Washington SB 5180 — Enshrining gender ideology into schools?

cloven hooves Women of the World Unite! America North America Washington SB 5180 — Enshrining gender ideology into schools?

Washington SB 5180 — Enshrining gender ideology into schools?

Washington SB 5180 — Enshrining gender ideology into schools?

Clover
Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

636

Feb 6 2025, 7:38 PM

#1

I got an email from some politician in my state that mentioned:

Quote:SB 5180 ensures school districts follow state law allowing students to use facilities, be addressed by their preferred pronouns, participate in activities according to their gender identity, and more.

Official bill info here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/BillSummary/?BillNumber=5180&Year=2025&Initiative=false

On the state government website they just write "Securing the rights of students to have a safe, civil, and respectful learning community." which I found rather "sneaky", because if you open the document you'll read:

SB 5180 AN ACT Relating to securing the rights of students to have a safe, civil, and respectful learning community that is free of discrimination by ensuring all schools adopt and enforce gender inclusive protections, policies, and procedures;

I posted this on Ovarit with the hopes that maybe there was already action on this item, but so far no additional info.

I'll try to reach out to WoLF and WDI USA and possibly some local groups like Sovereign Women Speak to see if there's any call-in or letter-writing campaigns against this or not. And I'll try to remember to update here if I find something.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Clover

Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

Feb 6 2025, 7:38 PM #1

I got an email from some politician in my state that mentioned:

Quote:SB 5180 ensures school districts follow state law allowing students to use facilities, be addressed by their preferred pronouns, participate in activities according to their gender identity, and more.

Official bill info here: https://app.leg.wa.gov/BillSummary/?BillNumber=5180&Year=2025&Initiative=false

On the state government website they just write "Securing the rights of students to have a safe, civil, and respectful learning community." which I found rather "sneaky", because if you open the document you'll read:

SB 5180 AN ACT Relating to securing the rights of students to have a safe, civil, and respectful learning community that is free of discrimination by ensuring all schools adopt and enforce gender inclusive protections, policies, and procedures;

I posted this on Ovarit with the hopes that maybe there was already action on this item, but so far no additional info.

I'll try to reach out to WoLF and WDI USA and possibly some local groups like Sovereign Women Speak to see if there's any call-in or letter-writing campaigns against this or not. And I'll try to remember to update here if I find something.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Shroom

28

Feb 8 2025, 11:11 AM

#2

(Feb 6 2025, 7:38 PM)Clover I got an email from some politician in my state that mentioned:

Quote:SB 5180 ensures school districts follow state law allowing students to use facilities, be addressed by their preferred pronouns, participate in activities according to their gender identity, and more.

This could absolutely be unintentional wording and not actually mean anything, but WOW is it manipulative to say the bill "[allows] students to... be addressed by their preferred pronouns", as if pronouns are, like, a fruit cup at the cafeteria that meanie gender criticals are stopping them from putting on their lunch tray. What a way to phrase "this bill forces school staff to verbally support students' sexist identities and follow the rules of their beliefs, regardless of how they feel about it, or risk being fired" JFC.

Don't get me wrong, using "allow" for the other (worse) issues glosses over human rights violations just as much, it's just reading "this allows students to have their sexist beliefs affirmed and catered to by adults!" really broke my brain lol. Like, at least there is a genuine aspect of permission ("allowance") involved with female-only spaces, but this bill straight up said "we're kindly ~allowing~ school staff to be forced to use inaccurate language by law" as if it's currently impossible for TRA teachers to say trans-identified kids' preferred names and pronouns for fear of being raided by the Gender Critical Police or something.

(Feb 6 2025, 7:38 PM)Clover I'll try to reach out to WoLF and WDI USA and possibly some local groups like Sovereign Women Speak to see if there's any call-in or letter-writing campaigns against this or not. And I'll try to remember to update here if I find something.

Thank you so much for doing something about this and sharing that you did! It's a small thing but it really helps break up the endless depressing-news-posting scroll and not make things seem hopeless. Looking forward to helping out if I can!

Shroom

Feb 8 2025, 11:11 AM #2

(Feb 6 2025, 7:38 PM)Clover I got an email from some politician in my state that mentioned:

Quote:SB 5180 ensures school districts follow state law allowing students to use facilities, be addressed by their preferred pronouns, participate in activities according to their gender identity, and more.

This could absolutely be unintentional wording and not actually mean anything, but WOW is it manipulative to say the bill "[allows] students to... be addressed by their preferred pronouns", as if pronouns are, like, a fruit cup at the cafeteria that meanie gender criticals are stopping them from putting on their lunch tray. What a way to phrase "this bill forces school staff to verbally support students' sexist identities and follow the rules of their beliefs, regardless of how they feel about it, or risk being fired" JFC.

Don't get me wrong, using "allow" for the other (worse) issues glosses over human rights violations just as much, it's just reading "this allows students to have their sexist beliefs affirmed and catered to by adults!" really broke my brain lol. Like, at least there is a genuine aspect of permission ("allowance") involved with female-only spaces, but this bill straight up said "we're kindly ~allowing~ school staff to be forced to use inaccurate language by law" as if it's currently impossible for TRA teachers to say trans-identified kids' preferred names and pronouns for fear of being raided by the Gender Critical Police or something.

(Feb 6 2025, 7:38 PM)Clover I'll try to reach out to WoLF and WDI USA and possibly some local groups like Sovereign Women Speak to see if there's any call-in or letter-writing campaigns against this or not. And I'll try to remember to update here if I find something.

Thank you so much for doing something about this and sharing that you did! It's a small thing but it really helps break up the endless depressing-news-posting scroll and not make things seem hopeless. Looking forward to helping out if I can!

YesYourNigel

113

Feb 9 2025, 4:28 PM

#3

(Feb 8 2025, 11:11 AM)Shroom WOW is it manipulative to say the bill "[allows] students to... be addressed by their preferred pronouns", as if pronouns are, like, a fruit cup at the cafeteria that meanie gender criticals are stopping them from putting on their lunch tray.

Right? Not even the meanest angriest anti-transers are trying to make it illegal to willingly call someone by the wrong pronouns. Yes, for something like women's bathrooms, men are explicitly barred from them, but roleplaying that you or someone else is the opposite sex? Um...okay?

Gender nonconforming people do experience pushback, but that's due to patriarchal gender hierarchies (though sometimes it's people just being weirded out by dysfunctional terminally-online behaviour but we'll focus on genuine cases) and this whole genderfuckery crowd would make a lot more progress if they acknowledged this fact staring them in the face, instead of inventing these bizarre inconsistent systems of oppression on the basis of gendersouls and arbitrary English-language third-person pronouns, which results in this completely misguided persecution complex where they're convinced everyone is so shocked and outraged by their daring genderfuckery that they're trying to burn them at the stake for...wearing she/they pins or calling themselves oreo-gender in their Tumblr bio. And the problem with Trump and his ilk isn't in him trying to bring back 60's gender roles in full force, but rather in not agreeing that your shiny special gendersoul should let you opt out of that cuz you're too special and avant-garde and that's not really your scene 😎

Edited Feb 9 2025, 10:55 PM by YesYourNigel.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

YesYourNigel

Feb 9 2025, 4:28 PM #3

(Feb 8 2025, 11:11 AM)Shroom WOW is it manipulative to say the bill "[allows] students to... be addressed by their preferred pronouns", as if pronouns are, like, a fruit cup at the cafeteria that meanie gender criticals are stopping them from putting on their lunch tray.

Right? Not even the meanest angriest anti-transers are trying to make it illegal to willingly call someone by the wrong pronouns. Yes, for something like women's bathrooms, men are explicitly barred from them, but roleplaying that you or someone else is the opposite sex? Um...okay?

Gender nonconforming people do experience pushback, but that's due to patriarchal gender hierarchies (though sometimes it's people just being weirded out by dysfunctional terminally-online behaviour but we'll focus on genuine cases) and this whole genderfuckery crowd would make a lot more progress if they acknowledged this fact staring them in the face, instead of inventing these bizarre inconsistent systems of oppression on the basis of gendersouls and arbitrary English-language third-person pronouns, which results in this completely misguided persecution complex where they're convinced everyone is so shocked and outraged by their daring genderfuckery that they're trying to burn them at the stake for...wearing she/they pins or calling themselves oreo-gender in their Tumblr bio. And the problem with Trump and his ilk isn't in him trying to bring back 60's gender roles in full force, but rather in not agreeing that your shiny special gendersoul should let you opt out of that cuz you're too special and avant-garde and that's not really your scene 😎

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

Recently Browsing
2 Guest(s)

Recently Browsing
2 Guest(s)