Part II
Transgender Student Guidance for School Districts
“A school district shall accept a student’s asserted gender identity; parental consent is not required. Further, a student need not meet any threshold diagnosis or treatment requirements to have his or her gender identity recognized and respected by the district, school or school personnel. Nor is a legal or court-ordered name change required. There is no affirmative duty for any school district personnel to notify a student’s parent or guardian of the student’s gender identity or expression.”
We left off with making the connection between what is being portrayed, said, and now celebrated regarding the transgender or LGBTQIA+ community, its agenda, and how it is of a sexual nature. This is the connection that is overlooked by some people who think we are just creating a safe space for a child who wants to play dress up or who continues to show “expressions” or “tendencies” that could be manipulated to be viewed as a want to live life exploring alternate sexual lifestyles.
Or in the words of the New Jersey Department of Education:
Gender Expression means external manifestations of gender, expressed through a person’s name, pronouns, clothing, haircut, behavior, voice, and/or body characteristics. Society identifies these cues as masculine and feminine, although what is considered masculine or feminine changes over time and varies by culture.
Hmmm, varies by culture?
The last sentence in Part I:
It’s important to make these connections as this is what the transgender movement is being used to do; confuse, divide, and uproot character, identity, and ultimately culture.
The sexualization of children has become stylish throughout the past several years. Even to the point where it has become the replacement for alternative social groups. Just read above, “clothing”, “haircut”, “behavior”, “voice” and/or “body characteristics”.
Remember the “in crowd”, the jocks, the rockers or rappers, the nerds, the slackers etc, and going all the way back to the greasers and preps. The difference here is that those groups were mostly in defiance of the system or “the man”.
Does this developing Trans group have some similarities to the alternative movements of the past; yes. Is it checking enough boxes so to feel similar and therefore overlooked as the next crazy thing the kids are doing; yes?
The stark difference is that the movements or groups of the past organically came about, and most importantly, their agendas were not pushed by institutions and government under the guise of protection for said group.
It might be in the guise of inclusion, acceptance, safety, or something else, but that’s inheritably part of the deception. Defenders of this agenda might ask, what is deceptive about creating a safe place for children who want to express different gender identities?
Isn’t it better to ask; how did the child learn that there were different gender identities? Furthermore, why are these positions so fragile that they need protection from the state and discovery/education from the NJDOE? More importantly, why does the state find it important with coordination from the NJEA to teach children about sexual content that does not involve biology or reproduction?
What’s next dating class?
Find a prom date club?
MOST IMPORTANTLY, who in the hell decided it was a good idea for adults to keep secrets with kids regarding content of a sexual nature while excluding their parent or guardian?
There used to be a term for adults who kept secrets of a sexual nature with children, but let’s move on.
Here is where the term pedo, sorry, “groomer” comes into the picture. By allowing the innocence of a child to wander, which is healthy, but in need of structure and boundary, definitions become suggestions and definitive facts fail to create the lines needed for productive personal and social construct.
This is where things take a turn and understanding these following points might help to explain why and how logical positions fall out of focus depending on one’s perspective. It might also explain why adherence to these new social “norms” can so quickly become accepted. These alternative provocative life styles have become trendy and popular within the entertainment world, bringing them front and center to the children.
People will make their own choices as to what they consider appropriate regarding entertainment, and while that may harshly vary, we will focus on the more basic. There are many aspects to breaking all of this down, but there are three pieces that seem essential and therefore create a need for mention.
This first point is confusing because it has been argued by all sides for different reasons. When it’s convenient, it’s used. When it’s in the way, it’s time to throw it away.
With that said, the first point explores why government gets to decide 18 years is the amount for every person to gain enough consciousness, intelligence, and maturity to make certain legal and potentially vital decisions for themselves. And it’s not by accident that now age is conveniently being pushed out of the way in an effort to move this hyper sexual focused agenda forward.
The second stand out has more to do with the parent/guardian than it does with the child. Yes, some of this has nothing to do with the child’s “expressions” or “tendencies”. The third is about narrative, popularity, useful idiots and/or a lack of integrity, self-esteem, and independence as a society.
-and just so it stated; this entire piece could have been written with discussion based on religion, but personal beliefs aside, this is for all people, whether you’re religious or not, to see just how ridiculous, dangerous, and illogical this sort of approach and thinking has become to our society, and more importantly its children.
Do I hope you are putting God first? Yes. If that means you can’t continue reading, or have a discussion; God bless you and have a great day.
Why 18?
An argument can always be made as to whether a child or a young adult has “what it takes” to make “good” or at least “decent” decisions, however, as per the 26th amendment in 1971 it was decided that 18 was old enough. It’s particularly important to remember why.
The Vietnam conflict saw the draft of 18 year olds in the mid 1960’s that didn’t have the right to vote, and songs like “Eve of Destruction” told the story. This decision wasn’t based on whether someone was old enough to decide their identity or sexual preference. It was heightened and thrust to the forefront of a society that could now draft kids for war providing their legal right to die for their country, without them having any say in the matter.
The Burke-Wadsworth or Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 started the first ever piece time draft in an effort for preparedness. On November 11, 1942 the draft age was lowered to 18 and capped at age 37. Under LBJ during the Vietnam War the draft numbers were set to increase. It would be almost 30 years before the 26th amendment allowed 18 year olds to vote.
Why is this number one and why is it important to bring this up? Well because it brings a sobering thought and feeling as to how we treat our youth, and to what level of seriousness we are using when approaching the launching pad for what will ultimately be their life. Once again think perspective. Imagine going from not allowing 18 year olds to vote with the mentioned circumstances, to address me with the pronouns I prefer because me and the government said so.
The second is tough terrain to navigate. It requires a certain amount of vulnerability that can be very uncomfortable. It requires us to think, admit, and accept that we as a parent or guardian might just be the cause and are in the wrong. Whether wrong means living vicariously through our child and deciding what we may have wanted for them, or following a popular trend because we didn’t initially see the harm; was the decision wrong? Was it guilt to do what the child thought was right, so to keep a relationship strong? Was it the lack of a spine to tell the child “No”?
In any case, aren’t we responsible for our child’s decisions and actions? Were those decisions and actions swayed by our own curiosity, cravings, or thoughts? One could argue that child protection services should have had a division devoted to this sort of abuse. Sadly, this is where the school counselor would have been there to notice and report the abuse. But, by today’s standards the counselor would be fired for trying to connect parents to their child and help with the overall wellbeing of their family.
With all that being said and assuming the push for this insanity isn’t at home’ it brings us back to the schools. Do these decisions and discussions belong in schools? Where should a child’s moral compass be developed? Can’t a community and more so a school with educated people see fit that there is no polarized direction in which a child can or should be pulled? Instead, shouldn’t a school be a place where that child can see clearly that achievement by hard work is a solid foundation to build upon?
And to those teachers, paras, and faculty who provide themselves as pillars to their community, praise should be given. The ones navigating these ridiculous times, making themselves available to needing students and becoming a friend and in some cases a hero; thank you.
As a parent it’s important to say that we see you, we appreciate you, and your work and effort does not go unnoticed.
Finally, the third piece which presents as an even harder challenge because it requires honest participation in community while abandoning popularity and manufactured narrative. Meaning that we need to speak open and honest as to what is really being agreed to, talked about, and even worse, promoted by entertainers, TV networks, education associations, and government.
The reason it’s harder is because it’s in public and popular trends and family identity now plays a part. The things we didn’t want to think may be on us as parents or guardians just may be a hard pill to swallow. However, this requires us to stand and be counted, and most importantly, to participate. Part of that public participation and discourse is reflection to identify what we are bringing to the table.
We’ve all heard people say that they didn’t like something or were opposed to that thing. How many of you showed up at a school board meeting? How many spoke out against it when the chance presented? How did the LGBTQIA+ agenda end up being a crucial part of NJ learning standards? Bullying seems to have many different forms and faces.
Is the opinion of an athlete, actor, or musician more important to you because they are popular? Is popularity guiding what used to be kitchen table discussions that helped develop our children’s moral compass? Let’s step back… Are you sitting down as family to have dinner weekly? What are you talking about at the dinner table?
When reality is brought back into focus, and if we’re being honest with ourselves; does the superficial or popularity stuff really matter? Yes, it’s entertaining, but does it really matter? More importantly, should we base our moral decisions on what TV or radio deems as, ok?
Tickets to watch the Kansas City Chiefs just went up along with jersey sales because singer Taylor Swift is dating tight-end Travis Kelce. Little girls were asking to go watch football games because a singer they like was going to be there cheering for her boyfriend. Still think entertainment isn’t influential?
The tying together of these points is what’s important. The sobering thought of how we as a society could send 18 year olds to legally die for their country without a say. The way our own agendas could lead children to what we want, rather than providing the support and structure for what they need. Even worse, the acceptance of lunacy because it’s popular; you know, everyone is doing it.
Remember when your ___________ said to you; if they jumped off a bridge, would you?
Yes, it’s that simple, and yet that confusingly crazy.
In part III we break down how strong content is digested and how it plays a role in a child’s mental diet. Plus, are terms like diversity, equity, gender identity, and safe space fundamental to our communities and society? Join us for part III and let us know what you think.
Thanks for reading.
Cited: https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-childrens-hospital-transgender-youth-center-patients-young-age-3
Cited: Transgender Student Guidance for School Districts
Cited: NJ 5756 – TRANSGENDER STUDENTS