Parents’ ‘Sex Ed Sit Out’ Protesting Forced Gender Ideology in Schools Spreads Across Country

[Pup7]

My mom is in her 80’s. When she was first married as a young thing in her 20’s, married women weren’t typically allowed to get a credit card in their own name without their husband’s written approval. How backwards is that??? Thank goodness for the laws we have in place that make that type of requirement illegal.

Yep! They couldn’t get loans, credit, sometimes even a bank account in their own name if they were married. Medical care could be shared too with your husband, especially regarding reproductive health.

Twisted.

 

[Alex337]

QwertyGirl:

My mom is in her 80’s. When she was first married as a young thing in her 20’s, married women weren’t typically allowed to get a credit card in their own name without their husband’s written approval. How backwards is that??? Thank goodness for the laws we have in place that make that type of requirement illegal.

Yep! They couldn’t get loans, credit, sometimes even a bank account in their own name if they were married. Medical care could be shared too with your husband, especially regarding reproductive health.

Twisted.

I’d heard about this kind of thing. My mother is only 60, so she avoided much of this. I wish I’d had a chance to speak about it more with my grandmothers.

 

[Pup7]

It seems like that is steadily changing. To me it seems fair that people shouldn’t have to put up with discrimination based on their gender identity.

I’m not saying they shouldn’t. I’m saying there’s a fine line between protecting rights and infuriating people. Passing a law in the US telling people “you must call people X” when ninety nine percent of people are going to do it anyway would never fly here. What I see is people tripping up because of voice or appearance and apologizing (oh I’ve been there) and getting “It’s okay” as long as the speaker is mindful going forward.

Most people - even ones who are anti-whatever - aren’t setting out to make waves.

 

[Alex337]

The way I see it is just because most people would follow a rule doesn’t mean it shouldn’t exist. If someone in my workplace kept calling me Mr and insisted on referring to me as a man even after I asked him not to I would feel harassed and it wound impact how well I work.

I have had students slip up and call me Mr (I’ve also had hideously embarrassed teens accidentally call me “mum”) because they just came from a period with one of my make colleagues. That’s fine, that’s a silly slip. But people need to have recourse for the more intentional abuses.

 

[edwest211]

My mother, who could bear children, bought a house. I have no idea what you are referring to. And that would not explain the millions of post-war Baby Boomers living in relatively new homes in cookie-cutter neighborhoods built right after the War.

 

[Pup7]

I really, really hate when people do that.

Did you stop to think you might not live in the same state?

Houses bought after WWII were likely due to VA LOANS. They were different. Different parameters. Different loan rules.

After WWII, active duty could not use a VA Loan entitlement like we can now. You had to have veteran status. My dad could not use VA entitlement in the 1950s as he was on active duty. They were told by the bank that they were barred from purchasing unless she could produce proof she couldn’t have more children.

I can’t remember if that was PA, NJ, or VA.

Just because you had a different experience doesn’t mean someone else is weaving yarns.

 

[edwest211]

And that’s becoming a problem. “Gender identity” is a very poorly defined term. “Gender expression,” even more so.

 

[edwest211]

Overreaction. I wrote that my mom bought a house during her child-bearing years. That’s all.

 

[Pup7]

Unnecessary. A wee bit patronizing.

I have no idea what you are referring to. And that would not explain the millions of post-war Baby Boomers living in relatively new homes in cookie-cutter neighborhoods built right after the War.

Edited to add - you’re right. I snapped and shouldn’t have and I’ll blame it on pain and I’ll own the snap. It doesn’t excuse what I did and I apologize. I cleaned up my statement a bit. But really, when someone says something and you have a different experience, there’s no need to make it sound like the first person is making it up, because I’m not.

 

[Alex337]

And that’s becoming a problem. “Gender identity” is a very poorly defined term. “Gender expression,” even more so.

It seems fairly well defined. Gender identity is the gender a person identifies as. Gender expression is how a person expresses gender.

For example; I identify as a woman. My gender expression is what would be viewed as traditionally rather masculine, though not so much that it would confuse folks as to what gender I identify as.

 

[pnewton]

I would feel harassed and it wound impact how well I work.

Such is the rather sad world we live in today. We have gone from bullying of the weak to the weak bullying with this type of threat. If the use of the wrong word of courtesy or pronoun was ever an issue for me, I would simply cease all use of pronouns and words of courtesy.

 

[Alex337]

Alex337:

I would feel harassed and it wound impact how well I work.

Such is the rather sad world we live in today. We have gone from bullying of the weak to the weak bullying with this type of threat.

It is a misapprehension that disallowing people to bully others at work is somehow bullying them.

 

[edwest211]

OK. We’ll just go back back to not assuming things. The internet just does not beat having a conversation with a person sitting across from you. Especially if you really don’t know each other.

 

[pnewton]

It is a disagreement not misapprehension. I would feel bullied by threats of being called for harassment. Why would my feelings be less valid than yours? Like I said, if necessary I would simply speak awkwardly using no pronouns and maybe full names if I were ever called on the carpet for such stuff.

I really don’t think it would be a problem for 99% of the people though. Most people aren’t so fragile they would run to HR of pronouns, they surely wouldn’t let their work suffer. One that would do that has issues with work ethics.

 

[edwest211]

OK. Seeking to avoid confusion, let me see if I can get the intended meaning here.

If a person identifies as a woman but is not, why do so?

If a person is a woman but exhibits behaviors usually associated with men, then why?

 

[Alex337]

It is a disagreement not misapprehension. I would feel bullied by threats of being called for harassment. Why would my feelings be less valid than yours? Like I said, if necessary I would simply speak awkwardly using no pronouns and maybe full names if I were ever called on the carpet for such stuff.

Heh, it’s the same kind of logic that says that laws against robbery impinge on the rights of thieves. In this situation you have been asked not to bother someone at your work; that’s not the same.

 

[pnewton]

Heh, it’s the same kind of logic that says that laws against robbery impinge on the rights of thieves.

See, again, disagreement. I do not see laws against crimes that have existed against the beginning of humanity anywhere near the same kind of logic as a rule designed to stop someone getting their feelings hurt in work by not being called the gender they want.

In the real world, when there is not real harassment, and I do not think this qualifies, the one who does the best work will be the one they keep, not the one who lets work suffer. I sometimes think we have forgotten what sexual harassment is all about. This doesn’t even bump the needle on the stuff that actually hits the courts.

 

[Pup7]

Last word on the matter.

Looks like Yale backs me up.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Guess I was wrong and it WAS a VA loan. As far as I knew, you couldn’t use that on active duty. I guess you could; my mistake. However, it was clearly legal to discriminate based on childbearing ability. And apparently for a long time if that year is indicative of case law.

They couldn’t buy because they needed her income, and the income couldn’t be counted because of her status. I missed a few details. It’s been a long time.

Have a great evening.

 

[Alex337]

OK. Seeking to avoid confusion, let me see if I can get the intended meaning here.

If a person identifies as a woman but is not, why do so?

If a person is a woman but exhibits behaviors usually associated with men, then why?

A person may identify as a woman without biologically having been one at birth for reasons that science is still uncovering. It seems that this gender dysphoria isn’t new, nor confined, and had shown up through history and across culture. They are more comfortable as the gender they identify with.

A woman may exhibit behaviours usually associated with men, and vice versa, for any number of reasons. Largely it just comes down to people like what people will like. I like doing power lifting because I find it fun and it helps with some injuries I have, it is normally considered quite masculine though.

 

[Alex337]

Alex337:

Heh, it’s the same kind of logic that says that laws against robbery impinge on the rights of thieves.

See, again, disagreement. I do not see laws against crimes that have existed against the beginning of humanity anywhere near the same kind of logic as someone getting their feelings hurt in work by not being called the gender they want.

Many cultures since the early times of humanity have viewed trans* people with great respect, believing they are specially blessed. Does those help?