Mediaboss Marketing

A bill to ban divisive concepts from certain public entities, including state agencies, local boards of education, and public institutions of higher education was given a favorable report in committee last week, with white legislators voting yes and Black lawmakers voting no.

HB7 is another front in the so-called culture wars to eliminate public discussions of race, sex and religion to purify the nation of diversity. It also points to a desire for a cultural revolution.

Our state and nation have a fault line regarding racial inequality and sexual orientation that laws like HB7 hope to stamp out by pretending they dont exist.

Is there any reasonable individual who believes the solution to a serious problem is to ignore it? Isnt the first key to solving a problem admitting it exists, and the second step discussing it?

What if, rather than banning divisive concepts, the state encouraged open and frank, age-appropriate education with the goal of understanding and perhaps even finding a way out of the present dilemma?

Perhaps expecting pragmatism from policymakers is too much to ask since it seems the art of governing is identifying the wrong problem, applying an incompetent remedy and declaring victory.

Divisive concepts are code words for Critical Race Theory, which is merely a boogeyman to divide the nation and state for political gain.

During her recent re-election campaign, Gov. Kay Ivey said the state had banned the teaching of CRT in grade schools, and, in practice, she was correct.

In August 2021, the State Board of Education banned CRT from being taught in classrooms across the state. After the passage of the resolution, Ivey said: As Ive said many times, CRT doesnt belong in Alabama schools.

CRT currently isnt being taught in Alabama classrooms, and Ive previously called on the Alabama School Board to keep it that way, the governor said. We need to focus on teaching Alabama kids how to read and write, not hate.

If CRT or so-called divisive concepts are not being used in grade schools or public institutions, why is there a need for a law? The sponsor of HB7 Rep. Ed Oliver, R-Dadeville doesnt seem to know what a divisive concept is or offer a coherent reason why it needs to be purged.

At the recent public hearing, Oliver said the law is designed to prevent racism in schools and state agencies. He had a different take on the bill when asked about it last year. Ultimately, the reason that the left wants to push CRT amongst little kids is simply they want to sexualize them, Oliver said.

They want to racialize them at an early age to make them easy to manage, pure and simple, he said. I hate to say a way to create more left-wingers that are woke and will do the things that the left wants them to do, but thats exactly what it is, to divide people. To make groups fight each other, so theyre easier to manage.

So is it about sex and the procreation of more liberals, or about banishing racism? Was Oliver lying in December 2022, or is he lying now? Or could it be that the bill itself is vague to the point of dangerousness and absurdity?

The fact is HB7 is a lemming law that follows behind other red states that have passed similar legislation, and it is not surprising as Alabama seems to be in a constant race to restrict individual choice and freedom of expression unless it aligns with a narrow orthodoxy.

The proposed legislation is not about education or state agencies in the sense of improving the outcome for students or citizen services; it is about control.

Dominating education is fundamental in an authoritarian society. In the 1930s and 1940s, Germany used education to instill values in children, which led to World War II and the extermination of six million Jews. The Soviet Union likewise did the same. Mao Zedongs Cultural Revolution in the Peoples Republic of China led to mass incarceration, re-education camps and wholesale murder of academics. The list is long and not unprecedented.

The Cultural Revolution in Iran expelled Western and non-Islamic influences from the state, leading with its universities. The Committee for Islamization of Universities carried out the task by ensuring an Islamic atmosphere for every subject from engineering to the humanities.

Have no doubt there are forces within Alabama and the United States that would carry out such cleansing if the door is opened wide enough by small bills like HB7.

Be not deceived like those who believed Roe v. Wade was stare decisis every liberty is constantly threatened.

For now, HB7 is part of a slow-moving coup gaining momentum. Revolutions to turn back modernity have a singular goal of total state control. Whether Berlin, Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, or Montgomery, legislation and the barrel of a gun are the devices used to wrestle a free society to subjugation.

The divisive concepts legislation is just the latest gambit to reorder the state and nation to fit the liking of a few individuals who seek power first.

There is no mistake that the divisive concepts bill is an effort to create a foothold to welcome more restrictive legislation to the end of one ideology dominating public education, public discourse and public life.

The state spends billions to create a pro-business image to attract business and generate good jobs for Alabamians bills like HB7 undermine those efforts.

HB7 seems like petty legislation, but it is a fifth column toward an imperious, illiberal cultural revolution.

The first step to resolve a problem is to acknowledge it is real.

Visit link:
Opinion | HB7 and a cultural revolution - Alabama Political Reporter

Rights and protections for transgender students are constantly evolving, as the culture wars play out and politicians, lawyers, families and students themselves grapple with what it means to be transgender in different contexts, particularly sports.

Recently, two federal actions brought some clarity to policies and laws related to the right of transgender students to play on sports teams that align with their gender identity. The decisions, by the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Supreme Court, are not the final word on trans athletes, but they are important milestones in the debate.

Heres a guide to those decisions and where the law stands now for young people who want to play on the single-sex teams that they believe match their gender identity, rather than the team that matches the sex they were at birth.

What do the new U.S. Department of Education guidelines say?

The new guidelines, issued April 6, state that schools, colleges and universities cannot bar students from a sports team simply because theyre transgender. But the guidelines also give schools the flexibility to prevent athletes from playing on a team that matches their gender identity in certain competitive situations or where there is a risk of injury. For example, a transgender athlete who was born as a male but identifies as a woman may be blocked from joining a womans team in some cases.

Schools would not be permitted to adopt or apply a one-size-fits-all policy that categorically bans transgender students from participating on teams consistent with their gender identity, the guidelines state. Instead, the Departments approach would allow schools flexibility to develop team eligibility criteria that serve important educational objectives, such as ensuring fairness in competition or preventing sports-related injury. These criteria would have to account for the sport, level of competition, and grade or education level to which they apply.

The guidelines are an update to Title IX, the 1972 law banning sex discrimination in schools or other programs that receive federal funding.

What happens if a school violates the order?

Schools that violate Title IX risk losing federal funding.

What was the Supreme Court ruling?

The Supreme Court ruled on April 6 that a 12-year-old transgender girl in West Virginia can participate in her middle schools girls cross-country and track teams, at least for now.

The case stems from a 2021 West Virginia law that prevents boys from competing on girls sports teams. Lawyers representing the girl, identified as Becky Pepper-Jackson, sued the state, saying the law discriminates against transgender girls. A federal judge ruled against her, saying that athletes who were born male do have an advantage when competing against girls.

The girls lawyers appealed that ruling, and a federal appeals court agreed that the girl could continue to play while the case moved forward. The Supreme Court upheld that order.

The ACLU cheered the ruling.

We are grateful that the Supreme Court today acknowledged that there was no emergency and that Becky should be allowed to continue to participate with her teammates on her middle school track team, which she has been doing without incident for three going on four seasons, as our challenge to West Virginias onerous trans youth sports ban makes its way through the courts, the organization said. This was a baseless and cruel effort to keep Becky from where she belongs playing alongside her peers as a teammate and as a friend.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey said he was deeply disappointed in the courts decision.

What do these federal actions mean for transgender athletes?

Both are at least partial victories for trans athletes, providing clarity on a much-debated issue thats been at the center of the culture wars. The rulings are especially meaningful for transgender athletes in elementary and middle school, where sports teams are rarely competitive, and for transgender athletes in states that previously barred their participation on teams that align with their gender identity.

It should go without saying, policies that fully include trans women and girls on sports teams with other women and girls harm no one, according to a statement signed by eight LGBTQ organizations.

Nobody should be denied the opportunity to be part of a team just because of who they are, said Kasey Suffredini, vice president of advocacy and government affairs for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit that advocates for LGBTQ young people.

Where does California stand on this issue?

At least 20 states have laws that prevent transgender students from playing on teams that align with their gender identity, but California isnt one of them. California schools already allow transgender students to play on the sports teams that they choose. Assembly Bill 1266, passed in 2013, requires schools to allow students to participate in any school program, including sports, and use any facilities, including bathrooms and locker rooms, that match their gender identity.

The California Interscholastic Federation, which governs high school sports in the state, affirms this in its bylaws and in a gender diversity toolkit, providing guidance for coaches, teachers, students and families.

Transgender students are entitled to and must be provided the same opportunities as all other students to participate in physical education and sports consistent with their gender identity, the state Department of Education states.

Even though Californias guidelines go further than the proposed change to Title IX, the state would not have to roll back its protections to be in compliance.

What about college sports?

The guidelines for college sports are more complicated and vary by sport. The National Collegiate Athletic Association recently aligned its policy to match the International Olympic Committees, which requires transgender athletes to submit testosterone documentation before competing. The standards are determined by the governing bodies overseeing each sport. The U.S. Tennis Association, for example, states that male-to-female transgender athletes can compete on womens teams if hormonal therapy appropriate for the assigned sex has been administered in a verifiable manner and for a sufficient length of time to minimize gender-related advantages in sport competitions. Someone who tests with too much testosterone, for example, might not be allowed to play in female competition, regardless of gender identity, in some cases.

We are steadfast in our support of transgender student-athletes and the fostering of fairness across college sports, said John DeGioia, former chair of the board of the NCAA Division I Committee on Academics and current Georgetown University president. It is important that NCAA member schools, conferences and college athletes compete in an inclusive, fair, safe and respectful environment and can move forward with a clear understanding of the new policy.

These guidelines apply to community colleges and most public and private colleges and universities.

Who is considered transgender?

Transgender is a general term that refers to a person whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth, such as someone who identifies as male but whose sex on their original birth certificate was marked female, according to the California Civil Rights Department.

Is this the end of the debate? What are the next steps?

Its likely not the end of the debate, especially in states with more restrictive policies. The proposed change from the Biden administration offers schools some flexibility in competitive situations, which is likely where the next disagreements will arise. Its also unclear what competitive means at the high school level, which could potentially lead to further court rulings and federal decisions in the future.

To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSources no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.

Go here to see the original:
Whos on the team: A guide to the latest federal actions about transgender athletes - EdSource

New College of Florida trustees should defer or outright deny tenure to five faculty members at their next meeting, Interim President Richard Corcoran said in a memo obtained by the Tampa Bay Times.

The memo, which was included in the tenure applications circulated to trustees last week, marks the first public statement Corcoran has made on the issue. He previously requested in a private meeting that faculty members withdraw their applications for tenure, which the Times first reported earlier this month.

Trustees will decide whether to grant tenure to the five at their next meeting on April 26. The names of the five faculty members have not been publicly released.

Corcoran laid out his reasoning for halting the tenure process in the memo, citing extraordinary circumstances including a renewed focus on ensuring the College is moving towards a more traditional liberal arts institution and current uncertainty of the needs of the divisions/units and College.

Corcorans highly unusual memo comes in the midst of contentious reform at New College. The public honors college made national headlines in January when Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed six new members to the schools board of trustees with a mandate to overhaul the school by offering a more classical education.

Critics of DeSantis, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, have rallied around the schools students and faculty, decrying the use of the school as a backdrop for the states culture wars.

Faculty union president and chemistry professor Steven Shipman said Corcorans latest move may have violated the schools collective bargaining agreement with faculty, which requires that tenure applicants get five days to respond to any new material added to their applications.

The memo exacerbates faculty leaders concerns over Corcorans involvement in the tenure process. Tenure protects faculty from political meddling in their research, teaching and activities outside the classroom and it is increasingly being scrutinized in Florida.

These cases are going to be viewed as important indicators of how faculty will be treated going forward, Shipman said. I expect there will be dramatic changes in how faculty respond to the vote.

Neither Corcoran nor New College of Florida representative Christie Fitz-Patrick returned multiple requests for comment.

The five tenure applications had already been approved by all levels of the schools academic administration, including Corcorans interim predecessor Bradley Thiessen and then-provost Suzanne Sherman. The only remaining step was approval by the schools board of trustees.

All five candidates are requesting tenure one year early an unusual distinction reserved for exceptional candidates or unusual circumstances. If their applications are deferred or denied at this months board meeting, they may still be eligible for tenure next year, Shipman said.

In his memo, Corcoran added that the tenure decision should be delayed due to recent turnover among trustees and school leaders. In January Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed six trustees in the pursuit of overhauling the struggling liberal arts school.

In their first meeting, the new trustees ousted former president Patricia Okker, making way for Corcoran to step in as interim president. Sherman, the former provost, also stepped down last month.

One of the DeSantis-appointed trustees, Emory University professor emeritus Mark Baurlein, said that neither Corcorans letter nor the changes in school administration should impact trustees evaluation of the candidates.

I am operating completely independently of Corcorans memo or anything else that is going on at New College, Bauerlein said, adding that he intends to take an active role in discussing the candidates merits for tenure with his fellow trustees.

Denial of early tenure is in no way prejudicial to how I would vote next year, he said.

Every Thursday, get the latest updates on whats happening in Tampa Bay area schools from Times education reporter Jeffrey S. Solochek. Click here to sign up.

Read more:
New College trustees asked to defer or deny tenure in new memo - Tampa Bay Times

Rishi Sunak

Portrayed as a Cameronite liberal, Sunak is in fact deeply conservative on everything from trans rights to refugees

It was one of the many strange quirks of the summer Tory leadership contest: that Liz Truss captured the mantle of the true blue Conservative while Rishi Sunak found himself painted as a wet, Cameronite liberal.

But in the past five months of his premiership, that portrayal of Sunak has started to become laughable. He is perhaps the most socially conservative prime minister of his generation, more so than Truss, Boris Johnson or even Theresa May.

Both his predecessors were happy to play to the Tory gallery on culture wars but Johnson as London mayor was a liberal on immigration and gay rights, and Truss was a stalwart at LGBTQ+ Conservative events, and as a student campaigned on drug legalisation.

May, who took a draconian approach to migration at the Home Office, also took a strong stance against stop and search, modern slavery and backed a ban on trans conversion practices.

There has been a tendency to see Sunaks focus on issues such as trans rights, grooming gangs and small boats as politically expedient ways for the formerly California-dwelling technocrat to win over his party.

Those close to him say that is demonstrably untrue. Far from being convenient red meat to the Tory members in the leadership election, his views on social issues such as gender, drugs, crime and migration are deeply conservative.

Sunak is said to be personally driven, in particular on the Equality Act and trans rights. He has taken a direct interest in Kemi Badenochs drive to change the Equality Act to allow organisations to bar trans women from single-sex spaces and events, including hospital wards and sports. It would redefine sex in the 2010 act to specifically refer to legal protections for biological sex.

No 10 sources have pointed out that was a formal pledge from Sunak from his leadership campaign, as well as one to review sex education material in schools. But, strikingly, it is one of the few pledges from that campaign that has survived. Others, such as fines for missing GP appointments, have been unceremoniously discarded.

There have been a number of other examples. Sunak gambled on vetoing Nicola Sturgeons gender recognition reform bill, and the prime minister is also thought to be taking a keen interest in the new guidance being considered for schools this term on transgender pupils, which would tell single-sex schools they cannot be obliged to admit trans students.

The number of pupils to which it will apply is likely to be negligible but it is the talk of certain circles since it was raised by the Girls Day School Trust, which runs 25 educational facilities in England and Wales. Sunaks daughters attend single-sex private schools.

The key area Sunak is exercised about is the rights of parents to be kept informed by the school on whether their child is questioning their gender identity, a move that some LGBTQ+ charities have said children may be keeping from their parents for good reason if they believe they are at risk from their own families.

But both Sunak and the education secretary, Gillian Keegan, are said to be determined that much higher regard is given to parental involvement and consent when it comes to pronouns, gender identity and sex education.

It is not just trans rights, which has become the unfortunate main battleground of the culture wars, where Sunak is demonstrating his deep social conservatism. He has made stopping the boats one of his five priorities and is set to make it virtually impossible for refugees to seek asylum in the UK apart from through an extremely narrow set of country-specific routes.

Again, this is not just the personal drive of Suella Braverman but of Sunak himself. Braverman, sacked just hours previously by Truss, was restored as home secretary as a price for backing Sunaks succession or so it was said. She was variably described as the shield behind which Sunak could hide his more liberal persuasions. That, again, now seems demonstrably untrue.

Sunak has been at the forefront of Bravermans drive on grooming gangs and although seemingly unwilling to echo her language, he has never disavowed it. It is another of the few pledges from his leadership campaign to have survived.

He also becomes obviously personally exercised on the subject of illegal drugs and is enthusiastic about banning nitrous oxide, calling the cannisters a scourge and promising a zero-tolerance approach.

Sunak may well reap some electoral rewards by trying to straddle both wings of the Conservative party leaning into his social conservatism, which is more in line with the perceived average traditional Conservative voter, and then advantaged in Liberal Democrat-leaning seats by being wrongly seen as a liberal.

Of course, the risk is that his enthusiasm for the culture wars backfires in the blue wall, while the economy tanks him in the red wall.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

More here:
Why Rishi Sunak may be the most socially conservative PM of his generation - The Guardian

Susan Stryker has a long list of titles and awards: first executive director of the GLBT Historical Society, winner of the Monette-Horowitz Prize for LGBTQ activism, and writer of books like Transgender History that are considered foundational to understanding trans history in the U.S.

Just before presenting a talk at Utah State University about trans history and its connection to our present, Stryker sat down to discuss her own history and how her works go from idea to reality.

I will find something thats interesting and go, how do I need to tell that story? Stryker said.

That strategy has led her to all sorts of mediums, from books to art to filmmaking, the last of which she had to teach herself in order to co-create the Emmy-winning documentary Screaming Queens: The Riot at Comptons Cafeteria.

The documentary tells the story of Compton's Cafeteria, an all-night cafeteria in a poor inner-city San Francisco neighborhood where many trans women would gather at night. It was constantly raided by police, and one night in August 1966, they decided they had enough and fought back.

Its one of the first known acts of militant resistance to policing and incarceration on the part of queer people, three years before Stonewall, Stryker said. I thought, this is an amazing story, and I wanted to put it out to the widest possible audience.

With her background in academia, Stryker has also written a number of essays on the trans experience. Perhaps her most well-known is also one of her oldest: My Words to Victor Frankenstein Above the Village of Chamonix. The essay, which turns 30 years old in just a couple of months, connects the story of Frankensteins monster confronting its creator to the experiences of trans people.

I thought thats just a great metaphor for the relationship between transsexuality and medical authority, Stryker said. To say you are doing these things for your reason, and youre kind of horrified at the fact that we have our own life.

The essay, which like Frankensteins Monster is split into seemingly disparate sections monologue, theory, criticism, journal entry seeks to reclaim words like monster that have been used against trans people.

If you kind of invite it towards you, take it on, but transform it, and then redirect that energy, Stryker said, it's like, to me that feels much more powerful."

Stryker says that act of transformation also applies socially, politically and even aesthetically. Its about reinventing what were given and learning how to create ourselves.

Lets just call that modern art, you know? Stryker said. And to feel that sense of experimentation, of playfulness, of creative inquiry about ones own embodiment, and ones way of being in the world that to me just feels quite beautiful.

"My Words to Victor Frankenstein remains the most-read essay in the history of Duke Universitys queer journal, GLQ. Stryker says she never wouldve expected it at the time, thinking of it as a one-off for a conference, but is nonetheless happy to see it persist.

I like the fact that people are still reading that old piece and that it still seems to resonate, Stryker said. Now of course, there are some things when I read it, Im going like, Thats a really clunky line, or its like, Oh, I shouldnt have said it that way, I should have said it like this. But by and large, Im still really happy with it.

Looking forward, Stryker hopes to do more public-facing work, including an art film about Christine Jorgensen, a trans woman who was (incorrectly) called the first person to get sex reassignment surgery and who, despite world-wide fame, Stryker says is not well remembered today.

Currently, shes working on Changing Gender, a book about the evolution of gender in the U.S. from colonization to the present. And no matter what shes working on, she says she always wants to speak on trans history in the hopes of informing and improving the present.

"Ive got a public platform for expressing my ideas, and the fact that this is happening right at the moment when trans issues have become such a divisive, contested, polarized issue in the culture wars, Stryker said, I feel a lot of responsibility and obligation to speak out in this context and use whatever I know and have learned to try to make the quality of life for trans people better.

Read the original:
Queer theorist Susan Stryker reflects on 30 years of work in trans ... - Utah Public Radio