If Florida repeals "The Reedy Creek Improvement Charter", how does that change Disney going forward?

[Karlk]

As a parent (and you are welcome to disagree with me), I understand your point, but I feel that there is an age where I encourage challenge, and there is an age that I do not. a 5 year old is too young to understand the complexities we are discussing.

A 16 year old is another story entirely. I WANT my 16 year old to challenge everything and form their own opinions. I do not want my 5 year old to do that as these topics are far too complex for a developing mind.

Most grounded post I've read, well said

 

[roctavia]

What about the majority of employees that support the bill? The majority of voters also support the bill.

I would question the people and voters that support the bill if they really know what this bill says/is for. It's similar to all of the people protesting against CRT in our schools and campaigning for school boards on the promise of getting CRT out of our schools... CRT isn't in any school district in this country and is a college/law school level theory, but that doesn't stop people from creating panic about it in our schools.

This bill does the same thing. They aren't teaching sex education to 5 year olds. They are allowing kids to be boys/girls/however they express. Teachers can have same sex partners and not have to hide that from their students. Talking about same sex relationships doesn't make kids gay, seeing same sex relationships doesn't make people gay or harm anybody mentally. Especially kids, they don't care beyond the fact that it's people loving each other. No curriculum has a "lets teach about being gay/trans" in the curriculum. It just allows for diverse books and stories to be in the classroom. That is a good thing no matter what a person's beliefs are. This bill makes all of those things a problem if a parent has a problem with it.

 

[PinkPixel]

There was a time I could put on a specific and appropriate show on for the kiddos to watch. Now Disney through their short stories, commercials (whatever) promotes an agenda. I don’t feel my child needs to be Influenced about these subjects at such a young age. We are trying to raise critical thinkers who reach their own conclusions not programmed robots. Just my thoughts

What specific show did you put on before that you can't now? What short stories did you see on what "subjects"? Really don't know what you're referring to, my kids watch Disney Junior.

 

[Karlk]

I would question the people and voters that support the bill if they really know what this bill says/is for. It's similar to all of the people protesting against CRT in our schools and campaigning for school boards on the promise of getting CRT out of our schools... CRT isn't in any school district in this country and is a college/law school level theory, but that doesn't stop people from creating panic about it in our schools.

This bill does the same thing. They aren't teaching sex education to 5 year olds. They are allowing kids to be boys/girls/however they express. Teachers can have same sex partners and not have to hide that from their students. Talking about same sex relationships doesn't make kids gay, seeing same sex relationships doesn't make people gay or harm anybody mentally. Especially kids, they don't care beyond the fact that it's people loving each other. No curriculum has a "lets teach about being gay/trans" in the curriculum. It just allows for diverse books and stories to be in the classroom. That is a good thing no matter what a person's beliefs are. This bill makes all of those things a problem if a parent has a problem with it.

It's definitely being taught

 

[TiggerBouncy]

I would question the people and voters that support the bill if they really know what this bill says/is for. It's similar to all of the people protesting against CRT in our schools and campaigning for school boards on the promise of getting CRT out of our schools... CRT isn't in any school district in this country and is a college/law school level theory, but that doesn't stop people from creating panic about it in our schools.

This bill does the same thing. They aren't teaching sex education to 5 year olds. They are allowing kids to be boys/girls/however they express. Teachers can have same sex partners and not have to hide that from their students. Talking about same sex relationships doesn't make kids gay, seeing same sex relationships doesn't make people gay or harm anybody mentally. Especially kids, they don't care beyond the fact that it's people loving each other. No curriculum has a "lets teach about being gay/trans" in the curriculum. It just allows for diverse books and stories to be in the classroom. That is a good thing no matter what a person's beliefs are. This bill makes all of those things a problem if a parent has a problem with it.

Perhaps... But that's for the voters to decide, and news commentators to discuss. I don't want Disney deciding if a bill is good for me. Neither do I want Coke, Nestle, or General Mills.

 

[mkb3]

I'm surprised this thread has been allowed to continue surviving.

Maybe they figure it's been staying cordial enough compared to the other ones and it might be best to have at least one place to keep letting people get this stuff out of their systems?

I am not sure if Pete and John have much to do with the boards, but from watching the channel I think those guys are pretty respectful of opinions that do not match their own. Who knows if that's for business reasons or how they really feel in life, but either way I respect that.

 

[k5xs]

Saber rattling on both sides. I definitely believe DeSantis can and will remove Disney's privileges if the company doesn't butt out of politics.

Unless “butting out” means not donating to the right candidates, of course.

 

[nancipants]

What specific show did you put on before that you can't now? What short stories did you see on what "subjects"? Really don't know what you're referring to, my kids watch Disney Junior.

Our toddler exclusively watches Disney Junior. I really appreciate the current cartoons with songs by Questlove about fighting racism, celebrating diversity, and being proud of your heritage. Not to mention the promo about love making a family, and the two promos celebrating Miles Morales for Black History Month and Gwen Stacy for Women's History Month. Right now my kid just cares about dinosaurs and Boppy (what he calls Spider-Man--I don't know either), but I want him to learn about those ideas from an early age. If they're wrong or inappropriate, then so are we.

(And Bluey is the best show on TV right now, period.)

 

[TiggerBouncy]

I'm surprised this thread has been allowed to continue surviving.

Maybe they figure it's been staying cordial enough compared to the other ones and it might be best to have at least one place to keep letting people get this stuff out of their systems?

I feel like in general people are discussing this respectfully without a lot of personal attacks. That's probably why.

 

[brightlined]

It's definitely being taught

<citation needed>

 

[DeeBee3]

Well, it's the parents' prerogative to raise their kids the way they want to, right?

Yes.

 

[DeeBee3]

I would question the people and voters that support the bill if they really know what this bill says/is for. It's similar to all of the people protesting against CRT in our schools and campaigning for school boards on the promise of getting CRT out of our schools... CRT isn't in any school district in this country and is a college/law school level theory, but that doesn't stop people from creating panic about it in our schools.

This bill does the same thing. They aren't teaching sex education to 5 year olds. They are allowing kids to be boys/girls/however they express. Teachers can have same sex partners and not have to hide that from their students. Talking about same sex relationships doesn't make kids gay, seeing same sex relationships doesn't make people gay or harm anybody mentally. Especially kids, they don't care beyond the fact that it's people loving each other. No curriculum has a "lets teach about being gay/trans" in the curriculum. It just allows for diverse books and stories to be in the classroom. That is a good thing no matter what a person's beliefs are. This bill makes all of those things a problem if a parent has a problem with it.

This is inaccurate. Yes, Critical Theory is a law school course, and this is often a response when people say schools are "teaching" this. No one is accusing schools of teaching law school classes. That is a disingenuous argument to attempt.

That's a completely different can of worms not meant for disboards.

 

[DeeBee3]

<citation needed>

Would happily provide or point in direction of resources you could study, but no appropriate for disboards and I don't want an infraction.

 

[brightlined]

Would happily provide or point in direction of resources you could study, but no appropriate for disboards and I don't want an infraction.

That's probably a reasonable indication that your sources are invalid. If, for example, a Virginia public school system had ever planned to teach CRT prior to Youngkin running on banning it, the details of it would be publicly available and likely published by a journalistic institution. It wouldn't be "risky" - it would just be news.

 

[DeeBee3]

That's probably a reasonable indication that your sources are invalid. If, for example, a Virginia public school system had ever planned to teach CRT prior to Youngkin running on banning it, the details of it would be publicly available and likely published by a journalistic institution. It wouldn't be "risky" - it would just be news.

I have no idea where you get your news and you do not know where I get mine. All news is "risky" as it is curated by human beings who are biased. My sources are valid. This all depends on your interpretation of "CRT."

Your response is a reasonable indication that no matter what proof I provided you, you would not believe it or take the time to study it.

 

[roctavia]

This is inaccurate. Yes, Critical Theory is a law school course, and this is often a response when people say schools are "teaching" this. No one is accusing schools of teaching law school classes. That is a disingenuous argument to attempt.

That's a completely different can of worms not meant for disboards.

But people are talking about Critical Race Theory... that is a law school subject and not appropriate for schools. But also it is not being taught in our schools. So people opposing it or trying to ban it are the ones who are being disingenuous and using it as a big scary thing, similar to this Florida legislation that is meant to harm the LGBTQ community but under the guise of "parental choice". Disney is working to protect their LGTBQ community/employees etc by opposing this legislation.

Schools should be teaching appropriate American/world history which does involve teaching about race and racism. But that is not CRT and not something that needs to be banned.

 

[brightlined]

I have no idea where you get your news and you do not know where I get mine. All news is "risky" as it is curated by human beings who are biased. My sources are valid. This all depends on your interpretation of "CRT."

Your response is a reasonable indication that no matter what proof I provided you, you would not believe it or take the time to study it.

I'll read anything if you want to DM it to me. But I find it hard to believe that it's on the mark if you have to hide what it is.

For the record - I read everything. It's easier to have fair and reasonable debates with people if you thoroughly understand both sides of the argument. (I'm not one of those "CNN or Fox" people - honestly, I usually ignore both of those beyond seeing how they're covering something.)

 

[TiggerBouncy]

That's probably a reasonable indication that your sources are invalid. If, for example, a Virginia public school system had ever planned to teach CRT prior to Youngkin running on banning it, the details of it would be publicly available and likely published by a journalistic institution. It wouldn't be "risky" - it would just be news.

I feel what he meant is that posting outside links of this nature on Disboards is likely to have the admins say enough is enough. That doesn't mean his sources are invalid. If you google it (I just did), I can find PLENTY of sources on both sides of the issue and both are probably valid; differences of opinion and differences of school systems and locations.

But CRT discussion goes beyond the nature of the thread which is what I think he meant.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

Disney is working to protect their LGTBQ community/employees etc by opposing this legislation.

For the record, I polled my daughter and her friends and my other friends in the LGBT community (some of them consider themselves separate from the LGBTQ+ community - again, does not belong really here).

Not a single one of them that I heard back from felt that Disney spoke for them if the issue is whether gender identity should be TOUGHT to 5 year old's.

There is still (reasonable) question as to the wording of the law and that should be addressed which they feel is an issue for the courts. There are still understanding issues of the law and those should be addressed by the courts.

But they do not feel they want or need Disney as a corporation to 'protect' them from this legislation.

I realize this is not scientific and they do not speak for everyone. I am just speaking for my little world.

 

[brightlined]

I feel what he meant is that posting outside links of this nature on Disboards is likely to have the admins say enough is enough. That doesn't mean his sources are invalid. If you google it (I just did), I can find PLENTY of sources on both sides of the issue and both are probably valid; differences of opinion and differences of school systems and locations.

That's fair. The problem I have with just saying "it's being taught" is that most of the argument for "it's being taught" is the claim that the curriculum has been "influenced" by "anti-racism" beliefs. No one's teaching CRT the way that the laws are written to suggest it is. And most of these bills are intentionally vague, to the point that they're almost impossible to enforce (which is why many, including this one, are using lawsuits by the general public for enforcement).


Honestly, my biggest problem with this bill is that it's anti-Conservative on a historical level.

Conservatives have run for decades on the idea that problems should be handled at the local level. Biggest example: the push to overturn Roe. The idea there is that states should be allowed to decide for themselves.

Public school issues are almost always handled at the local level - ie, the county or district.

If Tallahassee or Miami, for example, want to teach CRT or gender identity, the state shouldn't be outright banning them from doing so. The people making decisions on school curriculum should be local to the children being taught, with input from the parents of those children. It's the entire reason that school boards exist.

That's always been the Conservative model - let the affected people decide for themselves. Don't let outside people force you to do something.

If a school board in Florida wants to create a curriculum that teaches gender identity to 5-year-olds, they should be able to create that curriculum. Then, make the board defend it in public, and see if they're able to get re-elected (if they're even able to keep their jobs in the first place).

Florida didn't need a law for this. There were already mechanisms in place to deal with it.