Big Gummint Is Coming to Transgender Your Kids

Filed in Delaware by on February 1, 2018

I warned you months ago that the Delaware GOP, having less intelligence than a majority of the state’s chicken population, was pinning its 2018 hopes on its latest horror movie, “Attack of the 50-Foot Transgender.” (Is it a boy? Is it a girl? Do you want it in your kids’ locker room?)

Sure enough, the Department of Education held a public hearing last night on the nefarious Regulation 225, regarding how the state’s public schools should treat transgender students. I would argue this was all for show, as the department already has 11,000 written comments about it, and eight of Delaware’s GOP lawmakers attended to parade their conservative bona fides.

To nobody’s surprise, the state’s reactionaries showed up to voice their usual fear-based concerns. My favorite is the photo of the guy who looks like a fatter, less attractive Harvey Weinstein, nattering on about how people are biologically male or female. That’s not true — intersex people account for over 1% of live births — but don’t expect anybody voicing their opinions as facts to have their ignorance corrected. My question is simple: If you saw him naked from the waist up, would you be able to guess his gender?

What I find infuriating about all this is that the Department of Education won’t state the obvious reason for this guideline: School districts all over the country are paying out millions in damage lawsuits brought by transgendered students. The same dumbfucks who are bitching about this spend much of the rest of their time bitching about the government wasting money. They’re the same people who hate Obamacare but use the ACA.

About the Author ()

Who wants to know?

Comments (24)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Sites That Link to this Post

  1. Is This The Real Reason For Regulation 225? – Exceptional Delaware 2018 | February 2, 2018
  1. Paul says:

    Too bad the regulation isn’t about protecting the rights of transgender students. Oh wait! It is!

  2. Alby says:

    I should point out, because few people follow links, that the damage case I linked to cost the school district in question $800,000. In Delaware that’s the cost of educating 80 kids.

  3. bamboozer says:

    It’s yet another political song and dance designed to rile assorted haters that are the base of the Republican party in all states, this one included. Kudos to Alby for actually looking at the attendees, in particular “a fatter and less attractive Harvey Weinstein”, must have taken intestinal fortitude of a super human level.

  4. Bane says:

    I don’t know why this is an important regulation. Aren’t there already rules in place that allow teachers to report parents who pose a threat to their child? That’s what family services is for.

    I couldn’t care less if you are born transgender or not. It has nothing to do with the regulation. At its core, this is allowing a teacher the ability to withhold information about a child from their parent.

    I’m sure there are many kids who live in abusive homes. Many children whose parents would beat them for any issue at school, great or small. Why is this the only issue that recieves the “Teacher/Student secret pact clearance”. Kids who opt for special meals at lunch for religious purposes, they have to get a parents consent. Is anyone protecting them from the rage of their non-kosher parents? A father who forbids his child from playing football still has to sign a permission slip, even though the father is going to be irrate. Is a transgender child’s ass whooping more devistating than a non-transgendered kid who gets beat for practicing a certain religion or a kid who wants to play a sport? The goal should be educating the parents. Not helping kids to keep secrets from them.

    Im a life long Democrat, very progressive, but I have a problem with this. Has nothing to do with them being transgender.

    Its ignorant to make judgements on people who a transgender. I think it’s just as ignorant to blow off legit concerns associated with parental rights as hate mongering.

    The reason liberals lose is because they think that the only people who disagree with them are hillbilly Republicans.

    And I’ll tell you like this, the first white kid who claims to be black is going to be a problem. And I want all the liberals to be just as supportive when all those black voters are up in arms over school district sanctioned blackface.

  5. Bane says:

    And if law suits are the issue, regulations are not the remedy. This should come from the legislature, since it is something worth getting broad legislative clarity on.

  6. Alby says:

    “At its core, this is allowing a teacher the ability to withhold information about a child from their parent.”

    No, that’s one small part of the issue. Most of the people against this cite that, but scratch deeper and you get right to the “not in my locker room” stuff. It’s like anti-abortion people who are also against birth control. Congrats for falling for their framing, though.

    “And if lawsuits are the issue, regulations are not the remedy.”

    Whoa there. You’re going to have to prove that one, as we have regulations out the wazoo aimed, in part, at preventing lawsuits. Virtually every regulation, in fact. If the state did not regulate what came out of smokestacks, every company would be open to lawsuits about it. And so on. I think that’s just your anti-government bias talking there.

    “This should come from the legislature, since it is something worth getting broad legislative clarity on.”

    You want legislators setting policy in public education? Now you’re really out in left field. Most of them couldn’t pass a GED exam.

  7. Paul says:

    Bane, from my perspective, the regulation comes into play when there is already a rift between parents and the teen. The reg says that in matters of school, the teen is given the authority, in a most extraordinary way, of determining their own gender, and in these cases, the teen should prevail. Is this not unlike the issue of abortion, where it has been recognized that the child needs to have the authority to make their own decision regarding a pregnancy. Both issues are sexually related, and many people have a heart attack if the matter is merely brought up, nevermind shepharding a resolution to the situation. In matters of school, decent counselors would encourage the teen to try to communicate with parents and act to support this. In addition, in most homes, this is not a secret. The tiny child, not yet a teen is already showing a preference, from choosing clothing to toys. Most parents are aware of the issue long before high school. Finally, how many teens are we ready to see commit suicide? The statistics are grim. Teens in this category are far more likely to commit suicide than any others. Any parent who says “better dead than that” has already given up any authority they have to raise this child, let alone choose their gender. And sadly, here in Sussex County, there are parents who think just that. The ramification of having a child who is “different” is too much to bear. Hopefully, parents will learn to see this reg as one intended to help those under the most duress, and will accept a small gap in their authority in return for the benefits to the kids.

  8. jason330 says:

    Here are the profile in courage who attended the public hearing. Brian Pettyjohn SD19, Briggs King RD37, Postles RD33, Yearick RD34, Gray RD38, Lawson SD15, Richardson SD21, and Collins RD41. The “Sean Hannity Gives Me a Woody” Caucus.

    Looking up Collins district I see that he has recently Introduced the following: SCR 43 “DESIGNATING FEBRUARY 6, 2018 AS “RONALD REAGAN DAY” IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE”

    Ronald. Fucking. Reagan. Day.

  9. Alby says:

    Collins is the shitgibbon who lobbied for real estate interests in Eastern Sussex for 20 years before ridding us of John Atkins. He has to step lively because there’s a new shitgibbon in town.

    No, Bane, they’re not all hillbilly Republicans. Some are just in it for financial and political gain, and they find those hillbillies useful.

  10. Bane says:

    Alby, don’t blow off legit concerns because of the positions of bigots. I don’t think my wanting to know what’s going on with my child is the same as saying “not in my lockeroom”.

    Paul: medical issues are not the same as a child’s identity. Unless we are claiming that teachers should enjoy the same privaledge as doctor/patient; Which is essentially what this is creating… teacher/student privaledge. I think that’s a broad new territory that deserves legislative debate, not simply a regulation.

    I also think it’s ridiculous to connect this regulation with preventing suicide; As though the teacher recognizing the student eliminates bullying from students and nonacceptance from society and family members. This reg doesn’t do anything to solve those things, and has a chance of further alienating the child from their family. Your choice between this reg or child suicide is a false choice.

    If a parent says “better dead than that” someone should call child services. Let them determine whether the parent has “relinquished all rights to parent”. Teachers should not have that authority.

  11. That Reagan Resolution is an SCR, meaning it starts in the Senate. Does the name Colin Bonini ring a bell? He introduces it every session. Collins is his House henchman.

  12. Alby says:

    So let me get this straight: You think that your child will, unknown to you, start dressing like someone of the opposite gender, attend school in that attire and then tell the people there not to tell you because you won’t like it. That’s the scenario you’re worked up about. Like all conservative scenarios, it’s fiction. This is not how transgender people come out.

    As for your “legitimate concern,” maybe it is — for you. Not them. When people have a legitimate concern, they limit their criticisms to that concern. None of these people have. So don’t tell me not to blow off those concerns. They, not parental control, are the motivating factor here. The proof will come when they change that part of the regulation and the opponents don’t drop their opposition. If you actually listen to what they say, parental control is maybe 10% of what they rail about. I wasn’t there, but I doubt anybody confined their remarks to parental control.

    “This reg doesn’t do anything to solve those things”

    No, it doesn’t, but it indemnifies the school when and if a lawsuit erupts over the bullying. I imagine the state doesn’t want to say that for a couple of reasons, but go on and keep ignoring that. There’s a hobby horse to ride.

    Also, nobody is giving “teachers” that authority. This applies to the school administration.

  13. Bane says:

    But Alby, if the issue is that the parents already know, and there’s no way they will “unknown to me start dressing like the opposite gender” .. whats the point of the regulation? If the parents already know, why the need to keep the activity at school a secret? If the parent is abusive, how does this protect the child if the parent already knows? Both rationales are based on the same silly premise.

    I haven’t yet figured out who this actually protects the child from. Unless this isn’t really about protecting the child, but about protecting the teacher and districts.

    Your argument is that the Parents should already know, the kids at school know, there’s no requirement to contact child services if the child is in danger. Only people that get expanded protections and privaledges is the school district.

  14. Bane says:

    I agree with that alby… we’re on the same page. It’s the school district trying to protect themselves from claims of bullying. I’m there

  15. Bane says:

    They shpuld just say that… instead they have neocons acting like transgender kids are staging a zombie like invasion and liberals making us chose between the regulation and child suicide.

  16. Dave says:

    We had a term for all of this in the military industrial complex. It’s called “mission creep.” What was the mission of the public education system in the first place? I have forgotten.

  17. Gerry W says:

    The $800,000 sadly does not education 80 children, it pays for one teacher who has retired from teaching in Maryland and uses his/her teacher’s Union Contacts to obtain a Delaware position and slide through another 10 years in Delaware and grab another pension. That’s one loophole where the tax money could be directed to the students and away from the double dippers. Bane is correct with his concern about teachers, given the number of public School teachers arrested and convicted of sexual assaults, perhaps Teachers (Educators as they prefer) should not be calling the shots about their students lives.It’s interesting how many Teachers hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil when it comes to their coworkers and sex with students. Maybe A.I. Dupont Children’s Hospital could help in case of transgender students , offering counseling to both the student and parents but without removing the child from it’s parents. If there is so much supposed concern with the welfare of transgender students, why no extend that concern to actions of the Wrestling Coach or the Math teacher who who having sex in the School Parking lot with their students.

  18. Can someone shed more light on this $800,000 lawsuit? Any links?

  19. Alby says:

    @kevin: It’s the third link in the post above, leads to a NYTimes story from Wisconsin.

  20. Alby says:

    @bane: I think it’s overkill, and I think it will be stripped from the final approved version. My prediction is opponents will a) take immediate credit for the change and b) not stop bitching about locker rooms.

    Your reaction shows they have a decent pitch. Parental rights are a gut-level issue, which is why I think DOE will fold on that part.

    I read last week that schools are no longer including hall lockers in their building plans because kids won’t use them anymore. Maybe locker rooms will be next.

  21. Alby says:

    @Gerry: It’s roughly 80 kids using the state funding formula. I don’t know what the exact current amount per student is, but it used to be just under $10k per. Kevin could probably tell us.

  22. SussexAnon says:

    If only the parental concern was coming from desire to be informed and supportive of their child. Instead of “I wanna know so I can ‘fix’ my child and keep this from happening.”

    No need to wonder why LGBT students need special protections with the way a lot of Sussex County parents (and some teachers/administrators) think.

  23. lebay says:

    Gerry W-

    Were you a school nurse in RCCSD in the 1980s?

    If so, you’re more clueless now than you were when we (the students entrusted to your care) got over on you 35 years ago.

    If not, my apologies to the other Gerry W. She was a bit dim, but very nice.