriously ? How about CNN then?
      Bezos’ propaganda rag.

  11. Here come all the fake libertarians outraged over what someone else might choose to do with their own kid. If your right wing media bubble didn’t remind you several times a day how angry you are about this, would you still be angry?

    These culture war issues are nothing but rorschach tests that allow us to identify all the fake libertarians.

    Mother: fail
    mad.casual: fail

    1. Thank you for stating this fact. Too many fake libertarians claim to support freedom but are quick to judge when others do something outside the norm. As a true libertarian, I support a persons right to modify their body in any way at any age. I support the right of a child to make love to a man when they both consent. I support the right of a human being to take any drug at any time for any reason. I support every persons natural right to end their own life with the necessary medicine or with a shotgun or with the use of a tall building and an abrupt stop. I hold all these rights as natural rights that all human beings have a right to in an ethical society!

    2. >>someone else might choose to do with their own kid

      sales discouraged

      1. What about sex? Asking for a friend.

        1. you want to have sex with your child or sell your child for sex?

    3. Fuck off shitstain.

    4. Scott equates the institutionalized practice of physically and irreversibly changing people’s bodies to minimal and questionable positive outcome as equivalent to a form of therapy composed entirely of discussion of equally minimal and questionable outcome.

      If libertarianism is about equating free speech and association with physical destruction, I proudly emancipate myself from the party/ideology and thank you noting me by name in dissent.

      1. @mad.casual
        Puberty changes people’s bodies irreversibly. The whole point of puberty blockers is to stop or delay that. Stop pretending the choice is between irreversibly changing people’s bodies and leaving them be. It is between irreversibly changing them one way, vs irreversibly changing them another way. In the past too few people transitioned and their bodies were irreversibly changed by puberty into a type of body they did not want. This is a tragedy that could have been prevented through puberty blockers and other early health interventions.

        This is obviously a tough issue because people go through puberty before they are fully mature. So it is possible they might be mistaken and might not mind puberty after all. So there is definitely a danger that some people who might not want to transition if they thought about it more might do so and be stuck with an irreversible change. But that has to be balanced against the fact that not allowing people to transition will also result in an irreversible change.

        Did you think that people were just trying to help kids transition for no reason? Obviously if puberty didn’t cause irreversible bodily changes the responsible thing to do would be to wait until they grow up before they physically transition. No one disputes that.

        1. Except you do not have to make a choice to ‘transition’.

          Transgender people claim they are not the sex they were described as at birth. They ‘feel’ that they are the opposite sex. Since you can maintain your feeling without transitioning why would you want to transition at all?

          By their own admission gender is a feeling and not linked to their physical appearance. Why would you undergo such painful and radical surgery when you do not have to? How could you have such disregard for your own body?

          Either your gender is based on what you feel or it is open to judgement by others. If it is the former then it should not matter what the judgement of others is.

          1. @ecreek
            Don’t be pedantic. You know that the feeling is often linked with a desire to have a body more like the sex you feel like.

            To use another example, I feel like I like Godzilla movies. This is a true fact about myself and the judgement of others does not affect it. I can maintain this feeling indefinitely without watching Godzilla movies, telling other people that I like Godzilla movies, or wearing a Godzilla T-shirt. But I choose to do all those things because the feeling does not exist in a vacuum. It creates desires, such as the desire to go watch “Godzilla vs Biollante” for the 27th time.

            1. Why would you have a desire for a body more like the sex you ‘feel’ like? If you feel like that sex then you are that sex. You are either male or female. You cannot be more or less male or female so how does changing your body make you any different.

              This is not pedantic it is a perfectly reasonable question. How can you be more or less male or female and if you can’t then why would you change your body? Having a desire for something does not make it reasonable. There should be very strong arguments why you would want to change your body.

          2. It’s too full of stupid to warrant a legitmate reply. Children are weak and feeble, puberty, without intervention, makes them stronger and more capable. The arguments broadly in favor of puberty blockers are arguments in favor of lobotomies and the people making the arguments are living proof of the under-utilization of the practice.

            1. And, actually, there’s a case to be made that lobotomies would be far more effective at preventing suicides and depression.

        2. If libertarianism is about equating free speech and association with physical destruction, I proudly emancipate myself from the party/ideology and thank you noting me by name in dissent.

        3. Puberty blockers! Ffing hilarious. As if that is actually achieved by drugs. As if you should permanently alter a physically healthy nine-year old based on what they and their idiot parents think. It’s not an A vs. B choice between equally valid goals. It is reason vs. emotion. It is health vs. social disfigurement. Doctors who participate in this with kids need their licenses pulled.

    5. LOL. DoL thinks it is the libertarian stance to allow government workers to choose what is best for children instead of the parents. Hilarious.

      Keep bowing down to your government buddy. They know what is best.

    6. That is the essence of right-wing media today. No serious discussion about policy or principle. It is all about “Look what Dear Leader Trump did today!” and “Look at what some Democrat did today, how outrageous!”

      1. That you think this is somehow unique to ‘right-wing media’ is telling.

        Something something vast right wing conspiracy.

        1. Vast Right Wing Conspiracy and Russia. Mustn’t forget the Russkies.
          Good ol’ “Tailgunner Joe” McChemjeff stands against the Red menace.

      2. I heard “Orange man BAD” and “the Russians are coming to D.C.” for over 4 YEARS. Are you really gonna throw stones?

        1. Peeing Russian hookers and $150k stole the election dammit. Elections are only fair and undebatable when we “win” them.

      3. You’ve done a lot of this crying lately since biden and the left are being attacked by even Reason.

        You doing okay?

        1. I have? I’m sitting pretty.

          You seem to be the ones who are quite upset about so, so many things. Like this article, in which you have left 16 comments so far. About an extremely niche topic that affects about 0.1% of the population.

          So tell me who’s all worked up over nothing?

          1. Shackford.
            What the N.C. lawmakers are doing is hamfisted but right.

          2. “You seem to be the ones who are quite upset about so, so many things. ”

            “Here come all the fake libertarians …

            Mother: fail
            mad.casual: fail”

            You were saying?

            1. If libertarianism is about equating free speech and association with physical destruction, I proudly emancipate myself from the party/ideology and thank you noting me by name in dissent.

              1. He’s quoting DOL who was having a tantrum because we disagreed with him.

    7. Here come all the fake libertarians outraged over what someone else might choose to do with their own kid.

      Now do Jesus Camp

    8. Yep, we should let those Satanists sacrifice their kids, ’cause Liberty, baby!

  12. David Bowie on line 2 …

    1. And the members of The Cure, Echo and the Bunnymen, Dead or Alive, Poison, Motley Crue…

      1. I don’t know for certain, of course, but I strongly suspect that the parents of Bowie, The Cure, Echo, Bunnymen, Dead or Alive, Poison, Motley Crue… were notified multiple times by various state officials and employees about their children’s behavior.

        1. 8th grade Bowie was literally asked how can you have any pudding if you don’t eat your meat

      2. i think my fave glam rock band was Bullet Boys they did Smooth Up In Ya and covered For Love of Money well.

  13. I have to agree with the other commenters that this appears to be deliberately interpreting this law in the worst ways possible. Often to the point of absurdity

    1. I dunno, from the plain language it doesn’t look so far fetched to me. I get what mad.casual’s saying, but I don’t trust it to remain within those bounds, or even to be mostly within them. My reading of the mandate portion,

      If a government agent has knowledge that a minor under its care or supervision has exhibited symptoms of gender dysphoria, gender nonconformity, or otherwise demonstrates a desire to be treated in a manner incongruent with the minor’s sex, the government agent or entity with knowledge of that circumstance shall immediately notify, in writing, each of the minor’s parents, guardians, or custodians. The notice shall describe all of the relevant circumstances with reasonable specificity.

      makes it look like a pro-gender-bending measure, and a coercive one.

      1. Yea, that’s a good point

  14. If reason got its way kids would be high on drugs, intersex, and dropping out of school to turn tricks for Buttplug and DOL. That’s a great way to have a future.

    1. For Reason writers libertarianism is solely a way of announcing that you’re a contrarian, but that you’re still totally cool with the way that sex and drugs works for the white, upper-middle class elite.

  15. Letting government school officials hide issues from parents was never really one of the pillars of Libertarianism.

    1. Who knew?!

      In all seriousness, if the law currently allows school psychologists or other medical professionals treat children for gender reassignment without their parents’ knowledge, then that should be reason #478 to homeschool your kids.

      1. This has already happened in practice where a school member over ruled transitions of someone elses kid.

        https://thefederalist.com/2018/02/21/judge-removed-trans-teen-parents-highlights-whats-stake/

        1. That is not even an accurate summary of your own article. There was no school involved. It was a dispute among parents, grandparents, a 17-year-old teenager (not some confused 10-year-old waif), the county’s child protective services, and a hospital that produced a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. There was no school teacher hiding anything from anyone in the case that you cited. Not surprising that you outright lie about your own link.

          1. I will find tbe other one.

            But this is still the government telling parents that the government gets to choose who has ownership of a child over the objections of a parent.

            But you know schools have been doing this, you have been in threads about it.

            Again, you are stating government knows better than a parent and calling it liberty.

            1. I will find tbe other one.

              Oh, so you admit that you lied about your own article. Well that is a start for you.

            2. @JesseAZ. You said:
              “But this is still the government telling parents that the government gets to choose who has ownership of a child over the objections of a parent.”

              Nobody has ownership of a child because owning human beings is immoral and illegal. Parents have custody, not ownership of children and young adults. If they do a sufficiently bad job as custodians it is common for the government to transfer custody to somebody else, to prevent harm to the or young adult, in this case. That is what happened in this case.

              If they didn’t want to lose custody they should have done the right thing and helped him transition. Instead, they were poor custodians and tried to make him do some kind of fraudulent Christian therapy.

              1. Woe for the olden days when there was no benevolent state to take custody of children and surgically remove their genitalia to save them from their sick and abusive parents…

            1. From your own article:

              At the end of the school week, the teacher told the boy to take the books home and share them with his family.

              These were of course the books about transgenderism.

              So much for teachers hiding what they are doing from parents.

              We have no idea what actually happened in this case because this entire article just comes from the parents’ lawsuit. But even if we accept the whole thing at face value, the teacher talked to the kid about being transgender, and then told the parents about it. So you are still flailing about.

          2. Another example.

            https://www.wgtd.org/news/ksb-takes-middle-ground-stance-transgender-student-rights-issues

            Should I keep going jeff. Or are you more concerned with gaslighting?

            Now explain why schools/government should overrule parents from your left libertarian bullshit dogma.

            1. This article isn’t about kids deciding to transition. The article is about pronouns. That is the hill you are going to die on? We should have state legislatures dictating to teachers that they only use the pronouns that parents deem acceptable? If a teacher uses “he” instead of “she”, that represents some horrible abuse of power that mandates government action?

              How about this Jesse. Teachers should be treated like the professionals that they are. If a teacher isn’t capable of acting professionally, then the teacher should be fired. But the legislature should not be micromanaging every aspect of a teacher’s job. Just like the legislature should not be micromanaging every aspect of ANYONE’S job.

              This entire thing came about because people like you, on Team Red, do not trust teachers, whether they act professionally or not, and demand that they strictly adhere to a curriculum that is PC – Patriotically Correct – by right-wing standards. Any part of the curriculum that deviates from this narrow viewpoint represents heresy, brainwashing, indoctrination, etc., and must be stamped out by government edict. That is what this is about.

              1. If a teacher uses “he” instead of “she”, that represents some horrible abuse of power that mandates government action?

                The Equality Act that you’ve vocally and continuously supported certainly seems to think so. You really should have thought this one through a little bit.

              2. GET THE GUBMINT OUT OF MUH PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!!!!!!

                Do you have any idea how abjectly fucking stupid you actually are?

            2. @JesseAZ

              Children should overrule parents, not schools and governments. Sometimes children know better than their parents do. This is especially true when it comes to LGBT issues. Schools and governments are merely acting in the child’s behalf, protecting them from their vile parents.

              In your most recent example you are talking about whether schools should accept a child’s name/pronoun change without their parent’s permission. The school isn’t overruling the parents, it is choosing to listen to the child instead of their scumbag parents. What’s wrong with that? It’s just names and pronouns. Parents shouldn’t have a right to control that, it should be up to the kids.

              Parental control over children is a responsibility, not a right. It can and should be taken away or restricted if it is not exercised properly. Obviously replacing it with government control would be bad. But it looks like they’re doing the right thing and letting the kids be the ones that pick.

              1. Sometimes children know better than their parents do.

                Exactly! That’s why school lunches should consist of chocolate cake and ice cream. Children know how they feel, and what they feel is what is best for them. Do you seriously want some government bureaucrat deciding that children shouldn’t eat chocolate cake and ice cream for lunch every day? WELL DO YOU!

    2. I remember similar tactics being used against Prop 187, where the left said it was wrong for the State of California to deny welfare programs to illegal aliens because it would turn teachers and paramedics into criminals if they didn’t rat children out to the INS.

      Shackford should prove us all wrong by showing us a law that protects the right of parents to make these choices for their children without having the downsides he’s talking about. If it isn’t possible to require school psychologists and medical professionals to inform parents and obtain their consent before they start subjecting their children to gender reassignment without the negative consequences Shackford is talking about, then, from a libertarian perspective, he’s completely full of shit.

      P.S. The downside of the Fifth Amendment is that guilty murderers sometimes go free.

    3. If the parents might react in a way that will harm the children, then it is a good idea to hide those issues. One of the legitimate functions of government recognized by libertarianism is to prevent people from infringing on the liberty of others. That includes preventing parents from infringing on the liberty of children.

      1. If the parents are a legitimate danger to the child the teachers have violated their mandatory reporting role. The only reason to hide it is because the teachers are afraid of making themselves and their favored position look bad by moving to soon to the inevitable results of their position.

        1. +1 emancipation.

          If you want gender reassignment treatment as a child over your parents’ objections, you go in front of a judge.

          The procedures and precedent for doing that has a long, long history.

          There isn’t anything special about gender reassignment that hasn’t already been decided in other cases–from Christian Scientists not wanting treatments for their children; Jehovah’s Witnesses not wanting blood transfusions for their children; the Amish not wanting to educate their children past the Eighth grade; and children getting pregnant and either wanting an abortion over their parents’ objections or wanting to marry over their parents’ objections. Cases like that come up before family court judges every day all over the country. There isn’t anything new here.

          They’re just trying to run an end around parental rights without having to go see a judge.

          I call bullshit.

      2. Good god you’re bad this shit, sarcasmic.

  16. “A handful of Republican lawmakers in North Carolina want to force school officials to monitor kids for signs of any genderbending and to snitch on them to their parents.”

    Is this a reaction to a current policy that lets medical professionals treat children for gender reassignment without their parents’ knowledge or consent?

    If you’re using this as an excuse to run an end around the principle that medical professionals should not be allowed to treat children without their parents’ knowledge and consent, then you should be ashamed of yourself.

    1. Yes, linked to an example above. There are many cases were school councilors are taking students to various gender doctors without consent of the parents.

    2. The state exhorts you to surrender your children to their custody and then Shackford wants to make it so that they are under no obligation to tell you what your kid is up to.

      Statist much Shackford?

      1. And I have a simple response to anyone who ever tries to perform a medical procedure on one of my minor children without my, or my wife’s consent. (Other than immediately necessary life saving procedures for which well recognized legal exceptions already exist.)

        First I will sue you, and if you have caused irreparable harm I will at some later date shoot you in the face.

        1. Imagine you were a child and your parent wouldn’t consent to a medical procedure that would really help you. Imagine some good Samaritan managed to help you escape your parent’s control and get the procedure anyway?

          Now imagine your parent tries to sue and shoot them because they helped you? Imagine how that would feel. Maybe you’d want to shoot your parent in the face to protect the person who helped you.

          1. The principle that people shouldn’t be free to do anything to your children without your knowledge or consent remains true–even when you tell sad stories and play violins in the background.

            Did I mention that the principles in the Fifth Amendment remain valid even if it means guilty rapists and murderers go free, sometimes, too?

            Principles remain the same regardless of your sad stories. Aristotle taught us that 2,400 years ago. Just in case you haven’t heard, here’s the link.

            “An appeal to pity (also called argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, or the Galileo argument)[1][2] is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent’s feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_pity

            It means you’re wrong.

            P.S. The legal procedure by which minors can emancipate themselves already exists.

          2. a medical procedure that would really help you

            Cutting off someone’s dick to feed their psychosis isn’t “helping” anyone, you insane piece of shit.

            1. It’s just sarcasmic being a retarded cunt as usual. Treat it as such.

    3. Meanwhile we’re raising the smoking age to 21 all over the nation to prevent stupid, impressionable legal adults from making the wrong choices about what to put in their bodies.

  17. The other kids already police gender standards. Crossdress as a kid and you will be ridiculed.

    1. You sure about that?
      There’s a New Normal now.

      1. Absolutely sure. Children remain horrible to each other.

        1. Possibly, but hetero boys are probably the ones being bullied now.

          1. If not by their classmates, at least by their teachers…

    2. Zoomers are all faggots with autism now. I think Alex Jones is right about the government putting chemicals in the water.

  18. A State office, agency, political subdivision of the State or local government, or any organization with authority to license or discipline the members of a profession may not prohibit, impose any penalty, or take any adverse action against any individual who gives or receives counsel, advice, guidance, or any other speech or communication, whether described as therapy or provided for a fee, consistent with conscience or religious belief.

    Yes, this is the suicide hot line. Lucky you, you’ve reached a pro-suicide counselor! No, I’m not going to try to dissuade you, you should go right ahead and kill yourself, no questions asked. No, I’m not afraid of losing my position here if you do. Glad to help.

    1. And if you even have a glimmer of a thought about how your grief-stricken parents, who gave up so much to raise you and are legally responsible for your welfare will react, don’t worry about it. This conversation is protected and I’m under no obligation to inform them of anything we discuss. Now, let’s get back to discussing how killing yourself would solve all your social and emotional problems…

      1. Isn’t there a way to write the legislation such that it would keep agents of government from acting in secret, while at the same time not looking for trouble to make and suggesting it to family members?

        1. Considering the highly-subjective interpretations of ‘Congress shall make no law’ and ‘shall not be infringed’, I wish you the best of luck in your ‘least burdensome’ crusade.

        2. Yes, but it requires quoting Pink Floyd. “Hey! Teacher! Leave them kids alone!”

  19. This comment section is all you need to see that there aren’t actual libertarians here. Just basic Republican fascists.

      1. I guess we just discovered raspberries is another Buttplug sock.

    1. Scott equates the institutionalized practice of physically and irreversibly changing people’s bodies to minimal and questionable positive outcome as equivalent to a form of therapy composed entirely of discussion of equally minimal and questionable outcome.

      If libertarianism is about equating free speech and association with physical destruction, I proudly emancipate myself from the party/ideology and thank you noting me by name in dissent.

    2. The guy who defended lockdowns and masks tells others about liberty. Let’s all watch.

    3. I know what you mean. These commenters are absolutely repulsive. They are all about liberty when it’s about the government not telling them what to do. But when they find out that liberty means they aren’t absolute monarchs of their kids’ lives they freak out.

      1. I to pretend I was a firetruck as a toddler. Thanks goodness you and Shackford weren’t around to chop off my limbs, outfit me with wheels and dye me bright red.

    4. When you believe that a person should be 21 years of age and have to show photo ID to buy smokes, but that 8 year olds should be able to decide to surgically mutilate their genitals and nobody should have to show ID to vote…

  20. Well, as I was informed yesterday, it is the job of the state to police parents to make sure their kids are growing up “well adjusted”. So if a boy is playing with dolls, or if a girl is riding dirt bikes, they are clearly maladjusted because they are not conforming to the gender roles that the state deems that they must conform to. Time to bring down the hammer of state violence on those parents who dare to let their children deviate from traditional gender norms. That is what making America great is all about!

    1. Chemjeff plays with dolls and wears skirts?

      1. You vant he should instead play with the skirts the “dolls” are wearing?

      2. Ew. Fat trannys are the worst.

    2. “… it is the job of the state to police parents…”

      Telling parents what their kid’s are up to on school grounds during school hours is now “policing parents.”

      There is rank dishonesty and then there is Jeff.

    3. Time to bring down the hammer of state violence on those parents who dare to let their children deviate from traditional gender norms.

      Says the bloated fat piece of shit unironically arguing that girls who play with GI Joe dolls should be referred for genital mutilation by their school counselor with an AA in Early Childhood Development and a handsome licensed clinical social worker certificate, with no parental notification or consent.

      Libertarians for state run schools providing subsidized medical care to children against the wishes of their parents!

  21. Shackford, you disingenuous fuck. The bill doesn’t say, “The state is required to report nonconformist behavior to abusive parents.” It merely bans teachers and counselors employed by the state to advise children keep secrets from their parents. Quit creating strawmen to attack when you have a disagreement; focus on what’s actually in the bill and attack it on those grounds. Get your head out of your ass.

    1. No, it literally says:

      If a government agent has knowledge that a minor under its care or supervision has exhibited symptoms of gender dysphoria, gender nonconformity, or otherwise demonstrates a desire to be treated in a manner incongruent with the minor’s sex, the government agent or entity with knowledge of that circumstance shall immediately notify, in writing, each of the minor’s parents, guardians, or custodians.

      It doesn’t say the parents have to be abusive, but it does say the state is required to report certain types of nonconformist behavior to parents.

      Although the possibility of already abusive parents adds to the disturbing nature of such scenarios, I’m more concerned about woke teachers looking for excuses to label children as being of the “wrong sex” for their appearance, and then the parents’ being encouraged to think of their children that way. It opens additional cans of worms that are already too wormy in society these days.

      1. So… it prohibits state employees “suggesting” to a child that the child may be transgender without also notifying the parents.
        How is that improper?
        Rather, how would allowing state employees carte blanche permission to psychologically manipulate suggestible children in their care be proper?

        1. But yes, it does present the woke parents problem.
          But fuck global socialist parents and their global socialist youth.

        2. Rather, how would allowing state employees carte blanche permission to psychologically manipulate suggestible children in their care be proper?

          Well, that’s been the sole purpose of modern public education since the Prussians invented it in the 19th century.

        3. So… it prohibits state employees “suggesting” to a child that the child may be transgender without also notifying the parents.
          How is that improper?

          It’s improper because it requires notifying the parents even if those (or other) state employees are not suggesting such things to the child. And the trouble with a “has knowledge” standard is that it easily becomes a “should have known” one, resulting in state agents snooping where they otherwise needn’t, just to stay out of trouble. And by “snooping” I mean being hyper-aware of kids acting in ways contrary to stereotype.

      2. “Although the possibility of already abusive parents…”

        As opposed to the almost certainty of agenda driven activist school employees.

        Did any of you dumbasses ever attend public school? I did, and even though it was five decades ago I still remember the leftists who were profoundly more nefarious with their manipulations and inculcations than the religious zealots ever were.

        Don’t tell me things have gotten any better.

      3. This law didn’t materialize in a vacuum.

        This may be an overreaction to some bad policy and/or bad behavior, but that just means it’s an excellent opportunity for a libertarian writer to reassert parental rights. I’d have been happy if the emphasis were merely on why this is another good reason to home school–because it’s the best way to protect your right to make choices for your children.

        Poor bureaucrats being forced to tell parents what their children are doing isn’t even close to being the worst aspect of this–from a libertarian perspective.

        This is like a municipality passing an ordinance requiring everyone to keep a gun in the home–in reaction to gun control. Whether people should be arrested for failing to keep a firearm in the home isn’t the real issue. The voice of reason in that case asserts that we should all be free to own and keep a firearm in the home if we please.

        The principle at stake here is that no one should be able to initiate gender reassignment treatment on your children without your knowledge and permission.

        Incidentally, I maintain that support for things like prayer in public schools and teaching intelligent design are largely a function of the same thing. Parents think they should have some control over what you teach their children–because they should. We’ve seen the same thing with opposition to abortion with parental notification laws. From a libertarian perspective, even those of us who are pro-choice shouldn’t support giving children abortions without their parents’ knowledge or consent–at least not without pause!

        Asserting parental rights in the face of government bureaucrats should be a no-brainer from a libertarian perspective, and that’s what we do on other issues involving children. How likely is it that
        Lenore Skenazy will come tell us that government bureaucrats need to get between us and our transgender children–for the sake of the children? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

        1. How about instead legislating:

          It is the policy of this state that there is no such thing as being the “wrong sex” for anything other than processes limited by physiology. Those acting on behalf of this state or any subdivision thereof shall not recognize a statement that one is of the “wrong sex” for non-physiologic purposes as anything but opinion, and that opinion shall carry no weight as to actions or decisions of such officials.


  22. I’m a critic of getting lawmakers involved in what does and does not qualify as appropriate therapies.

    Boy, that’s a statement.

    So it should be totally legit for someone without any credentials to inject fix-a-flat into some woman’s ass right? She sought it out, and didn’t see an issue with it, so it’s therefore fine.

    Honestly a little curious about what the bounds of that should be, since this is such a wide statement that it boggles the mind.

    1. It may not be “fine”, but I don’t think it should be illegal.

      Regardless, that doesn’t seem to be the type of issue this bill is about. Can you show me the connection, please?

      1. I didn’t say anything about this bill in particular, I was referring to what you could extrapolate from the statement that legislatures should not be determining what is and is not a ‘therapy’.

        For example, if I sell you a surgery to rid yourself of your leg because you falsely believe your leg is gangrenous should it be legal for a surgeon to remove that leg?

        At what point is a surgeon taking advantage of the mentally ill to sell services to folks with compromised mental states, and should it be legal for them to do so?

        Apparently, the answer is ‘yes’ it should be totally legal to sell mutilating surgeries to people who otherwise can’t consent to this exact type of thing.

        The FDA recommends that women shouldn’t get breast implants before 18, or 22 respectively, depending on the surgery. Why does this not apply to other surgeries that are, by all accounts, the same thing or worse.

        1. ^ this!

          If a minor can’t legally agree to a cell phone contract, how is it possible for them to give legal consent to chemical or surgical alterations of their otherwise healthy bodies. Judges have gone off the deep end on this.

          1. You hate Trans Chuck. Just like you hate non-christians, blacks, latina folks, gays, and too many to name.

            Mormons hate Jews,but LOVE Israel. They love Polynesians too.

            Bigot

            1. I hate ever-drunk wife-beaters who blame their fuckups on everyone else.

              1. Me too.

                I’m not drunk nor have a wife to beat.

                1. So you’re a failure at that too.

                  1. Why does that make me a failure?

                    You mormon or something and got married at 20 right after your mission?

                    I prefer being able to fuck multiple girls.

                    Anyway you don’t know how old I am? I may be at an age where marriage isn’t practical.

        2. I don’t think such things should be legislated in particular concerning practice of medicine or other professions. Instead they should be handled under general principles of law regarding majority and ability to consent, which I don’t think even need to be legislated because I think they’re covered by general, judge-made law.

    2. In your argument, worth noting that Scott avoids any mention of efficacy or honesty directly. Pretty much because he can’t do so and back trans therapy and not conversion therapy.

      Presumaby, if doctor promises to fix your foot pain and then begins hitting you in the head with a hammer or, even more plausibly, promises to fix the pain in your left foot and operates on your right foot, Scott would oppose such treatments and insist that, at the very least, victims be able sue with a potential to win. But, again, Scott doesn’t actually care about honesty or efficacy as much as he cares that trans people get promoted and Christians get slighted.

      1. @mad.casual
        I think it’s more likely that he just had a word limit for the article.

        For a longer article he could have talked about the overwhelming medical consensus that physical and social transition improve the mental health of transgender people. For example, a meta-analysis at Cornell of 56 studies found 93% of them showed that it improved things, 7% showed it did not, but didn’t either. 0% showed it harmed.

        By contrast there is no evidence that conversion therapy works and the people who undergo it often find it a boring waste of time at best and insulting and humiliating at worst. People who promote that kind of tripe deserve to be slighted. I don’t want to call the Christians though. They display an obsession with rigid social roles that is more in line with the Pharisees than with Jesus.

        1. I think it’s more likely that he just had a word limit for the article.

          See my reference to the under-utilization of lobotomies above.

          You’re quoting selective meta-analyses of horrendously controlled studies in order to pretend that a highly invasive treatment is better than no treatment at all and ignoring the fact that there’s plenty of data suggesting that no treament at all is not just comparable, but superior in the larger number of cases. You want to mutilate children because thinking it makes them feel better makes you feel better and absolves you of your need to do something to help their plight. Your disdain for reason and embrace of ideology makes even the most disgusting of Mormon child polygamists seem benign in comparison.

  23. Taking a real controversial opinion here but can’t schools just teach kids to read, write and do math. When they get those basics down 100% then maybe we can talk about expanding their role in children’s lives.

    1. The trouble is, we must take the world as it is, not the way we wish it to be. Given that there’s much involvement of schools in such things already, and no prospect of getting it uninvolved in a hurry, how can the damage be minimized?

    2. Nonsense. The heroic state employees who have given us a 33% sub-6th grade literacy rate among high school graduates are the trusted, qualified professionals best positioned to help children navigate their sexual orientation and gender identity.

  24. I think Shackford is comparing this bill with a Libertopia where government employees are genuinely neutral on children’s sex or gender preferences.

    I think the sponsors of this bill are operating, not in Shackford’s Libertopia, but in environment where at least some government employees will be encouraging kids to conceal their gender dysphoria from “backward” and “bigoted” parents, to the end that the kids’ sexuality will be monitored by state officials and their family, as far as possible, kept out of the loop.

    1. monitored by state officials and *not* by their family, which will be cut out of the loop.

    2. Gender dysphoria is natural within something like 0.1-0.3% of the population (probably less really), but it seems there are certain people who see it, or wish to see it, in a far higher percentage of individuals. Some of those people are teachers, or counselors, or social workers.
      It seems this law would constrain their ability to influence toward their delusion/desire the children in their care independent of those children’s parents.

    3. Shackford doesn’t live in Libertopia, man. If the bill protected transgender kids’ rights and shat all over the 1A rights of their parents, he’d be cool with it. It’s the explicit intent of the argument that he’s making.

  25. Shackford continues to demonstrate he can stump with the best of the outrage whores in the media. If UCLA thinks .6% of the adult population identifies as transgender, most schools would see 1 or 2 kids in any year that might have an actual issue. The idea that teachers, the most liberal professionals in the nation, are going to run around monitoring how many days a week that Susie wear pants is pure fantasy.

    In other words, the aim here isn’t to “protect” struggling teens who have doubts about their gender identities from making life-changing decisions too soon.

    According to everything I have read the very small group of kids for whom this is real are at the greatest risk of all youth for suicide. Yet, alerting parents is somehow not protecting them? Kids anxieties about disappointing their family is what drives them to suicide. Getting it out in the open can’t make the odds worse.

    For fuck’s sake, statistically, the greatest danger to youth dealing with gender dysphoria is themselves. Why would public school admins encourage them to face it alone?

    1. Mormons hate Trans folks

      1. No they don’t. You can’t even bigot properly.

        1. Are you Mormon or something?

          Yes they do! They hate all non mormons pretty much.

          They’re terrible people and need to be wiped off the face of the earth.

          You’re a fucking piece of shit for defending them.

        2. Mormons are the goddamn bigots.

          People don’t choose their race, sex, or orientation. They can choose what church they go to.

          Mormons choose to go to a bigoted church.

          Fuck mormons and fuck you for defending them.

          1. While you’re fucking all the Mormons, could you maybe take a break from fucking your daughter, sarcasmic?

            1. Don’t have a daughter.

              I don’t know if sarcasmic does.

      2. Everyone hates you, sarcasmic. Nobody likes drunk welfare leeching pieces of shit who fuck their own children.

        1. Keep thinking I’m sarcasmic.

    2. Anyone who commits suicide because they have gender dysphoria has a very warped view of the importance of gender in human life. The desire to go on living is probably our strongest instinct. Those who commit suicide are not rational. They do it because they cannot get things in perspective. It seems to them a way of controlling their environment. If that is the way they deal with things that they think are beyond their control then changing gender will not help them. It won’t be long before something else threatens their sense of control.

      Playing the suicide card in any debate is futile since suicide is not a rational decision.

      1. Suicide can be a perfectly rational decision. There are many things worse than death. Neither you or the rest of the world would be any worse off after you’re dead than before you were alive. Even if it were always irrational it’s the fundamental expression of self-ownership. Anyone who makes suicide into a point of discussion is an authoritarian fuckwad who doesn’t believe in self-ownership.

        1. How do you know there are many things worse than death? Have you been dead? No one has come back to tell us they were glad they took their own life. How do you know without knowledge.

          Everyone has a right to take their own life but that does not mean it is a rational thing to do. Human beings do lots of irrational things.

          1. Human beings do lots of mostly irrational things.

            You seem young. Your point was understated, so I fixed it for you.

            1. You can’t fix things without being patronizing? Doesn’t say much for skills.

              1. Chuck’s a Mormon fuck.

                You got his garments in a bunch.

                Good job. Fuck mormons!

          2. We’ve all been dead. The trouble is remembering what that experience was like.

            1. Sure you can abuse language and redefine what being dead means but why would we trust any point you make about anything?

      2. Playing the suicide card in any debate is futile since suicide is not a rational decision.

        This statement lacks enough context to fully process. The conversation at hand is about children, who are, by nature of their immaturity, not expected to be fully rational. If by ‘playing the suicide card’, you mean, ‘threaten to kill yourself’, I agree about the futility. Getting a suicidal person to understand that is part of the counseling. If you mean that it is futile to discuss the risk of teen suicide, I heartily disagree.

        Shackford claimed that “the point here is not to protect the children”. I was making a counterpoint that ‘outing’ the kids to their parents is not the point of the notification. It is to alert the people closest to the student that they are at increased risk. Suicide is a leading cause of death among teens and the rates of suicide among this specific cohort rates special attention. This is as rational an explanation of the language in the law as Shackford’s assertion that it “sets out to police gender conformity”. Unless he has special insight he neglected to reveal in the article, his position appears partisan.

        I am not defending a political side here. I will continue to reassert that, statistically, the biggest threat to welfare of these particular youth is themselves. Notifying their legal guardians makes a lot more sense than unsolicited intervention by agents of the state.

        1. Mormons want to protect everyone from themselves.

          In reality we need to be protected from them.

        2. Then why couldn’t the legislation deal specifically with children at a heightened enough risk of suicide to have it make sense? Taking in every child who talks or acts in a way incongruent with their sex is so broad that it’s like suspecting all blacks of crime just because blacks are more likely to be criminals.

          1. Then why couldn’t the legislation deal specifically with children at a heightened enough risk of suicide to have it make sense?

            Was my point not clear? That is who it deals with.

            minor under their supervision “has exhibited symptoms of gender dysphoria, gender nonconformity, or otherwise demonstrates a desire to be treated in a manner incongruent with the minor’s sex.”

            That shouldn’t include “Billy looks swishy when he walks”, or “Susie wants to join the wrestling team”.

            It’s more like “Susie stated to the counselor that she is horrified at the thought of growing breasts”, or “Billy has stated his preference is to wear women’s underwear and requested permission to use the girl’s locker room to dress out for gym class”.

            Those kids are troubled and need more than a pamphlet and some platitudes about living their truth.

            1. Mormons want to protect everyone from themselves.

              In reality we need to be protected from the perv worshippers.

  26. Keeping parents informed of the goings on of their children, while they are in state custody is ‘policing.’

    Oh for fuck’s sake Shakford, libertarianism has enough struggles dealing with issues of minors or the mentally incapacitated, it does not need your bullshit piling on.

  27. Gender dysphoria is a mental disorder characterized by being disturbed by being your birth sex/gender.

    If there is already a precedent requiring people in charge of children to disclose other disordered behaviour, then this is nothing new.

    The disordered need help, not cheerleading.

    1. How do you prove that someone is disturbed by their birth gender/sex? There are no scientific procedures for determining the exact cause of disturbances. If you cannot be sure what causes the disturbance then surely you would not recommend radical and irreversible surgery. What if you found out later that there was another reason for your disturbance?

      1. The state is required to tell the parents of children in their care if they aren’t reading at the appropriate grade level. Whether the child is mentally handicapped or just doesn’t feel like reading the material provided is immaterial. I get direct phone calls when my child is clammy and nauseous and emails whenever any child in the school gets a fever. I had to pick one kid up from school because he said another kid was being salty. Hell, I get emails when suspicious white vans are spotted by people without kids in the neighborhood of the school.

        The idea that parents shouldn’t be notified when a kid expresses discontent with their gender is pointedly exceptional.

        1. Just because schools react to other issues does not mean that they should react to a child’s discontent with their gender. There may be very good reasons why they react to those other things. There should also be very good reasons why they react to a child’s discontent with its gender. You haven’t given any good reasons why they should.

          1. There may be very good reasons why they react to those other things.

            And there my be completely terrible reasons. You don’t give a shit. You aren’t making the case that the school shouldn’t be reacting to any/all of those issues, you just want to make sure schools have more control over the issue than parents do.

        2. The state is required to tell the parents of children in their care if they aren’t reading at the appropriate grade level. Whether the child is mentally handicapped or just doesn’t feel like reading the material provided is immaterial.

          But that’s because they [purport to] teach reading.

          I get direct phone calls when my child is clammy and nauseous and emails whenever any child in the school gets a fever.

          These are matters of health that can be judged objectively.

          Acting the “wrong sex” sticks out as not only subjective but also something they shouldn’t be sticking their noses into.

          1. What about kids who consistently act like dogs or cats such that people are asking questions?

            Should the parents be told?

            1. Maybe they should buy pet food.

      2. That’s why psychology isn’t an exact science. As soon as “proof” is found the disorder ceases to be mental and becomes medical.

        Psychologists observe what patients say and do to make a diagnosis.

        When someone pitches a fit often and convincingly about not being “the right gender” they get diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

        The question is how should they be helped? Trying to find out what is wrong with them and help them be happy in their assigned sex has been canceled by the lgbt lobby.

        When someone exhibits gender dysphoria psychologists are now supposed to cheer and break out the drugs while cosmetic surgeons start slicing.

        Because that’s “woke” dontcha know.

        1. “Woke” is intentionally jumping to conclusions.

          Not a good thing regarding life changing decisions.

  28. Great. The best site for finding sеx nearby * www. relax24. club (removе spacеs!)

    1. See that? A Web site where you can find out your sex. That should settle things.

  29. Teachers have long been submitting report cards to parents. Performance in math, English, PE, classes are taught, tested, graded and reported as a matter of course. Adding gender compliance classes to the curriculum will only open up a culture clash minefield and mean less time is devoted to more traditional subjects.

    1. The culture clash is raging.

      The woke cancel truth and kids are losing.

      1. If anyone is losing it’s the teachers. The legislature wants to saddle them with extra responsibilities fraught with controversy and difficulty with no mention of a commensurate increase in pay or benefits. The teachers would be the natural scapegoat for any tragedies when it comes to finger pointing time.

        1. Any teacher complaining about compensation for identifying concerns about the children in their care, shouldn’t be a teacher or otherwise responsible for children.

          Money? That’s pathetic.

          1. Teachers expect to be paid for the work they do. If you want the best teachers, you have to be prepared to pay for them. If you think the work you want them to do is of value, the best way to show this is to make their pay reflect this value. It’s much the same as any kind of work.

            It will be teachers who teach gender compliance to the students and teachers who give tests, mark and grade them. It will be teachers who will be held responsible should anything go wrong. If this is anything more than a cynical ploy of buck passing on the part of legislators, then of course teachers should expect their efforts be recognized in the only meaningful way our society understands: money.

            1. They get told what to do and are paid by the hour like everyone else.

              Nobody gets a raise every time their job changes.

              1. “Nobody gets a raise every time their job changes.”

                I suspect that their job won’t change. It’s all just cynical grandstanding on the part of the legislature. If they were serious, they would put up adequate resources.

            2. Then just another reason to keep your children out of public education.

              1. If you want a society with birthrates at or below Japanese levels, then go for it. Just realize the consequences of couples spending a significant portion of their income on education of their one (or maybe two) child.

                It’s odd that all your arguments hinge on ‘it’s for the children,’ but you support anti-natalist policies. (Policies that tend towards low birth rates for the population they govern,)

    2. Indeed and this will drive more and more parents to home schooling and private schools, where they can determine what is and isn’t taught.
      America’s public schools have become a laughing stock. Nothing more than brainwashing and indoctrination centers and you know what they’re indoctrinating children with.

      1. I don’t think anything like brainwashing occurs in public schools. Teachers have enough on their hands teaching the traditional curriculum. I am skeptical about this gender compliance, though. Boys and girls throw balls differently, for example. I see nothing good in teachers having to teach, test, grade and report how well their students conform to ball-throwing gender norms. That comes a lot closer to indoctrination than long division or sentence parsing.

        1. This is where a lot of this tranny crap comes from. In fact some schools in Commiefornia actually teach much worse to kindergartners.
          You have no idea what is being taught to kids in these rotted out public schools.

          1. “You have no idea what is being taught to kids in these rotted out public schools.”

            You mean it’s different from what they see on TV or the movies, on the internet, from their friends?

            If it’s the same, I wouldn’t worry so much. A loosening and dissolving of traditional gender roles seems to be permeating the culture. Blaming this on communist indoctrination in public schools is good hyperbole, but let’s face it, not only wrong but wrong headed.

  30. How is this bill in any way dangerous? If a child is exhibiting signs of Gender Dysphoria -which is a diagnosable mental illness whether you like it or not- it should be incumbent on teacher on parents to seek out mental health resources for the minor child. You disagree that this is the best course of action, so you attribute the legislation as being Anti-Trans. Nothing is further from the truth. minors should not be given puberty blockers and hormone treatments for what is at its very core a mental health condition. To call any legislation that restricts access to these drugs and treatments to ADULTS codified hatemongering as you have is beyond the pale of human reason.

    1. You’re right and that’s how the lgbt cancel lobby has worked since they coerced the APA to remove homosexuality from the DSM in the seventies.

      They don’t want being trans to be a disorder but they need it to be so doctors can administer drugs and perform cosmetic surgery that sterilizes these disturbed kids.

  31. If you were wondering why Libertarians can’t win an election, just read these comments.

  32. What the legislature in N.C. has decided is that young people do not have the knowledge or life experience to make those decisions for themselves.
    Of course they don’t, they’re too young to know. If they’re too young to consume alcohol, to young to vote or sign contracts then the logical conclusion is that they are too young to make those life changing decisions.
    Therefore the only logical course is to forbid any such life altering changes until they are of legal age. Once they are old enough to vote and partake in other such activities that only adults may do so, then they may have legal grounds for such. That is , after they’ve undergone psychological examination.
    This entire transgender rubbish has been the brain child of liberal progressives and the communists within the democratic party.

    1. “What the legislature in N.C. has decided is that young people do not have the knowledge or life experience to make those decisions for themselves.”

      I disagree. Young people know their predilections better than anyone else does. They are more in tune with their sexuality than their parents, teachers, lawyers or doctors. I agree they may be too young to make momentous decisions, but not because they lack knowledge. They have personal knowledge that others don’t and can’t have.

      1. Are you actually advocating the sterilization of disturbed children confused about their sexuality?

      2. Absolute rubbish! They don’t either. Their minds are not fully developed or matured enough to know .
        Stop spewing liberal garbage.

        1. At every turn you seem to denigrate the brain and mind of a child. I think you underestimate the power of a child’s brain. Above all it is flexible. As we age we lose that flexibility. That’s why pianists, language speakers do their best when they start before puberty. Young kids are not blessed with brains that allow them into abstract thought like higher math, But sexuality is something more basic, found even among the plants and other animals. Unlike the ability to do calculus, sexuality is baked in from the beginning.

          A child’s brain is also more adaptable to new circumstances. It comes with the territory of higher flexibility. It’s conceivable that a sexual transition in a child would have some advantages over waiting for some arbitrarily imposed age limit of consent. I really don’t know. Except that you shouldn’t underestimate a child’s abilities and potentials, and agency too if you’re claiming to be any sort of a libertarian.

          1. “ A child’s brain is also more adaptable to new circumstances.”

            That’s why children need to be taught right from wrong often and consistently through the words and actions of the adults who care for them.

            Because their brains will adapt to wrong behaviour as easily as right especially since wrong often seems like the easier path to the weak minded.

            That’s your excuse.

            1. “That’s why children need to be taught right from wrong often and consistently through the words and actions of the adults who care for them.”

              Exactly. As I said, abstraction is not a strong point for pre-pubescents.

              “Because their brains will adapt to wrong behaviour as easily as right especially since wrong often seems like the easier path to the weak minded.”

              I’m not sure what you are trying to say here or how it’s relevant to the discussion on gender compliance.

              1. Simply students should be taught that truth is what we know as demonstrated by the evidence of logic and science.

                They should be made aware of popular beliefs that we have to imagine what represents the unknown.

                The two should not be confused.

                The truth is that, unless we are disordered, we are born to exist as only one of two possible sexes which are consistent with our perception of gender. Anything else is disordered.

                That is what gender compliance means.

                1. It seems there are increasing amounts of disordered children going to schools these days. I really doubt that anything teachers add to the curriculum is going to change that. Except for devoting less time to traditional subjects like English and Arithmetic.

                  1. When it’s no longer in vogue to exhibit a mental disorder maybe fewer children will choose to.

                    Those with the disorder who don’t want it might finally get some help to overcome it, instead of encouragement to embrace it.

                    Those who are glad to be disordered will simply continue to puzzle the rest of us for whom life goes on.

                    I suspect we’ll generally be wasting much less time in school and everywhere on all things lgbt.

Please to post comments