Editor’s note: Michael Ackley’s columns may include satire and parody based on current events, and thus mix fact with fiction. He assumes informed readers will be able to tell the difference.
California Gov. Jerry Brown – the new, pragmatic Jerry Brown – revived his “Governor Moonbeam” image of the ’80s by signing into law a bill that will allow public-school students to decide if they are girls or boys.
This is not a difficult question for most kids, but for a few it is a matter of some confusion. The new law will give these few the option to decide from day to day if they are fish or fowl, so to speak.
For example, Jimmy, a junior high school student, may decide on Monday that he is a boy, use the boys’ bathrooms and gym locker room, and compete in sports with other males. However, if he wakes up on Tuesday and decides he actually is a girl, despite his physiognomy, he then may use the girls’ lavatories and locker rooms, and compete in girls’ sports.
The latter selection could be a decided advantage for Jimmy in high school, where (s)he may grow into a strapping 200 pounder and play center forward on the girls’ field hockey team. If this youngster graduates high school with decent grades and decides to attend a state university, a full-ride athletic scholarship may be in the offing.
After all, if this adolescent self-identifies as a girl, especially one who can bump any field hockey opponent into the cheap seats without committing a foul, coaches are bound to come after the kid.
We asked Gov. Brown’s spokeswoman, Liz Behan, about such a possibility, and she said, “We don’t think there will be any problems, because we don’t think there will be any problems.”
Well, we asked, what about students’ discomfort in having a person of the physiologically opposite sex sharing the showers with them?
“It certainly won’t bother boys,” said Behan. “Boys are notably insensitive and don’t care about privacy. On the other hand, girls are sensitive and caring, and will by sympathetic to a fellow student who is making a gender transition.”
As for the charge that state government is “spreading San Francisco values,” the bill’s author, the effeminate Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, who represents that city, dispatched his spokesman to point out that the Los Angeles and San Francisco school districts already have policies that parallel the new law, with no problems. OK, no problems that they recognize.
I’m a rodeo man: Tuffy Gessling’s rodeo clown act, which saw him don a Barack Obama mask, was puerile at best. But racist? Puh-leeze!
Presidents have been lampooned before, including in rodeos. Therefore, I take off my Roy Rogers-autographed cowboy hat to Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman, who has invited Gessling to perform in his congressional district.
Said the aptly named Stockman, “Liberals want to bronco bust dissent. But Texans value speech, even if it’s speech they don’t agree with. … (Liberals) want to crush dissent by isolating and polarizing anyone who questions Obama, even if it’s a rodeo clown with a harmless gag. The idea is to create a state of fear and make people afraid to trivialize Obama. No one tried to personally destroy the rodeo clown who wore a George H.W. Bush mask.”
Since the Gessling dust-up the Missouri State Fair Commission, having banned the clown (Gessling, not Obama) for life, has ordered that everybody hired by the state’s rodeo association undergo sensitivity training before performing at the state fair.
Further, Mark Ficken, president of the Missouri Rodeo Cowboy Association, resigned because the organization didn’t expel Gessling. Of course, Ficken is a school superintendent, and subject to the vagaries of state politics.
Personally, we’d like the cowboy association to employ a traditional, rude and insensitive response to folks who “can’t take a joke,” which would include the nation’s left-wingers. I’d hope that the “state of fear” Stockman referred to doesn’t extend to cowpokes.