Who is Speaking at Tonight's Board Meeting?

Update 2: See comments for what I heard. But I did want to speak to one comment by reader, PCP.

It’s not spreading hate to question some of the current approach to transgender issues in our public schools. It’s important to hear all sides and not shut down people you disagree with or try to use the mob to out shout them. As a medical professional myself, I am very well aware that the science is certainly not settled on this yet people on here act like it is and any questioning if it must mean the person is spreading hate and a bigot.

I agree. You can support people and their existence and support them where they are. But when you are talking about children, there are many areas that may feel gray and unsure especially in terms of the science. PCP is right that there may be things to talk about and no one should be shouted down for that. 

The blog is going on hiatus for a bit (unless there is huge breaking news) so I will do a separate thread when I return. But issues around parent notification and the issue of sports should have a forum. It might be a difficult conversation but I think sometimes it feels like if you don't offer blind support, then you are not an ally. 

And that's just not true. But let's have that discussion soon.

Update 1:

Well, the word got out and there are many people speaking for trans/gender inclusive schools. The main list is full at 25, including me, and there are 14 people on the waitlist. I note that D1 candidate, Debbie Carlsen, is to speak and it will be on inclusive education. 

 end of update

I saw the Speakers list for tonight's Seattle School Board meeting wasn't even half-full so I signed up to speak (on the fiscal policy). I noted at my sign-up that one person was going to speak on "trans propoganda" which I thought odd. 

But now there are two people speaking on "concerns about curricula and policies," two on "public testimony" (a phrase I have NEVER seen as a topic) and one person on "repression/authoritarian atmosphere.

I'm glad I'm going after these people because if they are infiltrating the Board meeting to spread hate, I might have something to say. 

Could be interesting. 

Comments

Anonymous said…
On the Future of Seattle Schools Facebook page, one parent noted that speakers 2-6 are all anti-trans and anti-abortion. It was posted last night and since then there have been a number of comments from people wantingto sign up to speak on behalf of LGBTQ+ students. I'm glad you're also going to be there.

Proud Mom
alkimothership said…
Curious.. would that type of message / topic be given the floor for comment? I would hope there are guardrails, to use a phrase the board seems so fond of, to stop this from happening.
Oy said…
Melissa,

Thanks for your willingness to speak at the board meeting. You've been following the district for probably close to two decades and you bring an important perspective.
melspy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
PCP said…
It’s not spreading hate to question some of the current approach to transgender issues in our public schools. It’s important to hear all sides and not shut down people you disagree with or try to use the mob to out shout them. As a medical professional myself, I am very well aware that the science is certainly not settled on this yet people on here act like it is and any questioning if it must mean the person is spreading hate and a bigot. If you wonder why SPS is so dysfunctional, maybe it’s time to all look in the mirror.
Anonymous said…
Proud mom, two of them are anti-abortion (Daranciang and Schremm), there’s no indication that the others are. Even if they all were, I don’t think that should mean they’re not allowed to speak at SPS meetings.

I agree that referring to ‘Trans Propaganda’ was unnecessarily inflammatory and accusatory.

SPS Parent
MillenialObserver said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Just Saying said…
The Seattle School Board never approved Inclusive Curriculum. The curriculum was just brought into the schools.

Parents have a right to know what is being taught- especially when it comes to science.

Education is education. Students should be taught about the implications of taking hormones, early menopause, surgeries etc. related to gender affirming care. Asking scientific questions is not spreading hate.
As I mentioned in a tweet, legal counsel Greg Narver came forward before the testimony to talk about the First Amendment but stated that not all speech is protected as in the Board's Policy 1430. From watching on a screen, it appeared to me that the crowd was respectful even as they disagreed.

However, Rankin state before Narver that "some speakers will say hateful things but we love you." I can state that the speakers who are against trans rights certainly explained why - mostly on "scientific" grounds but I heard no hate speech. Those speakers uniformly said no one is born in the wrong body which I'm sure hurts for those who have that lived experience but I'm not sure I'd call that hateful.

Those speakers did use terms like "gender ideology,"mystical mantras" and claimed that it really teachers pushing this. Several speakers pushed back, saying their children told them when they were not even in school that they felt wrong in their bodies. There was "pronoun madness" and mention of a large march in Canada against the trans movement.

I was very unhappy to hear one speaker against trans people saying "it can be confused with mental illness." One speaker followed on that saying that "transition won't solve mental health issues."

One speaker said parents felt helpless if a child tells his/her/their teacher about these feelings because parents think CPS will be called if they refuse to believe their child even if the teacher does. She said it was "a belief system."

One supporter said that there was nothing in the strategic plan or SOFG for support for these students. Indeed there is nothing for any LGBTQ student but a new strategic plan is to be written so it's possible things might change.

Another speaker, Michele Campbell, could not say enough nice things about SOFG which I found odd.

Of special interest to me was what Chris Jackins had to say. He told the Board they needed to get rid of "their consultant" AJ Crabill. Chris is direct but this was quite blunt. He also said the "principles" being set forward for the next BEX VI levy are not good. (I saw the survey and I agree. Who writes this verbose yet vague stuff?)
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Floor Pie said…
We certainly had our ups and downs with SPS when my oldest (class of '22) was enrolled there, but the high school's unapologetically welcoming environment for LGBTQ, supported by SPS's policies, was (maybe literally) a life saver. Even with supportive parents, it takes a village. I'm beyond grateful that that village was there for my kid.

I agree that "it's not spreading hate to ask questions." But when those questions are poised to chip away at policies that are there to protect and support vulnerable trans kids, I guess I can see how one might jump to such conclusions
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Who Is A. J. Crabill (and why should you care)?

Upcoming Seattle School Board Candidate Forum