You need to parse this stuff very, very carefully. There are many in the media with huge vested interest and record of misrepresentation. Starting from the "don't say gay" framing itself.
I'm quite willing to believe many on the Republican side are going to try to use this sort of thing to push their ideology, and I can well imagine any of this stuff getting misused, but there is a problem that needs addressing. Whether this addresses it well, I dunno.
One of the repeated themes has been trying to work around curriculum rules by trying to shoehorn gender stuff into pretty much every other subject, so that it escapes established rules on sex education. At first sight this seems to be closing that loophole - previously a "don't cover sex education stuff in lessons other than sex education" rule didn't seem necessary... Is the stuff about "reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" the existing general policy there - are such lessons already mandated as optional?
It's generally useful to try to find the actual text of any bill being discussed. Whenever I have, usually they're far more considered, nuanced and reasonable than any media discussion.