frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
This blog post was written by Orion Scribner (frameacloud) on 2025 April 19 for Otherkin News, which is a volunteer run project. We welcome other people to submit articles about alterhumanity in current events. Learn more about this project and what we’re looking for.

Previously, we wrote an in-depth article about the F.U.R.R.I.E.S. Act, a Republican proposed constitution amendment that proposes to criminalize allowing “non-human behavior” in public schools in Texas, which has been supported by the Governor. You can read it here. If you aren’t familiar with this news story yet, please read it first so that you can understand this one.

One more thing I noticed after I wrote my article is that the wording of the two F.U.R.R.I.E.S. Act bills isn’t completely identical after all: one of them has a typographical error in it. The version filed as Texas House Bill 4814 (TX HB 4814) says the F.U.R.R.I.E.S. Act stands for Forbidding Unlawful Representation of Roleplaying in Education, missing the final word of the initialism. The version filed as Texas House Bill 54 (TX HB 54) ends the initialism with Educational Spaces. I had assumed that its author, Republican Representative Stan Gerdes, must have filed the bill a second time because of this error, instead of correcting the introduced bill text afterward. However, in a post to his Facebook on March 14, Gerdes wrote that the bill

“now has the support of Governor Greg Abbott and Speaker Dustin Burrows, who recognize the importance of keeping distractions out of our classrooms. Speaker Burrows has reassigned our legislation as House Bill 54, a low bill number that signals its priority status in the Texas House! I’m grateful that our leadership is taking this issue seriously and ensuring that Texas schools remain places of learning, not roleplaying. I’ve appreciated the conversations I’ve had with my own Smithville ISD Superintendent on this issue—our educators should be focused on teaching, not managing classroom disruptions from kids pretending to be animals. This is common sense. Let’s get it passed.”

Given that the bill is associated with treating an urban legend as though it’s happening in real life, anything else he says about his bill is reasonable to view with doubt. Whatever the reason for the two different bill numbers, the bungled initialism is the one that most of the news articles repeat. At least one news source ends the initialism as “Education and Schools,” which doesn’t appear in either of the bill texts. I’m also skeptical of exactly what conversations Gerdes had with the Smithville ISD Superintendant, if any, for reasons that show up later in this post. I don’t recall seeing Burrows say anything about the bill, either.

Here is a round-up of some more of the media coverage about and response to the bill since I last wrote about it. This is a reference list, sorted alphabetically by surname of the author, with my own annotations about the accuracy of each article and any new information it contributed.

Bahari, Sarah (2025 March 17). Texas bill would ban ‘furry subculture’ from public schools. The Dallas Morning News. https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2025/03/17/texas-bill-would-ban-furry-subculture-from-public-schools/ Archived 2025 April 8: https://web.archive.org/web/20250408185746/https://www.dallasnews.com/news/texas/2025/03/17/texas-bill-would-ban-furry-subculture-from-public-schools/

Media Bias Fact Check (MBFC) says that this Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper for a region of Texas has a right-center bias and high credibility. This article accurately says that the litter box rumor has been debunked, and that the bill is connected with Republican efforts to use taxpayer dollars for private schools, though it doesn’t bring up that this means defunding public schools or the connection with satirizing transgender students. This article adds important new information about the story: some written statements about the bill were provided directly to the Dallas Morning News for the above article from the legislator, Rep. Stan Gerdes, and a spokesperson for Gov. Greg Abbott’s office, Andrew Mahaleris. Bahari reports, “Gerdes acknowledged furries soon might show up at another place: the Capitol in Austin. ‘I fully expect the subculture to show up in full furry vengeance at the committee hearing,’ he said in a statement, adding that he will not tolerate theatrics during the legislative process.” Sounds like Gerdes meant for the bill to be bait for a spectacle. The same statement also claims that “he wrote the bill in response to an incident in Smithville ISD, but he did not elaborate. Smithville is about 45 miles southeast of Austin. Neither Gerdes nor the school district immediately responded to a request for more information Monday from The Dallas Morning News.” Over a month later, there still has been no public comment from that school district to substantiate Gerdes’s claim.

Billson, Chantelle (2025 March 26). Texas GOP lawmaker introduces Furries Act after falling for the litter-boxes-in-schools hoax. PinkNews. https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/03/26/stan-gerdes-texas-furries-act/ Archived 2025 April 2: https://web.archive.org/web/20250402063947/https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/03/26/stan-gerdes-texas-furries-act/

PinkNews is an online magazine focusing on LGBTQ+ pop culture for the UK and worldwide. MBFC says it has a left bias and high credibility. That may have been true once, but sadly, PinkNews has started using generative AI in their process for writing their articles, judging by a flag that appears on the end of some of the web addresses that they linked to in their article: /?utm_source=chatgpt.com. This reveals that PinkNews used the genAI ChatGPT as though it was a search engine for discovering those links. PinkNews also gives an inaccurate history of how the litter box urban legend arose and spread, giving the wrong dates and crediting the wrong people. PinkNews says the legend started in the early 2000s and only credits its popularity to a single deleted tweet from a random sports coach in 2023. This is very far away from the facts: the legend was invented decades later than that, in 2021 and 2022, and was very visibly popularized by a number of Republican politicians and public figures. The fact-checking sites Reuters, PolitiFact, and Snopes have all covered this history as part of debunking the urban legend. If PinkNews had been even partly overseen by a human who cares about writing accurate news articles, they would have proofread their machine-generated story against at least one of those fact-checking sites.

Bollinger, Alex (2025 March 24). GOP governor tells rally that kids are using litterboxes in classrooms. The crowd agreed. LGBTQ Nation. https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/03/gop-governor-tells-rally-that-kids-are-using-litterboxes-in-classrooms-the-crowd-agreed/ Archived 2025 March 26: https://web.archive.org/web/20250326051627/https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/03/gop-governor-tells-rally-that-kids-are-using-litterboxes-in-classrooms-the-crowd-agreed/

LGBTQ Nation is an online magazine in the US that specializes in queer-positive news. MBFC says it has a left bias and medium credibility because it doesn’t label its opinion articles and uses loaded words. LGBTQ Nation has had several pieces on the litter box urban legend. This article focuses on that aspect of the context of the bill, and especially on how a number of Republican politicians and public figures have promoted the urban legend during the past few years, and that its purpose was to criticize transgender students having access to public school restrooms. Otherwise, this article doesn’t add new information about the bill.

Codega, Lin (2025 March 19). A Texas conformity bill could impact tabletop roleplaying games in schools statewide. Rascal. https://www.rascal.news/texas-furries-act-tabletop-roleplaying-games-in-schools/ Archived 2025 March 20: https://web.archive.org/web/20250320225725/https://www.rascal.news/texas-furries-act-tabletop-roleplaying-games-in-schools/

Rascal is a site for news about role playing games and culture, run by three people. Rascal doesn’t have an entry in MBFC. Although it’s a small news source, this is an especially well written article that was cited in the article by Them.us. It offers some original insights to the story from a couple of lawyers, and looks at the bill from the angle of being part of another moral panic, similar to what happened in the 1980s when the Satanic Panic spread urban legends about Dungeons and Dragons being dangerous. A ban on role play is a ban on a part of the Constitutionally protected freedom of expression in public schools. One lawyer, Tess Lynch, compares cat ear headbands with the black armbands in the landmark case about students’ freedom of expression, Tinker v. Des Moines, which is the same thing that my partners Page Shepard, House of Chimeras and I said about it in our convention panel about anti-furry bills a couple of years ago. The other lawyer, Noah Downs, says that the bill text is worded in such a broad way that it could ban or criminalize school clubs for Dungeons and Dragons and many other play activities organized or approved of by teachers.

Esguerra, Vanessa (2025 March 20). A Texas bill could ban ‘furries’ from public schools—yes, really. The Mary Sue. https://www.themarysue.com/a-texas-bill-could-ban-furries-from-public-schools-yes-really/ or https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-texas-bill-could-ban-furries-from-public-schools-yes-really/ar-AA1BjM4r Archived 2025 March 23: https://web.archive.org/web/20250323101320/https://www.themarysue.com/a-texas-bill-could-ban-furries-from-public-schools-yes-really/

The Mary Sue is a feminist online magazine for women about geek culture. MBFC says it has a left bias and high credibility. It focuses on fact checking what the furry fandom is really like, as part of the magazine’s interest in fandoms, but only barely implies that the bill has an anti-LGBT context.

Fields, Alyssa (2025 March 17). Furries, Meowing in School Now a 'Radical Trend,' According to Lawmaker. The Dallas Observer. https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/texas-bill-aims-to-eliminate-furries-in-schools-21926996 Archived 2025 April 9: https://web.archive.org/web/20250409081416/https://www.dallasobserver.com/news/texas-bill-aims-to-eliminate-furries-in-schools-21926996

The Dallas Observer is a newspaper established in 1980 and appears to have a left bias, focusing on local businesses and lifestyle. It doesn’t have a listing in MBFC. The above article was cited in several other news sources because it has an interview with a member of the furry fandom, Andrew Kaiser, about what he thinks of the bill. Kaiser had been active in the fandom in Texas, but he’s one of many LGBTQIA people who move out of that state to flee conservative politics. Kaiser explained that since the fandom is known for having many LGBTQIA people in it, “any legislative discussion or any Republican talking points regarding furries are considered as a proxy attack on that [LGBTQ+] community.” Although the furry fandom has its sexual aspects, much of it is carefully kept separate from that, and animal characters and role-play are normal in children’s media and play. Kaiser pointed out that many conservative bills that are supposed to protect children from seeing anything remotely associated with sexuality are really “a disingenuous attack on people that [conservatives] don't like.”

McCormack, Caitlin (2025 March 17). Texas bill aims to ban barking, meowing and other ‘non-human behavior’ in schools to tackle furries trend. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2025/03/17/us-news/texas-bill-moves-to-ban-non-human-behavior-in-schools-to-eliminate-furry-trend/ Archived 2025 March 17: https://web.archive.org/web/20250328092550/https://nypost.com/2025/03/17/us-news/texas-bill-moves-to-ban-non-human-behavior-in-schools-to-eliminate-furry-trend/

MBFC says the New York Post is a newspaper with a right-center bias and medium credibility. I notice that the New York Post is a tabloid that has a consistently transphobic slant in its reporting, judging by the headlines in its transgender tag. This is relevant because this bill arose from anti-transgender urban legends. This is a poor article with no new scoop to offer of its own, and which fails to mention that there is no truth to the Republican politicians’ claims about furries disrupting schools. The New York Post treats the litter box urban legend as though it was fact.

Mion, Landon (2025 March 19). Texas lawmaker proposes bill targeting furries; measure seeks to ban 'non-human behavior' in schools. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/texas-lawmaker-proposes-bill-targeting-furries-measure-seeks-ban-non-human-behavior-schools Archived 2025 April 6: https://web.archive.org/web/20250406225521/https://www.foxnews.com/politics/texas-lawmaker-proposes-bill-targeting-furries-measure-seeks-ban-non-human-behavior-schools

MBFC rates Fox News as a questionable source. Interestingly enough, even this article by Fox brings up that the litter box rumor is a debunked urban legend. However, Fox only says that the rumor “circulated online,” which is far less visibility than it demonstrably has had, even in this same article, where Republican politicians are promoting it as part of their platforms. Fox otherwise focuses on Gerdes and Abbott’s claims about furries being problems in schools. This allows the article to give the impression that there could be partly some substance to the claims about furries, even though they’re well-known to be baseless. It mentions that Abbott talked about “the furry issue as a motivating factor to allow private school choice vouchers,” but doesn’t explain that the vouchers would be made by sending taxpayer dollars away from public schools. Fox gave just enough of the facts to almost but not quite criticize Republican politicians or say something false.

Qureshi, Arshi (2025 March 20). ​​TEACHER'S PET: High school students identifying as cats & using litterboxes & leashes in class target of new crackdown with $25k fine. The US Sun. https://www.the-sun.com/news/13822175/texas-wants-ban-furry-culture-school/ Archived 2025 April 11: https://web.archive.org/web/20250411123606/https://www.the-sun.com/news/13822175/texas-wants-ban-furry-culture-school/

MBFC says the US Sun is an online-only tabloid with a focus on sensational news, a right bias, and mixed factual reporting due to failed fact checks and promotion of misinformation. The Sun outright says that the litter box urban legend is true, and fails to mention that it has been consistently debunked.

Ramirez, Juan Carlos (2025 April 6) Legislature should not focus on furries during current session. North Texas Daily. https://www.ntdaily.com/opinion/legislature-should-not-focus-on-furries-during-current-session/article_91a6ee7c-1f8c-4561-a665-5753a64b78bb.html Archived 2025 April 19: https://web.archive.org/web/20250419214919/https://www.ntdaily.com/opinion/legislature-should-not-focus-on-furries-during-current-session/article_91a6ee7c-1f8c-4561-a665-5753a64b78bb.html

Established in 1916, North Texas Daily is a student paper of the University of North Texas. MBFC doesn’t have an entry about this news source. Although this is an opinion article, it does well at summarizing various news sources related to this story. The author’s stance is that the bill distracts from real issues that lawmakers need to address about schools in the state. It doesn’t get into the context of Republican opposition to public schools or LGBT rights.

Riedel, Samantha (2025 March 26). Texas Republican Introduces Bill to Address the Nonexistent Problem of Furries in Schools. Them.us. https://www.them.us/story/texas-republican-legislation-furries-in-schools Archived 2025 April 10: https://web.archive.org/web/20250410001653/https://www.them.us/story/texas-republican-legislation-furries-in-schools

Them.us is an online magazine for LGBTQIA people, which MBFC rates as having a left bias and high credibility. This article is an accurate summary of the context around the bill. It also points out that the bill is "likely to fail as its predecessors have … not least because Texas legislators have filed over 10,000 bills in the 2025-2026 session so far.”

Villarreal, Daniel (2025 March 13). GOP legislator files bill to stop ‘furries’ from using litter boxes in schools. LGBTQ Nation. https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/03/gop-legislator-files-bill-to-stop-furries-from-using-litter-boxes-in-schools/ Archived 2025 March 14: https://web.archive.org/web/20250314064854/https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/03/gop-legislator-files-bill-to-stop-furries-from-using-litter-boxes-in-schools/

Another article from this online magazine. This is a good summary, focusing on the spread of the litter box urban legend among Republican politicians. In regard to the Smithville school district that Gerdes had said had a furry incident, this article notes that the district “serves only 1,885 students … [and no] known news reports covered the alleged incident.”

Villegas, Patti (2025 March 18). Texas Lawmaker Unleashes F.U.R.R.I.E.S. Act: No More Barking In Classrooms. The Dallas Express. https://dallasexpress.com/education/texas-bill-would-ban-furry-behavior-in-schools/ Archived 2025 April 19: https://web.archive.org/web/20250419215048/https://dallasexpress.com/education/texas-bill-would-ban-furry-behavior-in-schools/

MBFC says the Dallas Express was founded in 2021 and has a right wing bias and medium credibility. This is a poor article because it fails to mention that the litter box rumor has been consistently debunked by fact-checkers as an urban legend, which is a crucial part of this news story. It makes it sound like the politicians are responding in a reasonable way to a bizarre youth fad. The Dallas Express selectively quotes the furry who was interviewed in the Dallas Observer to make it sound like he’s normalizing these behaviors in schools, instead of any of the parts where he said that it’s not happening like that.

Generally, what we see in this round-up of news articles is that right-wing news sources vary in what degree that they will admit that the Republicans who support the bill are basing it on a debunked urban legend. Meanwhile, left-wing news sources vary in how much they get into the context of the bill to explain what Republicans are getting at. If any of these articles make you feel concerned or unsafe, please read my previous article about the bill and focus on the part about things that you can do, such as writing to your elected representative, or building solidarity with your local community.∎

frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Summary: In the US, Republicans have introduced the third and fourth bills this year that would ban students from being furries in public schools, with a pair of identical texts introduced as Texas House Bill 54 and HB 4814. Called the F.U.R.R.I.E.S. Act, these bills propose to amend the Texas Constitution to prohibit students from displaying “non-human behaviors” at school, to call schools that allow it abusive, and to punish the schools with expensive fines. Texas Governor Greg Abbott spoke approvingly of the bill and claimed it was in response to schools supposedly letting students behave as animals and use litter boxes. That was a debunked urban legend that Republicans invented in 2021. The purpose of the urban legend and the bills is to satirize transgender students who ask to use the right restrooms for their genders, and to justify defunding public schools in favor of private schools. Republicans oppose education for people other than the wealthy, and oppose allowing LGBTQIA people to exist. Below, find out more about what these bills mean and what you can do about them.

Read more... )

frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
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.
frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Content warnings: Rated G. An urban legend that describes an unsanitary situation. Sexism against transgender people, including attempts to prevent them from going to school or using facilities, and outing children to their parents. A straw-man version of furries being used to try to discredit transgender people, in a way that could cause trouble for people who identify as nonhuman.

In the USA, so far this year, Republicans have proposed three pieces of legislation that are opposed to furries or people who identify as nonhuman. That’s something they started doing last year, inspired by an urban legend about litter boxes in public schools, which they made up in parody of transgender students asking to use school restrooms. We’ve been ending up calling these “anti-furry bills” as we keep track of them in our Otherkin News blog. Furry isn’t the accurate word, but it is the word that Republicans use in the urban legend and usually in the bills too. Every once in a while, I’m checking on the status of the bills, and trying to see if there are any new ones. Here is the update for this week.

1. Oklahoma House Bill 3084 (OK HB 3084) “Schools; prohibiting certain students from participating in school curriculum or activities; effective date.”

Background: We wrote about this bill in detail in a previous Otherkin News post. The bill says that furry students should be taken out of school by animal control. Its only sponsor (writer) is Justin Humphrey (he/him). This seems linked with his opposition to LGBTQ people, as well as his efforts to legalize animal fighting. Later, Jim Olsen (he/him) took over as principal sponsor of the bill. He proposed changing it to have the same text as an unrelated bill of his, one requiring public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments.

Update: The bill’s current status hasn’t changed since our last update. It’s still at 25% progression toward becoming a law. Its text hasn’t changed from what it was originally, so it's still about furries.

2. Mississippi House Bill 176 (MS HB 176) “Gender dysphoria; require school personnel to notify parents of student who request to be referred to as different gender or nonhuman.”

Background: This was introduced at the same time as the first bill. As we previously wrote about it, the bill is mostly against transgender students in a way that could put them in real danger. It would require schools to out transgender students to parents, and to allow faculty to not accommodate any student who “identif[ies] at school as a gender or pronoun that does not align with the child's sex on their birth certificate, other official records, sex assigned at birth, or identifying as an animal species, extraterrestrial being or inanimate object.”

Update: This bill’s current status is dead! Hooray! It died in committee on March 3. When a bill dies, that means that it won’t progress toward becoming a law.

3. Missouri House Bill 2678 (MO HB 2678) “Prohibits students from engaging in ‘furry’ behavior while at school”

Background: We previously wrote about this bill. The bill says to pull students out of school for being furries or purporting to be animals. The bill’s only sponsor is Cheri Toalson Reisch (she/her). This appears to be connected with her opposition to transgender people as well as her efforts to undermine public schools in favor of charter schools.

Updates: This bill hasn’t changed or moved forward. It’s still the same as it was when it was introduced. A hearing hasn’t been scheduled for it, and it’s not on a House calendar.

-

About the writer: This blog post was written by Orion Scribner (they/them), who has been a community historian and archivist for more than ten years.
frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Content warnings: Rated G. Mentions of abortion and transphobia.

Summary: Checking for updates on this year's three anti-furry bills in the US. None of them have progressed. The bill for calling animal control on furry students has a new sponsor. He wants to rewrite it. It would instead become a duplicate of his bill that says classrooms must display the Ten Commandments. The bill hasn't changed yet, so it's still an anti-furry bill.

I just checked for updates about the current status of all of the proposed laws (bills) in the US that are about furries or people who identify as animals. Anti-furry bills aren't based on anything that anyone in real life is doing: not participants of the furry fandom, not children pretending to be animals in the playground, and not people who really do identify as animals. Republicans say they wrote these bills because of an urban legend that schools provide litter boxes for students who identify as animals. According to fact-checkers Reuters and Snopes, no schools have ever done that. Republicans made up the urban legend and bills in parody of transgender students asking to use school restrooms. On the Otherkin News blog, we have previously written about all three of the anti-furry bills that are active, which you can read here and here. I searched on LegiScan to see if Republicans have introduced more anti-furry bills since then, but I didn’t find any new ones.

Two of the bills haven’t had any action since we posted about them before. Those are Mississippi HB 176 and Missouri HB 2678. They’re both still at 25% progression toward becoming laws. Their state government sites don’t say that hearings have been scheduled for them.

Oklahoma HB 3084 is also still at 25% progression, but some things have been happening with it. This is the bill where Republican Representative Justin Humphrey (he/him) proposed that students who are furries should be taken away from school by animal control. As of the 15th, the bill added a second sponsor, Republican Representative Jim Olsen (he/him). Olsen took Humphrey's place as the principal sponsor. Some other bills that Olsen sponsors are against abortion (OK HB 1537, HB 3013, and HJR 1046), and to allow children to not get vaccines (HB 2963 and HB 3249). Last year, Olsen sponsored some anti-transgender bills (HB 1011, HB 2177, and HB 2186).

On the 19th, Olsen proposed an amendment to HB 3084, the anti-furry bill. You can read his proposed amendment on Oklahoma’s site, or read it on a third-party site, LegiScan. This amendment would delete the entire text of the bill and replace it with an unrelated text. The text of this amendment is the same as another bill Olsen sponsored this month, HB 2962. It would no longer be about furry students at all. Instead, it would propose a law requiring public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments. That would be unlikely to pass. In the US, public schools are government establishments, which prohibits them from displaying religious materials like that. I don't know what the advantage would be of duplicating the same text in two bills, or changing the topic of a bill so much. At this time, Olsen’s proposed amendment hasn’t been accepted. The bill’s current text is still what Humphrey originally wrote about furries.

On the 21st, the bill was withdrawn from the Rules committee. Then it was referred to the House Appropriations and Budget Education Subcommittee Committee. They haven't voted on it. I don’t see that they have scheduled a hearing for it. I'll keep watching for whatever happens next.

About the writer of this blog post: Orion Scribner (they/them) is a moderator on the Otherkin News blog.
frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud

Content warnings: Rated G. An urban legend that describes an unsanitary situation. Sexism against transgender people, including attempts to prevent them from participating in sports and using facilities like everyone else, and attempts to stop them from transitioning.


Summary: In 2023, Republicans began to propose laws (bills) in the US that would be against people who identify as animals. They base these on an urban legend that says schools provide litter boxes for students who identify as animals. Republicans made up that legend in parody of transgender students asking to use school restrooms (Scribner and Sol, 2024). The newest of these bills is Missouri House Bill 2678 (MO HB 2678). It’s the third such bill in 2024, bringing the historic total of these bills up to seven. This bill was written as part of a Republican effort to undermine public schools (which can’t ban transgender students from using the right restrooms, and students have First Amendment rights) in favor of religious charter schools (where students aren’t protected in those ways). The following blog post is a seven minute read.


What the Missouri bill says


Missouri House Bill 3678 (MO HB 2678) has the title “Prohibits students from engaging in ‘furry’ behavior while at school.” You can read this bill and see the latest actions on its official site, the Missouri House of Representatives, or on a third-party legislation tracking site, LegiScan. This bill was introduced this week, on February 13th, and read a second time on the 14th. It would add a law into the Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMo). It would go in the part of the state laws about education, in Chapter 167, titled “Pupils and Special Services.” It would say:


“A student who purports to be an imaginary animal or animal species or who engages in anthropomorphic behavior consistent with the common designation of a ‘furry’ while at school shall not be allowed to participate in school curriculum or activities. The parent or guardian of a student in violation of this section shall remove the student from the school for the remainder of the school day.”


The same as the other bills like it, this bill is based on an urban legend, not on anything that was done in real life by students, furries, and/or people who identify as animals (McKinney, 2022a). This bill's wording looks like it was based on a bill from another state, Oklahoma House Bill 3084 (OK HB 3084), or its predecessor last year, Oklahoma Senate Bill 943 (OK SB 943). It shares their inaccuracies: though there are real people who identify as animals, surveys show that most furries don’t, and the dictionary definition of the word “anthropomorphic” means resembling a human, not resembling an animal (Scribner and Sol, 2024).


Who wrote the bill, and what is its context with that author’s other motivations?


The Missouri bill’s only sponsor (writer) is Cheri Toalson Reisch (she/her). She is a Missouri Republican who has supported anti-transgender bills in the past. One of those is MO SB 39, which would ban transgender students from participating in their gender’s sports division (both in private and public schools, up to and including in colleges and universities). Another one is MO SB 49. It would bar minors from accessing gender transition related surgeries or medications, removes adult coverage of hormone replacement therapy and any gender-affirming or transitioning surgeries from the Missouri Medicaid program, and denies prisoners and inmates access to any surgeries related to gender transitioning. She described both these bills as a “great move in the right direction,” and has been vocally critical that they were not harsher (Central MO Info, 2023).


Reisch is familiar with the urban legend started by conservatives of students using litter boxes in school bathrooms. She has posted about it on Facebook, telling her constituents that it is actively happening in Missouri and accusing the Columbia school district of taking part in it, stating “This is happening in Columbia Public Schools also. Yes, the janitor has to clean the litter box” (McKinney, 2022a). That's never happened. Schools say they have not been providing litter boxes to students in this way, and even deny that they have had any students identifying or behaving as animals, according to reliable fact checking resources (Reuters, 2022; Palma, Snopes, 2023).


Reisch has a history of being especially critical of the Columbia school district, which is one of the largest and most successful school districts in the state (McKinney, 2022b). She’s used this urban legend to attack the district’s legitimacy. This may be because Reisch prioritizes independently-run charter schools over standard public schools. Earlier this year, she sponsored MO HB 1941, which would allow for charter schools to operate within the Columbia school district without the district’s sponsorship.


Why are Republicans criticizing public schools and favoring charter schools?


In the US, the normal types of schools for children up to about age 18 are called public schools. Families don’t have to pay for their children to attend them. They represent the ideal that everyone growing up in the country should have equal access to school, regardless of income, class, race, religion, or ability. Because public schools are government establishments, the US Constitution protects the students’ rights there. The First Amendment of the Constitution protects the freedom of speech and religion of everyone, and that’s for students in public schools, too. In the landmark 1969 case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, students sued because they had gotten suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The Supreme Court decided that it would be as tyrannical to prevent students from expressing political opinions within public schools as it would be in any other government establishments. The Court said students don’t “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” In 1948, McCollum v. Board of Education had decided that public schools can’t give religious instruction during the school day. In 1962, Engel v. Vitale decided they can’t make students pray (Pew Research Center, 2019). Public school dress codes often aren’t as fair as they should be, but for the most part, their students can wear what they want and what their parents allow.


In contrast, what are known as charter schools in the US are privately owned, so they’re allowed to have requirements or education goals which would be considered a violation of the First Amendment. Some of them have religious affiliations and may be owned or operated by religious organizations. This can affect the way the school is run. For example, Oklahoma charter St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School has planned Catholic religious instruction classes, and the school’s active and intentional participation in what it refers to as “the evangelizing mission of the Church” (Fitzpatrick, 2023). Charter school dress codes can be much more strict. They are often segregated by gender stereotypes, forcing girls to wear skirts and boys trousers, no exceptions. This has been challenged in some places against specific schools, such as in North Carolina earlier this year in a lawsuit against the Charter Day School Inc (Chung, 2023). These challenges are the outlier and not the norm, however; gender-segregated dress codes are still a very common practice for charter schools overall. Charter schools also require applications and choose students based on random lottery systems. However, studies find that charter schools are more likely to ignore parents inquiring about the enrollment process if the student has a disability or other special needs (Darville, 2018). Unlike public schools, they don’t welcome everyone.


The freedom of expression in public schools is important for transgender students. In 2020, the case ​​G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board decided in favor of transgender-friendly restroom policies in high schools. This precedent helps protect transgender students’ rights in public schools, but doesn’t apply to charter schools. During the course of the case, the Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund told the Court why to decide against transgender rights. In an effort to invalidate transgender people, the Fund compared transgender people to otherkin. The Fund used the word “otherkin,” and described them at length, mostly accurately but derisively (Brief Amicus Curiae, 2017, G.G. v. Gloucester Cty Sch Bd). This case was part of what inspired the Republicans to later make up the litter box urban legend. We don’t know if that particular brief inspired the legend too.


Republicans may be promoting charter schools because this would give them greater control over impressing their views about gender, religion, and politics on young generations. They may be undermining public schools because the separation of church and state limits their power to do so there. The urban legend and these bills are part of that.


Background about all of the furry bills and the urban legend that inspired them


To learn about this year’s first two anti-furry bills, read our post about them from last week (Scribner and Sol, 2024). That post also summarizes the four anti-furry bills last year, and the litter box urban legend. For further information about those aspects, you can watch our lecture about last year’s bills and what you do about bad bills (Chimeras, Scribner, and Shepard, 2023), and watch Chimeras’s lecture about the litter box urban legend (Chimeras, 2022).


What happens next with Reisch’s anti-furry bill?


The bill is at 25% progression toward becoming a law. The House heard the bill twice, but it hasn’t been voted on. At the time that we write this blog post, they haven’t scheduled the bill’s next hearing.


About the writers of this blog post


We are Orion Scribner (they/them) and N. Noel Sol (she/they), a couple of dragons. We never write articles with the assistance of procedural generation or so-called artificial intelligence (AI), and that type of content isn’t allowed on Otherkin News.


References


“Brief Amicus Curiae of Public Advocate of the United States, U.S. Justice Foundation, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund in Support of Petitioner.” Gloucester County School Bd. v. G. G. ex rel. Grimm, No. 16-273, 2017 WL 192454 (Jan. 10, 2017). http://files.eqcf.org/cases/16-273-amicus-brief-public-advocate-et-al/


Central MO Info (May 19, 2023). “Representative Toalson Reisch Disappointed in Senate’s Version of Trans Bills.” Central MO Info. https://www.centralmoinfo.com/representative-toalson-reisch-disappointed-in-senates-version-of-trans-bills/


Chung, Andrew (June 26, 2024). “US Supreme Court turns away case on charter school's mandatory skirts for girls.” Reuters.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-turns-away-case-charter-schools-mandatory-skirts-girls-2023-06-26/


Darville, Sarah (Dec. 21, 2018). “Want a charter school application? If your child has a disability, your questions more likely to be ignored, study finds.” Chalkbeat.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/2018/12/21/21106398/want-a-charter-school-application-if-your-child-has-a-disability-your-questions-more-likely-to-be-ig/


Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962). https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/370/421.html


Fitzpatrick, Cara (Sept. 9, 2023). “The Charter-School Movement’s New Divide.” The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/charter-schools-religion-public-secular/675293/


G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board. 972 F.3d 586 (4th Cir. 2020). https://casetext.com/case/grimm-v-gloucester-cnty-sch-bd-8


House of Chimeras (Aug. 12, 2022). "Litter Boxes in School Bathrooms: Dissecting the Alt-Right’s Current Moral Panic." OtherCon. https://youtu.be/WVjXOmN2IlU


House of Chimeras, Orion Scribner, and Page Shepard (2023). “Litter Box Hoax 2: Legislature Boogaloo.” OtherCon 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsXy_ctC4Jc&t=1425s


Legiscan. MO HB 2678. https://legiscan.com/MO/bill/HB2678/2024


Legiscan. MO HB 1941. https://legiscan.com/MO/bill/HB1941/2024


Mccollum v. Board Of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948). https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/333/203.html


McKinney, Rodger (Aug. 25, 2022). “State Rep. Cheri Reisch criticized for 'unwarranted' claim that CPS students use litterboxes.” Columbia Daily Tribune. https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/news/politics/elections/local/2022/08/25/state-rep-cheri-reisch-criticized-for-unwarranted-claim-that-cps-columbia-students-use-litterboxes/7895082001/


McKinney, Rodger (Feb. 6, 2022). “State Rep. Cheri Reisch states 'Columbia sucks' when referring to public schools in education hearing” Columbia Daily Tribune. https://www.columbiatribune.com/story/news/education/2022/02/06/cheri-reisch-states-columbia-sucks-when-referring-to-cps-in-education-hearing-mo-leg-basye/6662719001/


Missouri House of Representatives. MO HB 2678. https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB2678&year=2024&code=R


Missouri Senate. MO SB 49. https://www.senate.mo.gov/23info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=44407


Missouri Senate. MO SB 39. https://senate.mo.gov/23info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=44496

Palma, Bethania. (January 30, 2023). “How Furries Got Swept Up in Anti-Trans 'Litter Box' Rumors.” Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/01/30/how-furries-got-swept-up-in-anti-trans-litter-box-rumors/ Archived on March 30, 2023.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230330232007/https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/01/30/how-furries-got-swept-up-in-anti-trans-litter-box-rumors/


Pew Research Center (Oct. 3, 2019). “Religion in the Public Schools.”

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/10/03/religion-in-the-public-schools-2019-update/

Reuters Fact Check (October 18, 2022). “Fact Check-No evidence of schools accommodating ‘furries’ with litter boxes.” https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-furries-rogan-litterbox-idUSL1N31J1KT Archived February 13, 2023.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230213110524/https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-furries-rogan-litterbox-idUSL1N31J1KT


Scribner, Orion, and N. Noel Sol (Feb. 9, 2024). “Will Oklahoma Call Animal Control on Students?” Otherkin News. https://otherkinnews.dreamwidth.org/92680.html


Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). https://openjurist.org/393/us/503
frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Content warnings: Rated G. Sexism against transgender people. Adults who cause danger or distress for children by outing them as transgender or showing them animal bloodsports.


Summary:
In 2023, Republicans in the US began to propose laws (bills) that would be against furries or people who identify as animals. They continue to do so in 2024. The first two such bills of this year are Oklahoma House Bill 3084 (OK HB 3084) and Mississippi House Bill 176 (MS HB 176). Read on for information about these bills from this and last year, the urban legend that inspired them, what may happen next, and what you can do. This five page article (plus references) is a twelve minute read.


Humphrey’s anti-furry bill in Oklahoma


Republican Representative Justin Humphrey (he/him) specializes in writing bills that are intentionally bizarre so they will attract attention, and then cleaning them up later so that they will pass into law. On December 6, he wrote OK HB 3084, as its only sponsor. He prefiled it on January 17. It was introduced for its first reading on February 5. Here is the bill on Oklahoma’s official site, and on the third-party site Legiscan. It proposes a new law, which would read in full: 


“Students who purport to be an imaginary animal or animal species, or who engage in anthropomorphic behavior commonly referred to as furries at school shall not be allowed to participate in school curriculum or activities. The parent or guardian of a student in violation of this section shall pick the student up from the school, or animal control services shall be contacted to remove the student.”


In Humphrey’s interview with Rolling Stone about this, he specifically said that he wrote the furry bill in response to having heard about students using litter boxes in school. The Stone pointed out that that’s an urban legend that never happened at all, but he thinks it’s happened sometimes, if not widespread. He said that “furry” is the common name for a “mental illness” and “sexual habit,” and that there’s an “actual psychological term” for it, which he didn’t say because he found it “very, very difficult to pronounce” (Ehrlich, 2024). 


He probably was referring to “anthropomorphic behavior,” which he wrote in his bill text. That isn’t a psychological term or a mental illness, it’s about cartoon characters. The furry fandom uses “anthropomorphic animals” as a synonym for furries, fictional talking animal characters. “Anthropomorphic” often gets misused to mean “animal-like,” but its literal meaning is “human-like.” Humphrey’s wording would suffice to expel all students from a school: kids who act like animals and kids who act like humans. He likely based his bill on last year’s dead Oklahoma Senate Bill 943, which he didn’t write, but which also used the word.


Humphrey’s bill is the first that says to call animal control on furries. Would they refuse to pick up a student, or could this really cause students to be arrested and detained? Animal control is dictated by the local government (Bradshaw and Vankavage). Sometimes it may be outsourced to contractors who wouldn’t respond to this bizarre request, but in many cases it’s managed by local law enforcement. For example, one Oklahoman city ordinance says that all its animal control officers who are not already part of law enforcement “possess all authority of a police officer of the city for enforcing these animal regulations” (Vinita city code 2005 5-3-19). Humphrey explained that this part is a joke that he doesn’t intend to stick to, though, saying, 


“if you want to treat these people as actual animals, you call animal control. I’ll be happy to rewrite the language [to replace ‘animal control’ with mental health professionals]. But right now, I put that in there to make the point. A sarcastic point” (Erhlich, 2024). 


(Bracketed text in original.) Introducing a bill with an absurd part and then deleting or altering it to let it pass is a tactic that we see in one of last year’s bills, and it’s a favorite tactic of Humphrey’s.


The day after Humphrey filed his furry bill, he called it his “crazy” bill, saying, “I’ve laughed and said, well, we ought to neuter them and vaccinate them and send them to the pound." KOCO News reported, “Humphrey said although it may not become law, he wants to bring attention to what he called a problem” (Jones, 2024). Perhaps, like the urban legend that inspired it, the bill’s purpose is to attract attention by being intentionally absurd. It makes up a guy to get mad at: it describes an invented situation that has never happened, then recommends penalties for that imaginary situation, and those penalties themselves are something that may not be realistically carried out, or which would have absurdly high-stakes consequences. Humphrey’s furry bill doesn’t mention transgender people, but he wrote it in reference to an urban legend that parodies transgender people. Humphrey has also made many public remarks against transgender people, and he has supported anti-transgender bills (Murphy, 2021).


Other Representatives believe he may have intended for the absurdity of his furry bill to distract attention from more serious bills. On the same day that he prefiled this, he also filed a racially discriminatory bill about Oklahomans of Hispanic descent, House Bill 3133 (Jones, 2024).


Part of Humphrey’s amusement here is that he has a beef with animal control. In addition to his hostilities toward LGBTQ people, one of his long-term goals is to reduce the legal penalties for cockfighting from felony to misdemeanor. Throughout the US, this blood sport is illegal, and it is a federal crime to bring a child under age sixteen to any animal fighting events (Humane Society). Humphrey approves of allowing children there, saying, “You’re dang skippy I’ll take my kid to a chicken fighting before I’m gonna take them to see a drag queen” (Leigh, 2023).


This year’s anti-transgender and anti-furry bill in Mississippi


Introduced on January 17, MS HB 176 would require schools to out transgender students to parents, and to allow faculty to not accommodate any student who 


“identif[ies] at school as a gender or pronoun that does not align with the child's sex on their birth certificate, other official records, sex assigned at birth, or identifying as an animal species, extraterrestrial being or inanimate object.” 


As the nonprofit journalism site Mississippi Free Press noted, “There are no known incidents of Mississippi schoolchildren identifying as aliens or inanimate objects, but the idea of children identifying as animals may stem from an unsubstantiated urban myth about litter boxes that spread among Republican officials in recent years” (Harrison, 2024). Here is the bill on Mississippi’s official site, and on the third-party site Legiscan. The bill’s seven authors are all Republican Representatives: Charles “Chuck” Blackwell (main author), William Arnold, Randy Boyd, Larry Byrd, Dan Eubanks, Jimmy Fondren, and Donnie Scoggin. In the same month, Blackwell also sponsored the bill MS HB 303 (about digital currencies) and co-sponsored the bill MS HR 17 (for deporting undocumented immigrants back to Mexico) (TrackBill). 


An overview of last year’s anti-furry bills


Important background for what’s happening is that last year in the US, sexists introduced more than five hundred bills to limit the rights of transgender people (Reed, 2023). Four of those were also against furries or people who identify as animals. They were mainly against the rights of transgender students, and also opposed “a student's perception of being any animal species other than human” (North Dakota House Bill 1522) or “anthropomorphic behavior commonly referred to as furries” (Oklahoma Senate Bill 943). 


The text of the third, Indiana Statehouse Bill 380, only talked about dress codes and “disruptive behavior.” Later, this was amended to say “distractive behavior.” However, its writer said that it was to prevent “imitating or were behaving like a furry” (Herron, 2023). The bill’s unspoken real aim was to prevent transgender students from dressing as their gender. 


The fourth was a proposed amendment to Montana Senate Bill 544. It would have changed this internet censorship bill to also censor “acts of transgenderism,” which it defines as “a person being in the mental state of believing the person is transgender or transspecies” (Scribner, Shepard, and Sol, 2023). The word “transgenderism” is a dogwhistle used by people who oppose transgender rights. “Transspecies” is not typically thought of as a subset of it.


By the end of 2023, what came of those four bills? The line about animals was later deleted from the North Dakota bill, though it was still anti-transgender (Scribner, March 14, 2023). It passed on May 18, becoming law that will oppose the rights of transgender students. Last year’s Oklahoma bill died in committee. The Indiana bill passed on May 4, and will prohibit “distractive behavior” in schools. The Montana bill passed on May 19, and it’s still a clumsy plan for internet censorship, but the final text did not use the amendment that talked about transgender or transspecies (Legiscan). So far, no laws have passed with texts that mention anything along the lines of furries or identifying as nonhuman.


What are anti-furry bills really about?


These bills happened because of an urban legend. In parody of transgender students, Republicans made up a story that schools have litter boxes for students who identify as cats. Fact-checking site Snopes has been debunking this legend (Palma), as has Reuters Fact Check. This panel by a historian gives very detailed information about the legend’s development (Chimeras, 2022). Republicans imply through this legend that letting transgender students use the restroom that matches their gender identity would be as ridiculous as giving litter boxes to students who identify as animals.


What are the facts about people who identify as animals, if any exist? Surveys of the furry fandom show that most people who call themselves furries do not identify as animals (Plante et al, 2016, pp. 113-114). However, there are real people who sincerely identify as animals or nonhuman beings. Many call themselves therianthropes or otherkin (Scribner, 2023, “Simple introduction”). Sexists use the word “transspecies” to parody transgender people. However, a few transgender people call a nonhuman aspect of themselves transspecies (Chimeras, 2021). None of them did the things in schools that the urban legend says, so the legend isn’t true, and the legend wasn’t created in response to them. The threatening intent of the legend and bills is toward transgender people, but could cause trouble for furries and people who identify as animals.


Are there people who think of their gender identity as something nonhuman, and is that based on or part of the concept of being transgender? Transgender people who don’t feel they are a woman or man only or all the time have a nonbinary gender. Some people feel so different from a woman or man that they say their gender is something other than human. Since 2014, some call themselves xenogender, meaning “alien gender.” This can be a metaphor for something difficult to put into words, and they do not necessarily think of themselves as literally nonhuman, though some do. Surveys show that most nonbinary people define their gender in relation to being a woman or man; only 1.7% of nonbinary people call themselves xenogender or a variation on that word, and no other xenogender identity comes close to common (Gender Census, 2023). However, identifying as nonhuman is not inherently a form of being transgender, and was not developed based on the concept of being transgender.


What happens next for Humphrey’s anti-furry bill?


On February 5 and 6, it had its first and second readings, and it was referred to the House Rules Committee to read it next. That Committee has seven Republicans and two Democrats (State of Oklahoma). We’ll see if they let it die the same as last year’s Oklahoma bill, or if they vote for it to progress toward passing in some form. Remember the aforementioned interview where Humphrey said he doesn’t expect it to pass. Its purpose is to make “a sarcastic point” and attract attention away from other bills.


What happens next for the Mississippi bill? 


The day it was introduced, MS HB 176 was referred to the Mississippi House Education Committee and still waits for them to vote on it. Given that the Committee has a majority of Republicans (according to its government site and legislation tracking site, BillTracker.com), and the bill’s similarity to the North Dakota bill that passed last year with the portion about non-humans deleted, they’re likely to pass this bill in some form. The director of the Mississippi branch of the Human Rights Campaign, Rob Hill (he/him), said, 


“We’ve not seen this kind of bill in Mississippi before, and we hope that our leaders will resist another effort to stigmatize and isolate transgender and nonbinary youth and their peers [...] This is a very dangerous bill. It’s dangerous for the lives of youth … and it further perpetuates Mississippi’s image of being a place of discrimination” (Harrison, 2024).


What can you do?


Page Shepard (they/he), House of Chimeras (they/them), and I presented a panel about the bills last August. In the recording of our panel, skip to the timestamp 23:44 to hear what ordinary people can do about bad bills. In the written script of our lecture, see Slides 21 through 25.


About the author of this article


I’m Orion Scribner (they/them), and I’ve been writing and researching as an alterhuman community historian for more than ten years. I’m a moderator on Otherkin News, a volunteer-run blog about current events relevant to the alterhuman communities. My partner N. Noel Sol (she/her) did some editing in this document, especially in regard to animal control. Thanks for proofreading by my partner system the House of Chimeras (they/them), and my colleague Xylanth (it/its). I never write articles with the assistance of procedural generation or so-called artificial intelligence (AI), and that type of content isn’t allowed on Otherkin News.




References


BillTrack50. "Mississippi House Education Committee." https://www.billtrack50.com/committee/4245#billReferral 


Bradshaw, A. and L. Vankavage. “The Role of Local Government in Animal Control.” Humane Animal Control.  https://resources.bestfriends.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/Chapter%202_Role%20of%20Local%20Government%20in%20Animal%20Control.pdf?bG9ehcLSrIR08a1N_X1wbpYDzgy8_orb 


Vinita city code 2005 5-3-19: ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER; IMPOUNDMENT OF ANIMALS; REDEMPTION; SALE; EUTHANASIA. American Legal Publishing.

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/vinitaok/latest/vinita_ok/0-0-0-2467


Ehrlich, Brenna (January 17, 2024). “Students Dressed as Furries Could be Collected by Animal Control if New Oklahoma Bill Passes.” Rolling Stone. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/furries-school-bill-animal-control-1234948434/ 


Jones, Alyse (January 18, 2024). "How many newly filed bills will become law in Oklahoma?". KOCO-TV. https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-new-filed-bills/46431213 


House of Chimeras (Aug. 12, 2022). "Litter Boxes in School Bathrooms: Dissecting the Alt-Right’s Current Moral Panic." https://houseofchimeras.neocities.org/Lectures


House of Chimeras (Aug. 14, 2021). "The Use and Misuse of The Term Transspecies." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miSyXSesyzw 


House of Chimeras, O. Scribner, and P. Shepard (2023). “Litter Box Hoax 2: Legislature Boogaloo.” OtherCon 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsXy_ctC4Jc&t=1425s 


Harrison, Heather (January 19, 2024). “Teachers Required to Out Trans Students to Families Under Proposed Mississippi Bill.” Mississippi Free Press. https://www.mississippifreepress.org/39193/teachers-required-to-out-trans-students-to-families-under-proposed-mississippi-bill 


Herron, Arika (Jan. 26, 2023). "Indiana lawmaker targets furries in schools. Schools say there's no problem." IndyStar. https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2023/01/26/indiana-statehouse-bill-targets-furries-schools-say-no-problem/69840839007/ Archived Jan. 26, 2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20230126101035/https://eu.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2023/01/26/indiana-statehouse-bill-targets-furries-schools-say-no-problem/69840839007/


Humane Society Legislative Fund (February 4, 2014). “Farm Bill Strengthens Animal Fighting Law, Maintains State Farm Animal Protection Laws.” The Humane Society of the United States. https://web.archive.org/web/20141025151239/http://www.humanesociety.org/news/news_briefs/2014/02/farm_bill_passed_020414.html 


Legiscan, IN SB 380. https://legiscan.com/IN/bill/SB0380/2023 


Legiscan, MT SB 544. https://legiscan.com/MT/bill/SB544/2023


Legiscan, MS HB 176. https://legiscan.com/MS/bill/HB176/2024 


Legiscan, ND HB 1522. https://legiscan.com/ND/bill/HB1522/2023 


Legiscan, OK HB 3084. https://legiscan.com/OK/bill/HB3084/2024 


Legiscan, OK SB 943. https://legiscan.com/OK/bill/SB943/2023


Leigh, Sunny (April 15, 2023). "Bill to reduce penalties for animal fighting shut down in Oklahoma Senate". KTUL. https://ktul.com/news/local/bill-to-reduce-penalties-for-animal-fighting-shut-down-in-oklahoma-senate-cockfighting-chicken-fighting-dogfighting-humphrey-kunzweiler-humane-society-animal-wellness-gamefowl-lawmakers Content warning for animal cruelty. This article goes into some detail about the more criminal and violent extremes of animal fighting.


Mississippi Legislation. House of Representatives Committee Listing. https://www.legislature.ms.gov/committees/house-committees/ 


Murphy, Sean (15 April 2021). "GOP Oklahoma lawmaker criticized for transgender comments". AP. https://apnews.com/article/legislature-oklahoma-bills-oklahoma-city-5db54da2949c3398d3fc7c53714bdc36 


Palma, Bethania. (January 30, 2023). “How Furries Got Swept Up in Anti-Trans 'Litter Box' Rumors.” Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/01/30/how-furries-got-swept-up-in-anti-trans-litter-box-rumors/ Archived on March 30, 2023.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230330232007/https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/01/30/how-furries-got-swept-up-in-anti-trans-litter-box-rumors/


Plante, C., S. Reysen, S. Roberts, and K. Gerbasi (2016). FurScience! A summary of five years of research from the International Anthropomorphic Research Project. FurScience: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. ISBN: 978-0-9976288-0-7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304540208_FurScience_A_summary_of_five_years_of_research_from_the_International_Anthropomorphic_Research_Project The relevant section of the book is also on the project’s official web page here: https://furscience.com/research-findings/therians/7-2-animal-identification/ 



Reed, Erin (December 30, 2023). “Erin's 2024 Anti-Trans Legislative Risk Map.” Erin in the Morning. https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/erins-2024-anti-trans-legislative


Reuters Fact Check (October 18, 2022). “Fact Check-No evidence of schools accommodating ‘furries’ with litter boxes.” https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-furries-rogan-litterbox-idUSL1N31J1KT Archived February 13, 2023.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230213110524/https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-furries-rogan-litterbox-idUSL1N31J1KT


Scribner, O. (March 14, 2023). “A formerly anti-alterhuman but still anti-transgender bill will be heard Wednesday.” https://otherkinnews.dreamwidth.org/88744.html 


Scribner, O. (April 13, 2023). “A Simple Introduction to Otherkin and Therianthropes: Version

2.4.7.” The Works of Orion Scribner. https://web.archive.org/web/20230603220035/http://frameacloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/simpleintro.pdf 


Scribner, O. (February 22, 2023). “In US, three anti-transgender bills also oppose alterhumans; similar recent Supreme Court cases.” Otherkin News. https://otherkinnews.dreamwidth.org/86709.html 


Scribner, O., P. Shepard, and N. N. Sol (April 24, 2023). “Proposed amendment to Montana net censorship bill would ban transgender and transspecies people.” Otherkin News. https://otherkinnews.dreamwidth.org/89561.html 


State of Oklahoma House of Representatives. Oklahoma House Rules Committee. https://www.okhouse.gov/committees/house/rules 


TrackBill. “Mississippi Rep. Charles Blackwell (R).” https://trackbill.com/legislator/mississippi-representative-charles-blackwell/981-27365/ 


frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Content warnings: About opposition to transgender rights in US politics. A portion of this article is about how a specific politician is being targeted because she is transgender. This article is also about censorship, so it names some types of adult content. Rated PG-13.

Disclaimer: For historical purposes, this article collects some recent events that have been in the news about bills and court cases. All of this is publicly available information. The writers of this article are not lawyers, and this is not legal advice. For legal advice, you must consult with your lawyer.

Summary: Introduced in March, Montana Senate Bill 544 would change local Internet laws to prohibit commercial entities from distributing what it calls “material harmful to minors.” That’s mostly a euphemism for porn. The bill would require people to prove that they’re over 18 to access such materials by sharing their credit card info or sending a picture of their driver’s license. Artists, fans, and security professionals can see how this bill is a bad plan already, but that’s not the worst part. An amendment that was proposed this April would change it into an anti-transgender bill. The amendment would broaden the definition of “materials harmful to minors” to include “acts of transgenderism,” which it defines as “a person being in the mental state of believing the person is transgender or transspecies.” If Montana accepts this amendment, then this would become the fourth anti-transgender bill in the US which also opposes furries, transspecies people, or people who identify as animals. In Montana, it would also ban content about transgender people from being publicly on the Internet where they could be seen by people of all ages. This amendment is one of hundreds that seek to outlaw the visibility and freedom of transgender existence and gender nonconformity. Our article all about this is about eight pages long, half of which are sources referenced. Read more... )
frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Content warning: sexism against transgender people.

This is a follow-up on our blog's post from February 22, about three of the anti-transgender bills in the US that also oppose alterhumans. According to LegiScan, North Dakota House Bill 1522 will be heard in a committee hearing on Wednesday, March 15, at 10:30 AM in Fort Lincoln. The state offers live video of floor sessions, standings, and meetings. Also, you can see previous video recordings associated with this bill here. For example, people who testified for or against the bill. The bill would prohibit school boards and teachers from a variety of actions supporting transgender students. As it was introduced, the bill also would prohibit school boards and teachers from "Adopt[ing] a policy establishing or providing a place, facility, school program, or accommodation that caters to a student's perception of being any animal species other than human." This line was likely inspired by a conservative urban legend claiming that schools provide litter boxes for students who identify as cats, as if that is the next step in a slippery slope when schools allow transgender students to use the appropriate restrooms. In the newest draft of this bill, this portion about animals has been deleted, but the bill is still a threat to transgender students. It is just one of the 440 anti-transgender bills in the US right now. Two others of these bills are also still anti-alterhuman: IN SH 380 (implicitly, according to its writer), and OK SB 943, which specifically mentions furries. If you discover that any of the other bills are anti-alterhuman, please let us know in a comment.
frameacloud: A green dragon reading a book. (Default)
[personal profile] frameacloud
Content warnings: About opposition to transgender rights in US politics. Rated PG-13, safe for work.

Accessibility notes: If some words in this article are unfamiliar to you, you may find them in the glossary at the end of the article. The references section after that has unmasked web addresses, which make it printer friendly, but also make it annoying to listen to through a screen reader.

Disclaimer: For historical purposes, this article collects some recent events that have been in the news about bills and court cases. All of this is publicly available information. I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For legal advice, you must consult with your lawyer.

Summary: In the US, groups have attempted to oppose the legal rights of transgender people by comparing them to furries, otherkin, or trans-species people. Of the many bills introduced in January opposing transgender rights, three bills also opposed furries or people who identify as animals: ND HB 1522, OK SB 943, and IN SH 380. The background leading up to this includes three Supreme Court cases from around 2019: G.G. v. Gloucester County School Bd., G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Doe v. Boyertown Area School Dist. In these, amici curiae tried to discredit transgender people by comparing them to otherkin or trans-species people. This is a continuation of at least a decade of sexists making this comparison, with or without the knowledge that any alterhuman groups exist, as a straw-man fallacy.


This article is about nine pages long, so I'm putting it behind a cut tag. Click here to read the whole thing! )

Profile

otherkinnews: A centaur reading a newspaper. (Default)
Otherkin News

About

Otherkin News is a collaborative, volunteer-run blog for sharing news for otherkin, therianthropes, fictionfolk, plural systems, and all sorts of alterhumans. You can join and post here about current events in our communities and newspaper articles that are about us. The person moderating this is [personal profile] frameacloud. Everyone is welcome to subscribe and explore our tags.

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
456789 10
111213141516 17
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom