

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Members and supporters of the LGBTQ community attend the "Say Gay Anyway" rally in Miami Beach, Florida on March 13, 2022. (Photo: Chandan Khanna/AFP via Getty Images)
As the GOP pushes--and passes--broad laws to prohibit books, discussions or mental health services on issues of gender identity or sexual orientation, under the absurd guise of preventing sexual abuse, the Washington Post is laying out a welcome mat for the party's anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.
In giving the GOP the headline and the (extraordinarily lengthy) lead, Natanson and Balingit gave a bigoted and dangerous campaign the right to frame the story as a debate with two somehow comparable sides.
Under the headline, "Teachers Who Mention Sexuality Are 'Grooming' Kids, Conservatives Say," Washington Post writers Hannah Natanson and Moriah Balingit (4/5/22) spent the first 12 paragraphs of their article describing and quoting the right-wing claims that teachers talking about gender identity or sexual orientation--and those who support them--"want children primed for sexual abuse."
These malicious accusations, part of a spreading movement led by Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law, have not a shred of truth to them. But they will certainly stifle free speech in classrooms and further endanger LGBTQ+ students, at a time when many are struggling even more than usual because of the pandemic.
It barely matters that the Post brought in some "experts" later to offer the "other side"--that actually talking about these things in fact helps curtail sexual abuse (which in schools primarily happens at the hands of heterosexual male teachers, noted all the way down in the 37th paragraph of the Post article) and bullying against LGBTQ+ kids. In giving the GOP the headline and the (extraordinarily lengthy) lead, Natanson and Balingit gave a bigoted and dangerous campaign the right to frame the story as a debate with two somehow comparable sides.
In this way it's quite similar, in fact, to a piece Natanson penned last year (7/24/21) about "a war over critical race theory" in Traverse City, Michigan. There, a mock slave auction on Snapchat, along with posts like "all Black should die," served in Natanson's view to show,
how a town grappling with an undeniable incident of racism can serve as fertile ground for the ongoing national war over whether racism is embedded in American society.
As I noted at the time (FAIR.org, 8/2/21), admitting that the incident was racist but not that racism is undeniably embedded in society is precisely aligned with the right's framing of the situation, letting them set the narrative. Natanson "balanced" views of BIPOC students experiencing racism (and white students speaking in support of an equity resolution) with white adults insisting, against all evidence, that the town "was never racist." It's just "two ways of viewing the world," she shrugged.
Last week's "grooming" piece was perhaps even worse, in that not only did they both-sides the issue--which is egregious enough--Natanson and Balingit gave a much bigger spotlight to the bigoted and dangerous "side." They quoted ten sources defending the "Don't Say Gay" laws or attacking their opponents, front-loading most of them, and only six opposed--half of whom appeared after the 33rd paragraph, for those who've stuck around long enough to hear them. (One academic was also quoted, offering no direct debunking but arguing, among other things, that the right's strategy is "effective" and "clever.")
Of those most directly impacted by the bills, no LGBTQ+ students and only one openly LGBTQ+ educator were quoted.
In framing the piece, Natanson and Balingit wrote that the argument over "grooming" "draws on previous tactics adopted by the right to oppose the erosion of traditional gender roles at moments of societal transition, experts say." As media critic Dan Froomkin (Press Watch, 4/6/22) pointed out, "opposing the erosion of traditional gender roles" is quite a euphemism for the right's past homophobic and misogynistic campaigns against basic rights for women and lesbians and gays.
It was in Florida, as some rare voices in the media (e.g., Tampa Bay Times, 3/17/22) noted in their "Don't Say Gay" coverage, that Anita Bryant's infamous "Save Our Children" campaign was born, a vicious fight led by the religious right against early anti-discrimination laws to protect the rights of lesbians and gays. Rallying behind the claim that such laws would pave the way for gay teachers to "recruit" their young charges, the right stoked a moral panic to roll back these nascent rights.
Today, again, as groups long discriminated against and marginalized are fighting back against the "traditional" gender and racial hierarchies that render them less free than others, the right is pulling out its old moral panic playbook. It's urgent that the Post stop foregrounding and normalizing the specious right-wing claims behind attacks on LGBTQ+ kids and their teachers--like the parallel attacks on Black kids and their teachers as part of the "anti-CRT" campaign--and start highlighting the incredible harms these attacks cause to democracy, education and already-marginalized youth.
Please ask the Washington Post to foreground the viewpoints and interests of LGBTQ+ students rather than those of bigots in their coverage of the gender and sexual politics in schools.
You can send a message at letters@washpost.com, or via Twitter @washingtonpost.
Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your message in the comments thread here.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
As the GOP pushes--and passes--broad laws to prohibit books, discussions or mental health services on issues of gender identity or sexual orientation, under the absurd guise of preventing sexual abuse, the Washington Post is laying out a welcome mat for the party's anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.
In giving the GOP the headline and the (extraordinarily lengthy) lead, Natanson and Balingit gave a bigoted and dangerous campaign the right to frame the story as a debate with two somehow comparable sides.
Under the headline, "Teachers Who Mention Sexuality Are 'Grooming' Kids, Conservatives Say," Washington Post writers Hannah Natanson and Moriah Balingit (4/5/22) spent the first 12 paragraphs of their article describing and quoting the right-wing claims that teachers talking about gender identity or sexual orientation--and those who support them--"want children primed for sexual abuse."
These malicious accusations, part of a spreading movement led by Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law, have not a shred of truth to them. But they will certainly stifle free speech in classrooms and further endanger LGBTQ+ students, at a time when many are struggling even more than usual because of the pandemic.
It barely matters that the Post brought in some "experts" later to offer the "other side"--that actually talking about these things in fact helps curtail sexual abuse (which in schools primarily happens at the hands of heterosexual male teachers, noted all the way down in the 37th paragraph of the Post article) and bullying against LGBTQ+ kids. In giving the GOP the headline and the (extraordinarily lengthy) lead, Natanson and Balingit gave a bigoted and dangerous campaign the right to frame the story as a debate with two somehow comparable sides.
In this way it's quite similar, in fact, to a piece Natanson penned last year (7/24/21) about "a war over critical race theory" in Traverse City, Michigan. There, a mock slave auction on Snapchat, along with posts like "all Black should die," served in Natanson's view to show,
how a town grappling with an undeniable incident of racism can serve as fertile ground for the ongoing national war over whether racism is embedded in American society.
As I noted at the time (FAIR.org, 8/2/21), admitting that the incident was racist but not that racism is undeniably embedded in society is precisely aligned with the right's framing of the situation, letting them set the narrative. Natanson "balanced" views of BIPOC students experiencing racism (and white students speaking in support of an equity resolution) with white adults insisting, against all evidence, that the town "was never racist." It's just "two ways of viewing the world," she shrugged.
Last week's "grooming" piece was perhaps even worse, in that not only did they both-sides the issue--which is egregious enough--Natanson and Balingit gave a much bigger spotlight to the bigoted and dangerous "side." They quoted ten sources defending the "Don't Say Gay" laws or attacking their opponents, front-loading most of them, and only six opposed--half of whom appeared after the 33rd paragraph, for those who've stuck around long enough to hear them. (One academic was also quoted, offering no direct debunking but arguing, among other things, that the right's strategy is "effective" and "clever.")
Of those most directly impacted by the bills, no LGBTQ+ students and only one openly LGBTQ+ educator were quoted.
In framing the piece, Natanson and Balingit wrote that the argument over "grooming" "draws on previous tactics adopted by the right to oppose the erosion of traditional gender roles at moments of societal transition, experts say." As media critic Dan Froomkin (Press Watch, 4/6/22) pointed out, "opposing the erosion of traditional gender roles" is quite a euphemism for the right's past homophobic and misogynistic campaigns against basic rights for women and lesbians and gays.
It was in Florida, as some rare voices in the media (e.g., Tampa Bay Times, 3/17/22) noted in their "Don't Say Gay" coverage, that Anita Bryant's infamous "Save Our Children" campaign was born, a vicious fight led by the religious right against early anti-discrimination laws to protect the rights of lesbians and gays. Rallying behind the claim that such laws would pave the way for gay teachers to "recruit" their young charges, the right stoked a moral panic to roll back these nascent rights.
Today, again, as groups long discriminated against and marginalized are fighting back against the "traditional" gender and racial hierarchies that render them less free than others, the right is pulling out its old moral panic playbook. It's urgent that the Post stop foregrounding and normalizing the specious right-wing claims behind attacks on LGBTQ+ kids and their teachers--like the parallel attacks on Black kids and their teachers as part of the "anti-CRT" campaign--and start highlighting the incredible harms these attacks cause to democracy, education and already-marginalized youth.
Please ask the Washington Post to foreground the viewpoints and interests of LGBTQ+ students rather than those of bigots in their coverage of the gender and sexual politics in schools.
You can send a message at letters@washpost.com, or via Twitter @washingtonpost.
Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your message in the comments thread here.
As the GOP pushes--and passes--broad laws to prohibit books, discussions or mental health services on issues of gender identity or sexual orientation, under the absurd guise of preventing sexual abuse, the Washington Post is laying out a welcome mat for the party's anti-LGBTQ+ agenda.
In giving the GOP the headline and the (extraordinarily lengthy) lead, Natanson and Balingit gave a bigoted and dangerous campaign the right to frame the story as a debate with two somehow comparable sides.
Under the headline, "Teachers Who Mention Sexuality Are 'Grooming' Kids, Conservatives Say," Washington Post writers Hannah Natanson and Moriah Balingit (4/5/22) spent the first 12 paragraphs of their article describing and quoting the right-wing claims that teachers talking about gender identity or sexual orientation--and those who support them--"want children primed for sexual abuse."
These malicious accusations, part of a spreading movement led by Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law, have not a shred of truth to them. But they will certainly stifle free speech in classrooms and further endanger LGBTQ+ students, at a time when many are struggling even more than usual because of the pandemic.
It barely matters that the Post brought in some "experts" later to offer the "other side"--that actually talking about these things in fact helps curtail sexual abuse (which in schools primarily happens at the hands of heterosexual male teachers, noted all the way down in the 37th paragraph of the Post article) and bullying against LGBTQ+ kids. In giving the GOP the headline and the (extraordinarily lengthy) lead, Natanson and Balingit gave a bigoted and dangerous campaign the right to frame the story as a debate with two somehow comparable sides.
In this way it's quite similar, in fact, to a piece Natanson penned last year (7/24/21) about "a war over critical race theory" in Traverse City, Michigan. There, a mock slave auction on Snapchat, along with posts like "all Black should die," served in Natanson's view to show,
how a town grappling with an undeniable incident of racism can serve as fertile ground for the ongoing national war over whether racism is embedded in American society.
As I noted at the time (FAIR.org, 8/2/21), admitting that the incident was racist but not that racism is undeniably embedded in society is precisely aligned with the right's framing of the situation, letting them set the narrative. Natanson "balanced" views of BIPOC students experiencing racism (and white students speaking in support of an equity resolution) with white adults insisting, against all evidence, that the town "was never racist." It's just "two ways of viewing the world," she shrugged.
Last week's "grooming" piece was perhaps even worse, in that not only did they both-sides the issue--which is egregious enough--Natanson and Balingit gave a much bigger spotlight to the bigoted and dangerous "side." They quoted ten sources defending the "Don't Say Gay" laws or attacking their opponents, front-loading most of them, and only six opposed--half of whom appeared after the 33rd paragraph, for those who've stuck around long enough to hear them. (One academic was also quoted, offering no direct debunking but arguing, among other things, that the right's strategy is "effective" and "clever.")
Of those most directly impacted by the bills, no LGBTQ+ students and only one openly LGBTQ+ educator were quoted.
In framing the piece, Natanson and Balingit wrote that the argument over "grooming" "draws on previous tactics adopted by the right to oppose the erosion of traditional gender roles at moments of societal transition, experts say." As media critic Dan Froomkin (Press Watch, 4/6/22) pointed out, "opposing the erosion of traditional gender roles" is quite a euphemism for the right's past homophobic and misogynistic campaigns against basic rights for women and lesbians and gays.
It was in Florida, as some rare voices in the media (e.g., Tampa Bay Times, 3/17/22) noted in their "Don't Say Gay" coverage, that Anita Bryant's infamous "Save Our Children" campaign was born, a vicious fight led by the religious right against early anti-discrimination laws to protect the rights of lesbians and gays. Rallying behind the claim that such laws would pave the way for gay teachers to "recruit" their young charges, the right stoked a moral panic to roll back these nascent rights.
Today, again, as groups long discriminated against and marginalized are fighting back against the "traditional" gender and racial hierarchies that render them less free than others, the right is pulling out its old moral panic playbook. It's urgent that the Post stop foregrounding and normalizing the specious right-wing claims behind attacks on LGBTQ+ kids and their teachers--like the parallel attacks on Black kids and their teachers as part of the "anti-CRT" campaign--and start highlighting the incredible harms these attacks cause to democracy, education and already-marginalized youth.
Please ask the Washington Post to foreground the viewpoints and interests of LGBTQ+ students rather than those of bigots in their coverage of the gender and sexual politics in schools.
You can send a message at letters@washpost.com, or via Twitter @washingtonpost.
Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your message in the comments thread here.