Wall Street Journal on Gender Storytime in Montgomery County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it wrong to read picture books with ethnically diverse characters? What is the difference.

YES. White Christian straight characters only. MAGA.

People who are role models like Pete Hegseth and JD Vance. I’d have said Steven Miller but he’s Jewish, so not worthy of being a role model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WaPo's opinion section just published a piece critical of MCPS:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/04/23/supreme-court-montgomery-county-mahmoud-taylor/

Here's a key fair-use excerpt:

But forcing children to read books that contravene their family’s faith suppresses diversity in the name of saving it. The district should have maintained the opt-out and, having made the mistake of rescinding it, should have restored it after parents protested. Instead, time and money were wasted defending a lawsuit. Those resources would have been better used to improve the quality of education for all Montgomery County students, regardless of what they believe.

My God. The editorial and the quotes from the Supreme Court make MCPS look and sound absolutely ridiculous. How embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never once seen an example of a book that was actually being read in class that was actually offensive. The examples they have in the lawsuit seemed to be books that were on lists to possibly be read but no one ever seemed to say “yes my kids second grade teacher is reading this.”
It just seems like a huge non issue.

+1

Not one of these books was ever used in the classroom

The people are lying. They don't even have kids in public school. This lawsuit is absurd.

SCOTUS will give them this win God help all of us. It is not going to end well. UGH

That’s not true. My DD’s 4th grade class had to read the Boy Named Penelope book. I think that book is absolutely ridiculous and dangerous.

Huh? What on earth is "dangerous" about it? I've read it, it's a simple kids book about a kid who's trans... It honestly seems fine even for 5 year olds let alone 4th graders, nothing about genitals or sex or anything else folks might think is age-inappropriate, just a little trans kid being a kid. I can't imagine anything offensive or problematic about it, unless you don't think kids should know that trans kids exist? And even then, dangerous suggests someone could somehow be hurt by it and unless your kid is such a fragile snowflake you think they're going to collapse upon learning of the existence of trans kids (super weird if so), how could a book like this possibly hurt anyone?

I think the argument people are having here is about: do you think kids can change their gender just by thinking it is so, and do you think we should teach them about it. I think there is a reasonable difference of opinion on this.

Correct. This is one of the main arguments that LGBTQ advocates insist is truth and must be accepted by all as truth that the silent majority is resisting.

"silent majority"?

LOL, no.

+100000. I don’t think you can change your gender by thinking you’re a different gender. Plenty of people agree with me. The transgender movement is odd and I don’t know how we got here. I don’t want to discriminate against transgender kids but I also don’t want to teach young children that this is normal behavior. In my opinion, it’s often girls who 50 years ago would be a tom boy.

Hardly. The shift that freaks so many of these people out is boys who decide they are girls. THAT is the thing that freaks conservatives out. You never hear them talking about trans boys. It's all a huge freak out about trans girls.

If you ask me, all of this is the fault of the MAGA/Trumper idiots. THEY brought this very small group of people to the forefront to scapegoat them and use them to whip the conservative haters into a frenzy. Same things with immigrants. It's their typical divisive sh*t to use people's prejudices and demonize a vulnerable group for their own political gain. On the other side, people find this demonization of vulnerable groups so repulsive (fittingly) that they go hard in the other direction in an attempt to defend people they think are vulnerable.

So if you don't like having to talk about trans people all the time, go tell the MAGA morons who won't let it rest.

NP. This is just demonstrably untrue. Rapid onset gender dysphoria amongst groups of teenage girls caused by social contagion is a widely-documented phenomena which many people across the ideological spectrum regularly voice concerns about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it wrong to read picture books with ethnically diverse characters? What is the difference.

Go read Boy Named Penelope. It’s not a book that’s trying to stay neutral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside the emotional aspect of this argument, there is a link to the briefs filed by MCPS and the Plaintiffs. I'm not a lawyer, but it's a fascinating read.

MCPS Opposition to Writ of Certiorari:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-297/335502/20241218150621210_24-297%20-%20Mahmoud%20v.%20Taylor%20-%20Brief%20in%20Opposition.pdf

Plaintiffs Argument for Writ of Certiorari:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-297/336156/20241227173322003_Mahmoud%20Cert%20Reply%20FINAL.pdf

Link to the Documents filed with the case, including various amicus briefs and other replies by MCPS and plaintiffs:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docket/docketfiles/html/public%5C24-297.html

Looks like the question is if the inclusion of these books is just exposing students to ideas that are at odds with their religious beliefs, or if these books are part of an effort by MCPS to instruct students to think a specific way about gender and sexuality.

Interesting read. This is in MCPS's filing in the first link above:

At first, teachers and principals sought to accommodate these requests by excusing students when the
books were read in class. The growing number of opt-out requests, however, gave rise to
three related concerns: high student absenteeism, the infeasibility of administering opt-outs across classrooms
and schools, and the risk of exposing students who believe the storybooks represent them and their families
to social stigma and isolation.

I'm no lawyer so I have no idea about the legal side of this. But from a practical standpoint, if they are getting flooded with opt-out requests, maybe they should listen to such a large number of parents and just not read those books in class? Aren't they supposed to serve the interests of parents and their children? It would be one thing if it's 1 or 2 parents requesting it, but it sounds like a large number of parents opposed this.

(Also interesting MCPS is so concerned about student absenteeism in this situation and not other situations, but that's for another thread.)

But where does that end? What if the majority of families didn't want their kids exposed to any books that have gay people in them? People of color? Disabled people? Should schools just leave all those sorts of people out of books too? Besides being both morally and educationally problematic, that's also harmful to kids from those groups if they don't ever see people like them represented in school materials... avoiding books like that isn't a neutral choice, it's taking sides.

If a majority of families want X, the school system should probably do X. The schools are there to serve the parents and their children. We have an elected BOE, and open board meetings for this reason -- so the community can provide their input and the majority can vote for people who will steer the school system in the direction of the will of the people.

Unfortunately, the BOE does not know what its role or purpose is. It's disturbing how disconnected from the community MCPS and the BOE are.

I could not agree with this post more. And not just about these novels. The BOE repeatedly shows they don’t understand their role and fail to provide appropriate oversight of MCPS.

[Anonymous]

I am primarily on MCPS’s side here but I think they screwed the pooch with a couple of the books. But Alito having no freaking clue about Uncle Bobby’s Wedding? Good lord he is dumb as a box of rocks.

https://www.rawstory.com/samuel-alito-2671834188/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside the emotional aspect of this argument, there is a link to the briefs filed by MCPS and the Plaintiffs. I'm not a lawyer, but it's a fascinating read.

MCPS Opposition to Writ of Certiorari:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-297/335502/20241218150621210_24-297%20-%20Mahmoud%20v.%20Taylor%20-%20Brief%20in%20Opposition.pdf

Plaintiffs Argument for Writ of Certiorari:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-297/336156/20241227173322003_Mahmoud%20Cert%20Reply%20FINAL.pdf

Link to the Documents filed with the case, including various amicus briefs and other replies by MCPS and plaintiffs:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docket/docketfiles/html/public%5C24-297.html

Looks like the question is if the inclusion of these books is just exposing students to ideas that are at odds with their religious beliefs, or if these books are part of an effort by MCPS to instruct students to think a specific way about gender and sexuality.

Interesting read. This is in MCPS's filing in the first link above:

At first, teachers and principals sought to accommodate these requests by excusing students when the
books were read in class. The growing number of opt-out requests, however, gave rise to
three related concerns: high student absenteeism, the infeasibility of administering opt-outs across classrooms
and schools, and the risk of exposing students who believe the storybooks represent them and their families
to social stigma and isolation.

I'm no lawyer so I have no idea about the legal side of this. But from a practical standpoint, if they are getting flooded with opt-out requests, maybe they should listen to such a large number of parents and just not read those books in class? Aren't they supposed to serve the interests of parents and their children? It would be one thing if it's 1 or 2 parents requesting it, but it sounds like a large number of parents opposed this.

(Also interesting MCPS is so concerned about student absenteeism in this situation and not other situations, but that's for another thread.)

But where does that end? What if the majority of families didn't want their kids exposed to any books that have gay people in them? People of color? Disabled people? Should schools just leave all those sorts of people out of books too? Besides being both morally and educationally problematic, that's also harmful to kids from those groups if they don't ever see people like them represented in school materials... avoiding books like that isn't a neutral choice, it's taking sides.

If a majority of families want X, the school system should probably do X. The schools are there to serve the parents and their children. We have an elected BOE, and open board meetings for this reason -- so the community can provide their input and the majority can vote for people who will steer the school system in the direction of the will of the people.

Unfortunately, the BOE does not know what its role or purpose is. It's disturbing how disconnected from the community MCPS and the BOE are.

I could not agree with this post more. And not just about these novels. The BOE repeatedly shows they don’t understand their role and fail to provide appropriate oversight of MCPS.

Novels?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has gone overboard with the LGBTQ stuff. My middle school-aged daughter commented once that she felt they were trying to turn the kids gay. I'm being 100% real here.

It grooming , plain and simple.

You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Fine, it’s indoctrination.

Forced indoctrination. DP

+1 it's disgusting.

I am an atheist so nothing to do with religion, but pushing LGBTQ agenda on elementary school kids is just sick.

100%. I have kids in MCPS elementary and middle school - also an atheist. It is sick.

I think you both need to take a hard look in the mirror, and think about why you think it's "disgusting" or "sick" to include books about people who are different from you in a school curriculum where students will come from all different family types, and will be feeling all different things, and might just see themselves in some of these books.

And please educate yourselves. Gay and trans kids are the ones who get kicked out of the house and live on the streets, who self medicate with drugs and alcohol, who kill themselves at significantly higher rates, etc., etc. These kids need to know they are not alone, and that most people don't consider them "sick" or "disgusting."

Yah, 5 year old gay and tans kids? It's just disgusting that this gay, trans, sex parade idea gets pushed into 5 years old elementary school kids. Keep this for high school.

We had one Gay parent pushing their kid for this as early as K in Richard Montomery cluster( Bell Elementary). Now the same parent wanted everyone else to normalize the idea that 5 years old should be thinking about Gay, trans etc.

It's just sick. Trying to indoctrinate 5 years old kids for this is not helping any kid, it's destoying the life. I felt so sorry that little kid.

It's one thing to realize your sexual orientation when you grow up. But totally another to be indoctrinated by LGBTQ lobby in elementary school and have your life destroyed. Worse it's done by their own parents.

Often it’s the parents pushing it at that age.

It's mostly the parents and their circle otherwise a 5 year kid is not going to start thinking about becoming tran and gay.

Talk about living in a bubble - tell me you don't know any gay people without telling me you don't know any gay people!

Gay people don't "become gay," and certainly didnt change because of exposre to other gay people: they are born that way, the same way you are born tall or short, or with brown eyes or green eyes, or curly hair or straight hair, or white skin or dark skin, etc., etc., etc.

I am a cis, white, female, and my gay friends knew they were gay long before elementary school. And many of them thought something was wrong with them, or they were sick, or evil, because of who they were. They were scared, and anxious and suicidal.

By having books that shows different people, including lgbtq+ people, you allow these kids to exist without the terror and fear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WaPo's opinion section just published a piece critical of MCPS:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/04/23/supreme-court-montgomery-county-mahmoud-taylor/

Here's a key fair-use excerpt:

But forcing children to read books that contravene their family’s faith suppresses diversity in the name of saving it. The district should have maintained the opt-out and, having made the mistake of rescinding it, should have restored it after parents protested. Instead, time and money were wasted defending a lawsuit. Those resources would have been better used to improve the quality of education for all Montgomery County students, regardless of what they believe.

My God. The editorial and the quotes from the Supreme Court make MCPS look and sound absolutely ridiculous. How embarrassing.

+100000 and it only encourages support of the MAGA movement. Social issues that are completely ridiculous and it’s challenging to choose to side with crazies who support indoctrinating young kids. I think your average liberal person on here has been de synthesized about the trans movement. Consider how weird it would be 20 years ago if someone read a book to kids about becoming a different gender as a child. It would bring complete confusion and would be considered child abuse and perverse. Now it’s happening as a part of the school curriculum in certain school districts.

I wish this craziness would stop so we don’t have to keep electing candidates like Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it wrong to read picture books with ethnically diverse characters? What is the difference.

YES. White Christian straight characters only. MAGA.

People who are role models like Pete Hegseth and JD Vance. I’d have said Steven Miller but he’s Jewish, so not worthy of being a role model.

You realize the people protesting and asking for the opt out are like Muslim and Africans right? Lol. Dang Muslim and African white Christian nationalists. The white Christian nationalist movement seems to be one of the most diverse in the nation at this point. Muslims, Africans, Latino immigrants, etc. diversity is white Christian maga nationalists strength!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Who you want to have sex with is your choice, jsut keep it out of elemnatry schools.

If a fairytale where the prince marries the knight is about sex, then so is the story where the prince marries the princess.

Seriously. Do you folks not get it? You can't just say that schools should only have books with white straight cis abled people in them, because those are "neutral" and everything else is "controversial"/"pushing an agenda."

And the opt-out stuff is ridiculous. Do you think racist parents should also be notified and get the option to opt out every time a book is read that has an inter-racial couple or a person of color doing something that's "not their place" because they don't want the schools pushing a "race mixing agenda" on their kids? What about super-religious families who think a woman's place is in the home-- should they be notified of books where women hold jobs or where a wife (or child) speaks up rather than being submissive to the husband as the head of the household, and get to opt out to avoid exposing their kids to the school's "feminist agenda"?

So we have to show kindergartners that leather fetish gear exists? Are there zero boundaries in your world?

This is a strawman because none of the books in question show fetishist gear. You can go watch that YouTube link showing Pride Puppy. The leash and leather both refers to the dog's leash. Leather appears in a vocabulary list on the last page along with dozens of other words. There is no depiction of leather fetish gear in any of the images or text.

Wrong. This is factually untrue. Go read Grandad’s pride which is being taught to elementary school students in MD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Who you want to have sex with is your choice, jsut keep it out of elemnatry schools.

If a fairytale where the prince marries the knight is about sex, then so is the story where the prince marries the princess.

Seriously. Do you folks not get it? You can't just say that schools should only have books with white straight cis abled people in them, because those are "neutral" and everything else is "controversial"/"pushing an agenda."

And the opt-out stuff is ridiculous. Do you think racist parents should also be notified and get the option to opt out every time a book is read that has an inter-racial couple or a person of color doing something that's "not their place" because they don't want the schools pushing a "race mixing agenda" on their kids? What about super-religious families who think a woman's place is in the home-- should they be notified of books where women hold jobs or where a wife (or child) speaks up rather than being submissive to the husband as the head of the household, and get to opt out to avoid exposing their kids to the school's "feminist agenda"?

So we have to show kindergartners that leather fetish gear exists? Are there zero boundaries in your world?

This is a strawman because none of the books in question show fetishist gear. You can go watch that YouTube link showing Pride Puppy. The leash and leather both refers to the dog's leash. Leather appears in a vocabulary list on the last page along with dozens of other words. There is no depiction of leather fetish gear in any of the images or text.

Wrong. This is factually untrue. Go read Grandad’s pride which is being taught to elementary school students in MD.

That isn't one of the books at issue here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The minority here is the religious people who need special circumstances.

MCPS claimed so many people wanted the opt out that it was too difficult to manage, so they stopped offering the opt out. That suggests it wasn't a small minority.

They said it was dozens. That is a small minority.

Dozens in each grade level, out of a grade level of approximately 100-120. A substantial percentage, in other words.

This was discussed in oral argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never once seen an example of a book that was actually being read in class that was actually offensive. The examples they have in the lawsuit seemed to be books that were on lists to possibly be read but no one ever seemed to say “yes my kids second grade teacher is reading this.”
It just seems like a huge non issue.

So you have been to every single classroom in the entire county

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it wrong to read picture books with ethnically diverse characters? What is the difference.

YES. White Christian straight characters only. MAGA.

People who are role models like Pete Hegseth and JD Vance. I’d have said Steven Miller but he’s Jewish, so not worthy of being a role model.

You realize the people protesting and asking for the opt out are like Muslim and Africans right? Lol. Dang Muslim and African white Christian nationalists. The white Christian nationalist movement seems to be one of the most diverse in the nation at this point. Muslims, Africans, Latino immigrants, etc. diversity is white Christian maga nationalists strength!

And once Becket has used them for cover, they’ll still be rounded up and deported. The white Christian nationalist movement that funded this movement is just waiting to get rid of books about Muslims and Africans and now they’ve been given the opportunity to do so. By Muslims and Africans. Who I hope enjoy reading books about white Christian men.