flounder19

flounder19 OP t1_jegcs7b wrote

This situation was the subject of a AP investigation previously.

Essentially, the marine decided to adopt an orphaned Afghan child despite her being given over to her next closest relatives. When the US pulled out of Afghanistan, he helped them escape under false pretenses. then once they arrived in america, he revealed that he had gotten an adoption order for the child in virginia (based on false testimony) and stole the kid.

637

flounder19 t1_jbgjn5a wrote

I think it's also important to bring up that you haven't failed as a parent just because your child tells a teacher about their gender identity before you. There are a lot of different reasons they might make that decision.

But you're definitely a failure of a parent if you reaction to finding out after-the-fact is getting enraged and demanding a law to compel the teacher to tell you before your kid is comfortable doing so.

34

flounder19 OP t1_jbfph6n wrote

That’s your interpretation. But my own feeling is that this kind of legislation just sends the message to kids in unsupportive households that they need to shoulder the burden secretly until they’re at least 18. And that kind of isolated feeling likely has an awful emotional toll on top of the other hardships of being a trans kid

8

flounder19 OP t1_jbf7zbr wrote

Because the freedom is focused on the child’s rights. The goal is creating a supportive environment where students can confide in teachers confidently. Otherwise kids in non-supportive homes have literally no one to turn to who won’t report back to their parents. Hell, even if a kids parents are supportive, they may still want to privately work through their gender identity before telling their parents.

6

flounder19 OP t1_jbf78ub wrote

Ironically there’s very little coverage/pushback for the dem sponsored bill to protect trans kids although it’s unlikely to pass. But id argue that the major wave of anti-trans legislation we’ve seen lately is a pushback against trans people becoming more comfortable & visible with their existing freedom. If these hills were a reaction to democrats overreaching they’d be rolling back recently passed laws. Instead, they’re taking away long-standing rights because people dared to exercise them

10

flounder19 OP t1_jbd6o4b wrote

  • HB619-FN - Sponsors: Roy (R), Spillane (R), McCarter (R), Verville (R), Notter (R), Seidel (R), Alicia Lekas (R), Love (R)
  • HB417-FN - Sponsor: Testerman (R)
  • HB368-FN - Sponsors: Cannon (D), MacKay (D), Moulton (D), Toll (D), Marjorie Smith (D), Schultz (D), Bouldin (D), Rung (D), Dutzy (D), Wilhelm (D), Watters (D), Perkins Kwoka (D)
19

flounder19 OP t1_jbbxdrz wrote

Possibly still trans people. It's not like the fight over gay rights was resolved in 10 years (it's still very much ongoing in some ways). And gay people are more common than trans people which helped humanize them to the opposition. A lot of people have never met anybody trans so they're extra susceptible to fear mongering about them

17