Lincoln, NE Public School staff's transgender training concerns parents


I would expect this PC garbage in CA, but not in a overly red state like Nebraska. What’s next, unisex restrooms and locker rooms because some boys may not be a boy and some girls may not be a girl? SMH.

"By sidelining academic teacher training and replacing it with social re-engineering, the LPS administration has placed a higher priority on social reformation than on education,” Terry says in a copy of an “introductory speech” prepared for school board members.

Terry, reached by phone, declined further comment, saying she preferred to address the school board through established board procedures. The Journal Star obtained a copy of her email and attachments from another source.

Her email to other parents included three handouts she said had been provided to LPS staff, including one titled "12 easy steps on the way to gender inclusiveness” that, among other things, advised avoiding “gendered” expressions such as “boys and girls.”

The handout suggests opting for more specific terms such as “calling all readers” or “hey, campers.”

Other handouts talk about the continuum of sex and gender, and that the human condition doesn’t operate on a strict binary system of male and female.


This must be what I saw earlier on one of the NCRegister blogs:

Teachers Told to Call Kids “Purple Penguins” as “Boys and Girls” Not Inclusive

My first thought was, why not just use the word “children”? :shrug:

Where I grew up, “you guys” is meant to include both boys and girls. :stuck_out_tongue:

It is all a bit odd, though, that’s for sure.


"advised avoiding “gendered” expressions such as “boys and girls.”

Well, sure, we wouldn’t want young kids to find out that human beings consist of boys and girls, men and women, husbands and wives, moms and dads.

We’ll cover that in biology and anatomy–maybe.

I have to wonder how far the education establishment is willing to go in denying reality. Perhaps such terms as boys and girls will have to be outlawed.


Maybe we should just redefine the words “boys” and “girls”?


Student Services Director Russ Uhing said the goal of the administrative session was to help school leaders better understand the issues facing students so they can be welcoming to all students and make them feel comfortable.

That’s particularly important for gay, lesbian and transgender students, he said, because they are at a higher risk of being bullied, having mental health issues and committing suicide.

LPS has trained staff on behavioral and social issues, including gay and lesbian issues, for many years, Leggiardo said. And staff time is spent on other behavior, cultural and social issues. But this is the first year they’ve talked specifically about transgender issues, mostly because there is more information available.

What is there to get angry about here? I understand you may not agree with any number of things involving this, but they’re simply advisory notes to help teachers wrap their heads around what’s going on with even one or two of their kids. It’s not enforcement that, “If I hear the word ‘girl’ or ‘boy’ mentioned in this school, disciplinary action will be taken.” We’re talking about helping kids not get bullied, and recognize when certain kids are at higher risk for bullying and suicide.

The parent that you quoted seems to have had sort of a knee-jerk reaction this, especially since inclusivity training has been a part of their training for years now. Her words are incredibly hyperbolic and a little over-the-top for what’s actually going on, in my opinion. Especially since 1) Kids who don’t conform to neat gender roles and stereotypes exist in schools whether or not you think it’s right, and 2) Many times, these kids are tormented by fellow students and even teachers.

The morality of whether transgender individuals should be supported in their transition and whether or not they need to be understood/protected from bullying/suicide are two totally separate issues. I think that LPS had the latter in mind when devising this literature, which is entirely noble in my opinion.


That is crazy. Can’t believe the parents in Lincoln would put up with this. Doesn’t sound like the Lincoln I used to know as I was born and raised there. I didn’t go to the public schools though.


Apparently these materials are only being used at one school, where some of its students have identified as transgender.

[Lincoln Superintendent Steve Joel] said the materials were only distributed at Irving Middle School and won’t be disseminated district-wide, because it’s up to each school to determine what their needs are.

“Now obviously there might be a school where this isn’t a conversation and maybe doesn’t need to be a conversation,” he said. “To Irving’s credit, they have children that represent what the discussion points are and they’re helping their faculty understand, give definition.”

“There is no one size fits all approach to this,” he said. “We can’t turn a deaf ear to that. We have to understand it. (That) doesn’t mean we have to approve of it, but certainly we can’t be judgmental inside our schools.”


Racial integration of schools was PC garbage that parents protested too.

Just sayin’.


No wonder so many parents are choosing to home school


This is already the case in my area.

That’s an invalid recycled argument. How does the the color of a person’s skin/where they’re born at all compare to poor choices one makes in life/the misinformation one learns?


That’s an invalid recycled argument. How does the the color of a person’s skin/where they’re born at all compare to poor choices one makes in life/the misinformation one learns?


This is already the case in my area.

That’s an invalid recycled argument. How does the the color of a person’s skin/where they’re born at all compare to poor choices one makes in life/the misinformation one learns?


You are begging the question regarding poor choices and misinformation.

Regardless. I wasn’t making an argument. I was just sayin’. And what I said was true.


How is it an invalid argument, though? What makes it necessarily invalid?

And just because a trait isn’t physically distinguishable doesn’t mean it can’t be the basis for discrimination, both historically and presently. Were/Are Christians persecuted for the way they look/where they’re from, or the choice they’ve freely made to follow Christ?

Nothing is a true equivalent, but comparing the history of discrimination and intolerance lets us better understand its ugly face and change the way we treat people as individuals with inherent dignity, however flawed we all may be.


Are unisex restrooms and locker rooms intrinsically bad? In the “Down Time” episode of the vintage cop show CHiPs, Officer Grossman says, “They’re putting in a women’s locker room. Orders from Sacramento.” Officer Cahill subsequently says something along the lines of, “Yeah, it’s another blow for women’s lib!” Keep in mind that the CHiPs episode in question originally aired in 1978.


Disgusting on every level.

There was a scientific article a while back detailing that majority of these documented transgender people are the result of bad invitrofertilizaion done via some unlicensed clinic that the parents pumped $$$$$ into, in order to have a kid. Why adoption was never an I option for them, I’ll never know.


What you said is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

The color of one’s skin vs. the actions one takes in life. The two are not comparible in any sense. “LGBT” is not a religion even if its ‘members’ tout it as such. It’s an abominable lifestyle and not something to encourage, especially to young children. God creates people of different skin colors but gives us all free will. Are you suggesting a boy should be able to call himself a girl? Sure he has the freewill to do so but it doesn’t make it true nor does it mean we should all encourage it. I cannot believe this is even an isue in the world today… I have to wonder when it was that we all lost our marbles!? :shrug:


One of the evils of secular left liberalism is that it denies nature - the nature that God created - and replaces it with a false nature created in the image of the god of political correctness. Some of this seeps into the Catholic liturgy with gender specific references taken out of the readings and prayers. It is evil and insidious - especially since it seeks to subvert children.



So what’s your point?


That’s why I tend to side with Nature in the “Nature Vs Nurture” stuff. What is Evil buy nature is forever evil. What is Good by nature is forever good.

We are good. The Nurture of Sin makes us Evil. The Nurture of God makes us More Good.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit