Orion Scribner (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
frameacloud) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
otherkinnews2025-01-18 06:45 pm
frameacloud) wrote in otherkinnews2025-01-18 06:45 pm
Mississippi and Oklahoma propose laws against students who identify as nonhuman animals
For the third year running, Republicans in the US have once again continued to write "anti-furry bills." On January 17, Republicans introduced Mississippi House Bill 1060 (MS HB 1060), which you can see for yourself on the state government's site, though you may need to enable Javascript if your web browser doesn't display it properly: https://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2025/pdf/history/HB/HB1060.xml Currently, this is the bill's official description, as written by its sponsors:
"Gender dysphoria; require school personnel to notify parents of student who request to be referred to as different gender or nonhuman."
Emphasis added. Furthermore, the sponsors wrote it with this summary:
"An Act To Require School Administrators, Teachers, Counselors Or Other Personnel Of The School To Provide Written Notification To The Parent Or Legal Guardian Of Any Student Identifying At School As A Gender Or Pronoun That Does Not Align With The Child's Sex On Their Birth Certificate, Sex Assigned At Birth Or Using Sex-segregated School Programs And Activities Or School Facilities That Do Not Align With The Child's Sex Assignment At Birth, Within Three Days Of Becoming Aware Of Such Conduct Or Request By The Affected Student; To Provide That No School Personnel Shall Be Disciplined Or Suffer Any Unlawful Reprisal For Refusing To Acknowledge A Student By A Preferred Gender, Pronoun Or Animal Species That Is Inconsistent With The Child's Sex Assignment At Birth; To Prescribe The Legislative Intent; And For Related Purposes."
Emphasis added. Despite what the description and summary says, the bill text itself doesn't mention either of the topics that I emphasized here. This leaves it an ordinary example of legislature proposed to discriminate against transgender students in public schools. This is a common pattern in anti-furry bills, where an early version of the bill mentions students who identify as nonhuman animal species, to try to attract attention, and then the sponsors delete that part later so that the bill can focus on their real intentions against transgender students. Republicans mean for the temporary inclusion of that topic to satirize transgender students and make a comparison that they see as absurd. It's a reference to an urban legend that Republicans circulate, where supposedly schools that let transgender students use the restrooms they want are also providing litter boxes in classrooms for students who are furries. That urban legend has been debunked by the fact-checking sites Snopes and Reuters.
The bill was sponsored by these eleven Republican Representatives: Charles Blackwell, William Arnold, Randy Boyd, Larry Byrd, Carolyn Crawford, Jim Estrada, Greg Haney, Stacey Hobgood-Wilkes, Donnie Scoggin, Joseph Tubb, and Beth Waldo. These are some of the same authors as a similar anti-furry bill from last year, Mississippi House Bill 176, which was also written by the same Blackwell, Arnold, Boyd, Byrd, and Scoggin, plus Dan Eubanks and Jimmy Fondren.
[Edited to add] Another new one is Oklahoma House Bill 1327, by sole sponsor Justin Humphrey. This is basically the same as his bill from last year, Oklahoma House Bill 3084, still proposing that students who identify as animals should get picked up from school by animal control. He specializes in introducing bills that sound bizarre to attract attention, and later he cleans them up so they'll pass into law. He prefiled it on December 30th so that it will be introduced on February 3.
Anti-furry bills similar to these began in 2023 with North Dakota House Bill 1522, Oklahoma Senate Bill 943, Indiana Statehouse Bill 380, and a proposed amendment to Montana Senate Bill 544. 2024 had Oklahoma House Bill 3084, Mississippi House Bill 176, and Missouri House Bill 2678. No anti-furry bills have yet passed into law as such. Fellow volunteers and I have been reporting on these in the Otherkin News blog all along, which you can read in the tag for that purpose. Don't like this bill? If you're a US citizen, voting is only one of your powers to shape the laws that you live under. In the recording of my polycule's panel about anti-furry bills, skip to the timestamp 23:44 to hear what ordinary citizens can do. In the written script of our lecture, see Slides 21 through 25.
"Gender dysphoria; require school personnel to notify parents of student who request to be referred to as different gender or nonhuman."
Emphasis added. Furthermore, the sponsors wrote it with this summary:
"An Act To Require School Administrators, Teachers, Counselors Or Other Personnel Of The School To Provide Written Notification To The Parent Or Legal Guardian Of Any Student Identifying At School As A Gender Or Pronoun That Does Not Align With The Child's Sex On Their Birth Certificate, Sex Assigned At Birth Or Using Sex-segregated School Programs And Activities Or School Facilities That Do Not Align With The Child's Sex Assignment At Birth, Within Three Days Of Becoming Aware Of Such Conduct Or Request By The Affected Student; To Provide That No School Personnel Shall Be Disciplined Or Suffer Any Unlawful Reprisal For Refusing To Acknowledge A Student By A Preferred Gender, Pronoun Or Animal Species That Is Inconsistent With The Child's Sex Assignment At Birth; To Prescribe The Legislative Intent; And For Related Purposes."
Emphasis added. Despite what the description and summary says, the bill text itself doesn't mention either of the topics that I emphasized here. This leaves it an ordinary example of legislature proposed to discriminate against transgender students in public schools. This is a common pattern in anti-furry bills, where an early version of the bill mentions students who identify as nonhuman animal species, to try to attract attention, and then the sponsors delete that part later so that the bill can focus on their real intentions against transgender students. Republicans mean for the temporary inclusion of that topic to satirize transgender students and make a comparison that they see as absurd. It's a reference to an urban legend that Republicans circulate, where supposedly schools that let transgender students use the restrooms they want are also providing litter boxes in classrooms for students who are furries. That urban legend has been debunked by the fact-checking sites Snopes and Reuters.
The bill was sponsored by these eleven Republican Representatives: Charles Blackwell, William Arnold, Randy Boyd, Larry Byrd, Carolyn Crawford, Jim Estrada, Greg Haney, Stacey Hobgood-Wilkes, Donnie Scoggin, Joseph Tubb, and Beth Waldo. These are some of the same authors as a similar anti-furry bill from last year, Mississippi House Bill 176, which was also written by the same Blackwell, Arnold, Boyd, Byrd, and Scoggin, plus Dan Eubanks and Jimmy Fondren.
[Edited to add] Another new one is Oklahoma House Bill 1327, by sole sponsor Justin Humphrey. This is basically the same as his bill from last year, Oklahoma House Bill 3084, still proposing that students who identify as animals should get picked up from school by animal control. He specializes in introducing bills that sound bizarre to attract attention, and later he cleans them up so they'll pass into law. He prefiled it on December 30th so that it will be introduced on February 3.
Anti-furry bills similar to these began in 2023 with North Dakota House Bill 1522, Oklahoma Senate Bill 943, Indiana Statehouse Bill 380, and a proposed amendment to Montana Senate Bill 544. 2024 had Oklahoma House Bill 3084, Mississippi House Bill 176, and Missouri House Bill 2678. No anti-furry bills have yet passed into law as such. Fellow volunteers and I have been reporting on these in the Otherkin News blog all along, which you can read in the tag for that purpose. Don't like this bill? If you're a US citizen, voting is only one of your powers to shape the laws that you live under. In the recording of my polycule's panel about anti-furry bills, skip to the timestamp 23:44 to hear what ordinary citizens can do. In the written script of our lecture, see Slides 21 through 25.
Dude.
Re: Dude.
Since you're new on Dreamwidth, here's an etiquette tip about how folks usually act around here. This isn't like a news site where readers go off in the comment section unnoticed. The comment area on a blog post here is a discussion forum where the writers and readers of the blog have conversations directly together with one another. Your replies go to the person who wrote the blog post, which in this case is myself. That means when your message says "you," it comes off almost as though you're telling me-- the innocent blogger!-- to grow a pair, even though you meant that for the Republican legislators who I was reporting on. I understood what you meant, but it didn't feel so good to get that in my email inbox today.
Don't worry about that too much, though, because every social media site has its own unique set of unwritten etiquette rules that longtime users take for granted. This is one of the best social social media platforms out there, in terms of connecting directly with real people through one's own words and original writings, instead of reblogs and algorithms and bots, so I'm delighted to see you trying out this site for the very first time today, and I hope you'll continue to settle in and stay here. Again, welcome!
Re: Dude.
Additionally, thank you! I'll try to keep the etiquette in mind next time, so thank you for letting me know.
Re: Dude.
no subject
Mississippi House Bill 1060 died in committee on February 4, 2025.
Oklahoma House Bill 1327 is at 25% progression and had its second reading referred to Rules on February 4, 2025.
I'm continuing to watch for more anti-furry bills.