Wall Street Journal on Gender Storytime in Montgomery County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the argument is based on religion, shouldn't then book about single parent families be banned, what about interfaith families? Which kind of diversity is allowed? It seems like 1 group of people gets to decide for all.

I think these are complex and nuanced things to debate and discuss. Unfortunately, MCPS and the BOE opted to not have this debate and discussion publicly, overruling the opinion of their elementary school principals who advised pushing this down to the elementary level was premature and would lead to problems.

Most surveys show that MCPS parents are ok with LGBT content at the secondary level, but there's great opposition at the elementary level, which is what this lawsuit and fight is about.

I understand that LGBTQ+ advocacy in primary school makes parents uncomfortable (it makes ME uncomfortable!), but when my son was in MCPS elementary, his 4th and 5th grade classes had a group of boys who kept picking on others and calling them gay. The administration, who was otherwise great at stopping individual bullies, struggled to reduce the general name-calling because it was like whack-a-mole. This was before the MCPS push to read such books in class. I think that advocacy might indeed create a kinder atmosphere at the upper elementary level, when kids are outgrowing their elementary school, adolescent hormones are starting to trigger some of them, and generally they're spoiling for a fight. It gets worse in middle school, but then better in high school, but at least middle schools are 3 year programs made to curtail preteens' Lord of the Flies instincts (and full of adults who have a calling to teach that age group, bless them). The outreach needs to start earlier.

My take is that we need to accept some things that make us uncomfortable, to instill greater kindness and tolerance.

- parent of high school and college kids.

That's fine that that's your take. But other parents don't share that POV and their voices were silenced in the debate because Lynne Harris and LGBTQ advocates wanted it that way.

Now, the consequences of that undemocratic approach is costing us time, energy and resources.

They weren't silenced. There was a steady stream of people disagreeing during public comments. Lynne's not on the board now, but the newly elected board members are also in favor of the current policy.

What does speaking at public comments accomplish with regard to delaying or modifying implementation of the policy? Those parents testified and the board routinely derided and ignored them. If I recall correctly, Lynne refused to meet with them and they complained about that as well.

Lynne and the BOE ignored dissent and opportunities to engage and find compromise because they believed they were right and refused to have their worldview challenged.

The fact that the new BOE holds the same beliefs as Lynne says a lot about how Montgomery County and MCPS are run.

[Anonymous]

Set aside the topic of the books for a minute. Here's the history as I udnerstand it:

1. MCPS allows parents to opt out
2. So many parents opt out that it becomes difficult to manage
3. MCPS stops allowing opt out

Now.. if so many parents want to opt out, why not listen to the wishes of the parents? It's not just 1-2 parents but so many parents are asking for X, so why not consider their request? MCPS is there to serve students and their parents.

For example, let's say the book was Huckleyberry Finn and many parents objected to it due to the heavy use of the N-word. Should such a huge number of parents be ignored?

[Anonymous]

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?

It's dangerous because it presents as accepted, the idea that a 5-year-old can just decide that they are not the gender that they are born with and that there's no reason to question it and everyone should accept that 5-year-old's decision and if you don't, you're an intolerant bigot.

It is a book with an incredibly controversial political stance that is not widely accepted.

That's why it's dangerous. It's propaganda masquerading as ELA material.

I don’t know that I’d use the word dangerous, but I do work at a school with several self-described trans kids in grades k-2. I do think we are giving this a little too much attention. I also know a 1st grader who insists he’s a dinosaur. And I know many teens and adults who were tomboys and now aren’t. I don’t think someone aged 5-7 should be labeling themselves so categorically.

[Anonymous]

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?

It's dangerous because it presents as accepted, the idea that a 5-year-old can just decide that they are not the gender that they are born with and that there's no reason to question it and everyone should accept that 5-year-old's decision and if you don't, you're an intolerant bigot.

It is a book with an incredibly controversial political stance that is not widely accepted.

That's why it's dangerous. It's propaganda masquerading as ELA material.

I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Set aside the topic of the books for a minute. Here's the history as I udnerstand it:

1. MCPS allows parents to opt out
2. So many parents opt out that it becomes difficult to manage
3. MCPS stops allowing opt out

Now.. if so many parents want to opt out, why not listen to the wishes of the parents? It's not just 1-2 parents but so many parents are asking for X, so why not consider their request? MCPS is there to serve students and their parents.

For example, let's say the book was Huckleyberry Finn and many parents objected to it due to the heavy use of the N-word. Should such a huge number of parents be ignored?

Because MCPS actually does not value or believe it should be beholden to parental input. MCPS and BOE leaders believe they know better than parents. They look down on parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Set aside the topic of the books for a minute. Here's the history as I udnerstand it:

1. MCPS allows parents to opt out
2. So many parents opt out that it becomes difficult to manage
3. MCPS stops allowing opt out

Now.. if so many parents want to opt out, why not listen to the wishes of the parents? It's not just 1-2 parents but so many parents are asking for X, so why not consider their request? MCPS is there to serve students and their parents.

For example, let's say the book was Huckleyberry Finn and many parents objected to it due to the heavy use of the N-word. Should such a huge number of parents be ignored?

Because MCPS actually does not value or believe it should be beholden to parental input. MCPS and BOE leaders believe they know better than parents. They look down on parents.

Easy to do when you think everyone who disagrees with you is a bigot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Set aside the topic of the books for a minute. Here's the history as I udnerstand it:

1. MCPS allows parents to opt out
2. So many parents opt out that it becomes difficult to manage
3. MCPS stops allowing opt out

Now.. if so many parents want to opt out, why not listen to the wishes of the parents? It's not just 1-2 parents but so many parents are asking for X, so why not consider their request? MCPS is there to serve students and their parents.

For example, let's say the book was Huckleyberry Finn and many parents objected to it due to the heavy use of the N-word. Should such a huge number of parents be ignored?

The more I think about this, the more I think MCPS is in the wrong.

For example, let's say MCPS offered a free after-school math tutoring option because some students weren't learning well enough in class. Then a lot of parents sign their children up because they want that for their children. Why cancel it because it's what parents want?

[Anonymous]

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?

It’s grooming.

This.

You seriously think reading about a trans kid coming out, or seeing a pride parade is grooming? Is going to change your kid? If this is what you think, you are bonkers

This is about seeing others who are different than you and accepting them as the humans beings they are.

For all your religious espousals, aren't these LGBTQ+ people (kids and adults) made in God's image too? And why do you think being aware of them, and accepting, them is grooming?

[Anonymous]

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?

It's dangerous because it presents as accepted, the idea that a 5-year-old can just decide that they are not the gender that they are born with and that there's no reason to question it and everyone should accept that 5-year-old's decision and if you don't, you're an intolerant bigot.

It is a book with an incredibly controversial political stance that is not widely accepted.

That's why it's dangerous. It's propaganda masquerading as ELA material.

I remember reading a book where a 10 year old girl decided to live. Y herself in the woods for a summer. Her parents were fine with it. It was never questioned. I didn’t think that I could run off and do that.
I’ve read books where no one questioned that animals could talk or you could walk through the back of a wardrobe into another world.
I’ve read books where no one questioned that an all powerful and all good being would just decide to kill every living creature in the world, save for two of each species - no one questioned it!
None of this was considered grooming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the argument is based on religion, shouldn't then book about single parent families be banned, what about interfaith families? Which kind of diversity is allowed? It seems like 1 group of people gets to decide for all.

I think these are complex and nuanced things to debate and discuss. Unfortunately, MCPS and the BOE opted to not have this debate and discussion publicly, overruling the opinion of their elementary school principals who advised pushing this down to the elementary level was premature and would lead to problems.

Most surveys show that MCPS parents are ok with LGBT content at the secondary level, but there's great opposition at the elementary level, which is what this lawsuit and fight is about.

I understand that LGBTQ+ advocacy in primary school makes parents uncomfortable (it makes ME uncomfortable!), but when my son was in MCPS elementary, his 4th and 5th grade classes had a group of boys who kept picking on others and calling them gay. The administration, who was otherwise great at stopping individual bullies, struggled to reduce the general name-calling because it was like whack-a-mole. This was before the MCPS push to read such books in class. I think that advocacy might indeed create a kinder atmosphere at the upper elementary level, when kids are outgrowing their elementary school, adolescent hormones are starting to trigger some of them, and generally they're spoiling for a fight. It gets worse in middle school, but then better in high school, but at least middle schools are 3 year programs made to curtail preteens' Lord of the Flies instincts (and full of adults who have a calling to teach that age group, bless them). The outreach needs to start earlier.

My take is that we need to accept some things that make us uncomfortable, to instill greater kindness and tolerance.

- parent of high school and college kids.

That's fine that that's your take. But other parents don't share that POV and their voices were silenced in the debate because Lynne Harris and LGBTQ advocates wanted it that way.

Now, the consequences of that undemocratic approach is costing us time, energy and resources.

They weren't silenced. There was a steady stream of people disagreeing during public comments. Lynne's not on the board now, but the newly elected board members are also in favor of the current policy.

What does speaking at public comments accomplish with regard to delaying or modifying implementation of the policy? Those parents testified and the board routinely derided and ignored them. If I recall correctly, Lynne refused to meet with them and they complained about that as well.

Lynne and the BOE ignored dissent and opportunities to engage and find compromise because they believed they were right and refused to have their worldview challenged.

The fact that the new BOE holds the same beliefs as Lynne says a lot about how Montgomery County and MCPS are run.

I think it just says that the voters weren't buying what the "Opt Out" candidates were selling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the argument is based on religion, shouldn't then book about single parent families be banned, what about interfaith families? Which kind of diversity is allowed? It seems like 1 group of people gets to decide for all.

I think these are complex and nuanced things to debate and discuss. Unfortunately, MCPS and the BOE opted to not have this debate and discussion publicly, overruling the opinion of their elementary school principals who advised pushing this down to the elementary level was premature and would lead to problems.

Most surveys show that MCPS parents are ok with LGBT content at the secondary level, but there's great opposition at the elementary level, which is what this lawsuit and fight is about.

I understand that LGBTQ+ advocacy in primary school makes parents uncomfortable (it makes ME uncomfortable!), but when my son was in MCPS elementary, his 4th and 5th grade classes had a group of boys who kept picking on others and calling them gay. The administration, who was otherwise great at stopping individual bullies, struggled to reduce the general name-calling because it was like whack-a-mole. This was before the MCPS push to read such books in class. I think that advocacy might indeed create a kinder atmosphere at the upper elementary level, when kids are outgrowing their elementary school, adolescent hormones are starting to trigger some of them, and generally they're spoiling for a fight. It gets worse in middle school, but then better in high school, but at least middle schools are 3 year programs made to curtail preteens' Lord of the Flies instincts (and full of adults who have a calling to teach that age group, bless them). The outreach needs to start earlier.

My take is that we need to accept some things that make us uncomfortable, to instill greater kindness and tolerance.

- parent of high school and college kids.

That's fine that that's your take. But other parents don't share that POV and their voices were silenced in the debate because Lynne Harris and LGBTQ advocates wanted it that way.

Now, the consequences of that undemocratic approach is costing us time, energy and resources.

They weren't silenced. There was a steady stream of people disagreeing during public comments. Lynne's not on the board now, but the newly elected board members are also in favor of the current policy.

What does speaking at public comments accomplish with regard to delaying or modifying implementation of the policy? Those parents testified and the board routinely derided and ignored them. If I recall correctly, Lynne refused to meet with them and they complained about that as well.

Lynne and the BOE ignored dissent and opportunities to engage and find compromise because they believed they were right and refused to have their worldview challenged.

The fact that the new BOE holds the same beliefs as Lynne says a lot about how Montgomery County and MCPS are run.

I think it just says that the voters weren't buying what the "Opt Out" candidates were selling.

Weren't most of the BOE incumbents who were up for re-election last time around voted out? Of course, we don't know why, but that does suggests parents were not satisfied with the BOE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the argument is based on religion, shouldn't then book about single parent families be banned, what about interfaith families? Which kind of diversity is allowed? It seems like 1 group of people gets to decide for all.

I think these are complex and nuanced things to debate and discuss. Unfortunately, MCPS and the BOE opted to not have this debate and discussion publicly, overruling the opinion of their elementary school principals who advised pushing this down to the elementary level was premature and would lead to problems.

Most surveys show that MCPS parents are ok with LGBT content at the secondary level, but there's great opposition at the elementary level, which is what this lawsuit and fight is about.

I understand that LGBTQ+ advocacy in primary school makes parents uncomfortable (it makes ME uncomfortable!), but when my son was in MCPS elementary, his 4th and 5th grade classes had a group of boys who kept picking on others and calling them gay. The administration, who was otherwise great at stopping individual bullies, struggled to reduce the general name-calling because it was like whack-a-mole. This was before the MCPS push to read such books in class. I think that advocacy might indeed create a kinder atmosphere at the upper elementary level, when kids are outgrowing their elementary school, adolescent hormones are starting to trigger some of them, and generally they're spoiling for a fight. It gets worse in middle school, but then better in high school, but at least middle schools are 3 year programs made to curtail preteens' Lord of the Flies instincts (and full of adults who have a calling to teach that age group, bless them). The outreach needs to start earlier.

My take is that we need to accept some things that make us uncomfortable, to instill greater kindness and tolerance.

- parent of high school and college kids.

That's fine that that's your take. But other parents don't share that POV and their voices were silenced in the debate because Lynne Harris and LGBTQ advocates wanted it that way.

Now, the consequences of that undemocratic approach is costing us time, energy and resources.

They weren't silenced. There was a steady stream of people disagreeing during public comments. Lynne's not on the board now, but the newly elected board members are also in favor of the current policy.

What does speaking at public comments accomplish with regard to delaying or modifying implementation of the policy? Those parents testified and the board routinely derided and ignored them. If I recall correctly, Lynne refused to meet with them and they complained about that as well.

Lynne and the BOE ignored dissent and opportunities to engage and find compromise because they believed they were right and refused to have their worldview challenged.

The fact that the new BOE holds the same beliefs as Lynne says a lot about how Montgomery County and MCPS are run.

I think it just says that the voters weren't buying what the "Opt Out" candidates were selling.

Weren't most of the BOE incumbents who were up for re-election last time around voted out? Of course, we don't know why, but that does suggests parents were not satisfied with the BOE.

Yes, but the incumbents were replaced by people who endorse similar positions.

[Anonymous]

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?

They just don’t like it! But they are ok with a book about a baby boy who plays with trucks and balls and grows up to play football and race cars

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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?

It's dangerous because it presents as accepted, the idea that a 5-year-old can just decide that they are not the gender that they are born with and that there's no reason to question it and everyone should accept that 5-year-old's decision and if you don't, you're an intolerant bigot.

It is a book with an incredibly controversial political stance that is not widely accepted.

That's why it's dangerous. It's propaganda masquerading as ELA material.

I remember reading a book where a 10 year old girl decided to live. Y herself in the woods for a summer. Her parents were fine with it. It was never questioned. I didn’t think that I could run off and do that.
I’ve read books where no one questioned that animals could talk or you could walk through the back of a wardrobe into another world.
I’ve read books where no one questioned that an all powerful and all good being would just decide to kill every living creature in the world, save for two of each species - no one questioned it!
None of this was considered grooming.

Your first two examples are clearly fantasy, and no one would object to having those stories be labeled as fantasy.

Plenty of people have objected to the Bible, and its teachings are now restricted to private schools.

None of your examples are an apples to apples comparison unless you are suggesting LGBTQ+ ideology be restricted to private schools as well?