USF: Their Latest Shark Jumping Policy

I really thought that, by the time I got around to this, it would have been done to death. I thought for sure it would have made a bigger splash, but, maybe, idiocy from the University of San Francisco Jesuits is just old news – same lunacy, different day. However, this seems to be an “all bets are off” move on the whole Catholicism thing: http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4659/‘Gender-Inclusive-Housing’-Pilot-Program-Launched-at-Univ-of-San-Francisco.aspx

The Jesuit-run University of San Francisco (USF) launched a pilot program for the 2016-2016 school year offering “gender-inclusive housing” to students who “identify as transgender” or “do not wish to be identified by any sex or gender identity,” embracing and promoting a view of human sexuality at odds with Church teaching and the statements of Pope Francis and the U.S. bishops.

Whoa-ho! “Embracing and promoting a view of human sexuality at odds with Church teaching”?!? They did WAYYYY more than that. They essentially said, “Room with whomever you choose. “ Want to room with someone who is confused about their gender (which I’d like to point out is not a mental issue but a purely scientific, factual reality)? No problem. Want to room with someone of the opposite sex (they used to call that cohabiting)? No problem.

I know many a college student who wouldn’t mind shacking up with their boyfriend/girlfriend, and they often “hook up” in their dorm rooms anyway, so they might as well be shacking up. That said, it’s usually frowned upon by a Catholic school. Yes, I realize we’re talking about the University of San Francisco but, still, codifying it in the housing code even seems a bit ridiculous for them.

 The description on the USF website defines gender-inclusive housing as “an option for two or more students to share the same room regardless of their sex, gender, or gender identity,” and states that the housing option is intended to support the University’s mission “to create safe, affirming, and inclusive communities by providing options for students of varying identities and preferences.”

Again, what the what??? Seriously, USF, you just jumped the shark in your race to be the most cutting edge on the Catholic immorality scene!

 In addition to reasons relating to gender identity, students who “prefer to live with a roommate of a different gender” can also apply for the housing. The description noted, “Like all other on-campus housing options at the University of San Francisco, gender-inclusive housing is not intended for romantic couples though USF will not investigate your reasons for seeking gender-inclusive housing.”

Well, at least they admit they’re just going with a “don’t ask, don’t tell” for the “romantic” crowd. 

A representative of the University told The Cardinal Newman Society that the gender-inclusive housing is currently in effect for two floors of freshmen occupants, and one floor of upperclassmen in campus dorms. But the representative noted that the housing will be reserved primarily for upperclassmen on two floors next year as many freshmen were confused about the housing policy.

I think “policy” might where the confusion comes in, since you really have none. Or, maybe, parents and students are a little confused by your whole mission statement of “The core mission of the university is to promote learning in the Jesuit Catholic tradition,” since you’re clearly not following either the Jesuit tradition or a Catholic tradition. Maybe this will help: How about “Do as you damn well please while we do some fiddling!” That would probably make it a whole lot clearer. 

A number of freshmen called the student housing office about the gender-inclusive housing wanting to live with their romantic partners, the USF representative told the Newman Society. The University then had to explain that the primary purpose of the housing was for those facing gender identity concerns. The representative added that gender-inclusive housing accommodations for freshmen next year will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Doesn’t “sex-crazed college student” qualify as a gender-identity somewhere? Doesn’t it go LGBTQS…? Isn’t this whole scenario just a tad bit judgmental?

The Newman Society asked USF administration officials about consequences for students if sexual relationships are discovered in the gender-inclusive housing units, but no response was received by the time of publication.

Come on, Newman Society. This is a Jesuit school. You Pollyannas should know by now the vast majority of Jesuits and Jesuit-run schools have zero belief in or tolerance for consequences. Honestly! Consequences for your actions or theirs? Please. How antiquated.

USF officials were also asked about the new housing policy’s conflicts with Church teaching, and if any efforts were being made by the University to help students struggling with gender identity confusion to reject the current cultural push to embrace living life as their non-biological sex. No responses were received.

Sounds like USF was pretty darn quiet on the other end of that receiver. “Uh, hello? USF? Are you there? Anyone?”

Newman Society Vice President for Program Development Bob Laird said the University’s decision to embrace gender theory in their student housing “brings into question their core Catholic values.”

Pretty much everything USF does calls into question their Catholic value. It would be a much shorter list to come up with things that don’t blow Catholic teaching to hell at USF. See? Done already!

But seriously, kudos to the Newman Society for holding their feet to the fire. They go on to nicely outline the Church teaching on “gender identity” and the Holy Father’s rejection and condemnation of it. Isn’t it interesting that USF has probably used the phrase “Who am I to judge?” ad nauseum but are strangely silent on the whole “gender identity is comparable to nuclear war” thingy?

In a July 2014 statement responding to President Obama’s executive order on “gender identity discrimination,” Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore and Bishop Richard J. Malone of Buffalo, N.Y., speaking on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, called gender identity a “false idea that ‘gender’ is nothing more than a social construct or psychological reality that can be chosen at variance from one’s biological sex.”

Yes, gender is kind of science, USF. So says science and so says the Church.

More recently, Bishop James D. Conley of Lincoln, Neb., writing in a Nebraska newspaper last month, called the promotion of gender identity among students “an act of irresponsibility.” The bishop was responding to proposals in Nebraska allowing high school students to participate in sports based on their preferred gender identity.

Jesuits, irresponsible? Inconceivable (or not).

Really, parents. Don’t waste your money on such a tragedy of a “Catholic” school. They are CINOs at the absolute best, and that’s really placing the bar just a bit above them. I’m hoping they are ordered to remove the term “Catholic” from their descriptions after this one. The whole school is one gigantic near occasion of sin – and actually more like a close occasion.

 

 

 

 

O Gender Confused Canada!

Oh, Canada! Your neighbors to the south have always had a good time teasing you about your love of hockey, the frigid cold you endure, your brightly colored law enforcement, and your lovable way of pronouncing things, but really? You’ve now let the liberal government ban the words “mother,” “father,” “Mr.” or “Mrs.” on all forms of communication in the schools??? Perhaps it’s been a little too cold lately?

https://education.alberta.ca/media/1626737/91383-attachment-1-guidelines-final.pdf

If only that were the only problem with the document below, though. Let’s look at the bloody highlights! And, please understand, it appears this is not limited to public schools.  (http://www.catholicworldreport.com/NewsBriefs/Default.aspx?rssGuid=in-canada-a-bishop-protests-gender-ideology-mandate-for-alberta-schools-60353%2F)

Self-identification is the sole measure of an individual’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

Silly society! It used to be that gender identity was determined, well, by gender. You know, science? That science thing is just so fact based. We should have ditched it a long time ago in lieu of rainbows and lollipops. What were we thinking?

All students and staff … have the right to be open about who they are, including expressing their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression without fear of unwanted consequences;

Gender expression. Interesting. So, if they now think themselves a sex obsessed teenage boy, do they now get to express this without fear of unwanted consequences? Outstanding! Now let’s look at some of their “best practices”:

5. Minimizing gender-segregated activities.

And

7. Providing safe access to washroom and change-room facilities

Well, which is it Canada? You really can’t have both.

As understandings of diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and gender expressions evolve, and learning environments and school communities evolve, best practices will also change and evolve.

Cannot wait to see what that brings! Hopefully it will evolve into sanity, but I’m not holding my breath.

Staff have access to information about available community resources and expertise. When needed, they can help a student (or the student’s family) identify and access relevant and appropriate resources and supports beyond the school. No student or family should be referred to programs which purport to ‘fix,’ ‘change’ or ‘repair’ a student’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

I found this particularly sad. What if a student wanted help in doing so? What if they wanted to change their notion of which gender they “identified” with? What if they discovered their lifestyle wasn’t what they wanted? “Nope! You are an anatomical male who “identifies” as a woman, and there you will stay, no matter how miserable it makes you!”

Some individuals may not feel included in the use of the pronouns “he” or “she” and may prefer alternate pronouns, such as “ze,” “zir,” “hir,” “they” or “them,” or might wish to express themselves or self-identify in other ways (e.g., Mx. instead or Mr., Mrs., Ms., or Miss, or no prefix at all).

Oh, my ever-loving goodness. It’s going to take teachers forever to try and formulate sentences without offending the multitudes of the “diverse!” This is totally and utterly insane. And, my gosh, can you imagine if someone screwed it up simply because they were trying to spit out an everyday sentence and got the pronoun wrong? Good luck teaching the conjugation of verbs, too! That’ll have to become a big no-no, or at least will take hours to get through a single verb when they’re done. There will be lawsuits abounding. Canada might actually succeed in making California look sane! Check that. I’m sure we’ll be following along soon!

Wherever possible, before contacting the parents or other adults involved in the care (such as social workers or caregivers) of a student who is trans or gender-diverse, consult with the student to determine an appropriate way to reference the student’s gender identity, gender expression, name and related pronouns.

And now the village idiots will have to stand around as a club and make sure all pronouns are in order.

While Alberta Education requires documentation to confirm a student’s legal name and birthdate, it does not require documented proof for a change of sex or gender. Schools and school authorities have the ability to change student gender information on a student record in the PASI system using PASIprep, or through their PASI-enabled SIS.

This might possibly be because your predecessors weren’t quite as insane as you and couldn’t comprehend a topsy-turvy world where that might be necessary.

When there are segregated educational, recreational or competitive activities, students who are trans and gender-diverse have the right to participate in these activities in ways that are safe, comfortable and congruent with their gender identity or gender expression.

Indicators of this best practice in action

  • Schools work to reduce or eliminate the practice of segregating students by gender as much as possible. For example, they avoid structuring courses or activities based on gender-specific roles such as “boys” versus “girls” in academic, athletic or talent competitions.

I cannot help but hope the athletes rise up out of a sense of fairness. Are girls going to want to compete with boys in strength competitions? Will boys want girls on their football teams? Also, who do you think’s getting the role of Maria in the “Sound of Music?” Can’t wait to hear that one sung by a bass!

Providing safe access to washroom and change-room facilities.

Students with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and gender expressions have a right to accommodation when it comes to the use of washroom and changeroom facilities that are congruent with their gender identity. This applies during school time and school-related activities on and off school property (such as field trips and athletic events). Although creating separate spaces may sometimes be necessary, emphasis should be on creating safe and inclusive spaces. As part of a comprehensive whole-school approach, strategies should be in place to ensure all areas of the school are safe for all students, all of the time. This may include implementing proactive strategies such as communicating clear behaviour expectations to all students, increasing adult presence and supervision, and monitoring key areas of the building and grounds.

So now, not only will kids be exposed to other kids of the opposite sex in bathrooms and locker rooms, they will also have to put up with more adults monitoring them? Also, don’t separate spaces violate their own code???

All students have access to change-room facilities that meet their individual needs and privacy concerns. This may include a choice of options such as: – a private area within the common change-room area (such as a stall with a door, or an area separated by a curtain); or – a nearby private area (such as a nearby washroom).

I don’t know about you, but there wasn’t room for 40 changing rooms in my high school locker room, and I think it had about 5 toilet stalls. I wonder if the dollar signs will ever click with this people?

A student who objects to sharing a washroom or change-room with a student who is trans or gender-diverse is offered an alternative facility (this scenario also applies when a parent or other caregiver objects to shared washroom or change-room facilities on behalf of their child).

And, again, what are you going to do if 40 object?

When travelling for competitions or events at another school, staff ensure accommodation for changing, showering, or washroom facilities. When staff make these arrangements, they take care to maintain the student’s confidentiality by not disclosing information related to sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression without the student’s direct permission.

Wouldn’t that deny the right of the other students to make that objection?

Staff participate in targeted professional learning that is evidence-based and builds their knowledge about diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and gender expressions and its implications for teaching and learning, social and emotional well-being, and personal safety.

This increased knowledge and understanding will also give staff information and strategies to help create positive environments that welcome and respect all members of the school community.

Translation: You will be reprogrammed.

Findings from recent Canadian research indicate that for many students with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and gender expressions, school is not a safe place. This is also true for students who may be perceived as lesbian, gay, bisexual or trans, two-spirit, queer or questioning, as well as students who are harassed about the actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression of their parents or other family members

Two-spirit? This is the second time I’ve seen this mentioned. What the heck? Is this a double-reverse trans? This is seriously getting out of hand! I seem to remember Archbishop Cordileone being ridiculed for suggesting that the list of letters would grow. Well, I’m not really sure why people were in a tizzy over that one. It’s totally and completely true!

The rest if their grand plan has to do with bullying. Nobody advocates bullying except those who would bully. If they think making everyone comply with all of these ridiculous measures is going to lessen the bullying, they’re in for a rude awakening. Making everyone dance circles around the few and forcing them to compromise their beliefs will likely only increase it. They would do themselves a world of good if they could simply encourage everyone to employ Christ-like behavior. Unfortunately, there’s no “safe space” provided for Him.

Just an aside…In writing this I looked up the lyrics of “O Canada!” which led me to look at the song’s history.  Here is the official lyrics:

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

Interestingly enough, the usual offended crowd tried to get the lyrics changed to gender-neutral, Godless lyrics, but the people said “no” and the topic was dropped.  Here’s hoping Canada stands up for their children the way they’ve stood up for their anthem!