Right. There's a lot of ripple effects that something like this will cause, including the possibility of some that people may not even see coming. Teachers as a whole have limited influence to make things better themselves, even with the best of intentions and desire to see students succeed. It's a dilemma, but I can't possibly imagine any world in which tightening the leash even more somehow makes things better.
I see where you're coming from here. I do want to point out that grouping They'Them and Zhe/Zhem is somewhat erroneous--the former is much more common than the latter, and is used mainly by non-binary people (people that don't strongly identify with either gender). I have several non-binary friends, just as I have several trans friends, but I've never met a single person who uses any other pronouns. Again--live and let live. It doesn't bother me if someone wants to be referred to as just "them", and in practice it's really not a big deal at all.
Conservative media likes to group all alternate pronouns together--they'them, she/her, zhey/zhem, ze/zim, xer/xers, etc etc etc because it paints anyone who uses any alternate pronouns as delusional, regardless of how uncommon other pronouns actually are. It might seem nitpicky to point that out, but it really is a very important distinction. Just like how progressive media likes to equate all Trump supporters to Nazis. It's the same fallacious strategy, just on the other side of the coin, and just as erroneous.
Absolutely--ideas planted in children's heads can have lasting impacts on how they see the world when they get older. In your case especially, using a "live and let live" philosophy seems to be the best solution--let kids be kids. If they make gender based decisions when they're older and understand the weight behind it then that's fine, but there's no need to flood their brains with that kind of stuff now. Part of it, as well, is due to gender ideology being such a comparatively new concept that we're still feeling things out, like long-term effects for instance.
This is another instance of something blown out of proportion by conservative media. The vast majority of elementary schools are not implementing any kind of gender-based teachings (and I speak from experience, having grown up and around a very blue state with family still teaching there), and in middle and high school teachers are mindful about how they teach those things.
The drag queen thing was likely conceived as a media stunt designed to ruffle feathers and piss off conservative news outlets, which it succeeded in spectacularly. That kind of thing happening doesn't happen for virtually any other purpose.
Of course. Abortion remains perhaps one of the touchiest issues of all, and people on both sides feel very strongly about it. The biggest concern I have about P25's implementation of abortion restrictions is because it doesn't account for the very case-by-case nature of abortions. More and more conservative legislature potentially endangers life itself by refusing abortions even when the mother's safety is at stake. This isn't something P25 cares about--in the manifesto, abortion is demonized as a liberal ritual, something that needs to be thrown out and shunned. I'm simplifying here, of course, but the problem remains--applying a universal, unyielding issue to a complex problem is asking for trouble, regardless of any moralistic debates.
Of course, by very nature, conservatism emphasizes a smaller central government (state decision) whilst progressivism emphasizes a stronger central government (national decision), so you're going to see fluctuations depending on any person's ideology.
And birth control and proper education are truly invaluable tools for preventing the need for abortion in the first place. Unfortunately, Project 2025 has sections about limiting access to contraception and birth control, which sort of shoots this point in the foot with no real viable replacement.
The reason I try my hardest to stay politically neutral is because it offers the clearest lens into objectivity. The farther one sways to either side, the harder it is to maintain a purely objective standpoint--something I've witnessed both around me and by personal experience time and time again. I do hope that someday others will see that too, but with each coming President focusing so hard on undoing everything the last guy did, that seems to be an unlikely possibility. And with increasingly aggressive legislature (P25 being the most prominent but far from the only example) true understanding from one side of the aisle to the other remains ever elusive. Someday that could change, but until then I'll continue being the best voice of reason I can.
Thank you for pursuing a well-thought out conversation in this screaming match of a forum!
