This is in response to the Executive Order from the White House on 1/29/25, targeting teachers honoring the authentic gender identity of their students.
The order talks about “indoctrination” and “gender ideology”. The fear-mongering and gaslighting used in this order involves the notion that many adults (teachers and medical professionals) are intent on changing cisgender children into transgender children. This simply cannot be done. Gender identity is inherent within all of us. Similarly, no one can make a transgender child cisgender. Which is why it is so imperative to listen, honor, and affirm. Additionally, the use of the term “gender ideology” implies that the understanding/knowledge of gender is moving beyond traditional beliefs about designated sex determining gender, and the gender binary. Why yes, yes it is. Understanding of gender is always evolving and it has been growing more and more evident with time that traditional beliefs about gender are limiting, inaccurate, and outdated.
Indoctrination implies something is being forced to be accepted “uncritically”. From where I stand, affirming transgender youth has always been looked at with a critical eye. However, anyone or any organization doing this work with transgender youth agree that following the youth’s lead when it comes to their asserted gender identity is best practice. Those who listen to and support transgender youth telling them who they are do so in response to the gender identity shared with them, they do not initiate or create this in the child.
Is it best to affirm them and tell them any way they are is OK? Yes. That is not indoctrination. That is affirmation. Is it best for others around them to listen to them, affirm them, and honor their authentic gender identity? Yes. That is not indoctrination. That is allyship. That is affirmation in action.
Oh, and students cannot learn math when their identities are being ignored.
The order references teachers “facilitating social transition”. This gives the impression that the teachers are driving the decisions. What happens in reality is that transgender youth sometimes ask to be referred to at school by their chosen name and pronouns that reflect their authentic gender, sometimes before they are ready to be (or before it is safe to be) “out” at home. This is only a partial aspect of social transition and not a complete social transition (in all settings). It is done at the student’s request. Doing so (without the threat of forced disclosure) is honoring a youth’s identity, dignity, and right to feel safe at school. Social transition, and the order of settings in which this is achieved, is individualized and should be driven by the youth themselves.
The Administration again undermines itself by including blatantly false information in this order. It implies that teachers are also facilitating medical transition without parental consent. This cannot be done. Parental consent has to be given for any medical gender-affirming intervention. Parents often DO consent to this because they see the pain dysphoria causes, and the relief medical interventions provide.
The executive order lists that teachers are not allowed to sexually exploit minors directly before stating they should not be “practicing medicine” or “facilitating social transition”. This is purposeful. If the implication is that affirming a youth’s gender comes anywhere near sexually exploiting a student, teachers will be less willing and less equipped to stand up for what is right by affirming the youth’s asserted gender identity. There is nothing sexual about honoring one’s gender identity. We all have one, and having that honored is a basic human right.
As I was writing this blog post, a friend sent me a screenshot of a post from the California Department of Education. It thrilled and relieved me; I hope it does to you as well.
“President Trump signed an executive order today that does nothing but require the Secretary of Education to determine what federal education funds can legally be rescinded as a penalty for teaching curricula that President Trump finds objectionable.
We can give the Trump Administration that answer right now: nothing. Is it against federal law for the White House to dictate what educators can and cannot teach by threatening to defund essential public services for students. School curriculum should not vacillate back and forth depending on the occupant of the White House, which is why federal law already prohibits the federal government from leveraging grants to mandate specific instructional content in schools.“
In solidarity!