Jaimee Michell is clearly all in on the grift. This is a woman who abuses her body with other woman, who wants to use triumphalist identity politics to give herself a name.
She does not want to help children. She just wants to con conservatives so that she can give herself and her sexual perversions some sense of decency. She wants to cover for herself and the rest of the LGBT zoo, all while claiming that, or rather pretending that, she cares about children.
She hates President Donald Trump.
She mocks his supporters.
She calls their support of his presidency and his prospective second run “a cult.”
And then check out the next clapback below that tweet:
Notice how five years ago, she was dead-set on cashing in on President Trump.
Now she wants nothing to do with him, and she considers any ongoing support for him “a cult.” This is sick and selfish grifting, and what makes it worse is that she and her fell GAG groomer-grifters are all in on making money, and making everyone fall into accepting their perversion and pervasive andp permissible.
MassResistance activists have been sounding the alarm on this whole issue for the last two months.
Where have you been, folks? Did you really think that a bunch of out homosexuals who want to flaunt their gayness, their lesbianism, their transgenderism really cared about the kids? Did they really care about the parents?
No, they cared about themselves. They wanted to groom the larger conservative electorate and their media supporters to go in on tolerating homosexuality and transgenderism. It will never be right or normal for two adults of the same sex to sleep with each other. It’s immoral and unnatural. There is no other way to say it.
And it will never be OK for these LGBT groomers to put a “Save the Kids” hat on themselves, as if to give themselves a cover of virtue and goodwill.
Is parental rights the best argument for reforming schools and protecting children?
There are three issues that are dragging down the larger Parents Rights movement to stop LGBT promotion and perversion in the public schools. There is a great deal of compromising and political correctness when it comes to calling out serious issues that are harming children, undermining adults, and hurting our country.
1. “I just want to focus on parental rights.”
Parental rights as a full and final argument for school and public policy are not good enough. Parental rights are not an absolute, and an argument based on rights alone inevitably leads to a clash of competing rights.
Furthermore, there are parents who think they have a right to push sexual explicit themes, images, and ideas onto their children. They are wrong! There are parents who insist on trying to medically transition their children, even though the science and statistics are dead-set against this abusive, corrupt, vile practices.
No, parental rights is not a strong enough argument to stop LGBT indoctrination and exploitation. Parents, citizens, activists in general must speak the truth about homosexuality, transgenderism, and the rest of the sexual paraphilias forcing their way into the public square.
2. “Let’s talk about religious liberty. Let’s not worry about what people do in their bedrooms. Live and let live.”
Frankly, the argument for religious liberty as a catch-all for defending children from sexually explicit and abusive content is a non-starter. The Satanic Temple in several states has filed lawsuits to nullify abortions bans. They claim that abortion procedures actually constitute a ritual in their depraved religious services. Furthermore, adding a sectarian element to the fight for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness creates more conflicts rather than resolving them.
Religious liberty is a copout for people who don’t want to tell the truth about homosexuality and transgenderism. Religious liberty is an evasion for people who don’t want to stand up for natural right and natural law, and who do not want to acknowledge that some cultures are better than others.
3. “It’s not about gay sex or straight sex. I don’t want you to talk with my kids about sex at all.”
Granted, government schools do need to get out of the sex education business. For decades, before the 1960s, children were not receiving any comprehensive sex ed. They learned that there are two sexes, and they learned how babies were formed. That was pretty much it.
Now, we have perverted teachers, administrators, activists, and business interests dead-set on sexualizing children as early as possible. It’s easier to manipulate minds that have been saturated with perversion and pornography at a young age. Indeed, from Ancient Rome to the Present Day, distracting and saturing people in sexual license is a great means for controlling the people. Worst of all, these sex ed programs want to normalize sex among teens, homosexuality, and transgenderism. Children are faced with enough confusion in the world, the media, the business sector. Now the education classes and sectors want to infuse them with more confusion, too. Enough.
However, like in the two instances above, parents don’t want to point out that homosexuality and transgenderism are harmful, intrinsically disorder, and inherently wrong. It’s not politically correct, it’s not polite or right to point out that there are fundamental differences between natural marriage and affection compared to homosexual conduct and gender dysphoria as an essential aspect of someone’s existence.
For those who want to hide behind the mantra “don’t teach my kids anything about sex,” LGBT activists will fire back: “Fine, then the married teacher cannot have a picture of his or her spouse on the desk, either.” They will argue that the teacher should not even wear his wedding ring, or talk about her children.
See, there is nothing wrong with sex per se. People are born in one class or another: male or female. People have sexual desire which they wish to consummate in a marriage. There is nothing wrong with recognizing the natural institution of marriage, and there is certainly nothing wrong with a teacher stating that he has a wife or that she has a husband.
There is going to be some reference to sex, since individuals are male or female, and children need to be confortable with their identities as such. Any attempt to get away from confronting sexual perversion by saying “Let’s not talk about sex at all” will bring out the vile, embittered hypocrisy of LGBT activists to enforce that prohibition pharisaically.
The best way to fight the cultural rot in our country is to tell the truth, and tell the truth without compromise or cowering. All the catch phrases like “parental rights” and “religious liberty” when it comes to the battle to safeguard children and preserve our communities is a cowardly copout at best, and a dangerous rode to accommodation for the LGBT mob at worst.
This may be my most controversial article yet (at least to some) – but precisely because it may be considered controversial is why I believe it is important to publish it. So, let’s begin with a both baffling and bold statement:
LGBT supporters and their opponents are both right.
No. One side must be wrong, because one side has clearly declared that homosexuality is wrong and aberrant, and therefore the behaviors must be curbed and criminalized as much as possible.
Yet, let’s allow Critical Spectator to make his case:
Impossible? Well, let me explain.
Let’s Get Physical
Little over 100 years ago, in 1915, Albert Einstein published his general theory of relativity, explaining gravity and, consequently, the behavior of large objects. About a decade later Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg gave the world their interpretation of quantum mechanics, which serves to describe the physical behavior of subatomic particles.
Unfortunately, while both are immensely valuable they lack a common link – in other words, what works for large objects doesn’t seem to work at a single subatomic particle level – and vice versa.
This paradox keeps springing to mind whenever I’m observing disputes that extend from the interests of an individual to the interests of the society – clashing with them violently – with people on both sides of the front exchanging arguments, completely missing the simple fact that they are speaking from entirely different perspectives.
Indeed, people may get away with disgusting acts in private, but such behaviors cannot become appropriate or mainstream.
And, interestingly, it may mean that much like the physical theories, they are both correct, while being in conflict with each other.
One such war is being fought over LGBT rights.
That phrase “LGBT rights” is a misuse of the notion of right. A right must be universal, not particular, and not promoting one group at the expense of others. What homosexual and transgender activists want is privilege, not equality. They want promotion, not rights.
Individual Fights the Society
The differences in opinion boil down to a clash of an individualist against a communitarian view. The former – arguably more visible these days – suggests that individual freedom is of paramount importance and that people should have the liberty to do what they want even if it meets disapproval of the majority. Communitarianism preaches superiority of the common interest over individual rights.
Individual freedom cannot be the paramount value in any culture. It’s simply not possible. The individual does not come into being via freedom alone. There is a culture, a political hegemony which exists before the individual. This tenet is a fundamental concern in real conservatism, and Conservatives across the country need to get back to adhering to it.
Both of these views – much like the physical theories – can coexist but will clash if they stray outside of the area they make sense in.
On an individual level there is nothing wrong with anybody choosing to live with and loving any other person regardless of their gender (and as long as the relationship is consensual). There is really no reason to deny two consenting adults the ability to live (and sleep) with each other.
Actually, there is plenty wrong with such destructive behaviors. It’s a misuse of organs, it spread venereal disease, and it deprives children of the mother and father that they need to grow up. At this point, Critical Spectator starts to get the whole argument wrong.
However, while that works for individuals it does not necessarily work for the society at large.
Individuals make up society, but not exclusively. As stated above, there is a moral fabric, a cultural framework which must be respected in order for individuals to exist, survive, and thrive.
The value of a relationship to an individual is defined by the person’s subjective interests and feelings. The value of relationships to the society is defined by their functional roles.
Since gay marriage does not serve a reproductive purpose it is therefore not equal to a heterosexual relationship (for the society), even though on an individual level they are both the same – i.e. are expressions of mutual love between two people.
There is no such thing as “Gay marriage.” We need to stop allowing modern-day commentators to normalize this crisis of misusing language.
Conversely, forcing the communitarian expectation of a heterosexual relationship on a homosexual person is pointless for the society and harmful for the individual. It is therefore preferable that individuals retain their liberty in choosing whom to spend their lives with.
There is really no such thing as a “homosexual.” People are not born gay. There is no gay gene, and homosexuality as a facet of one’s behavior or personality is not permanent. It’s simply not true. Once again, Critical Spectator is critically off on this point. Notice how much the discussion has continued to veer to the left when it comes to homosexuality and transgenderism. Commentators and pundits insist on treating the behavior as a static identity, when it is not.
Some people may argue that homosexual couples can have children via surrogacy or adoption but that’s just trying to find a detour to reach a predetermined ideological goal, while ignoring broader implications, consequences of which we don’t know yet – and this uncertainty warrants prudent behavior.
It’s good that Critical Spectator throws some shade at this proposal. Homosexuals should not be parents. They cannot be parents, in fact, since they cannot reproduce.
Asia doesn’t have a habit of taking all Western ideas wholesale, evaluating each of them for its usefulness instead or observing how they play out elsewhere before making a decision.
The normalization of homosexuality has wreaked untold havoc in Western Countries. The political tyranny, the cultural depravity, the moral vacuity which have ensued because of the destruction of natural relations cannot be ignored.
The first issue is the true long term impact on the children – and not only by the parents but also the society, as social stigma can impede good upbringing, even if both parents are perfect in their roles. Prevailing social norms have to be accounted for when enacting laws that address issues of a small minority. And while there is little scientific evidence of directly adverse effects, the samples used in research supporting same-sex parenting are neither randomized nor big enough – and possibly impacted by ideological bias.
More pundits need to point out how homosexual coupling hurts children. Destruction of marriage hurts children, and the corrupt proposal hurts communities as a whole.
Secondly, setting any legal precedents in one case often acts as a gateway for promotion of other ideological goals, which are even more questionable. One of them visible in the West today is an attempt at normalization of transsexualism and the queer theory, supporting the idea of gender fluidity.
Dr. Thio Li-Ann explained quite succinctly that decriminalizing sodomy was the first step in a much larger, more militant agenda. She outlined how reducing sexual differences to “Partner A and Partner B” in marriage would lead to genderless constructs throughout societies, as well as the imposition of this rank dishonesty onto every facet of the culture.
This has severely adverse effects in both formal and informal ways, with courts ruling that children as young as 3 or 4 years old can undergo gender transitioning, with parents finding it fashionable to have or raise a transgender child – including celebrities like Charlize Theron, who is transitioning her 7 year old son into a daughter. Or with informal initiatives which grow in popularity, like the “Drag Queen Story Hour”, featuring men dressed up as women reading stories to children in schools and libraries around America and in a few cities abroad already as well.
Gender transitioning is child abuse through and through. One should call it what it really is: sexual mutilation of minors. Furthermore, countries should criminalize this practice for adults, too. Why should anyone–or everyone–participate in this lie that a man can become a woman, or vice versa? It’s an abusive corruption of language and a vile imposition on the rest of the community. It’s deceptive at its core, as well, and complicates medical as well as other cultural spaces.
Here’s the summary from their website:
“Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is just what it sounds likeâdrag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores. DQSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models. In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real.”
In other words, we’re no longer talking about what two people do in their bedroom but what millions of children are being taught in schools at an especially important and fragile time in their approaching adolescence.
The normalization of homosexuality was never about the bedroom. Homosexual militants wanted to decriminalize their perverse conduct precisely so that they could live “out and proud” openly, then take steps to demand that everyone else accept them. This whole movement was never about consenting adults avoiding incarceration. This movement was about preying on minors and adults to practice their sexual perversion and proclivities with abandon and without limit.
I don’t think it falls under “love is love” slogans. Especially as at least two of the men have turned out to be past sex-offenders. This is tantamount to a bait and switch scheme, and certainly does not inspire trust about the entire community – nor about the consequences of supporting LGBTQ causes only to be duped into letting both terrible people and terrible ideas dictate the new standards.
Those sex offenders were discovered by MassResistance at the Houston Drag Queen Story Hour programs three years ago. And MassResistance has found out that there
Is this the promised progress? Color me skeptical.
There is no possibility of tolerance when it comes to widespread sexual perversion. What people do in the privacy of their homes has public consequences. The government does indeed police and regulate behavior in the bedroom. The culture sets standards regarding what behaviors should be promoted, permitted, and prohibited within and without the bedroom.
Critical Spectator strikes me many ways as a neoliberal globalist. He supports individual freedom, yes, but within the constraints of the local culture’s values and traditions. This neoliberal sentiment also means that individual freedom no matter what has some value. However, he wants to reconcile this globalist tendency with the more conservative leanings of his adopted country. That is a tension which cannot last long.
And has now frayed, since the Singapore government has declared that they will repeal Section 377a of the penal code.
Responsibility & Tolerance in Governance
I’ve often praised Singapore for its common sense and today is no different – even though it may sound counter-intuitive in this case. Section 377A, which (technically) criminalizes sexual relations between men is a remnant of colonial legislation, most of which was repealed in 2007. It is not applied in practice and the government has long declared it would not be enforced.
On the face of it, it would appear it is common sense to just get rid of it. But sometimes the most reasonable thing is to defend the status quo.
First of all, Section 377A serves as a political tool, appealing to largely conservative sentiments of the Singaporean society. Secondly – and crucially – it focuses attention of the pro-LGBT activists, who cannot progress beyond this obstacle with any other ideas.
The law has served as a stop-gap to prevent the spread of further LGBT perversion. Repeal the anti-sodomy statute, then the activists will clamor for the entitlement to get married, to throw parades in their honor, and then demand the “right” to adopt children.
As long as it exists, all protests will be revolving around its repeal. If it falls, one day, then it is safe to assume that Pink Dot will not dissolve – much like it never happened with activism in the West – but, instead, is going to turn to promoting other ideas, opening Pandora’s box for the government.
Indeed, this is the case. With the repeal of 377a, activists across the island nation have voiced their deep displeasure. They want more, and they want it now. In fact, some see it as an insult that the government has taken the token steps to repeal a statute which they were not enforcing in the first place.
Singaporean authorities face an unenviable task of balancing the interests of the country (both its society and well-being of its citizens, as well as its global brand as a modern, supremely developed city-state) with the need to retain support from individuals across various age groups and beliefs.
I find it very frustrating that government policy must be discussed in terms of “balance.” There is right and wrong, there is good and evil, there is wise and unwise, and as much as possible governments must insist on doing what is right, even if it is not popular in the short term, whether with the citizens of the country or the world at large.
At the same time the dead law exposes hypocrisy of the advocates of its repeal, proving that the government’s reluctance to remove it is not unfounded.
Activists don’t care about the real conditions in which gay couples live in Singapore today – free from any persecution and arguably being the safest and most prosperous in the entire region.
Homosexuals have been able to do quite a lot in Singapore, without fear or recrimination or retribution. The truth is that they condemn themselves for abusing their bodies and living in accordance with a lie. A number of Singaporean bloggers and commentators acknowledge that homosexual “communities” are fraught with abuse, negativity, and outright hatred. So much for “Love is Love.”
These facts are irrelevant because political and ideological agendas are too valuable, leveraging this meaningless section as a symbol to rally support behind.
The law is not meaningless, in that curtail the normalization of sexual perversion is good for individuals as society as a whole.
Ultimately, the whole 377A drama has little to do with love or ending discrimination – even if many people who join in may idealistically believe it does. It’s about exerting ideological influence on the country and political one on the government that leads it. But the authorities cannot yield, in no small part because the pressure on them would only intensify to give protesters even more later.
And yet the government has given in, and more pressure will follow.
There’s always some cause in bad need of support, after all.
As a result, the best thing to do is not to enforce the law and yet leave it there to prevent more ambitious pursuits of even more dubious aims. All of that while waiting to see where these ideas lead in the Western countries, respecting the will of the majority while leaving the door open for a safe and comfortable life to the minorities.
The homosexual activists will never leave well-enough alone. They can’t, since they are not well themselves, harming their bodies and struggling with issues
And that’s easily the most balanced, considerate and tolerant approach you’ll witness anywhere in the world.
Final Reflection
The analysis provided by Critical Spectator is thorough, for certain. He could not have predicated that the Singapore government would repeal 377a. I do find troubling his equivocation that both the government and the activists are right about 377a. This is his globalist neoliberalism standing out: “Everyone is right, and everyone has their own truth” is the jist of this misplaced mindset. No, one side is right and one side is wrong, and in politics the powers that best should strive for choosing the right side of the fight as much as possible.
The Singapore government has chosen poorly in their decision to repeal 377a. They most likely fear the potential commercial backlash from Western countries, which are intent on normalizing the destruction of the family. Rather than respecting its own borders, language, and culture, the Singapore government wants to wander further into the globalist, secularist experiment, one which treats identity politics and globalist grandstanding as more important than the long-seated traditions of the different peoples within the island nation.
One has to wonder how much longer Singapore will survive, now that the country is turning away from its singular identity as a conservative enclave in the midst of an ever-increasing globalist neoliberalism.
The pro-family victories are just growing by leaps and bounds across the country. This is really amazing! Of course, the corporate media will never report these victories, so pro-family forces and activists must pick up the slack.
Check out these press releases from the Virginia Family Foundation:
Victoria Cobb, President Friday, August 12, 2022
We are happy to report some encouraging developments this summer on both the parental rights and gender and human design fronts.
Parental Oversight of Sexually Explicit Material
After years of fighting hard to keep schools from presenting highly sensitive and sexualized materials to children, we are finally seeing some progress with helpful policies from Governor Youngkinâs administration.
Last week, the Virginia Department of Education finalized its Model Policies for Sexually Explicit Materials in accordance with SB 656 (R-Dunnavant), which the General Assembly passed this year. These policies ensure schools notify parents of any instructional material that includes sexually explicit content and to offer alternative, non-explicit instructional material in its place. These policies are now ready for local school divisions to implement!
These model policies prioritize parentsâ involvement in their childâs education by doing things like requiring principals to publish sexually explicit material and emphasizing the importance of protecting a childâs innocence, a concept thatâs attacked by todayâs culture.
Unlike the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students published by VDOE under the Northam Administration in 2021, which violate the legal rights and responsibilities of parents, these model policies actually acknowledge that parents do in fact have the fundamental responsibility to make decisions about their childâs education.
Of course the work isnât finished, as each local school board must adopt the VDOE policies or something more comprehensive no later than January 1, 2023. But our Grassroots and Policy teams are already working on a plan to spread the word and help encourage school boards to create policies that protect parental rights.
Request to ban âConversion Therapyâ Denied!
On another front, the Department of Health Professions rejected a request to create a regulation that prohibits the ability of a licensed Behavior Analyst to help an adult overcome unwanted sexual desires or gender confusion using mere talk strategies (i.e., âconversion therapyâ). These so-called âconversion therapyâ bans have been struck down as unconstitutional limitations on free speech by courts across the country and represent classic âviewpoint discrimination.â
We urged the Department to reject the proposal because it would also interfere with a patientâs right to direct the purpose and goals of their therapy/counseling. The reality is that people can and do change their mind, behavior, and desires relative to their sexuality all the time, often due to professional counseling they have received.
We love it when we get to communicate good news to you, especially when many parents are feeling overwhelmed by the avalanche of hypersexualized topics that conflict with their family values being taught to their kids. We are thankful that good decisions are being made that protect our rights and freedoms.
For MassResistance activists like me, the defeat of another reparative therapy ban is a big deal. Indeed, all such bans have already been ruled unconstitutional, and any further steps to push such an abuse of power will only bring a state into further litigation.
The fact that parents have more powers to review sexually explicit materials is a great reform, too, and it should not be neglected.
Loser Albert Carvalho of LAUSD by way of Miami-Dade County, Florida
Working with MassResistance, I have been privileged to work with parents all over the United States. I even connected with a number of activists in Miama-Dade County, who had been fighting against their countywide school district earlier this year.
Miami-Dade County schools wanted to push all kinds of LGBT perversion in the children. They even wanted to replace Hispanic Heritage Month with LGBT History Month. Disgusting.
The parents also told me that their school district superintendent, Alberto Carvalho, was hired by LA Unified School District!
Wow, what a small world.
Things are not working out so well for the new hire in Downtown Los Angeles, either. Check out this report from EdSource:
Enrollment decline: LAUSD’s Carvalho says families leaving the state or choosing to home-school
Where have all the students gone?
They have fled from the poisonous, decrepit, failed system that is government-run education in Los Angeles County. That’s what!
Californiaâs K-12 enrollment decline of more than 270,000 students since the pandemic began is largely attributable to people leaving the state, not enrolling children in transitional kindergarten or kindergarten, or deciding to home-school their children but failing to file the paperwork to account for them, the head of the stateâs largest school district and other experts said Sunday.
The pandemic allowed parents to see what their children were REALLY learning in the classroom. Parents from all over Los Angeles County alone showed me all kinds of terrible lessons that the SJWs disguised as teachers were pushing on their kids.
The fact that learning was Zoomed into the home gave parents unprecedented access to learn what their children were taking in, and these revelations helped parents rise up against all kinds of perverse lessons and curricula, including Critical Racist Theory, Critical Perv Theory (LGBT, Queer, etc.)
âIn Los Angeles, in a very, very obvious and evident way, the greatest loss was in (transitional) kindergarten and kindergarten students,â LA Unified School District Superintendent Alberto Carvalho told a gathering of education journalists. âYou have to really accept that parents made a decision, âIâm not going to send my kid to pre-k or kindergarten.’â
Notice how this report makes it seem as the parents’ decision was unthinking, unfeeling, or arbitrary. The truth is that parents are taking into account the long-term needs of their children, and they don’t want them to suffer in a pandemic-driven school system that puts the desires of government employees and politicians ahead of children and their parents.
Regardless of where the students ended up, their learning has been harmed, Stanford University education professor Thomas Dee said. Deeâs research described how the youngest students were most affected by not returning to school following Covid. His work was highlighted in a collaboration report that included EdSource, The New York Times and Big Local News, a data journalism project at Stanford.
Not sure what to think of this statement at first glance. How do academics measure real educational achievement nowadays? The metrics for assessing student performance in homeschools and home-school co-ops deserve more attention and a different kind of metric, I think, since it’s about more than mere test scores.
âEnrollment data shows a disruption that students are experiencing, and those disruptions matter because research literature shows switching schools, particularly in a reactive manner, impacts development,â Dee said.
The disruptions are the fault of school districts and the administrators who shut students out of their education. Don’t blame the parents!
And âmissing out on early childhood educational experiences can be really consequential,â Dee added.
Kids are still missing out because in too many districts, they are still required to wear masks. Covering up a child’s mouth impairs their speech and cognitive development. It’s just so vile!
Across California, the number of students enrolled in the public school system dropped below 6 million this year for the first time in two decades. As districts navigated the sudden shift to virtual learning amid the pandemic, declines steepened as many families faced extra barriers, considered alternatives to the public school system or chose to delay enrollment for their youngest learners.
These barriers didn’t come out of nowhere. These barriers are the result of selfish politicians and bureacrats–and teachers–who put their wants ahead of the needs of children. No, adult teachers do not need to wear masks, and NO, they have no right to demand that the students in their classrooms wear masks, either. They were perfectly capable of teaching without all the COVID-19 restrictions and regulations. A lot of greedy teachers unions and their enablers wanted to milk the government systems for as much taxpayer dollars as possible without having to work.
The enrollment declines, both in California and nationally, are going to lead to fiscal impacts and school closures in the years ahead, said Daniel Domenech, executive director of the American Association of School Administrators.
GOOD!
âYouâre going to have to sell buildings when they become empty. Youâre going to have to exit staff because you wonât need the number of teachers that you have,â Domenech said. âParents didnât want their children in school because they were afraid.â
GOOD! And they have only themselves to blame. This is some of the best news I have read yet, especially considering how difficult it is for parents to get pro-student responses from school districts, administrators, and teachers. They brought this mess on themselves, and they deserve to suffer from it.
But, he added, the impact of the pandemic on students is profound.
âThe whole virtual learning experience was a fiasco because school districts were not prepared for virtual learning,â Domenech said. Nationally, thereâs âa pulling away of students from the public school system because of the impact of Covid.â But he said itâs unclear how many of the students will return.
Virtual learning is that, virtual, i.e. not real. Children need constant contact and interaction with their teachers and peers to improve their learning and development.
The three men spoke Sunday afternoon at the national conference of the Education Writers Association in Orlando, Florida.
In Los Angeles, enrollment has been steadily declining for two decades. The district has 58% of the student population it had at its peak in the early 2000s, now at 430,000 students.
Los Angeles Unified is one of the worst school districts in the country. The learning outcomes are terrible, there is no accountability, teachers and administrators have a long record of ignoring, enabling, or even enacting abuse against students. The politics of the school board, the teachers union, the administrators, and the state legislature has created a hostile, untenable situation in which constant rancor is the norm, not the exception. Worst of all, the needs of the students is completely ignored.
But data shows those students did not migrate in large numbers to private and charter schools, the superintendent said. Charter schools in the district also had an enrollment decline of about 2% during the pandemic, he said.
Charter schools are going woke, too, and parents are breaking away from that mess, too. Charter schools alone are not the solution. School choice will impose competition on all schools, certainly, but most importantly curricular integrity and
LAUSDâs enrollment decline has only increased since the pandemic hit. The district lost â9,000 kindergartners when the pandemic hit,â Carvalho said. âThatâs a huge, a huge number.â
The district has hired people to go into neighborhoods to try to track down missing students and interview their parents, he said, describing a massive push in which he and other top administrators have joined others to try to keep track of 30 children each.
If this does not sound creepy to you, I don’t know what to tell you. The school district spent more money that it does not have to hire people to “track down missing students.” TRACK DOWN?! What is this? Now school districts are extending their police-state machinations outside of the classroom and pressuring/bullying parents! We all know where this is leading: these observers, “trackers” are going to find out whether the parents are providing any kind of education. If they think that the level of education does not meet their “standards,” the CPS can come in and take the kids away. This is just awful.
Every parent who gets a visit from these trackers must slam their door in their faces and tell them to get off their property.
In some cases, he said, district workers have found that undocumented families left the country during the pandemic âbecause there was no opportunity to work. The kids left with the families. And they left by the thousands.â
More good news! Illegal aliens are leaving the country. LAUSD worked so hard to attract illegal aliens, because for that corrupt district, it was never about love of California, the county, or the country; it was all about raking in more taxpayer dollars based on the attendance disbursements. This is beyond disgusting.
In other instances, he added, families left California for other states such as Florida âbecause of political ideology and lower taxes. If they had the means, parents made decisions.â
There! Finally someone has the guts to put in print that California sucks, and the Democrats own these failures.
They went to another state where âtheir child could go to a school that was more aligned with their own beliefs in terms of medicine and in terms of schooling.â
And let’s not forget the fact that Florida opened up their schools throughout the entire season. They refused to shut down the schools, and they banned school districts from forcing students to wear masks. Best of all, Florida weathered the COVID-19 spread with little trouble and enjoyed comparable, if not lower rates of infection compared to hard-core lockdown blue states.
Perhaps the biggest problem in figuring out the decline student by student is the lag in parents letting the district officially know they have decided to home-school their children by filing an affidavit with school officials.
âParents are taking their time to file the documents,â he said.
The parents should be more churlish. They should not have to tell anyone anything. Of course, the problem for the last seventy-plus years is that school districts have their parens patriae role, i.e. they can assert a limited parental role when the child is outside of the classroom.
Statewide, during the height of the pandemic, a record 35,000 families had filed an affidavit with the state to open a private home school, but the numbers dropped the following year, according to California Department of Education records. That level is still much higher than the 15,000 affidavits filed in the years prior to the pandemic.
Let’s hope for more private schools popping up all over the state of California. No one in their right mind should want their children to suffer in a decrepit, underperforming government school.
According to LAUSDâs enrollment analysis conducted as a part of Carvalhoâs 100-day plan that launched when he became superintendent in February, LAUSD has seen the most significant declines by grade at the elementary school level and the most significant declines geographically among west and central local districts over the last six years.
The spread of enrollment decline is really good news, because it goes to show that this decline is not just in supposedly white neighborhoods. Central sections of Los Angeles Unified have predominantly black and Hispanic populations. Parents care about their kids, period. It has nothing to do with skin color or income level. Parents care about their kids, and no amount of cultural marxist wrangling can change that.
The district has also noticed that the largest drops have been among middle-class families, but that analysis does not take into account the students who left to attend the City of Angeles virtual school during the pandemic.
WOW! Notice the journalistic sleight of hand here. More like a “slight,” indeed, insulting poor and working-class families, as if they do not care about their children at all. Most of the kids who were the most affected by the virtual learning were no doubt poor and working class families, since it was much harder for them to have one parent at home to supervise the children during their in-home Zoom lessons.
LAUSD doesnât consider private schools a large factor in its enrollment decline because local private school enrollment has also been on the decline for the past few years, dropping more than 6% since 2017. Reflective of the national trend, homeschooling in the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim metropolitan statistical area doubled to 8% in 2020.
Homeschooling has become so much easier because of the wide availability of resources via the Internet, social media, and trading applications online. What was a difficult transition for many parents twenty or even ten years ago has become so much easier because of the wide array of curricular choices and programs online and via homeschool co-ops.
Final Reflection
There is so much winning following the steady implosion of government school enrollment around the country. For decades, the school districts have been failing students and insulting parents. Bureaucrats, administrators, and politicians have put the demands of special interests ahead of the needs of children. The COVID-19 pandemic pushed parents past the breaking point, and they finally rose up demanding the best for their kids. They do the right thing to the degree that they can homeschool their children AND deprive the local school districts of any further funding.
The State of the Union 
