Decipher this or as the Riddler would say to Batman, Riddle me this:
Ze pronouns are a set of gender-neutral pronouns used to refer to someone without specifying their gender. They typically include “ze” for the subject, “zir” for the object, and “zirself” for the reflexive form, similar to how “he” and “she” are used. pronouns.org
California has long been at the forefront of progressive policies aimed at protecting transgender and LGBTQ+ students in public schools. In July 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1955, known as the SAFETY Act, into law. This bill prohibits school districts from enacting policies that require staff to notify parents about a student’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression without the student’s consent, unless required by law. cde.ca.gov – It also invalidates existing “forced outing” rules and provides resources for families supporting LGBTQ+ youth. cde.ca.gov
Proponents argue that such measures create safer environments by respecting student privacy and reducing risks of familial rejection or abuse. However, these policies, part of a broader trans movement in education, may have unintended consequences. They could inadvertently fuel increased bullying, provoke cultural backlash from certain ethnic groups, intimidate teachers into silence on concerning behaviors (including struggles with mandated pronoun usage), heighten vulnerabilities to grooming, normalize gender dysphoria by excluding parents from key decisions, and provide financial and political benefits to external entities like hospitals and politicians. This essay explores these effects, drawing on available data and examples to highlight how well-intentioned reforms might backfire.
To understand the context, it’s essential to outline the key policies driving the trans movement in California schools. AB 1955 builds on earlier legislation like SB 48 (2011), which mandates the inclusion of LGBTQ+ contributions in history and social studies curricula. publications.csba.org – Schools are also required to enforce anti-bullying measures under AB 9 (2011), which addresses harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity. publications.csba.org – Additionally, guidelines from the California Department of Education encourage supportive practices, such as allowing students to use facilities and names aligning with their gender identity, and require teachers to use preferred pronouns, including non-binary ones like “they/them” or neopronouns (?) such as “zir/ze.” publications.csba.org
Understanding Ze Pronouns
Ze pronouns are a set of gender-neutral pronouns used by individuals who prefer not to be identified by traditional gendered pronouns. They are often used in place of “he” or “she.”
Pronoun Forms
The two common forms of ze pronouns are:
- Ze/Hir:
- Subject: Ze
- Object: Hir
- Possessive: Hirs
- Example: “Ze is a writer and wrote that book hirself.”
- Ze/Zir:
- Subject: Ze
- Object: Zir
- Possessive: Zirs
- Example: “Ze is a writer and wrote that book zirself.”
Pronunciation
- Ze: Pronounced with a long “e” (like “zee”).
- Hir: Pronounced like the English word “here.”
- Zir: Also pronounced with a long “e.”
Usage and Importance
Using ze pronouns helps to affirm a person’s identity and disrupts assumptions based on appearance or name. It is important to respect individuals’ pronouns as they reflect their gender identity, which may not always be visible. If unsure about someone’s pronouns, it is appropriate to ask politely.
To this I and most sane people reply: Huh?
These efforts aim to foster acceptance and reduce discrimination, responding to data showing LGBTQ+ youth face higher rates of victimization. For instance, in rural and urban areas alike, LGBTQ+ students report lower school connectedness and higher harassment than non-LGBTQ+ peers. foxnews.com- Yet, the rapid implementation of these policies in diverse school settings may overlook potential downsides.
One prominent unintended consequence is the persistence—and possible escalation—of bullying against LGBTQ+ students since 2017, despite heightened focus on acceptance. Data from the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) for 2017-2019 reveals stark disparities: 58.4% of gay, lesbian, and bisexual students reported experiencing some form of bullying or harassment in the previous year, compared to just 27.5% of straight students. nea.org – While direct year-over-year increases are not uniformly documented, specific indicators suggest worsening trends. The GLSEN National School Climate Survey shows that the percentage of LGBTQ+ students hearing homophobic remarks from school staff in California jumped from 12% in 2019 to 49% in 2021. facebook.com -This spike coincides with intensified policy pushes, including inclusive education mandates that may provoke resistance in conservative pockets or among students unfamiliar with trans issues.
Historical data further illustrates this pattern. Homophobic bullying rates in California schools rose steadily from 7.6% in 2001-2002 to a peak of 10.8% in 2008-2009 during debates over Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage, before gradually declining to 9.9% by 2012-2013. yougov.com – The acceleration during politically charged periods suggests that aggressive advocacy can sometimes heighten tensions rather than diffuse them. Recent surveys reinforce this: In 2021, most LGBTQ+ students in California experienced victimization based on their identity, with 67% hearing negative remarks about gender expression from staff. While not all increases can be directly attributed to trans policies, the emphasis on visibility and acceptance may create a backlash effect, where students or even educators resist change, leading to more covert or overt hostility. This counters the intended outcome of reducing bullying through education and protection.
Compounding this issue is the role of ethnic groups in bullying dynamics, particularly among Blacks and Hispanics—demographics often aligned with Democratic and teachers’ union interests but culturally less accepting of LGBTQ+ lifestyles. Hispanic communities, influenced by Catholic traditions, and Black communities, where disapproval of gay marriage remains higher than among secular Whites, may contribute to resistance. cde.ca.gov – Statistics on bullying involvement (as perpetrators, victims, or both) reveal patterns: Multiracial students report the highest rates at 30.6%, followed by African Americans at 23.2%, Whites at 20.6%, Asian Americans at 18.5%, and Hispanics at 17.9%. In race-based bullying specifically, White students perpetrate 50.7% of incidents, slightly exceeding their 47.3% share of the student population, while Black students are disproportionately victimized at 37% despite comprising only 15% of students. These figures suggest that in diverse California schools, where Hispanics and Blacks form significant populations, cultural clashes could amplify bullying. For example, Asian students are more likely to be bullied based on race or ethnicity, forbes.com – but African American involvement in bullying is higher overall. Policies aggressively promoting trans acceptance may alienate these groups, leading to unintended increases in harassment as students from less accepting backgrounds push back. This dynamic undermines the movement’s goals, as it risks turning potential allies into sources of conflict, especially in union-supported districts where political sensitivities run high.
Perhaps the most concerning unintended consequence is the potential for teacher intimidation, exacerbated by mandates on pronoun usage, which could enable grooming by predators under the guise of inclusivity. Policies like AB 1955, combined with rules against “body shaming” and requirements to use preferred pronouns (including challenging ones like “they/them” for singular use or “ze” for those rejecting binary norms), create fears among educators of job loss or lawsuits for perceived discrimination. publications.csba.org – Teachers who believe in only two biological genders based on XX/XY chromosomes often find these mandates confusing and conflicting with their views, leading to disciplinary actions. For instance, former Jurupa Unified School District teacher Jessica Tapia won a $360,000 settlement after being fired for refusing to use students’ preferred pronouns due to her religious beliefs. lawcommentary.com – In liberal districts, relaxed dress codes—intended to accommodate gender expression—may allow more revealing attire without challenge, potentially normalizing environments where inappropriate behavior goes unchecked.
Teachers, mandated to spot grooming under existing harassment training, might hesitate to report due to overlapping concerns about misgendering or shaming.
A recent case underscores this risk: In February 2026, Ruben Guzman, a 31-year-old assistant principal at Sunrise Middle School in San Jose and a 2024 California Teacher of the Year finalist, was arrested for attempting to solicit sex from someone he believed was a 13-year-old boy. komonews.com – Guzman, honored by the San Francisco 49ers for classroom excellence, was caught in an undercover sting offering money for sex acts. -publichealth.jhu.edu – While not directly tied to trans policies, the incident occurred in a progressive district where fears of retaliation for addressing “different” behaviors could silence whistleblowers. Critics argue that emphasizing student privacy and anti-shaming creates a chilling effect, where teachers avoid intervening in potential grooming scenarios to evade accusations of bias. This inversion—where protections for trans students might shield predators—represents a profound unintended risk, especially as penalties for non-compliance grow.
This insane pressure to use the “correct” pronoun has made many if not most teachers crawl into a shell. And rather than say or do anything that could be perceived as against the school policy – they just do NOTHING – which is one explanation why you get pedophiles like Guzman in a school system where everyone is trained to spot sexual predators and those that groom children for sex!
Further complicating matters is the apparent normalization of gender dysphoria through these policies, which exclude parents from discussions about transitions during vulnerable adolescent years. Nationally, diagnoses of gender dysphoria among U.S. youth nearly tripled from 15,172 in 2017 to 42,167 in 2021, with over 121,000 children aged 6-17 affected between 2017 and 2021. brightpathbh.com – In California, mandates against informing parents about potential chemical interventions (like puberty blockers, often called “chemical castration”) or surgeries may transform what was once a rare condition into a mainstream one, as schools encourage transitions without parental consent. This exclusion overlooks the natural confusion during puberty, when bodies undergo significant changes, potentially leading to irreversible decisions.
Beneficiaries of this trend include the medical industry, where hospitals billed at least $119.8 million for gender procedures on minors from 2019 to 2023, with surgeries like vaginoplasty costing up to $53,645 per episode. -cbsaustin.com – Politically, such policies may serve to create “victim groups” for electoral gain, as Democrats and unions leverage trans issues to mobilize voters, while critics argue this prioritizes ideology over child welfare. fordhaminstitute.org – This partisan motivation, evident in national debates and executive orders restricting trans rights in schools, further entrenches divisions. pewresearch.org
In conclusion, California’s trans movement in public schools, exemplified by AB 1955, seeks to safeguard vulnerable youth but may produce opposite effects. Bullying persists at high levels, with spikes in hostile remarks since 2017; cultural backlashes from groups like Blacks and Hispanics exacerbate divisions; teacher intimidation, including over pronoun mandates, could foster environments ripe for grooming, as seen in the Guzman case; and the normalization of dysphoria through parental exclusion benefits medical profits and political agendas. These consequences highlight the need for balanced approaches: Strengthen anti-bullying enforcement with cultural sensitivity training, ensure transparency in reporting without forced outing, provide support for teachers navigating pronoun issues, and regularly evaluate policies through independent audits. Only by addressing these unintended outcomes can California truly create safer schools for all students.