LGBTQ+ rights

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Moms for Liberty, meet John Birch: the roots of US rightwing book bans

      by

      Moms for Liberty is a Florida-based pressure group which campaigns for book bans in US public schools, an issue at the heart of the national debate as Republican-run states seek to control or eliminate teaching of sex education, LGBTQ+ rights and racism in American history.But rightwing calls for school book bans are by no means a new phenomenon – and a look at the Moms for Liberty website indicates why.Moms for Liberty seeks to organise “Madison Meetups”, events it describes as “like a book club for the constitution!”, featuring discussion of “liberty, freedom and the foundation of our government”. Under “resources that we have found helpful”, the only resource offered is The Making of America, a book by W Cleon Skousen.In the early 1960s, Skousen was a hero to and a defender of the John Birch Society, a far-right group that campaigned against what it claimed was the communist threat to America.Matthew Dallek, a professor of political management at George Washington University, is the author of Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right. He points out that though the Birchers were not the only ones promoting book bans in the 60s, “they were likely the most visible group promoting book bans or promoting the policing of content in schools, libraries, movie theaters, even on newsstands”.The Birchers, Dallek adds, focused on “the so-called erosion of the moral fiber of the United States, but also the struggle to rid the country of what they regarded as really the socialist left wing”.The society still exists but its influence is greater than its presence, most obviously through a resurgence of Bircher-esque thought and action in the Republican party of Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis.In the society’s heyday, Dallek says, book bans and school board elections, another current battlefield, “gave Birchers a way to take action in their community.“They looked at where their kids went to school and their local library and the movie theater they would pass by. Part of their agenda was to insert what they considered Americanist publications, as opposed to communist propaganda.“What’s frightening now is that I don’t recall a time where those efforts were so often successful. Moms for Liberty and the other successors to the John Birch Society, they’re having a lot more success at actually implementing their vision.”Last month, the writers’ organisation Pen America reported a 28% rise in public school book bans in just six months. As the 2024 election approaches, attacks on the place of race in history classes and teaching on LGBTQ+ issues seem certain to feature in Republican debates and town halls.Dallek considers the Birchers’ influence on the Republican party over more than 60 years. But he can’t recall the society inspiring “any sweeping legislation like Florida has now passed, through three major bills. And one in particular, it’s very Orwellian. They have these education minders who have to approve all texts in school libraries. That was certainly a dream of the Birch Society.”Tactics are familiar too. Birchers often protested against what they called pornography in books and teaching, as a vehicle for communistic thought. Now, the hard right sees pornography in books on LGBTQ+ rights, in drag queen story hours, or in the casting of children’s plays.Dallek says: “Whatever the language is, whether it’s ‘woke’, or ‘progressive’, or ‘pornographic’, or ‘communistic’, in a way the brilliance of the Birchers and other groups is in the way they use language. They’re able to distill ideas and aspects of the culture they find offensive and brand them as something evil, something un-American, something that will twist and pollute the minds of kids.“I don’t know that they meant that it was literally communistic to teach sex ed in schools but it was a kind of brilliant shorthand, because they were able to mobilise a lot of supporters by saying this was a civilizational battle. A battle for whether your children will grow up being moral or not, whether they’ll have a decent life.“And if we want to bring it back to today, Ron DeSantis is out there claiming, ‘We’re only banning books that are pornographic or that kids should not be exposed to.’ But then when you’re talking about banning Toni Morrison? I mean, come on. It’s ridiculous.”But it’s real. The Bluest Eye, Morrison’s first novel, and her masterpiece Beloved have been removed from some Florida libraries.Dallek notes other echoes. For instance, the role of rightwing women.“Historically, schools have been in terms of teaching jobs often reserved for women. And so, ironically, in the 1960s and 70s, as feminism becomes a major force in the culture and many women expect to work outside the home and be active politically, conservative, really far-right women take an element of that and get active in their communities.“Women have been on the frontlines of many of these fights to ban books, to police what kids are learning. Parental rights, the whole idea … is I think focused at the moms and … imposing their version of Christian morals on public education and many public spaces.“To go back to the W Cleon Skousen thing” on the Moms for Liberty website, “it does suggest a link to the past. Skousen continued to write in the 1980s and 90s. He was a defender of the John Birch Society and was held up as a hero.”Skousen died in 2006. Seventeen years later, to Dallek his recommendation from Moms for Liberty “suggests there really is a tradition in modern American politics, on the far right, that has become much more mainstream.“Groups like Moms for Liberty understand that. That there’s a set of ideas, and a literature, and a whole kind of subculture around this effort to police ideas and morality in schools. And they are tapping into that very effectively.”
      Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right is published in the US by Hachette More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Court upholds exclusion of transgender lawmaker from Montana legislature

      by

      Zooey Zephyr, the transgender state lawmaker silenced after telling Republicans they would have blood on their hands for opposing gender-affirming healthcare for kids, was barred from returning to the Montana house floor in a Tuesday court ruling hours before the legislature wrapped up its biennial session.A district court judge, Mike Menahan, said it was outside his authority to overrule lawmakers who voted last week to exclude Zephyr from the house floor and debates. He cited the importance of preserving the separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches.“Plaintiffs’ requested relief would require this court to interfere with legislative authority in a manner that exceeds this court’s authority,” Menahan wrote.The ruling and lawmakers’ decision to adjourn brought a sudden end to a standoff that put a national spotlight on transgender issues and the muffling of dissent in statehouses across the US.Democrats and the transgender community were outraged over Zephyr’s treatment. Republicans were indignant over the vehemence of the response.Attorneys for the state asked the judge to reject an emergency motion from Zephyr’s lawyers. The first-term lawmaker was silenced two weeks ago for admonishing Republicans, then banished from the floor for encouraging a statehouse protest.Zephyr told the Associated Press Menahan’s decision was “entirely wrong”.“It’s a really sad day for the country when the majority party can silence representation from the minority party whenever they take issue,” Zephyr said.An attorney for Zephyr, Alex Rate, said an appeal was being considered. But with the legislative session ending, a ruling would be of little immediate consequence.The punishment against Zephyr was through the end of the 2023 session. Since the Montana legislature convenes every two years, Zephyr would have to be re-elected in 2024 before she could return to the house floor.Lawyers working under the state attorney general, Austin Knudsen, cautioned that any intervention by the courts on Zephyr’s behalf would be a blatant violation of the separation of powers. They wrote in a court filing that the statehouse retains “exclusive constitutional authority” to discipline its own members.Knudsen, a Republican, issued a statement saying the lawsuit was an attempt by outside groups to interfere with the Montana lawmaking process.”Today’s decision is a win for the rule of law and the separation of powers enshrined in our constitution,” he said.Zephyr and several of her Missoula constituents on Monday filed court papers seeking an emergency order allowing her to return to the house floor. Democrats have denounced her exclusion from floor debates as an assault on free speech intended to silence her criticism of new restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors.But lawyers for the state said the censure of Zephyr was “for good cause” following the 24 April demonstration.“One legislator cannot be allowed to halt the ability of the other 99 to engage in civil, orderly, debate concerning issues affecting Montana,” state lawyers wrote.GOP leaders under pressure from hardline conservatives silenced Zephyr from participating in floor debates and demanded she apologize almost two weeks ago, after she said those who supported a ban on gender-affirming care for youths would have blood on their hands.On 24 April, Zephyr raised a microphone in defiance on the house floor as protesters in the gallery demanded she be allowed to speak and refused to leave. Seven were arrested on trespassing charges and two days later lawmakers voted along party lines to oust Zephyr from the floor and gallery.She has since been working from a bench in a hallway or at a statehouse snack bar.The actions against Zephyr have propelled her to political prominence. But in Montana, Republicans hope to capitalize on her high profile by painting Democrats as a party of extremists.The lawsuit seeking to reverse her punishment was filed by attorneys working with the Montana American Civil Liberties Union. It named the house speaker, Matt Regier, and sergeant-at-arms, Brad Murfitt, as defendants. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Montana governor lobbied by non-binary son to reject anti-trans bills

      by

      The son of the Republican governor of Montana, Greg Gianforte, met their father in his office to lobby him to reject several bills that would harm transgender people in the state, the Montana Free Press reported.David Gianforte told the paper they identify as non-binary and use he/they pronouns – the first time they disclosed their gender identity publicly. They told the outlet they felt an obligation to use their relationship with their father to stand up for LGBTQ+ people in the state.“There are a lot of important issues passing through the legislature right now,” they said in a statement. “For my own sake I’ve chosen to focus primarily on transgender rights, as that would significantly directly affect a number of my friends … I would like to make the argument that these bills are immoral, unjust, and frankly a violation of human rights.”The governor, who assaulted a Guardian reporter in 2017, responded with an email that said: “I would like to better understand your thoughts and concerns. When can we get together to talk about it? Love, Dad.”Brooke Stroyke, a spokesperson for the governor, declined to comment to the Montana Free Press.“The governor loves his family and values their thoughts, ideas and perspectives,” Stroyke said. “Our office will not discuss private conversations between the governor and members of his family.”Republicans across the US have moved to restrict transgender rights. Ten bills in the Montana state legislature this session target transgender people, according to translegislation.com, an online tracker.Those bills including measures that would deny gender-affirming care to minors and limit the definition of sex in state law, which could limit legal protections for transgender people. Another bill prohibits drag shows on any public property or places where minors are present.On Tuesday, the state legislature voted to ban Zooey Zephyr, a transgender Democratic lawmaker, from the statehouse floor. Zephyr previously told lawmakers they would have “blood on their hands”.David Gianforte told the Montana Free Press they didn’t expect their lobbying to ultimately change the outcome of the bill.“I feel like I have a voice and I can be heard,” they said. “And I feel, not only in communicating with my father, that’s not necessarily the main point, but also just showing support for the transgender community in Montana. I think that could be meaningful, especially at this time.”Greg Gianforte pleaded guilty in 2017 to a charge of misdemeanor assault after he attacked the Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs on the eve of his election to the US House. Gianforte received a six-month deferred sentence and served no jail time. He became Montana governor in 2021.A few weeks after the meeting between the governor and David, the governor sent the legislation banning transgender-affirming care back to the legislature with revisions. David said the press release accompanying those changes was “bizarre”.“It’s bizarre to me to read the press release that my father put out,” David said. “He talks about compassion toward children, the youth of Montana, while simultaneously taking away healthcare from the youth in Montana.“It’s basically a contradiction in my mind.” More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Montana Republicans bar transgender lawmaker from the statehouse floor

      by

      Montana Republicans have barred the transgender lawmaker Zooey Zephyr from the statehouse floor for the rest of the session after she told colleagues they would have “blood on your hands” if they voted to ban gender-affirming medical care for trans children.Under the terms of the punishment, Zephyr will still be able to vote remotely. The Democratic representative had been forbidden from speaking for the past week over her comments, which Republicans said violated decorum.The decision to silence Zephyr had already drawn protests that brought the statehouse to a halt on Monday as demonstrators demanded Zephyr be allowed to speak.In a defiant speech on Wednesday before lawmakers voted, Zephyr said she was taking a stand for the LGBTQ+ community, her constituents in Missoula and “democracy itself”.She accused the Republican house speaker, Matt Regier, of taking away the voices of her 11,000 constituents and attempting to drive “a nail in the coffin of democracy” by silencing her.“If you use decorum to silence people who hold you accountable, then all you’re doing is using decorum as a tool of oppression,” she said.Zephyr’s punishment has ignited a firestorm of debate about governance and who has a voice in democracy in politically polarizing times, much like recent events in the Tennessee statehouse where two black lawmakers were expelled after participating in a post-school shooting gun control protest that interrupted proceedings.In Montana, Republicans said they would not let the Missoula lawmaker speak unless she apologized for her remarks last week on the proposed ban, which she refused to do. Conservative Republicans have repeatedly misgendered Zephyr since the remarks, deliberately using incorrect pronouns to describe her.Zephyr’s remarks, and the Republican response, set off a chain of events that culminated in a rally outside the capitol at noon Monday. Protesters later packed into the gallery at the statehouse and brought House proceedings to a halt while chanting “Let her speak.” The scene galvanized her supporters and and those saying her actions constitute an unacceptable attack on civil discourse. Police arrested seven people at the capitol.Tuesday’s floor session was cancelled without explanation, and Republican leaders closed the gallery to the public on Wednesday “to maintain decorum and ensure safety”, they said in a letter to Zephyr.The events have sent shockwaves through Missoula, a liberal college town where 80% of voters sent the first openly trans legislator in state history to the state capital.“When she first ran I thought, ‘they’re going to do something to limit her power’,” said Erin Flint, 28. But she didn’t expect Zephyr to be silenced completely.Montana has long leaned to the right, but with more of a libertarian bent than a zest for culture wars. That allowed Democrats to win the governorship regularly for decades, and occasionally to win control of one or more houses of the legislature.Andy Nelson grew up in a town of 750 people in eastern Montana, and only felt comfortable coming out as gay in his senior year of college at the University of Montana in Missoula, when he volunteered at the Center, a local LGBTQ+ community group where he is now executive director. He remembered long discussions wondering whether such a group was still necessary after gay marriage was legalized nationally in 2015. But that all changed in 2016, with the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump.Trump handily won the state that year and in 2020. Republicans now hold both congressional seats and all statewide offices, although one of the state’s two US Senate seats is held by Democrat John Tester, a top GOP target in 2024. Last year, as Zephyr was elected in her Missoula district of about 11,000 residents, the GOP Republicans rode a surge in popular support to win a supermajority in both chambers of the legislature.Zeke Cork, 62, one of the Center’s board members, recalled the 1970s as a great time to be out in Missoula, though he said he had to follow certain rules to be safe. A railroad dispatcher, Cork has lived all over the US but returned to Montana in 2015. He felt safe enough to transition fully two years ago.Cork has been traveling to the state capitol in Helena to speak against the legislation affecting trans people since it was first introduced. After Zephyr was silenced, he joined dozens of others from Missoula at the capitol earlier this week.“We would much rather be living quiet lives, out of the spotlight, living under the radar, living our best lives,” Cork said. “I don’t want to be having this battle.”But, Cork added, the community has no choice. “She speaks for me and I sent her to that house,” said Cork, who lives in Zephyr’s district. “We’re fighting for democracy right now.” More

    • 213 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      It’s not just trans kids: Republicans are coming after trans adults like me, too | Alex Myers

      by

      On Thursday 13 April, Missouri’s attorney general issued an emergency ruling that restricts access to gender-affirming care for both minors and adults, under the guise that hormone therapy is an “experimental use” rather than an FDA-approved treatment. For the past year, transgender youth have been a football for conservative politicians, with their access to gender-affirming care restricted or outlawed in 14 states. But this move by Missouri’s attorney general is the first attack on gender-affirming care for transgender adults; assuredly, it won’t be the last.The first time I tried to get access to gender-affirming care was in 2003. I was 24 years old and lived in Rhode Island. I’d been out as transgender for eight years by then, eight years spent looking (on a good day) like a 14-year-old boy, until finally the me I saw in the mirror and the me I saw in my head didn’t match any more. Only testosterone would make me feel like myself.I told my doctor, who was kind and sympathetic and said she had no idea about the protocols for administration of testosterone to a transgender person. She did find me a list of all the practitioners in Rhode Island who offered such care. There were three names on the list. True, Rhode Island is not a large state, but still: three names. I called them all. Only one would see me, and only after I had gone to therapy and had a psychologist certify that I was ready to transition.That was the standard back then – and that’s what the Missouri attorney general wants to require of adult transgender individuals now, only more extensive. In 2003 in Rhode Island, I needed to see a therapist for at least three visits. The Missouri AG wants documentation of least three years of “medically documented, long-lasting, persistent and intense pattern of gender dysphoria” before an adult can be approved to get hormones. Three years of therapy is lengthy, time-consuming and expensive; three years is a very long time to suffer before being allowed to get medical attention.Moreover, back in 2003, “gender identity disorder” was in the Diagnostics and Statistics Manual (DSM) as a mental disorder. Doctors required transgender individuals to visit a psychologist so that there was a “legitimate” diagnosis to accompany the prescription of hormones – even though, back then and still today, the use of hormones for gender reassignment is an “off-label” use. But that diagnosis was removed from the DSM in 2013, replaced with “gender dysphoria”.That’s the term Missouri’s AG uses in his emergency ruling and, in doing so, trying to return to the idea that being transgender is synonymous with being mentally ill, a narrative that the right has used at several historical moments to marginalize LGBTQ+ individuals. The narrative here isn’t really about a diagnosis or medical legitimacy – it certainly isn’t about the health of the transgender person. The subtext clearly is that transgender people are mentally ill and delusional, and they need a medical authority to help them figure out who they are.The therapist that I saw in 2003 was a gay man who had a lot of compassion for the situation I was in. He knew it was a hoop I had to jump through, and he also knew he had to do his job. He asked me questions, took notes, and eventually wrote a letter certifying that I fit the diagnosis of “gender identity disorder” and that hormone therapy would help treat this disorder.I felt uncomfortable with the process; it seemed to me then and it seems to me now that there isn’t anything wrong with my gender identity. I know very well who I am; it’s how I feel about my body that needed to be addressed in a medical way. That’s the shift that was made in the DSM – away from “gender identity” and towards “dysphoria”. That’s the shift that the Missouri AG is trying to undo and rewrite.But that diagnosis and that therapist’s letter got me a prescription for testosterone in Rhode Island, a medical intervention that was absolutely transformative and life-saving for me.And then I moved to south-west Florida. I called endocrinologist after endocrinologist, asking if they would see me, look at the paperwork from my Rhode Island doctor, look at the letter from the therapist. A dozen said no – one receptionist told me curtly that the doctor didn’t see “transgendereds”. Another hung up on me. A third said, “Are you kidding me?” Eventually, I found a doctor in the Miami area, a three-hour drive away, who agreed to see me.This was typical for transgender care back then and, sadly, now. Unless you live in or near a major metropolitan area, getting a doctor who is trained, comfortable and willing to provide gender-affirming care is not easy. I was a person with a lot of privilege: health insurance from my employer, a good income, the language and education and time to persist in finding a therapist and a doctor who would treat me. For many transgender individuals, this would be too much, especially to maintain for three years. Missouri is trying to pile more work on to an already significant burden.But more than the details of this particular attack, I hope people will see the mounting pattern here. The first wave of legislation came for transgender youth. This next wave is coming for transgender adults. Put these restrictions next to the rulings against abortion and you can see a larger picture of bodily control. Who gets to make medical decisions about their bodies? Not pregnant women. Not transgender people.Back in 2003, I was so frustrated by my own experience that I vowed to work for improvements. I’ve fought for transgender civil rights and worked in particular for transgender students. There were years when we were making headway, when a conversation between a transgender individual and their doctor was sufficient basis to prescribe hormones. Now, it seems like we are at an inflection point. It’s time to strip away the rhetoric and recognize what’s at stake: our rights to control our bodies, our rights to control our identities. And I’m not just talking about transgender people.
      Alex Myers is a novelist and teacher who lives in Vermont More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas state agency orders workers to dress ‘consistent to their biological gender’

      by

      A Texas state agency told its employees this month that they must dress in a manner that is “consistent with their biological gender”, a directive that seemed to be a thinly veiled attack on transgender employees.The state’s department of agriculture laid out the dress policy in a 13 April memo, which was first reported by the Texas Observer.The memo says that “Western business attire” is appropriate and lays out acceptable business casual items.“For men, business attire includes a long-sleeved dress shirt, tie, and sport coat worn with trousers and dress shoes or boots,” it says. “For women, business attire includes tailored pantsuits, business-like dresses, coordinated dressy separates worn with or without a blazer, and conservative, closed-toe shoes or boots.”It prohibits women from wearing clothing that allows for “excessive cleavage” as well as skirts that are shorter than four inches from the knees. It also bans certain footwear – Crocs, slippers and slides are all not allowed. Also not allowed are neon and fluorescent hair colors as well as lip and other facial piercings. Clothing that is “too tight or too revealing” is also not allowed. “You are a professional, look like one,” the memo says.The policy comes as Texas and a number of other US states have moved to attack transgender Americans. There was more anti-transgender legislation filed in Texas this year than in any other state, according to a tally by Axios.Proposed measures would restrict drag performances, impose new obstacles to gender-affirming care and limit teaching about gender and sexuality, the Texas Tribune reported.Texas’s department of agriculture is run by Sid Miller, a Republican who was first elected to his role in 2014. An outspoken supporter of former president Donald Trump, Miller has faced headwinds because of some scandals in recent years.The memo says agency supervisors can exercise “reasonable discretion” in assessing employees’ clothing. Employees’ refusal to comply with a request to change their clothing could result in their dismissal.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“If a staff member’s inappropriate attire, poor hygiene or use of offensive perfume/cologne is an issue, the supervisor should first discuss the problem with the staff member in private and should point out the specific areas to be corrected,” the memo says.The CEO of the LGBTQ+ advocacy group Equality Texas, Ricardo Martinez, told the Texas Tribune that the ambiguities in the policy could lead to confusion. “Are women no longer allowed to wear suits? Can men wear necklaces?” he said.An attorney with the Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, Brian Klosterboer, told the Texas Tribune that the policy violated federal law. Federal civil rights law also protects LGBTQ+ individuals from discrimination by their employers, the supreme court ruled in 2020. More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Book bans in US public schools increase by 28% in six months, Pen report finds

      by

      Book bans in US public schools increased by 28% in the first half of the 2022-23 academic year, the writers’ organisation Pen America said on Thursday, describing a “relentless” conservative “crusade to constrict children’s freedom to read”.Releasing a new report, Banned in the USA: State Laws Supercharge Book Suppression in Schools, Pen said the increase was over figures for the previous six months.“Censorious legislation in states across the country has been a driving force behind new restrictions on access to books in public schools,” it said.“Since Pen America started tracking public school book bans in July 2021, [it] has recorded more than 4,000 instances of banned books … this includes 1,477 individual book bans affecting 874 unique titles during the first half of the 2022-23 school year.”Book bans are more common in Republican-run states. According to Pen, “seven districts in Texas were responsible for 438 instances of individual book bans, and 13 districts in Florida were responsible for 357 bans”.It added: “Of the 1,477 books banned this school year, 30% are about race, racism or include characters of colour, while 26% have LGBTQ+ characters or themes.”Pen also highlighted “the misapplication of labels such as ‘pornographic’ or ‘indecent’ by activists and politicians to justify the removal of books that do not remotely fit the well-established legal and colloquial definitions of pornography.“Alarmist rhetoric about ‘porn in schools’ has been a significant factor behind such mischaracterisations, which routinely conflate books that contain any sexual content or include LGBTQ+ characters with ‘pornography’.”According to Pen, the most frequently banned books in the 2022-23 US school year were Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobabe, Flamer by Mike Curato, Tricks by Ellen Hopkins and The Handmaid’s Tale: a Graphic Novel by Margaret Atwood and Renée Nault.Atwood last year supported Pen by auctioning an “un-burnable” edition of her dystopian feminist novel, which was published in 1985 and became the inspiration for a hit TV series. It raised $130,000.Atwood said then: “Free speech issues are being hotly debated, and Pen is a sane voice [amid] all the shouting.”Book bans have not been without political blowback.In Florida on Wednesday, so-called “don’t say gay” laws regarding the teaching of gender and LGBTQ+ issues were expanded from public elementary schools to the whole state system. But the Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, last week saw a major donor pause support for his nascent presidential run, citing book bans as one policy of concern.Interactive Brokers founder Thomas Peterffy told the Financial Times: “I have put myself on hold. Because of his stance on abortion and book banning … myself, and a bunch of friends, are holding our powder dry.”The Pen chief executive, Suzanne Nossel, said: “The heavy-handed tactics of state legislators are mandating book bans, plain and simple.“Some politicians like Ron DeSantis have tried to dismiss the rise in book bans as a ‘hoax’. But their constituents and supporters are not fooled. The numbers don’t lie, and reveal a relentless crusade to constrict children’s freedom to read.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Florida board approves expansion of ‘don’t say gay’ ban to all school grades

      by

      Florida’s board of education has approved the expansion of the state’s so-called “don’t say gay” bill, which now prohibits discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity at school across all grade levels.Wednesday’s approval came at the request of the Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, who in the past two years has waged what critics call a “culture war” across the state through his bans on gender-affirming care, Covid-19 precautionary measures and abortion rights, among other facets.According to an education department spokesperson, the proposal will take effect after a procedural notice period that lasts about a month, the Associated Press reports.The rule states that Florida educators “shall not intentionally provide classroom instruction to students in grades four through 12 on sexual orientation or gender identity unless such instruction is either expressly required by state academic standards … or is part of a reproductive health course or health lesson for which a student’s parent has the option to have his or her student not attend.”Previously, the Parental Rights in Education law focused on banning classroom discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity only from kindergarten through third grade.Parents are allowed to sue school districts over violations and educators who violate the ban risk having their licenses revoked.The expansion is a part of a series of anti-LGBTQ+ being proposed in Florida, including a ban on gender affirming care that would allow the state to take “emergency” custody of a child whose parents allow them access to such care.Other bans include curtailing drag performances, banning pride flags from public buildings, as well as removing college majors and minors on gender studies and critical race theory, among other similar disciplines.In a statement to the Associated Press, Florida’s education commissioner, Manny Diaz Jr, said: “We’re not removing anything here. All we are doing is we are setting the expectations so our teachers are clear: that they are to teach to the standards.”As a result of DeSantis’s “don’t say gay” bill and his culture war against “wokeness”, the governor, who is widely expected to launch his 2024 presidential run, has found himself going head to head with Disney, one of the state’s largest private employers.Last month, Disney pushed back against DeSantis’s crackdown on LGBTQ+ rights by announcing its plans to host a major LGBTQ+ conference at Walt Disney World in Orlando. The announcement was widely regarded as a defiant response to DeSantis who assumed new powers in February that allow him to appoint members of the development board that supervises the theme park and its self-governing district. More