Relax, Paso school board. No one is trying to outlaw gendered words like Mr. and Mrs.

The Paso Robles school board wants to make the world safe for ladies and gentlemen — or at least for the words “ladies and gentlemen.”

In a bizarre, totally unnecessary move Tuesday night, the board narrowly adopted a resolution opposing any government effort to compel the use of non-gendered language.

What a relief, right?

Except, a mandate banning such terms isn’t on the horizon — and not even liberal California would be so obtuse as to outlaw words that have been in common use for centuries.

Is school board worried about a slippery slope?

The school board’s resolution is a gross overreaction to a leaked proposal from the National Education Association that never actually saw the light of day. It suggested union contracts replace gender-specific words with more inclusive language, such as “parental leave” instead of “maternity leave,” “parent,” instead of “mother” or “father,” and “birthing parent” instead of “mother.”

Nothing came of it. But even if it had, this suggestion would have applied only to union contracts — not to classroom teaching.

Apparently, though, just like with the whole drama over critical race theory, the Paso school board majority is worried this is some kind of super-slippery slope and fancies itself the vanguard of the culture war charged with defending the good old days from progressive re-education.

Allow such language in union contracts and the next thing you know, fourth-graders will be suspended for saying “mother” or “father” instead of “parent.”

That’s ridiculous, and so is this resolution.

It’s nothing more than fear-mongering from a board majority that loves to keep its finger on the panic button.

Traditional terms like “Mr.” and “Mrs.” do not need protection.

There is no conspiracy afoot to do away with Mother’s Day and Father’s Day and replace them with Parent’s Day.

Phrases like “ladies and gentlemen” — while a bit old-fashioned — are not considered hate speech.

Stripping away protections for LGBTQ+ students

Ironically, the very board members who are so concerned about protecting teachers and students who use gendered language — so much so that they go to the trouble of passing a resolution — are simultaneously eyeing ways to water down protections for LGBTQ+ students that are included in the district’s current anti-discrimination policy.

At its last meeting, the board considered deleting a section of the policy pertaining specifically to LGBTQ+ students, under the argument that those students already are protected under the policy’s more general language.

That proposal — strongly opposed by members of the LGBTQ+ community — was ultimately tabled, but is expected to be brought back to the board in September.

But think about that for a second.

The marginalized group that faces chronic bullying and high suicide rates doesn’t need delineated language protecting their rights because those rights are covered by larger policy. But the dominant majority — which already has eons of advantage and privilege — requires special resolutions enshrining their precious language.

‘Science tells us sex cannot be changed’

Many who spoke at Tuesday’s meeting criticized the resolution protecting gendered language as yet another assault on the LGBTQ+ community.

One speaker suggested an alternate resolution that would support the use of all titles and pronouns, whether gender or non-gender specific.

Still, the board went ahead and adopted the resolution on a 4-3 vote.

Throughout the discussion, board members who supported the measure paid lip-service to protecting and respecting the rights of LGBTQ+ students, yet some of their comments were ill-informed and down-right offensive.

Statements made by Frank Triggs, a retired pastor who was appointed to the board in February, were especially egregious.

“Biology is not a state of mind, but that’s what we’ve been hearing tonight,” he said. “Science tells us sex cannot be changed. It is determined at conception. It cannot be changed.”

Science — modern science, at least — says no such thing.

We’ll cite just one of many sources: an article in Scientific American.

“The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic,” its headline says.

Here’s the gist: “Biologists now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and male.”

Triggs went on to say that students should accept “the reality of who they really are and how they were born, and have the proper self-esteem.”

In other words, in Trustee Triggs’ world, there is no such thing as transgender. You are male or female and if you don’t like it, you grin and bear it.

Is there any wonder that transgender students at Paso Robles High School are suffering?

Here’s how one transgender student described her experience to the school board: “I shouldn’t have to walk to school with the fear that I’m going to get beat up, with the fear that I’m going to get discriminated against, the fear that I may lose my life, all because I choose to live my truth. ...

“I already get enough comments when I use the bathroom, when I walk in the hallway, when I’m in the locker room. The last thing I need is my school board on my back as well.”

School board members who believe it’s more important to pass a resolution against some phantom mandate forbidding use of words likes “ladies” and “gentlemen” than to create a safe, welcoming environment for LGBTQ+ youths have no business governing.

Please, Paso Robles voters, research the positions of school board candidates. Come November, vote for those who will protect and respect LGBTQ+ students.

This story was originally published August 25, 2022 at 6:00 AM.