A Massachusetts judge has ruled that a father cannot pull his 5-year-old son out of kindergarten lessons that include books addressing “gender stereotypes.”
Last year, U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted a preliminary injunction to a Massachusetts father identified as Alan L. to allow him to opt out his son, identified as J.L., from kindergartner classroom instruction involving books with LGBTQ+ themes in Lexington Public Schools, according to the Boston Herald.
However, on Tuesday, Saylor issued a memorandum ruling in favor of Lexington Public Schools regarding two books in the kindergarten curriculum, the Herald reported.
Saylor said the two disputed books, “Pink Is For Boys” and “Except When They Don’t,” do not fall under the opt-out provision because they focus on gender stereotypes rather than explicit themes regarding gender identity or LGBTQ+ relationships.
According to its Amazon profile, “Pink Is for Boys” is a book that “rethinks and reframes the stereotypical blue/pink gender binary and empowers kids and their grown-ups to express themselves in every color of the rainbow.” The profile adds that it “invites and encourages children to enjoy what they love to do, whether it’s racing cars and playing baseball, or loving unicorns and dressing up.”
Amazon describes “Except When They Don’t” as a “stereotype-breaking book” that “invites children to examine what they’re told ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ activities are and encourages them to play with whatever they want to and to be exactly who they are! This book is published in partnership with GLAAD to accelerate LGBTQ inclusivity and acceptance.”
In his ruling Tuesday, Saylor wrote that “because the book teaches about gender stereotypes, not gender identity, it does not violate plaintiff’s religious faith, as defined in the complaint, and therefore falls outside the scope of the preliminary injunction.”
Saylor also included a definition of the term “LGBTQ+,” appearing to quote Wikipedia and said that the term “means relating to people who ‘[are of] a sexual orientation that is nonheterosexual, including lesbians, gay men, bisexual people, and asexual people; people who are transgender or non-binary; people who are intersex; and queer people.’”
“Based on the record evidence, defendants are not required to provide an opportunity for plaintiff to opt his child out of classroom instruction using the books Pink Is For Boys by Robb Pearlman and Except When They Don’t by Laura Gehl,” Saylor wrote.
HARVARD FACULTY COMMITTEE SUGGESTS CAPPING A’S IN PROPOSED INTERNAL RANKING SYSTEM
Sasha Gill, partner at Louison, Costello, Condon & Pfaff, LLP who is representing Lexington Public Schools, told Fox News Digital in a statement, “The court’s ruling shows that parents do not have carte blanche in seeking opt-outs for religious reasons and that opt-out requests need only be granted when the identified materials directly conflict with parents’ stated beliefs.
“It’s not about how the curricular materials are marketed to the public or whether they have a connection to groups that advocate beliefs the parent finds objectionable,” Gill said. “The question is how the materials are actually presented to students, something the Supreme Court made very clear in Mahmoud.
“Overly broad opt-out requests like the one made by this parent expose some of the practical implications of implementing Mahmoud in the public-school setting, but this is just the tip of the iceberg.
“For this one child, Lexington Public Schools administrators, teachers and paraprofessionals have now spent an unthinkable amount of time trying to ensure two same-sex characters in a storybook aren’t standing too close to each other, lest they be considered gay-appearing enough. It’s an incredible burden to put on public schools.”
Sam Whiting, counsel at Massachusetts Liberty Legal Center, who is representing Alan L., told Fox News Digital in a statement, “We were very pleased that the Court issued a preliminary injunction order which forces the school to opt our client’s child out of over a dozen books that clearly violate his religious beliefs on sexuality and gender identity.”
Whiting added, “The court’s recent clarification of this order allows the school to use two books on gender stereotypes with our client’s child but, importantly, does not modify the substance of its holding that our client has a constitutional right to opt out of LGBTQ+ curriculum materials. The determination of this side issue does not affect the major victory the Court handed down in favor of this father’s parental rights.”
