“San Diego Unified School District teaches young children about dozens of novel sexual orientations and gender identities,” reports Just The News:
The LGBTQIA+ Terminology-Student Panel Welcome slides share nine gender identities including “demigirl,” “demiboy” and “genderfluid,” while a slide from The Trevor Project lays out 28 “LGBTQ Youth Sexual Orientations” including “aegosexual,” “queer demisexual,” “greysexual,” “abrosexual” and “heteroflexible.”…
Using a rationale rejected by the Supreme Court’s Mahmoud precedent against a suburban D.C. district’s no-exceptions LGBTQ curriculum, SDUSD claims it can expose children to such mature and disputed concepts because it’s “not trying to change the religious beliefs or ideologies of any person” but rather “to change how we respond to the most vulnerable populations that we serve.”
It threatens to sanction teachers for refusing to use students’ preferred names and pronouns, because by “validat[ing] each student’s identity” it hopes to “decrease the current dismal statistics around bullying, suicide and homicide.” When they “occasionally slip,” students and educators can simply “offer a brief apology.”
There are 72 different genders that transgender people can choose from, according to Medicine.Net. There are many made-up pronouns such as “ze” and “zem” that are hard to keep track of.
Forcing people to use particular pronouns can violate the First Amendment, as law professor Eugene Volokh explained in the Washington Post. The First Amendment can protect a speaker’s right to not use the pronouns preferred by a transgender person, even if it offends that person, as a federal appeals court ruled in Meriwether v. Hartop (2021), which revived a professor’s First Amendment lawsuit over being forced to use a transgender student’s preferred pronoun.
Recently, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals revived students’ First Amendment lawsuit over school rules forcing them to use classmates’ preferred pronouns; it let them sue school officials for violating their free-speech rights, in Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District (2025).
Calling a child a new name or pronouns is not a neutral statement of fact, but an endorsement of them transitioning, which can have negative consequences. For example, guidance from Britain’s National Health Service “recognizes social transition as a form of psychosocial intervention and not a neutral act, as it may have significant effects on psychological functioning.”
Encouraging kids to transition by using their new name and pronouns could put them on the road to gender transition procedures they may come to regret. A New York Post article says that many girls who get sex changes will “struggle for the rest of their lives with the irreversible medical consequences of a decision they made as minors.”
