Yeah, I’m probably confusing it with the violence side.
aren’t we all…
This seems like an appropriate place for this:
One publisher created multiple versions of its social studies material, softening or eliminating references to race — even in the story of Rosa Parks — as it sought to gain approval in Florida
“Rosa Parks is a woman who rode a bus”, right?
How you can mention Rosa Parks without mentioning race is… ugh, I don’t even know.
The second one at least acknowledges race in a roundabout way. And actually “enslaved people” is perhaps more accurate. Isn’t there a story about an African-American man who a restaurant refused service to… until the next day when the exact same person showed up at the exact same restaurant decked out in African-looking clothing. Assuming he was some sort of important ambassador or businessman visiting all the way from Africa, the restaurant was then only too happy to serve him.
But even so… to not mention race…
Because Florida Law. Specifically the Stop W.O.K.E. Act. Can’t have snowflakes feel bad.
Here are the before and after the company submitted to comply with the Act.
The second section replaced “african american” with “certain groups” despite it being one very specific group.
So apparently there were a bunch of cops at the Orlando drag show, and they witnessed … wait for it … nothing.
But while agents took photos of three minors — who appeared to be accompanied by adults — at the Orlando drag show, they acknowledged that nothing indecent had happened on stage, according to an incident report obtained exclusively by the Miami Herald.
“Besides some of the outfits being provocative (bikinis and short shorts), agents did not witness any lewd acts such as exposure of genital organs,” the brief report stated. “The performers did not have any physical contact while performing to the rhythm of the music with any patrons.”
Sounds like they did not break the law.
I don’t have a mainstream news source, but a bill in Florida just made it out of committee today which if read literally would ban insurance coverage for mastectomies, including for breast cancer patients. This was pointed out during the debate in committee. The goal of the bill is to ban gender affirming care for teenagers, and ban insurance coverage of it for adults, and the problem for cis women comes into how they define that. Presumably that will be fixed before the full Florida house votes on the bill, but that’s a pretty big screw up.
Also could ban prostatectomies. Crazy stuff.