Disney backlash by LGBT employees

[TheBurmundseyIndustrialEstate]

Disney has been very supportive of LGBT rights up to this point but it has decided to back a bill in Florida that would ban LGBT teaching to children in kindergarten.
Most of it’s customers are parents of that age group and they must realise that it is what most of them agree with and want.
There are walkouts planned in Disney Florida by LGBT staff and the corporation is being painted as being anti gay and LGBT.
I can’t think of many large corporations that have publicly stood up against the trans lobby are prepared to endure the backlash.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60842337.amp

It's very disingenuous to say that most parents agree with the new law.

It means teachers could be sued by parents if they explain to a class- up to grade 3 - that some people are gay. Very shitty when some of those kids will have gay parents, relatives or grow up to be gay themselves.

Just because some people might be okay with the T part doesn't mean the legislation as a whole is anything other than wildly discriminatory, and puts teachers in a horribly vulnerable position.

You have misinterpreted the article. Disney don't support the bill, they have been silent about it. The striking employees want Disney to actively oppose the bill.

And it's not just about trans, it's LGB too.

It’s not just kindergarten age, it’s up to the age of ten. And the bill bans any discussion of families with same-sex parents, of gay relationships generally, not just trans conversations.

I argued hard against Section 28, and I saw what that did to teachers and young people in the UK at the time. People don’t stop being gay just because you pretend they don’t exist.

This is the problem with LGBT as a label. The T is v different from the LGB. Unfortunately activists for the T part of it are dragging LGB people backwards, as this proposed legislation seems to illustrate.

Can you give us an example of the “LBGT “ teaching that is happening ? Seems these the days it is all about the T so perhaps a little scrutiny would be worth while. Some parents may well agree with some of the law. If no discrimination is happening to the employees at Disney then why would they have a case for complaint?

Cross posted with MrsP but agree that we are being dragged backwards by the T

The bill would ban age-appropriate discussion for kids under 10. For little kids the sort of education they get is more about friendships and bullying, not picking on people who are different. And as part of that, families come in all shapes and sizes, some children live with their gran, some have two mums. Except under this legislation you couldn’t say the last bit. I haven’t heard so much about what the impact would be for teaching teenagers but can’t imagine it’s going to be good.

It makes increasingly little sense to group T(QIALMNOP+) with LGB. Even the official Stonewall line is that gender and sexuality are entirely unrelated (hence why a man with a penis can be a "lesbian"), so why on Earth do they insist on always lumping them together?

And the bill bans any discussion of families with same-sex parents, of gay relationships generally, not just trans conversations.

Where? Show me the wording.

I have a sense this is going to be a bit like a "show me where she said that" game, regarding JKR's essay.

Here's a link to the bill, if you want to read it.

Closest relevant text I can see is:

Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.

If you're claiming that "bans any discussion of families with same-sex parents", surely it also bans any discussions of families with opposite-sex parents?

(I am interested to see if there's something I'm missing here - as far as I can see this is a "lots of people making up stuff about what something else says they haven't read" situation again. At the surface level this appears to be largely a straightforward pushback against all the sort of "roll two dice and figure out a way to use those body parts" type content...).

@NecessaryScene

And the bill bans any discussion of families with same-sex parents, of gay relationships generally, not just trans conversations.

Where? Show me the wording.

I have a sense this is going to be a bit like a "show me where she said that" game, regarding JKR's essay.

Here's a link to the bill, if you want to read it.

Closest relevant text I can see is:

Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.

If you're claiming that "bans any discussion of families with same-sex parents", surely it also bans any discussions of families with opposite-sex parents?

(I am interested to see if there's something I'm missing here - as far as I can see this is a "lots of people making up stuff about what something else says they haven't read" situation again. At the surface level this appears to be largely a straightforward pushback against all the sort of "roll two dice and figure out a way to use those body parts" type content...).

This bill is part of a pattern of bills pushed across the US to ban certain things happening in practice by making staff working in those areas so afraid of being sued that they won't engage with the topic at all.

It's exactly the same framework being used to sue doctors who provide access to abortion.

Most of these laws and structured and suggested by a far right lobby group in the US whose ultimate aims include the denigration of womens right to abortion. The passing of these laws is often accompanied by the setting up of reporting websites and funds to make it incredibly easy for anyone to sue people that they feel has broken the law.

But sure, you go ahead and ignore the context of how these laws, as they are passed, play out across America because technically the law doesn't say the exact words you can't say gay.

The reality is that once it is passed, no teacher will say gay for fear of being sued. Because they will be sued.

The reality is that once it is passed, no teacher will say gay for fear of being sued.

Possibly true, because a bunch of weird Democratic media outlets seem to have convinced them that it's a "don't say gay" bill...

And did you know that if you don't affirm kids' pronouns they commit suicide?

I am sorry but your ignorance is unreal. Look up ALEC - American Legislative Exchange Council.

That is where these laws come from. And they do not give a shit about women. The last few decades of trying relentlessly to overturn roe vs wade - so much of that is them.

They do not care about women. They are not your friends.

They do not care about women. They are not your friends.

Right? So why are the left so determined to empower them? Why was there no self-regulation here? Why are teachers so determined to teach age-inappropriate stuff that they're inviting people like that to come in and make laws?

A lot of the reason we're against all this gender idiocy is because of the backlash. This is a backlash coming in - and it was always inevitable.

I'm basically saying - you were going to be hit by something to stop it, and as somethings go, this isn't too bad. It might be the least worst option.

If the teachers wanted to respond by drawing up their own guidelines to convince the lawmakers that this wasn't necessary, that would be ideal. Are there any moves in that direction?

I mean, it's like puberty blockers. There are various outcomes you have to rank.

In order of preference, many people will rank thus:

1. Medics deciding themselves to not to give kids puberty blockers
2. Laws stopping medics giving kids puberty blockers
3. Medics giving kids puberty blockers

As they may think that even if law getting involved in medicine is a blunt tool, it's better than the worst option, which is sterlised kids.

If you think law is a blunt tool, there is a very easy way to avoid it - don't do the most controversial things driving the laws.

If you think the law will "stop you saying gay" and you "want to say gay", would it really be so hard to teach age-appropriately, so people don't bring in age-appropriate teaching laws that might, as collateral, stop you "saying gay"?

Or is there a determination to make it a culture war thing - you have to give kids puberty blockers and age-inappropriate teaching to piss off the bigots?

Why should Disney get involved? They are a private company specialising in theme parks. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the bill I don't see why it's within the remit of Disney execs to get involved in legislative discussions about education.

@MrsPaperclip

This is the problem with LGBT as a label. The T is v different from the LGB. Unfortunately activists for the T part of it are dragging LGB people backwards, as this proposed legislation seems to illustrate.

I'm really surprised that after decades of gay people campaigning for acceptance that they were 'born this way', 'natural' and 'not just a phase' they are now lending their support to an ideology that undermines that from the outset of children's lives, telling very young children that non-conservative-stereotypical behaviours or interests mean they may need medically 'fixing' into the opposite sex, that doctors made a 'mistake' when they 'assigned' a sex, rather than accepting as natural same-sex attraction and/or a wide bandwidth of behaviour, interests, dress and friendship groups.

@OvaHere

Why should Disney get involved? They are a private company specialising in theme parks. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the bill I don't see why it's within the remit of Disney execs to get involved in legislative discussions about education.

Indeed. They should not be involved. It's a very dangerous idea that they should be .

Agree @OvaHere, actually finding it increasingly frightening that it's going further this way.

'You must make statements denouncing anything that we don't like even if it's nothing to do with your business'.

@MichelleScarn

Agree *@OvaHere*, actually finding it increasingly frightening that it's going further this way. 'You must make statements denouncing anything that we don't like even if it's nothing to do with your business'.

Absolutely this. It's the expectation that everyone must constantly prove how Good and Right and Pure they are, all the time, in every sphere even with it has absolutely nothing to do with them - and will actually make no difference anyway.

It find it baffling and, frankly, worrying, that some people are so desperate to a) force companies to publicly declare their adherence to the latest Acceptable Truth, and b) desperately want to believe that gigantic capitalist companies are Nice People.

It is a ridiculously childish way of looking at the world.

It's similar to JKR and the vitriol being thrown at her, "you have this world of magic and sparkle which allows us to suspect reality and be do/whoever we want therefore you must never, ever deviate from this".

I was at school when Section 28 was in operation, I was taught about homosexuality etc, so I don't particularly buy into a lot of this faux outrage. Section 28 was misjudged legislation but it didn't do the damage that people falsely claim it did.

The Florida bill seems to be about age-appropriate education and is not a "don't say gay" as lobby groups try to make it out to be. People are angry because they will prevent 8 year olds from having lessons where they are told to pick a sexual orientation and gender.

There is more outrage over this bill then the "conversation therapy" bills being presented all over the world which will prosecute parents, teachers, medics etc if they didn't immediately affirm a child's new gender identity.

This is why LGB needs to distance itself from T.

There is a huge difference between teaching young kids that some people have two mummies or some men get married to other men, and teaching young kids that some people are born in the wrong body and that if you don't align with societies expectation of your sex, there is something wrong with you that can be 'corrected' by 'changing sex' with powerful drugs and surgery.

I'm as gender critical as they come but I'm totally opposed to laws like this - they are absolutely designed to stoke up hatred and suspicion of LGB as well as T people.

Preventing teachers from telling small children that they can change sex etc is much better done by guidance and proper leadership.

The Florida bill seems to be about age-appropriate education

Age 8-9 (perhaps 20 if kept back) is awfully late for basic sex education. I tend to agree that this is a bad bill aimed at limiting schools ability to teach about different families.

That said I think the idea that we want corporations lobbying for or against legislation is much more dystopian.

I'm as gender critical as they come but I'm totally opposed to laws like this - they are absolutely designed to stoke up hatred and suspicion of LGB as well as T people.

As are most feminists. I can't imagine many GC feminists (or even male-centring feminists) would support this nonsense.