Continuing on this theme, readers will recall that reader J.K. in Silverdale is helping run the campaign of a candidate for the local school board, and asked whether or not that candidate should attend a forum held by the Moms for Liberty. Readers gave many interesting answers, although those answers were by no means unanimous, one way or the other.
J.K. wrote in with a report on how things ended up turning out, and we thought we would pass it along. And so:
First, thank you to the readership for your thoughtful campaign advice. Reading your comments clarified for us that there were sound arguments for either choice.
My candidate did not attend the Moms for Liberty forum. I did.
I did not attend in any official capacity; I am not a public figure and my role in my candidate's campaign is not public knowledge. I showed up with the other member of our campaign, and we sat and listened with the twenty or so adults and handful of kids in the audience. Only four candidates from across our county of five school districts showed up. This was not a well-attended event.
Within the first few minutes, I realized that my candidate had absolutely made the right call when she decided not to attend. She had reached out to the hosts asking about the format of the event, and she received a polite response including some generalities, but stating that the format had not been finalized. I'm not sure the format ever was finalized. The moderators were civil but prone to editorializing. After brief introductions, the moderators read a series of statements that distorted facts, and candidates were asked to hold up a green or red card to signal agreement or disagreement. There was no disagreement among the four candidates. Positions stated in the forum included no pornography in school libraries, consider arming teachers for school safety, God gave parents children to mold as they see fit, only the U.S. and state flag should be seen at school, community health clinics should not be at schools, and board members should take a stand against state law (which is a violation of the oath of office). Between the loose, editorializing format and sheer number of distorted facts, this simply was not a venue for my candidate to present a different perspective.
Listening to these people at board meetings and at this forum, I confess a perverse fascination. They seem sincere in their beliefs and emotions, and they seem to live in an alternate reality. They are deeply concerned about "what is happening in our schools," but provide some mix of no evidence, distorted evidence, or happenings from outside our district. When they make public comments at board meetings, it's a bizarre, performative act. They expend great effort finding issues, real or imagined, to be angry about. Frequently, their complaints are about issues outside the purview of the school board, and are therefore pointless.
Unfortunately, their distorted reality has real and terrifying consequences. A music teacher at one of our schools, Brownsville Elementary, posted on Facebook about a curious kindergartner asking if he's a boy or girl (the kid apparently asked because of the teacher's red shoes, not his dress or red fingernails). His response: "I don't have to be a boy or a girl. I dress like me. And if someone thinks I dress like a girl, then I take that as a compliment because girls are awesome!" A local right-wing pastor posted about this, urging parents to make a fuss and pull their kids out of the school. The pastor's post was picked up by Libs of TikTok and went viral. On Monday, Brownsville Elementary was closed due to a bomb threat.
This is stochastic terrorism. There are over 400 elementary students who attend that school, and parents will now send their kids there knowing their children's lives were credibly threatened. Prior to Wednesday's board meeting, my candidate friend texted me, "They are bringing in sheriffs to protect us. That is not a joke." Public comments at the meeting supported the teacher and LGBTQ+ community by about a 3-or 4-to-1 margin, and included multiple pastors who countered the right-wing pastor by affirming inclusive Christianity. And yet, there is that minority that seems to think a peaceful man in a dress is a bigger threat to children than the all-too-real fear of being blown up.
This is the reality in a blue district in a blue state. Please, even if you are in a blue district, do not be apathetic about your local school board elections.
For anyone interested in following the election in my district, Central Kitsap, here is our voters' pamphlet. The brave candidates striving for inclusive schools include the first Asian woman to run (p. 33), the first Black member of our board, and my friend.
Thanks, J.K.! This certainly helps make clear why the SPLC made the choice it did. (Z)