The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Journal of Free Speech Law: "When Teachers Misgender: The Free Speech Claims of Public School Teachers," by Prof. Caroline Mala Corbin (Miami)
Just published, at 1 Journal of Free Speech Law 615 (2022); from the Introduction:
This Article argues that public school teachers do not and should not have a free speech right to deliberately misgender students in the classroom. Transgender students are already a vulnerable at-risk population, and studies show that misgendering at school increases that risk. Misgendering also deprives transgender students of an equal educational opportunity. For a teacher to intentionally misgender students subject to their authority is not only unprofessional but potentially unlawful under federal and state laws banning discrimination in education.
As a matter of doctrine, how teachers address their students in the classroom during class should be considered speech pursuant to their official teaching duties. Under Garcetti, it is essentially government speech with no free speech protection. Granted, the Garcetti Court acknowledged the possibility of an academic freedom exception, but as a descriptive matter it is unlikely that academic freedom covers elementary and high school teachers' deliberate misgendering of the students in their care. As a normative matter, the cloak of academic freedom should not protect classroom speech that is tangential, inaccurate, and harms students, particularly marginalized ones.
In any event, misgendering speech fails the other two requirements for a government employee speech claim: While questions of gender identity are issues of public concern, the teacher's use of pronouns to address a specific student is not a discussion of it. Finally, a teacher's deliberate misgendering is highly disruptive to the school's responsibilities and goals. It is a hindrance to both educating students in the designated curriculum and training them for citizenship. Moreover, the additional responsibilities a school has with regard to the young impressionable students entrusted to its care and captive to their teachers' speech means that its interests in providing an environment where those students can learn and thrive outweigh the slight free speech value of the teacher's misgendering.
We have many more articles coming in the next several weeks.
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. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Seems pretty uncontroversial. Intentionally calling a student the wrong name is bullying and is unprotected speech no matter what de minimum "expressive" right the teacher might claim. Misgendering is also bullying, regardless of what the teacher thinks about the matter. Disagreement about the policy is appropriate for blogs like this one, not the classroom.
Wrong name as defined by whom?
If the parents legally change the child's name, fine. Otherwise...
Exactly. A teacher is not required to use a nickname.
If Betsy for whatever reason really hates being called Elizabeth, and the teacher makes a point to call her Elizabeth in front of all the other students every time she talks to her...that's a bad teacher.
Whatever. Use of a nickname is completely optional.
Not being an asshole is also completely optional, but refusing may keep you from being a teacher for long.
Lol talk about question begging.
How would you characterize the behavior in my above hypothetical?
Your hypothetical doesn't add anything.
It's like someone saying, "Someone isn't a jerk just because they do X."
And you respond, "Oh Yeah, well what if they do X just to be a jerk?"
Read like one comment above that, dude.
Its not being an asshole, teachers don't have to keep track of 20-30 idiosyncratic names.
Oh, first Robert is Bob, second is Rob, third is Bobby. Calls second Bobby, bullying!
Try 200 — each year…
one year, I had five "Jasons..."
You missed the "intentional" part. Like if I started calling you Dick from Ohio over and over because OMG I just cannot seem to get it through my thick ol' head that you're a Robert.
Sarcastr0 22 mins ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
"Not being an asshole is also completely optional, but refusing may keep you from being a teacher for long."
Calling the child elizabeth when the child prefers the name betsy or bess or liz could be considered being a jerk.
On the other hand calling elizabeth her preferred name of Bob because she is suffering a mental illness and thinks she should be a male is pure evil. the teacher is embracing and perpetuating the childs mental illness. Transgender has become the current fad diagnosis in the mental health profession.
On the other hand calling elizabeth her preferred name of Bob because she is suffering a mental illness and thinks she should be a male is pure evil.
Pure evil! That is some extremely powerful naming power.
Do you seriously believe that mutilating a childs body as an experimental treatment for a childs mental illness is actually beneficial. Especially for a mental illness that most children grow out of.
Josef mengelee was considered evil for what he did, yet transgender advocates embrace similar experimental treatment on the mentally ill.
In spite of knowledge of basic biology, you and queen embrace the evil.
Joe, we were talking about calling them the name they request.
Bit of space from that to Mengele!
Sarcastr0 20 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Joe, we were talking about calling them the name they request.
Bit of space from that to Mengele!
Sacastro - its the embracement of a dangerous/permanment / irreversable biological treatment of a mental disease that is the evil. thus the reference to Mengele.
[T]he embracement of a dangerous/permanment / irreversable biological treatment of a mental disease that is the evil
As I said, that's some powerful naming energy you're referring to.
Did Prince teach us nothing?
You got that right!
just assign each desk a letter and number combination and address the occupant of the desk by that label instead.
they they have a headstart of being just a cog in the machine
students just have way too much authority over how the classroom is conducted. used to be a society run by adults but not its everyone for themself
Can you just spend a moment reflecting on that last sentence?
"If Betsy for whatever reason really hates being called Elizabeth, and the teacher makes a point to call her Elizabeth in front of all the other students every time she talks to her..."
Teachers shouldn't to anything for the express purpose of making a student upset. But that applies equally to use of a nickname or any other conduct.
That begs/fails to properly frame the question. Required by whom? By the student? Or by the teacher’s employer?
If you mean the former, I think that’s pretty uncontroversial. If you mean the latter, it requires analysis, not ipse dixit.
I assume the employer says something like, "you should use the name the child wants unless it's absurd/mean/vulgar."
I recall the nicknames of many of my childhood playmates:
Pinhead, Pooltable Legs, Frankie Pootz (stinky Frankie), Ronnie Chink (he was NOT Asian), Kongo Bill or Kong. I could go on.
Why make exceptions? You either are about affirming the child or you are not, you cannot pick and choose when to concern others with your ideology.
A teacher is not required to use a nickname, unless their employer requires them to use it.
"bullying"
Use of this term is like college kids using "unsafe" or "putting me in danger" about speech by people they don't like, a magic word justifying any nonsense.
Bob, it's the teachers who are being bullied -- and a lot of good ones are leaving.
Usually you have 6 classes and a supervisory period so you have upwards of 200 kids whose names you struggle to remember -- and not confuse with their older siblings -- and now you have students changing their names on a daily basis.
No mas!
Yet miraculously those nuns managed it year after year.
Good teachers aren't leaving because Melissa wants to be Missy.
I have a common name that has multiple common nicknames. I can't remember any teacher having problems keeping track, even when there were multiples of us in the class (nevermind all the boys in their other classes who also shared the name).
That said, accidents are quite different from intentional. Obfuscating the two does you no service.
I'm now accepting applications for a replacement word that also means "making someone upset." Let's focus on the issue please.
How about "Asshole."
Yeah, no bully ever bullied by calling someone a name they didn't like.
It's not that it's nice having somebody call you "Bretty-wetty", but unlike being kicked in the balls it doesn't rupture a testicle, either, and that's got to count for something.
For some absurd definition of bullying that only applies to millennial and zoomer snowflakes. It may be rude, but it in no way is "bullying."
Also, "wrong name" assumes its conclusion. Why isn't the right name the student's legal name? Just because it's not the student's preferred name doesn't make it "wrong."
Doing it intentionally and repeatedly? The intent is most definitely to bully.
I dunno, DMN, I was bullied via a rhyme involving a nickname I didn't like back in the day.
It sucked - I still remember it like 3 decades later. I do think bullying is overused, but it was also underaddressed back in the day.
That sounds more like teasing.
My recollections of bullying involve arm-twisting, pushing, punching, and weggies.
Mine also
"mis-gendering" isn't a real thing
When the Brits referred to their monarch as 'she' out of habit after Charles had been crowned was what?
Stupidity, like those idiots who forget a new year starts January 1st.
Frank Drackman 5 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
"“mis-gendering” isn’t a real thing"
I concur - Just to be clear - the transgender movement is a fad / pseudo diagnosis of the mentally ill. The transgender diagnosis a planted in the patients mind, making the disturted mentally ill person believe they are misgendered and the biological treatment will cure their mental illness. The false diagnosis is planted in the minds of the mentally ill in the same fashion the last fad in mental health profession planted the "repressed memory syndrome" in patients minds.
embracing the false diagnosis is pure evil.
Oh do please post a link to the supporting research.
really bob - it doesnt take a rocket science to recognize the obvious.
That gay and trans folk have always been a normal variation of humanity?
Why combine them when they have basically nothing in common?
Taken to its logical end — transgender theology indicates there are no gay people. Just people who are the “wrong” gender.
If you want a complete understanding of the reasons why queer people are often grouped together socially, and are natural allies, then you'll have to belly-up to the bar and go take a few queer studies courses at a university.
If you just want a short answer? Because bigotry doesn't do nuance.
There's no research showing putting your hand on a hot stove hurts either.
It's a fad well over a hundred years old at this point, at least.
Really and what do you base that on?
The historical existence of trans people.
Anorexics have been around for hundreds of years, too. But if they became 10-100 times more common in the space of a few years, you'd think something odd was going on.
If it's not a fad, the only alternative explanations that make any sense involve things like sex-hormone mimetics accumulating in the environment.
Good point on the 10-100 x increase – with the exception that the increase is closer to 1000x-2000x the other point is that the cure rate is close to zero – another point is the mental health profession has a long sordid history of fad/pseudo diagnosis and treatments.
All points which should alert even the least knowledgable that something is amiss with this transgender diagnosis fad. Something about being woke that hinders basic critical thinking.
Perhaps. But berating a kid over it is.
“Intentionally calling a student the wrong name is bullying and is unprotected speech”
You do not seem to have a grasp on what “protected” speech is. Hint: Very protected speech is that. Popular speech needs no protection.
Hint: calling your students derogatory names in front of other students while on the job can get you disciplined or fired.
"public school teachers do not and should not have a free speech right to deliberately misgender students in the classroom. Transgender students are already a vulnerable at-risk population, and studies show that misgendering at school increases that risk."
Transgender students are mentally ill, not unlike anorexic students, and should be treated as such. You do not tell an anorexic girl that she is fat, nor do you confirm this confusion. That's child abuse.
"Misgendering also deprives transgender students of an equal educational opportunity."
OK, I think that I'm African-American and I'll be denied my educational opportunity if I am not called that.
Why would a teacher be calling any student “African-American”?
Many identify students by race.
And I should have said "treated like."
So, categorically suspected, dismissed, and overlooked for opportunities? I mean, knock yourself out.
Just call the kids by their last names as legally entered with the school.
The teacher is not the kids' friend. Nor their family. Smith is called Smith, and Hassan is called Hassan.
I can still recite in order the last names of students in my class on differential equations.
That'd be a solution, for sure, but that is not the culture and norms we have in the US.
And teachers would need to swap to that for all students, not just the trans students.
Of course for all.
You're correct; our culture is too familiar. But we are not saying that the students call each other by their last names.
In many universities, the faculty are addressed with an honorific title. In such cases it is presumptive, arrogant and condescending that faculty address students with first names and other informal address.
Tying yourselves in knots just to get around it is real mature, guys.
Yeah, that's not going to work in a class with three Lees, two Smiths, and a handful of Garcias. You have to be able to distinguish between students with the same last name. It really isn't that hard.
You know, even if it was a mental illness the idea that you treat one mental illness the same way you treat some other mental illness is just stupid and ignorant (and clearly just an excuse to be an asshole on your part.)
I'm Like Hairy Truman, I just tell the truth, and people say I'm an Asshole.
Can you think of one illness where the best plan of action is to have the sufferer go all-in on their delusions?
Yes. Gender dysphoria.
Not a thing.
Nige 1 day ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
"You know, even if it was a mental illness the idea that you treat one mental illness the same way you treat some other mental illness is just stupid and ignorant (and clearly just an excuse to be an asshole on your part.)"
A) it is a mental illness ,
B) you dont treat a mental illness by cutting off healthy body parts. You dont even treat a physical illness by cutting off healthy body parts (with the possible exception of using healthy body parts as a graft for such things as ACL replacement or skin or organ transplants).
You shouldn't be calling any students fat.
Just like you shouldn't tell them they're "not gay" or "not smart" regardless of your feelings on the topic.
You're right, "Fat" doesn't really carry any weight (get it? Fat doesn't carry any weight...) you gotta add "Fuck" after it, but be ready to duck, it's like the N-word for Fat Fucks, and alot of Fat Fucks can throw down when they have to...(and not just Big Macs)
Frank "Slim"
"Transgender students are mentally ill,"
Just as the superstitious people who believe silly, childish fairy tales are true are mentally ill.
How should we address people afflicted by that gullibility and delusion?
Carry on, clingers.
Transgender students are mentally ill, not unlike anorexic students, and should be treated as such. You do not tell an anorexic girl that she is fat, nor do you confirm this confusion. That’s child abuse.
You all must excuse Dr. Ed 2.
She is actually a transgendered woman under the delusion she is a man born in a mans body.
We should not indulge her mental illness and should therefore remember to refer to her as "she".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k96h1dYQrj0
Please mam, you must realize that biology is full of exceptions and edge-cases.
Of course not. Public school teacher speech is government speech.
Academic freedom, in the context of public schools, is a matter of public policy that should be weighed against other governmental interests. The government is entitled to form its own viewpoint on matters ranging from how history should be taught to the way its agents address students.
That said, the better public policy is to require teachers to use the student's correct name and pronoun, which are those corresponding to the student's biological sex.
"The government is entitled to form its own viewpoint on matters ranging from how history should be taught to the way its agents address students."
Can the government instruct its teachers to teach that the sun revolves around the earth?
Why wouldn't they be able to?
Because its completely false.
So?
Do public employees have a 1A right to refuse to say things required by their employment that they believe are false?
As Eugene explained, under Garcetti, speech that is part of an employee's job duties gets no First Am. protection period. Reasonable minds can differ as to whether or not that's a good legal rule, but there's no question that it is the current legal rule.
According to whom? please say scientists please say scientists please say scientists please say scientists please say scientists
It's actually not wrong, it depends on how you define your frame of reference.
Nothing is true, everything is permitted! *eyeroll*
The only way to make your argument work is to define an artificial non-inertial frame of reference, i.e. one that is pointless for both Newtonian and relativistic purposes because you have to posit a bunch of artificial accelerations and fiat in some fictional forces.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/480496/the-earth-revolves-around-the-sun-or-the-sun-revolves-around-the-earth
On the other hand that does describe red state history classes, so maybe you're on to something....
"Nothing is true, everything is permitted! *eyeroll*"
It's all about perspective.
In conservative schools they would teach both sides of the argument.
In conservative schools they prize dogma, impose censorship, reject academic freedom, collect loyalty oaths, demand submission to statements of faith, teach nonsense, enforce silly speech codes, enforce sillier conduct codes, suppress science and warp history to flatter superstition, and rarely "teach both sides."
This is why essentially all of our strongest research and teaching institutions are operated by and in the liberal-libertarian mainstream, while conservative-controlled schools congregate at the bottom of every legitimate quality ranking.
Carry on, clingers. At the bottom of the educational barrel, as always.
Anyone who believes that humans are causing climate change, that COVID vaccines prevent COVID, that cloth masks prevent COVID spread, that it's normal and healthy to sexually desire another man’s anus, and that the races are of equal average intelligence has no business talking about science.
I think you might have just ruled out the entirety of the world's scientific community, cranks and fossil fuel shills excepted, naturally.
Did you not learn about the Scopes Monkey Trial in school?
Or hell, the 90s fight over states requiring schoolings to teach "intelligent design"?
The power of states to compel teachers to spout lies is well documented.
See climate change...
See climate change by just looking out of your window. Yes. We know.
Yes, it's called "Seasons"
Can the government instruct its teachers to teach that the sun revolves around the earth? - Yes. And rather obviously so.
Should it? - No.
Though maybe if they did, it would bring some personal reflection to the question of whether this social experiment of a near-monopoly on education was the right course.
So the parent's wishes don't come into the equation? Or the students'?
The best public policy is, within reason, to address students respectfully in a manner conducive to learning. Because that's what the kids are in the classroom for, learning. They're not there to hear about their teachers' personal opinions on transgenderism or signaling to other students that one kid is disfavored and thus fair game for abuse.
Further, unless the teacher does a medical exam and has the credentials necessary to determine "biological sex," all they have to go on is outward appearance or, at best, a binary option on a form that ignores the reality that significant numbers of children are born with some intersex characteristics.
The problem here, of course, isn't misgendering. That's like saying that Winston was wrong when he says he saw four fingers.
The problem is on O'Brien's end of things: The demand that somebody say they see five fingers when four are held up.
The fuss is over teachers refusing to misgender when somebody demands they do it.
Yeah, the crux of the article seems to be an unsupported moral claim that the standard practice of using pronouns that refer to the student's biological sex is "wrong" in the same way that many people feel that having members of same sex is "wrong".
This approach lacks academic rigor. I wonder what role the Journal of Free Speech Law has in insuring that its articles meet academic standards?
It's not wrong most of the time, it's just also better to respect the wishes of the student in that regard when the issue arises, it's really not that difficult.
Yes, nothing says 'rat to the face' like respecting a student's wishes about their preferred pronouns.
I'm stealing "rat to the face."
YOU CAN'T STEAL IT! I'm giving it to you.
I'll believe that cisgender straight people don't understand the difference between sex and gender when they start getting confused by jokes about "made that guy my bitch" or taking away someone's "man card".
If you can understand those jokes, then you understand just how someone can be a male woman.
I frequently cite jokes in making an argument that you are obligated to say mistruths to placate the feelings of others.
Uh they're jokes. The joke is insinuating that someone who doesn't conform to sex stereotypes is really of the opposite sex.
You know, "Jimmy likes to play with dolls! Jimmy's a girl! He should have his balls cut off! Haha!"
You guys aren't joking.
The men who think I'm less of a man because I suck dick aren't joking either.
Also, I think you'll find that queer people don't really care what's in the pants of a transperson. That's between them, their doctors, and their intimate partners. Everyone else has no legitimate interest. Conservatives are the folks that are obsessed with trans genitals.
"The men who think I’m less of a man because I suck dick aren’t joking either."
You probably don't want guys like that teaching kids about gender, eh?
Pretty sure the dudes being homophobes is the problem, not the “teaching gender” part.
But nice way to dodge my point, which was, is, and will be: y'all understand the distinction between sex and gender just fine when you're using it to demean a person. You're only confused when someone says "huh, you're kinda right."
"y’all understand the distinction between sex and gender just fine when you’re using it to demean a person. You’re only confused when someone says “huh, you’re kinda right.”
Uh, guilty as charged, I guess?
Smart BeeE LTD is an educational consultancy dedicated towards providing services to Home and Overseas students in making educational avenues abroad accessible to them.
SmartBeeE
Any consideration to an English teacher giving a lesson on pronouns?
Men are men.
Women are women.
An individual is not correctly addresses by plural pronouns.
Science.
Ooh, English fail right there.
English usage of plural gender-neutral pronouns used for a single person is older then America and never fell out of style.
It seems to me that Prof. Corbin’s position would mean that a school could also require teachers to “misgender” students—i.e. that if a school instituted a policy that students are to be referred to by their biological sex, a teacher could be disciplined for using a transgender student’s preferred pronouns instead.
If she’s willing to accept this as a consequence, that’s fine of course, but I thought it was a little odd she didn’t even mention the possibility. (Admittedly I skimmed the article pretty quickly, so please correct if she did in fact mention it. I saw the discussion of “Don’t Say Gay” laws, but that seems like a slightly different issue.)
She said:
So while she likely agrees there is no First Amendment right for a teacher to use a student's preferred pronoun contrary to school policy, that policy may violate Title IX or state law.
I'm mostly here for the amusement factor of seeing everyone switch sides on the issue of whether the government can tell its teachers what to say while on the job.
What's in a name?
Just number the students at the beginning of the school year.
It's traditional to do that at the end of the year.
What about the student who thinks she's a princess?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYzfTHO9tkY
Or the student who thinks she's a pony?
You treat all kids with kindness, respect and sensitivity, not with mockery and sneering.
"Or the student who thinks she’s a pony?'
Or that Mr Ed is actually a talking horse that belongs to Wilbur.
You have your fetish; the student has its fetish. Don't judge its kink and it won't judge yours.
Don't talk about kinks and fetishes in relations to kids, Don. Sincerely.
Asking teachers to do the same is apparently "fascism" these days.
Never understood the allure of teaching anyway, "Summer's Off" must suck to hate your job so much, but I can see why if you have to say
"OK, "Elizabeth" please put your Penis back in your pants, the real Girls don't want to see it"
Frank "XY"
Just want to note that having to say, "OK Phillip, put your penis back in your pants" is already part of the job description.
C'mon, where's the Reverend Jerry S??? best part of "And Justice for all" is that Judge telling the Cross Dresser to take off his wig...
So the bad pay is made up for by the likelihood of being sued by the sort of self absorbed people who send their children to school with gender issues.
Private schools look better all the time.
"Misgendering" is not a coherent or valid concept but people are trying to bully you into pretending otherwise.
Maybe it would be valid to say that transgender is misgendering.
So, does "we have more coming" and Prof. Corbin's "thank you" to E.V. in her acknowledgements mean that E.V. agrees with her position that teachers do not have free speech rights in this matter?
"...and studies show that misgendering at school increases that risk."
At least according to England's NHS, most transgender pre-pubescent kids will desist and in some cases affirming their desire to socially transition can cause harm:
"In cases where a pre-pubertal child has effected, or is effecting, a social transition (or expresses a wish to effect a social transition) the clinical approach has to be mindful of the risks of an inappropriate gender transition and the difficulties that the child may experience in returning to the original gender role upon entering puberty if the gender incongruence does not persist into adolescence."
Does not say 'most.'
"The clinical approach in regard to pre-pubertal children will reflect evidence that suggests that, while young people who are gender querying or who express gender incongruence may have started their journey as younger children, in most pre-pubertal children, gender incongruence does not persist into adolescence."
Yeah but it doesn't say "mostest"!
LoL.
Not kids diagnosed as transgender, though, which is what you said.
You get that “what I said” is printed a few comments above, and people, including yourself, can read it, right?
Yes.
And your version of my comment has, "kids diagnosed as transgender" in it? Weird, must be a bug in the commenting software.
Especially since I'm aware that "transgender" isn't a diagnosis, although gender dysphoria is.
If that's your preference, fine, same applies.
huh? It's not my preference, it's based on the definition of words like "transgender" and "gender dysphoria".
Sure, but it doesn't say 'kids diagnosed with' either of those, it says 'young people who are gender querying or who express gender incongruence.'
Sigh. It says, "in most pre-pubertal children, gender incongruence does not persist into adolescence.”
Gender incongruence and transgender are synonyms.
Puberty resolves gender dysphoria in most cases. So they advocate blocking puberty to treat gender dysphoria. Why?
Because they don't WANT to resolve it, they want to set it in stone.
That's a No True Scotsman argument.
bullsheit.
This entire thing strikes me as people looking for an excuse to be offended.
If you are in direct conversation with me, how do you "misgender" me? If you use my name, that's my name - no gender discussion. If you use pronouns, the first- and second-person pronouns in english are all gender-neutral - I, me, mine, you, your. The only gender-specific pronouns in english are third-person - which by definition means you aren't speaking to me. How, precisely, am I supposed to be harmed by the pronouns you use when talking to other people?
Offended, not necessarily. I see more a desire to be special just for existing (hence the ever growing list of neo-pronouns) or an opportunity to exert power over others. It could be all three but none of them are good things to promote in a healthy society.
Ah yes the POWER OF TRANSGENDER.
Correct. If someone is offended because another someone says "I'm a boy" or "I'm a girl", that's very much the first person looking for an excuse to be offended.
If it's just someone saying it and that's the end of it, I doubt you find many that are truly offended. That's more likely to garner bemusement or perhaps pity at someone who can't distinguish fantasy from reality -- much like if they declare themselves king/queen of Siam.
Offense comes into play when another someone fantasizes, contrary to reality, that they actually ARE a boy or girl, and demands you agree. And then runs to guv'ment and/or the lynch mob if you don't.
"...which by definition means you aren’t speaking to me. How, precisely, am I supposed to be harmed by the pronouns you use when talking to other people?"
Here's a typical case. Let's say you are a male who identifies as female and uses "she/her" for 3d party pronouns.
Teacher asks class for their opinions on something. You give yours. Then the teacher picks someone else and summarizes you by starting "He argues XYZ... what do you think of that"?
One doesn't have to be absent to have 3d party pronouns used to identify them, after all.
When I went to school "She" would get "Her" ass kicked by "They" (rest of the class including the "She"s)
I've been through a lot of classes that used the Socratic Method and I can't think of a one that used that format. Teachers who want to personalize the debate (and there are sometimes good teaching points to be made by doing so) will make that personalization as strong as possible by saying "Bob argues XYZ", not merely "he". On the other hand, teachers who want to drive the focus to the argument and away from the person will do that entirely and say "You just heard an argument for XYZ". I can't think of any examples that used half-measures.
You don't have to. Any teacher inclined to deliberately mis-gender someone is also going to deadname them.
Again, it's the guy demanding to be misgendered, and the teacher refraining from humoring him.
You can imagine class flow however you'd like it to be.
In terms of controlling the teacher's words, how is a boy demanding to be called a girl different from that same boy demanding the teacher affirm the earth is flat?
Do some delusions have political priority?
Yes!
The Earth isn't flat, but the kid might have gender dysphoria.
In Medicine we're taught "First do no Harm"
Taking a perfectly health male child, cutting off his Schlong and Balls, inflicting a gash and calling it a "Neo" gash, and to add insult to literal injury, injecting him (I'm sorry, I mean "her") with enough Estrogen to put out the Sun (hot Flashes reference),
Sounds alot like "harm" to me, and like something Dr. Mengele did...
Frank "Fists, do some harm"
So if someone goes the full route, what is the success rate for the surgery and the resultant new plumbing?
ask John Wayne Bobbitt
close to zero -
The surgery doesnt cure the mental illness.
I've actually seen that done -- legitimately until the child's name was legally changed.
Or telling a minor that some of their healthy body parts should be cut off.
"Let’s say a teacher objected to the marriage from which a child legally takes their last name. Can they refuse to use the name in class? Outrageous."
You think it's outrageous for a Kindergarten teacher to refuse to call a student by her married name, as long as the name was changed legally?
And not just genitalia -- there's a mental illness, I forget the name of it -- where the person wants an arm cut off.
We don't affirm that -- at least not yet.
Using a child’s preferred name does not tell them anything about their body parts. For the same reason that wishing a man Happy Hannukah does not mean that you think they should be circumcised.
Some Jewish men do not want to be circumcised. Some transgender people do not want surgery.
When you address someone in a way that recognizes them as Jewish or transgender, that does not “tell them that some of their healthy body parts should be cut off”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_dysphoria
Just to clarify, are there circumstance in which an adult can cut off healthy body parts from a child?
OK, male circumcision, you got me there.
Any other situations?
The duty to call everyone who disagrees with you an asshole is surprisingly high among control freaks.
" The right to be an asshole is interestingly incredibly high in priority to most conservatives. "
Disaffectedness and bigotry are a powerful combination in this context -- and at this white, male, right-wing blog!
We're talking about names and you're reading a Clive Barker novel.
They're respecting the asshole's chosen title.
Because the world doesn't work that way, best for kids to learn it early.
I didn't know Clive Barker wrote for The World Professional Association for Transgender Health.
"Age restriction lifted for gender-affirming surgery in new international guidelines"
https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2022/09/age-restriction-lifted-for-gender-affirming-surgery-in-new-international-guidelines/?fj=1
You're right, perfectly healthy people voluntarily cut off their primary sexual organs.
Are you suggesting that it's a physical illness?
We're told that some transgender people require life-saving medical care, ranging from puberty blockers to hormones to surgery.
What type of illness is this care designed to treat?
Queen almathea 39 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
“Transgender students are mentally ill”
"You, of course, don’t know what you’re talking about."
Queen - is there something about being woke - that you lose all concept of reality, lose all concept of basic biology.
He's going to flip when he Googles "pre-op."
I suggested that it's bullying - and creepy - to tell a child his or her healthy body parts ought to be cut off. I mentioned the speech element in the situation.
It sounds more significant than calling someone "Patrick" instead of "Patricia."
A complement from someone who has shown zero comprehension of any subject matter that he/she/queen/king has commented on.
fwiw - you are delusional if you believe transgender treatment is A) a valid diagnosis and B) if you think the treatment will cure the mental illness.
Why do you think it's okay to groom children for anal sex?
Huh? Who said it should be barred?
I gave you a link.
Yes, and I gave you another example of a name taken from a union a teacher may object to: a child bride taking her husband's last name.
Do you think it's outrageous for a teacher to refuse to use the name of a child-bride who legally changes her name?
If not, it's possibly that what you find outrageous is the teacher's objection to the same-sex union, and not the teacher's refusal to use the name derived from that union.
“Look, if your legal name is David and you tell me you prefer Dave and I insist on calling you David I’m being an asshole.”
Says who? What if I tell David that I prefer not to use nicknames and he insists that I call him Dave anyway. Why is he not being an asshole?
I disagree with your premise. A person could validly say, "I don't use nicknames in professional situations. I am your teacher, not your friend, and it is not appropriate for me to engage with you as if you were the latter." You might think this person is stuffy and old-fashioned, but they are not remotely "being an asshole."
Or a teacher might insist — as some of mine I recall doing — on calling people by their titles, not their first names at all. "Mr. Nieporent, what is your response to such and such?" If I said, "Call me Dave," he's not being an asshole by declining to do so.
Obviously, there are circumstances where someone doing so would be an asshole. Singling out one person in that regard, or doing it not out of any sort of general principle but for the purpose of annoying the student.
Say the expert on assholery, often being a major asshole in these comments.
No, you're trying to slip something by us there. Your name is to identify you, yes. Which is not the same as it being your identity. It's not about self-expression.
"Some bizarre formalistic fealty rooted in the rectification of names or some such abstract principle over my expressed preference regarding my name is, if not assholery *very* close to it (as I think you acknowledge somewhat by saying “stuffy and old-fashioned,” which, despite your protestation, are kind of cousins of assholery)"
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is what losing an argument looks like.
Depends on the context that you're using the term in. In this case the characterization of bullying doesn't add anything to the argument.
In this case the characterization of bullying doesn’t add anything to the argument.
...What? Isn't that what DMN is talking about above?
You're of the opinion that academic journals shouldn't "bar" any speech?
Huh? In some contexts the terms "gender" and "sex" are synonymous, so yes, gender does equal sex in those contexts.
But I assume you're using the word to refer to something along the lines of one's person relation to socially defined gender roles, and of course it's been obvious that everybody relates differently to socially defined gender roles since the beginning of time.
So what?
Dont continue to show your stupidity
Transgender is a mental illness - not a biological illness
"you are in no position to diagnose mental illness. ... your transphobia"
A "phobia" is a mental illness. You are in no position to diagnose mental illness yet you just did.
“Your take, which is a trend with you, is to declare the speech so ‘wrong’ that it shouldn’t qualify to be presented based on a standards criteria.”
Have fun arguing with the imaginary person in your head.
I'm pretty sure I know what my take is. I even wrote it down in a comment!
"I get it’s upsetting to be predictable in one’s bias-led thinking, but c’mon."
Lol. I get that it's easy to predict things if you make up facts as you go along.
Where did I say that the article was wrong, let alone that it should be "barred" for its wrongness?
Again, so what?
Thinking your own gender is wrong because you don’t fit in with cultural stereotypes of men and women seems an incredibly unhealthy and backwards concept, but ok.
"Gender has long meant complexes of social norms and expectations"
Nah, it was long meant as a polite substitute for "sex" which has a double meaning. Making "gender" separate from "sex" is just newspeak.
Comfortable how? They didn't feel comfortable doing/saying/thinking certain things until they wear certain clothes or are referred to with slightly different words?
If this is all about fitting into society's expectations of gender, how is it not infinitely worse knowing that nearly everyone you meet is doing double takes looking at you in confusion, wondering if you're trans or just a really ugly man/woman?
"assigned at birth"
Sex is observed at birth, not "assigned". The doctor/nurse/mother does not say, I think, penis not withstanding,, I am assigning you to be a girl.
"Maybe it means more thinking a gender you weren’t assigned at birth is one you’re more comfortable in presenting/identifying with."
So what? If you're more comfortable presenting yourself according to the norms and expectations of someone from 8th century China, knock yourself out. If you start identifying as someone from 8th century China, that's a little weird. But you certainly don't get to demand that other people say that you are from 8th century China.
The states of Florida, Georgia, Texas, Utah to name a few.
I recommend Hellraiser for all your gore needs, then maybe you'll leave the kids alone.
well they'll only do it once
It's usually observed before birth, and continually throughout one's life.
"The doctor/nurse/mother does not say, I think, penis not withstanding, I am assigning you to be a girl."
And if a doctor did that, the person wouldn't be transgender in any meaningful sense, unless they identified as a girl. The concept of sex assigned at birth is just bullshit designed to avoid acknowledging the concept of biological sex.
And yet they persist in spite of this nastiness, which should tell you something.
That’s certainly an interesting attempt at deflection.
If “gender-conforming surgery” is like something out of a horror novel by Clive Barker, does that mean you’re against it?
The link is to prevent any attempt at gaslighting.
Why is it not right? Whatever you think of the inclusive use of the word woman or the meaning of the word "misgender", saying that a biological male who identifies as a woman is not a man is clearly incorrect as a matter of usage, given that a definition of the word (arguably the main definition) of "man" is a biological male.
So at the very least, claiming that a biological male is not a man, and insisting that others affirm this, is equivalent to saying that two and two equal five.
One commenter offered an "outrageous" hypothetical, I offered another.
The claim is that using the "wrong" name is bullying, and bullying "is unprotected speech no matter what de minimum “expressive” right the teacher might claim."
There's not support for the claim that bullying is categorically unprotected, so it's really just a claim that using the wrong name is unprotected.
But your claim, that someone bullied you by calling the wrong name, doesn't show that calling someone by the wrong name is necessarily bullying, and it doesn't show that calling someone by the wrong name is unprotected.
Usually, not always.
And what's worse is telling kids that they are born into the "wrong" body, which is more like a religious belief than something that should be though at school.
Why would mine or your being against it or for it have anything to do with another person's choice to undergo it?
So it's *not* like a novel by Clive Barker.
At least you agree it's happening.
In the context of teacher/student authority and with that given power dynamic and in front of other students as well, this gives license to every student consider the victim fair game. The teacher has clearly signaled that the victim student is unprotected. That will have direct consequences.
Teasing and bullying aren’t the same thing, even if they sometimes use the same tactics. Teasing is meant in fun (for real, not just as an excuse) while bullying is meant to do harm. You might call your best friend an “asshole” in jest, make fun of their new haircut, accuse their mother of dressing them, or even punch them in the arm all as a form of camaraderie. Bullying isn’t intended to create a closer relationship with someone you like, it’s intended to enforce a power hierarchy between a stronger and weaker person. And this is where the teacher is bullying since they’ve turned their own teacher/student power dynamic from one with inherent trust into one just like that with a bully–a negative, punishing experience.
The characterization of bullying adds to the argument in that in emphasizes harm created through unprofessional behavior designed to make a personal point. Would you find gaslighting a better term?
We have cases on this actually!
First-up, you don't find child-brides in the public school system. Their husbands always isolate them from their peers, so public school is a big no-no.
Second-up, yes actually, almost everyone in the child-bride's life will totally recognize the new name. It's almost like child brides, when they happen, are with the consent and encouragement of their parents, who often themselves are in an isolated community such that the child bride does not realize how fucked up her situation is.
It's almost like actual groomers are pretty thorough in making sure that their victims aren't exposed to people that might realize they're victims.
Seriously people, isolation and control are necessary steps here. You don't get child brides in a vacuum, they're the result of fucked up communities (in the US, normally some flavor of fundamentalist, be it Christian or LDS) that reinforce and isolate.
Here comes Bob, with a psychological vocabulary from the 1950s to tell us how a suffix can be a diagnosis.
Nobody tells the kid, the kid tells others, when they choose to tell them.
Shawn_Dude — To your very helpful distinction between teasing and bullying, I add that it gets complicated (and dangerous) when the target is a person with a disability to tell which is intended. That happens frequently among children with Asperger's, for instance.
A common result is that what might begin as friendly teasing can fairly quickly shade over into hostile bullying. Things then really go off the rails when adults—including teachers and school administrators—treat that situation as if it resulted from a character deficiency in the targeted child. That readily turns into a punishing insistence that the child, "toughen up."
To which the child responds with an (accurate) conclusion that the adults have joined sides with the bullies. It can be horrifically damaging—even life threatening—when bullied children in schools conclude the adults in charge have taken sides with the bullies.
Some of the commentary on this thread would endorse teachers and school administrators who do that. Of course the teachers and administrators mostly do it out of ignorance and professional incompetence. Maybe that similarly excuses some of the comments here.
Sarcastr0, the reason people use terms like "transphobia" is exactly to imply that it's actually some sort of mental problem. With an added dollop of "you're a scardy-cat!"
Queen almathea 23 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
You’re just repeating your initial conclusory statement, which is no surprise for a person who obviously doesn’t know much about what he’s so confidently opining on."
I will repeat my statement -
Transgender is a mental illness.
the second point is that it doesnt take a lot of expertise to recognize the obvious.
It does take a lot of stupidity to believe it isnt a mental illness.