Gender-Baiting Is Dehumanizing—And It Hurts Families Across the Political Spectrum, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Gender-Baiting Is Dehumanizing—And It Hurts Families Across the Political Spectrum

by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

June 13, 2026

Elaine Godfrey’s Atlantic piece on the Paxton-Talarico Senate race is a sobering reminder that we are likely to see an ugly campaign season in Texas. Already, the attacks on James Talarico have moved beyond policy disagreement into gender-baiting, mockery, and false claims about his identity. These tactics are not only dishonest; they are dehumanizing.

Whatever one thinks of Talarico’s politics, no candidate should be reduced to insults about masculinity, gender identity, or sexuality. This kind of rhetoric does not merely target one public figure. It sends a message to every LGBTQIA perso—and to every young person who is questioning, searching, or simply different—that their dignity is conditional and that their humanity can be turned into a punchline.

That cruelty is especially painful because Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Intersex, and Asexual (LGBTQIA) people are not abstractions. They are our children, siblings, cousins, parents, students, neighbors, colleagues, and friends. They live in Democratic families, Republican families, religious families, secular families, rural families, urban families, and every kind of Texas family. 

Geez, human variation does not sort itself neatly by party, denomination, ZIP code, or ideology. 

That is not “higher education gobbledygook.” It is lived reality.

So when political leaders mock gender identity or use anti-LGBTQIA insinuations to score points, they are almost certainly wounding people in their own communities—and quite possibly in their own families. 

They may imagine they are attacking an opponent, but the damage radiates outward. It reaches the child listening from the back seat, the teenager in the pew, the college student afraid to come home, the parent who loves their child but now feels politically cornered into silence.

Most positively, this moment also reminds us that LGBTQIA people have never been merely the objects of ridicule or fear. They are agents of courage, culture, family, faith, scholarship, public service, and democratic possibility. Every year on June 28, communities around the world observe International LGBT Pride Day, honoring the anniversary of the 1969 Stonewall uprising in New York City—a watershed moment that helped catalyze the modern gay liberation movement. 

Pride is not only a celebration. It is a public affirmation that people who have been shamed, criminalized, silenced, and excluded are fully human and fully worthy of dignity, safety, joy, and belonging.

Happy Pride Month, by the way!

This is why gender-baiting is so morally bankrupt. It asks us to move backward, toward shame and stigma, precisely when history calls us forward—toward recognition, repair, and love.

This is not strength. It is not faith. It is not leadership. It is the politics of humiliation.

Texas deserves better than campaigns built on ridicule. We can debate taxes, schools, health care, immigration, war, democracy, and the future of the state without stripping people of their dignity. In fact, we must. A democracy worthy of the name depends not only on votes and institutions, but on the moral discipline to recognize one another as fully human.

The truth is simple: LGBTQIA Texans belong to all of us. They are part of every community, including those that pretend otherwise. To attack them for political gain is to attack the sacred fabric of family, faith, and human dignity itself.

Reference

Stonewall riots. (2026, June 12). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

‘We Have Not Seen Ugly Yet’

Paxton versus Talarico is already awful.  

By Elaine Godfrey | May 27, 2026

Mark Felix / Bloomberg / Getty
May 27, 2026

TWO THINGS are as certain as bluebonnets in spring now that Ken Paxton is the Republican nominee for the Senate in Texas: Democrats have a better-than-usual chance of winning statewide. And the next 23 weeks are going to be hideous.

Paxton’s big win comes days after President Trump stuck his finger into the wind, determined that the incumbent, John Cornyn, was toast, and gave the attorney general his last-minute support. Even though the nearly 28-point margin was surprising, it was probably always going to be Paxton. A runoff tends to attract the hardest of the hard-core—the kind of determined voter who is willing not only to show up to vote in March, but to show up and vote in March, sit through 12 weeks of brutal attack ads, then head back out to the polls in May. The kind of Republican who might argue, as one woman did in Dallas when I spoke with her last week, that Paxton and Trump are bringing masculinity back to the party like Bambi’s father “coming out of the forest with those huge antlers.”

Now that these dutiful Republicans have secured the animated stag of their dreams, they will turn their attention to his general-election opponent: James Talarico, the 37-year-old Democratic state lawmaker and aspiring Presbyterian minister. In some ways, the two men have become avatars for their respective parties, which will spend the next five months ruthlessly attacking each other.

Paxton, a MAGA folk hero, seems even more committed to the movement than Trump himself is. As attorney general, he filed dozens upon dozens of lawsuits against Presidents Obama and Biden, and sued to overturn the 2020 election results. Paxton and Trump happen to share a strikingly similar ethical and legal rap sheet: Both men have been indicted (Paxton’s charges involved securities fraud and were dismissed after he agreed to do community service and take an ethics class); both have been impeached (Paxton was suspended by the Texas House but later acquitted by the Senate); and both have been accused of—and deny—infidelity. (Angela Paxton is now divorcing Ken on “biblical grounds.”)

Read: Ken Paxton is actually doing this

Although Talarico doesn’t yet have Paxton’s name recognition, he does have strong youth-pastor energy and, at least for now, the moral high ground. As a faith-forward economic populist, Talarico has a core campaign message of love triumphing over hate, and little guys taking on the billionaires. Republicans know that they’ve got a tough race ahead of them, which is why they’ve already settled on a strategy: make Talarico seem like a weird dude.

Unfortunately for Democrats, Talarico has been more than a little helpful in this effort. In 2021, the state lawmaker said that “God is nonbinary,” a statement that is off-putting to some Christians, not because they believe that God is literally a man but because they can’t fathom why someone would drag God into the earthly debate over gender identity. Talarico has also said that there are six biological sexes and that he supports access to abortion, in part, because God asked for consent when he blessed Mary with the baby Jesus. As a candidate in 2022, he pledged to run a “non-meat campaign,” which was never going to play well in cattle country.

Lately, Talarico has been doing some backtracking. “I know there are two sexes, men and women. I also know there’s a very small percentage of people who have these chromosomal abnormalities, and I believe they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect,” he told CBS this week, adding that there are “some statements that I’ve made that I certainly regret.” Whenever Talarico is accused of being insufficiently pro-meat, his campaign circulates a photo of the candidate gnawing on a turkey leg at the state fair.

Still, both sides have heaps of material to work with. Which is why the next few months promise a total inundation of negative advertising online, and on the airwaves in Texas. Democrats will hammer into voters Paxton’s scandals—and the failures of Republican leadership. “Will Republicans get away with running a superficial attack campaign when Texans are really hurting?” Matt Angle, a state Democratic strategist, told me. “They’ve been in control for 30 years. If something’s broke, they broke it.” Meanwhile, Republicans are already parroting Paxton’s proposed “Tala-freako” and “Low-T Talarico” nicknames. This morning, the Trump adviser Stephen Miller wrote on X that Democrats have nominated their “first transgender senate candidate.” (Talarico is not transgender.) “We have not seen ugly yet,” Vinny Minchillo, a Texas Republican strategist, told me. They’re going to make Talarico “the woke DEI candidate of all woke DEI candidates. And pound him, pound him, pound him.”

The task ahead will be tough for Talarico, who will have to decide when to counter these attacks directly—Define thyself lest ye be defined, as the political maxim goes—and when to remain firmly astride his moral high horse. He will also have to fend off the unprecedented amounts of money that Republicans are pumping into the race in order to protect their fragile Senate majority. Already, Paxton has secured the backing of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which initially endorsed Cornyn and which, last night, dutifully scrubbed its website of all anti-Paxton press releases and ads.

Yet for Talarico, hope remains. No Texan needs reminding that inflation is high, or that the war in Iran has the whole world on edge and gas prices rising. Trump’s polling is bad, and among Texans, Talarico has higher favorability numbers than both Paxton and the president. In what might end up being a particularly good year for Democrats, victory is not only possible but achievable.

Still, if Democrats have done one thing well in Texas over the past 30 years, it’s dash hopes. The last time a Democrat came close to winning statewide in Texas was in 2018. Back then, Senator Ted Cruz beat Beto O’Rourke by roughly 215,000 votes. This time, the figure that Republicans have their eye on is 778,139, or the number of Texans who voted in the March GOP primary but who were not excited enough about either Republican candidate to vote in the runoff. A drop in turnout was expected. But a 36 percent decline “mirrors a lack of Republican enthusiasm we’ve seen in other states,” Minchillo said. For Texas Republicans, that number is “distressing.”

Last night on Truth Social, Trump congratulated Paxton and promised to hold a few rallies to help gin up some excitement. “Texas, this will be FUN!” the president teased. We’ll see.

Texas Taxpayers Will Fund Dozens of Private Schools that Openly Discriminate, by Josephine Lee, Texas Monthly, Jan. 13, 2026

Friends:

In a deeply reported investigation for the Texas Observer, staff writer Josephine Lee reveals that Texas’ newly enacted school voucher program—branded by Governor Greg Abbott as “education freedom”—will instead funnel public dollars to private schools that openly discriminate on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability status. 

Drawing on an analysis of 291 state-approved private schools serving students beyond kindergarten, Lee finds that more than 90 percent are religiously affiliated, over 100 prioritize or require students of a particular faith, and at least 60 maintain written policies excluding or disciplining LGBTQ+ students. 

Despite taxpayer funding of $10,474 per student (and up to $30,000 for students with disabilities), these schools are not required to accept all students, comply with Title IX, or provide meaningful special education services.

As Lee makes clear, the program’s structure all but guarantees exclusion rather than access. Many participating schools charge tuition above the voucher amount, offer little to no special education services, and retain broad discretion to reject applicants. Nik Nartowicz of Americans United for Separation of Church and State captures the core constitutional and moral concern succinctly: 

“Taxpayers should not be forced to fund someone else’s religion or discrimination; it’s a violation of taxpayers’ religious freedom.” 

Far from expanding educational opportunity, Lee’s reporting shows that Texas’ voucher scheme primarily subsidizes families already in private schools, drains resources from public education, and entrenches a two-tier system in which discrimination is not a side effect but a legally protected feature—one poised to grow into a multi-billion-dollar public entitlement. 

If this concerns you—as I believe it should—now is the time to act. I urge you to join Our Schools Our Democracy for its Week of Action, February 2–6, to demand transparency, defend taxpayer dollars, and insist on fairness for Texas public school students. Participants will be equipped with ready-to-use tools—including sample social media posts, an op-ed template, and a draft email to lawmakers—so you can take immediate, effective action.

-Angela Valenzuela

Texas Taxpayers Will Fund Dozens of Private Schools that Openly Discriminate
The state has signed off on voucher funds for schools that exclude non-Christian and LGBTQ+ kids.

by Josephine Lee | Texas Monthly | Jan. 13, 2026

Upon signing school vouchers into law last May, Governor Greg Abbott pronounced that he had delivered “education freedom to every Texas family.” But the billion-dollar program, which opens to parents on February 4, has enrolled dozens of private schools that openly discriminate against Texas families on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity, according to a Texas Observer analysis of information gathered from the schools’ websites and handbooks, and survey responses and phone calls with school leaders.

The Observer gathered information about all 291 schools selected by the state that offer education beyond the kindergarten level. More than 90 percent are affiliated with or owned by a religious or faith-based group, the analysis found. More than 100 of those schools require or prioritize for admission students of the same faith, and more than 60 have a written policy that discriminates against LGBTQ+ students, the schools’ own data shows.

The Texas Comptroller’s office announced December 22 that nearly 600 private K-12 and early pre-K schools had already been enrolled in the Texas Education Freedom Account (TEFA) program, as the state vouchers have been dubbed. But only about half that were listed on its website as of January 1 serve students beyond kindergarten. The comptroller’s office, which administers the voucher program, has not provided comment for this story.

About 70 percent of these schools are concentrated in the greater metropolitan areas of Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Austin. Many rural Texas families will have no options; more than 180 of Texas’ 254 counties have no elementary, junior, or senior high schools enrolled so far.

Participating students in approved private schools will receive $10,474 for the 2026-27 school year—though students with special needs may receive up to $30,000 and homeschool students will receive $2,000. If applications for the voucher program exceed available funding, program rules state that the comptroller must prioritize applications of students with disabilities and lower incomes.

But these rules don’t guarantee student access to enrolled private schools.

The Observer’s analysis found that around a third of the schools enrolled in the program have a 2025-26 tuition that exceeds $10,474 and few offer special education services. Private schools generally increase rates every year, and the tuition excludes other fees and costs, such as registration, testing, sports, supplies, field trips, or uniforms.

Governor Greg Abbott in 2023 (Logan Hannigan-Downs/College Station Eagle via AP)

Unlike public schools, private schools are not required to accept all students and can weed out students through a lengthy admission process that requires recommendations, testing, and interviews. Chinquapin Preparatory School, a secular school in the Greater Houston area, only invites students to take an admissions test if they first pass a review of prior standardized test scores, report cards, and recommendations. Even after passing the exam, they still have to clear interviews and classroom observations.

In addition, around 40 percent of the religious schools have policies that favor students of their own faith and around 25 percent have policies that discriminate against LGBTQ+ students.

Nik Nartowicz, lead policy counsel for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the organization has opposed private school vouchers for many years because of such inherent biases. “Taxpayers should not be forced to fund someone else’s religion or discrimination; it’s a violation of taxpayers’ religious freedom,” he told the Observer.

Of the participating schools included in the Observer’s analysis, 268 are religious—with 176 Catholic, 91 Protestant, and one Jewish. Only 23 are secular.

Of the 176 Catholic parochial schools, at least 40 percent prioritize admission of students from their own parish or other Catholic students, based on a review of policies posted on school websites and handbooks. For many of these schools, non-Catholic students are at the bottom of the priority enrollment list. For example, St. Theresa Catholic School in Austin prioritizes in order: children of faculty, siblings of current students, children of parishioners, children of alumni, and children of other Catholic parishes, before enrolling all other applicants, based on “alignment with the school’s mission and values” and assessment results.

“Parochial schools maintain admission requirements so we can faithfully live out our educational and spiritual mission,” Camille Garcia, Secretariat Director of the Diocese of Austin, wrote in response to the Observer’s inquiry on St. Theresa Catholic School’s admission policies. “These requirements are not meant to exclude, but to ensure alignment with the mission and with the parent’s vision for their children.”

About a third of the other participating 91 Christian schools bar from enrollment students who are not from Christian families, based on admission policies posted on websites and handbooks and some responses via phone calls. Some identify themselves as “covenant schools” that aim to only partner with Christian families in the education of their children, as opposed to “mission schools” with an evangelical objective. Many of these covenant schools require an applicant’s family to be professing Christians, to be active members of a Christian church, or provide a character reference from a pastor. That includes Conroe’s Lifestyle Christian School, whose website states: “For a student to be eligible for admission or re-enrollment, the family must be Christians, a member of an evangelical, Bible-believing church, and REGULAR in attendance at the church.” Even if families fit this criteria, its handbook states, “LCS reserves the right to decline admission or re-enrollment of any student at the sole discretion of the school’s administration.”

Lifestyle Christian School’s head of school Chris Brown did not respond to the Observer’s multiple requests for comment on the school’s admission policies.

Students enrolled in Christian schools generally have to attend chapel services and are taught scripture. But some of the approved schools also practice “Kingdom Education,” a religious education model that integrates the Bible into all subject-area instruction. For example, the the McAllen-based Covenant Christian Academy’s curriculum map for 8th Grade American History states that for all units from European settlement to the Civil War to the Industrial Revolution students will learn the guiding Biblical principle that begins with, “God is creator. All things, including time, were made by and for Himself” and ends with, “God’s plans for history are beyond my full comprehension.” Its curriculum map for a unit on “Prokaryotes and Viruses” for 9th Grade Biology states students will learn about creationism, the “success of pathogenic organisms as a result of the Fall and Curse,” and “disease as a result of sin.” Learning addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, according to its 3rd Grade Math curriculum map, means learning about the “absoluteness-immutability” of God.

Milton Gonzalez, executive director of Covenant Christian Academy declined to comment on the school’s curriculum for this story.

Covenant Christian Academy and other approved schools, like the First Baptist Academy in the San Antonio area, use textbooks from Abeka or Bob Jones University Press which have included inflammatory and controversial racist statements that describe slavery as “black immigration” and characterize slaves as “better investments than indentured servants.”

Christine Povolich, head administrator of the First Baptist Academy did not respond to the Observer’s multiple requests for comments on the school’s curriculum.

In 2005, the Association of Christian Schools International sued the University of California for religious discrimination because the university system had rejected credits from high school courses based on Abeka and Bob Jones textbooks. The attempt was quashed by a 2008 United States District Court for the Central District of California decision in favor of the University of California and a year later upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. But Texas’ approval of schools that use these texts could raise more questions about whether these schools are appropriately preparing students for colleges.

For at least 25 percent of the 268 participating religious schools, behavioral expectations include adherence to strict sexuality and gender policies. Some of these schools forbid enrollment of or allow schools to kick out LGBTQ+ students, according to the Observer’s review of school handbooks.

Many Christian schools use the Association of Christian Schools International’s template “Statement on Marriage, Gender, and Sexuality,” which states that “rejection of one’s biological sex is a rejection of the image of God within that person,” that “‘marriage’ only has one meaning: the uniting of one man and one woman,” and that “any form of sexual immorality (including adultery, fornication, homosexual behavior, bisexual conduct, bestiality, incest, and use of pornography) is sinful and offensive to God.” The Bay Area Christian School in the Greater Houston area states in its handbook under a section called “Bay Area Christian School Lifestyle Stance” that “The school reserves the right to refuse enrollment or discontinue partnership when the atmosphere or conduct within a family or actions or stances of a student oppose the scriptural posture” of the school, including “immoral heterosexual activity, homosexual activity, bisexual activity, transgender activity, or sexual deviancy.”

Many Catholic schools included similar statements in their policies. For example, Catholic schools in the Diocese of Corpus Christi use “Human Sexuality: Guiding Principles for Catholic School Leaders,” which states that students will use names, pronouns, and facilities corresponding to their biological sex and that “expressions of a student’s sexual identity” and “expressions of a student’s disordered inclination for same‐sex attraction” are prohibited as they may cause “disruption or confusion regarding the Church’s teaching on human sexuality.” The Diocese also suggests conversion therapy should be used when school leaders identify gay and transgender students. The document states that school leaders should “encourage the family to seek the guidance of their pediatrician and counseling by a trained licensed professional who may be able to assist with this issue in accord with Catholic teaching and natural law.”

Katia Uriarte, director of communications for the Diocese of Corpus Christi, declined to comment for this story.

Bay Area Christian School’s Head of School Les Rainey did not respond to the Observer’s multiple requests for comment on the school’s admission policies.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 mandates that public schools prevent and redress sex-based and gender-based harassment of students in public schools. But “Private religious schools don’t have to have that framework,” said Paige Duggins-Clay, chief legal analyst at the Intercultural Development Research Association, a Texas education and civil rights policy organization. “Private schools can say our religious beliefs or our moral beliefs dictate that having a gender identity or sexual orientation that doesn’t conform with traditional male-female binaries is against our religion.”

Texas’ voucher law also states that private schools will not be considered “state actors,” thus restricting the state from “imposing requirements that are contrary to the religious or institutional values or practices of an education service provider.” Attempts during the legislative session to include anti-discrimination provisions in the voucher law were blocked.

Unlike public schools, private schools are also not required to enroll or provide special education services to students with disabilities that are otherwise required under federal law—so long as they don’t receive federal funding under those provisions.

Even though Texas’ voucher program prioritizes students with special needs, most private schools currently enrolled lack special education services. The Observer received information from 257 schools regarding special education services through a mix of survey responses, phone calls, or information from school handbooks. Of those, less than a dozen schools stated that special education services are available to students. If students with special needs are accepted, some schools said they provide limited accommodations, such as extended time for tests, preferential seating, small-group instruction, and testing; fewer schools offer services for dyslexia and dysgraphia or tutoring for extra costs. Most Catholic school handbooks include a statement similar to that by the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, which states, “Students with exceptional learning needs are admitted to the extent that the needs of students can be met within the scope of the programs and available resources on each campus.”

These private schools’ limited ability to provide special education services to students has not stopped private school leaders from encouraging families to obtain an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) to qualify for up to $30,000 in school vouchers. The Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops, for instance, has created a handout for parents instructing them how to request an evaluation for an IEP from their local public school district. (The Texas comptroller enacted rules requiring an IEP to qualify.)

Steven Aleman, senior policy specialist with Disability Rights Texas, which advocates for public school students with disabilities, told the Observer he’s concerned this will “only divert precious public resources away from remaining public school students with disabilities.”

State Representative Gina Hinojosa, a longtime voucher opponent who is running to be the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, told the Observer, “Make no mistake, every time they talk about ‘school choice’ they are actually taking options away from Texans.” She added that Abbott is “making taxpayers pay the tuition of families who are already enrolled in private school.” 

Gina Hinojosa on the House floor in May 2025 (Jordan Vonderhaar for the Texas 

Observer)

Last December, Brentwood Christian School in Austin held a webinar on the program for families whose students were already enrolled at the school. During the meeting, a parent expressed concern that the award-winning school would change if there was a “run of people” from public schools.

But President Jay Burcham eased their concerns. “We’re full,” Burcham said, explaining that the school only has 15 remaining seats across 14 grade levels. “We do not have to change our accommodations for anyone. We are Brentwood Christian school. This program is for the parents. You’re the beneficiary,” he said.

Burcham suggested students already enrolled in private schools would be prioritized. “It’s been said they want this first go-through to be more for the people who are already in private schools,” he said, later adding, “We want as many of our people in as possible.” During the webinar, Burcham instructed parents how to qualify for the program’s first priority tier for students with disabilities: “If you got the diagnosis, that’s step number one. … Then we have to work really hard with the school district to get an IEP in place.” Even if they don’t qualify for the priority slots, Burcham still encouraged existing Brentwood parents to apply.

In response to the Observer’s inquiry about the webinar, Burcham said the school also held an informational meeting including prospective applicants. But he wanted to make sure currently enrolled families knew they could also apply. “BCS tuition is quite a bit lower than most Central Texas private schools. Even with this lower tuition, we still have many families who receive financial aid subsidies through BCS. These are families who are making ongoing sacrifices to keep their kids in a private and parochial school environment, and they are an intended and welcome participant in the TEFA program, just like the students who may be using TEFA to transfer from a public school to a private school are intended and welcome participants,” Burcham wrote via email.

According to the voucher law’s fiscal note, the billion-dollar program could grow past $6 billion in the next biennium since the Legislature can appropriate more money to expand it to cover more students.

“We need you to register, because the intent is that they’re going to grow this,” Burcham told Brentwood parents during the webinar. “In other words, if you register, but you don’t get TEFA, in two years, you have a high likelihood. So, think of the long game.”

Josephine Lee is a staff writer at the Texas Observer. She has previously worked as an educator and community organizer. Her reporting on labor, environment, politics, and education has been featured in Salon, The Daily Beast, Truthout, and other outlets. She was raised and lives in Houston.

Texas A&M president resigns after instructor’s firing over gender teachings, Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Washington Post

Friends:

Texas A&M University President Mark A. Welsh III has announced his resignation barely a week after a viral video set off a storm of political outrage that ended with the firing of senior lecturer Melissa McCoul and the removal of both a dean and department head.

The controversy began in Professor McCoul’s children’s literature course when a student objected to her teaching of Jude Saves the World, a novel whose main character is nonbinary. The student insisted the lesson was “illegal” and against religious belief. McCoul, who had successfully taught the text in previous semesters, maintained that her teaching was both lawful and academically appropriate. 

For the record, it's not illegal since anti-DEI, Senate Bill 17 allows us as faculty to continue to teach and conduct research. The moment was nevertheless secretly recorded, uploaded to social media, and swiftly seized upon by political figures eager to weaponize it.

Welsh—a retired four-star general and former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—soon found himself under heavy fire from state leaders including Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Rep. Brian Harrison, who demanded his ouster and the dismantling of all so-called “DEI and LGBTQ indoctrination” in Texas universities. His attempt to appease critics by firing McCoul and demoting administrators did not silence the uproar. In the end, he stepped aside.

Now, faculty and students at Texas A&M face an unsettling reality: a campus climate increasingly shaped by political dictates rather than academic judgment. McCoul, by all accounts a respected instructor with more than a decade of teaching experience, is fighting her termination through an appeal.

From what I have gathered about Welsh’s own defense of academic freedom—including a thoughtful LinkedIn post shared by Dr. Leonard Bright—I cannot help but wonder if his willingness to stand by this principle hastened his exit. It is sobering to realize that one of our state’s largest and most prestigious public university could not shield its president from partisan attack when he appeared to affirm what is, after all, a constitutional right.

As assaults on higher education escalate across the nation, Welsh’s resignation is a stark warning. It signals not only the erosion of academic freedom but also the weakening of democratic norms. The question we face is urgent: Will Texas universities defend the right of professors to teach and students to learn without fear, or will they surrender to political interference? The future of higher education in this state—and the public it serves—depends on the answer.

—Angela Valenzuela

Texas A&M president resigns after instructor’s firing over gender teachings

President Mark A. Welsh III is stepping down after a video of a student accusing an instructor of illegally teaching “gender ideology” led to the instructor’s firing.

Texas A&M University President Mark A. Welsh III (Mark Felix/For The 

Washington Post)

Molly Hennessy-Fiske | Washington Post | September 19, 2025

HOUSTON — The president of Texas A&M University’s flagship campus is stepping down a little over a week after a viral video of a student accusing an instructor of illegally teaching “gender ideology” led to the instructor’s firing, the removal of a dean and department head, as well as calls for investigations — including by the Justice Department.

President Mark A. Welsh III is a retired four-star general who trained as a fighter pilot and later served as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He has also held roles including associate director for military affairs at the CIA, commandant of cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy and dean of the Bush School of Government and Public Service at A&M.

Welsh took over at Texas A&M two years ago after M. Katherine Banks retired as university president in the wake of a scandal involving the botched hiring of journalism professor Kathleen McElroy. That job offer provoked backlash from the Texas GOP because of McElroy’s work on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, which Texas has since banned.

Welsh will step down Friday, according to a statement released by Texas A&M late Thursday.

“Today, President Welsh has submitted his resignation, and both the Board of Regents and I agree that this is the right moment for change,” Texas A&M Chancellor Glenn Hegar said in a separate statement posted on X.

Hegar, a former GOP state lawmaker, thanked Welsh for his service and contributions to the university. He said the nine-member Board of Regents — appointed by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) — will conduct a nationwide search for Welsh’s successor and appoint an interim president “to guide the university during this transition.”

On Friday, Welsh posted a statement that shed little light on why he decided to resign, apart from the recent controversy.

“When I was first appointed as President of Texas A&M University, I told then Chancellor John Sharp and our Board of Regents that I would serve as well as I possibly could until it was time for someone else to take over. Over the past few days, it’s become clear that now is that time,” Welsh wrote.

“It was the right decision for him to do for himself, the university, students, and faculty,” said Leonard Bright, a professor at Texas A&M’s Bush School of Government and Public Service, in a text message. “Now, we look to the university and (board of regents) to conduct an earnest search for a replacement who will fully support the values of academic freedom and protect the university from political interference in our classrooms.”

State Rep. Brian Harrison (R), who posted the viral video and audio recordings of Welsh while repeatedly demanding his ouster, celebrated his resignation Thursday on X.

“As the first elected official to call for him to be fired, this news is welcome, although overdue,” Harrison wrote. “Now … END ALL DEI AND LGBTQ INDOCTRINATION IN TEXAS!!”

The video excerpt that contributed to Welsh stepping down was shared by Harrison on Sept. 8. It was filmed on July 29 during a children’s literature class, but neither the student — whom Harrison declined to identify because they had requested anonymity — nor instructor Melissa McCoul appear on camera.

In a statement emailed to The Washington Post by her attorney this week, McCoul said the class was on the second of three days reading a middle-grade contemporary fiction novel called “Jude Saves the World” that she had taught in “several previous iterations” of the class.

“The main character, Jude, is nonbinary. The plot largely deals with Jude’s difficulties with ADHD in school, their relationship with their friends, mother, and grandparents, and their friend group’s attempt to build an LGBTQ-accepting social club in their town,” she said.

McCoul said that on the first day, she had provided “contextual background information on sex, sexuality and gender as they applied to children’s literature, as well as the ways things like toys and clothing are often gendered,” and was recapping those points when the video was filmed.

The footage begins as the student interrupts to insist the lesson is “not legal, and I don’t want to promote something that is against our president’s laws.”

“According to our president, there’s only two genders,” the student says, alleging that the instruction “very much goes against, not only myself, but a lot of people’s religious beliefs.”

In response, McCoul can be heard telling the student that “if you are uncomfortable in this class, you do have the right to leave. What we are doing is not illegal.”

She then referred the student to a department head, noting that officials were aware of the concerns. “I’m not convinced that your proposal will be effective in stopping me from teaching things that are biologically true, because I do have the legal and ethical authority, professional expertise in this classroom,” McCoul said, before telling the student to leave.

A day later, McCoul was fired. Her attorney Amanda Reichek, a Democratic former Texas judge, has released a statement calling McCoul “a highly regarded senior lecturer,” noting that she had “over a decade of teaching experience under her belt when she was summarily terminated” and is appealing her firing.

After the video went viral, Welsh also removed McCoul’s dean and department head, but that did not satisfy Harrison or Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R), a staunch ally of President Donald Trump.

“His ambivalence on the issue and his dismissal of the student’s concerns by immediately taking the side of the professor is unacceptable,” Patrick posted on X last week.

Abbott had already threatened to fire Welsh in January after the university’s business school invited doctoral students and faculty to a conference designed to promote classroom diversity. Welsh responded by pulling the university out of the conference.

Several other presidents of major U.S. universities have also been forced out or resigned under pressure in recent years, as elected officials and conservative activists — including in the Trump administration — increasingly scrutinize campus culture and decisions.

Trump and his administration have this year attacked Columbia, Harvard, Northwestern, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Virginia. Texas A&M, with an enrollment of more than 79,000, is the largest state school to face such backlash and is among the largest universities in the country.

Texas GOP leaders have passed laws this year strengthening their control over university curriculums, hiring and protests.


Susan Svrluga contributed to this report from Washington.

Manufactured Outrage Is Big Business, by Allison Hantschel

Friends,

Thinking about manufactured crises. In a July, 2018 piece appearing in Dame Magazine, journalist Allison Hantschel writes of how so much of the outrage we see in America is not just fomented, but purchased and thusly, contrived to make you think you or your country is under attack. She does well to call out the press itself by being wittingly or unwittingly party to this outrage. She cites a specific example of manufactured rage that you can read for yourself here the the Palm Beach Post titled, "Libs of TikTok creator backed by Babylon Bee CEO of Juno Beach." 

This CEO sponsors a social-media agitator to defame LGBTQ people as pedophiles. The added step of sharing LGBTQ individual's posts for purposes of targeting them, is exactly how this quickly turns to violence. Hence, this is pre-meditated violence and regular media play into this by treating dishonest people like these as "news." And then members of the press wonder where this animus against gays and others started?!

It's all so disturbing and our youth, in particular, need to be literate about such things and to not get overtaken by these paid-for, truly hostile and vicious manufactured messages of hate that result not just in civil violence, but state violence via campaigns and the filing and passage of defamatory anti-trans laws.

If we as a polity are silent about such things, incipient authoritarianism finds fertile ground. This is anathema to democracy and democratic principles, my friends.

-Angela Valenzuela 

Manufactured Outrage Is Big Business

ALLISON HANTSCHEL JUL 18, 2023

Last month was one of the most frightening in recent memory for the LGBTQIA+ community. Pride events across the country were canceled out of safety concerns, with violent anti-LGBTQIA groups disrupting and menacing previously safe havens like libraries, bookstores, and bars.

GOP-led legislatures across the country have passed nearly 80 anti-trans laws, from banning gender-affirming medical care to defunding libraries that carry books about sexual and gender identity. In Arizona, teachers have to use the pronouns correlating with a student’s assigned sex at birth regardless of how they identify. In Alabama, trans students are forbidden from competing in sports. In Indiana and Florida, teachers may not speak about “human sexuality,” even to refer to a same-sex spouse in day-to-day conversation.

That drumbeat is echoed on social media as a parade of outrages, minor situations or events knitted together—like a trans influencer drinking a beer, a store displaying a rainbow shirt, or a teacher reading a story about diversity—to give people the false idea that their way of life is under attack.

The influencer, the store, the teacher—they’re not forcing anyone to do anything. People can scroll on by, walk past, shrug. They can go back to their jobs, their hobbies, their concerts, their churches, their board games and bike rides and sports leagues, without being affected by the teacher or the store or the influencer ever again.

But posted, memed, re-recorded and TikToked, dishonest right-wing media figures turn these things into calls to arms—they claim that these people are out to corrupt and recruit our children, knowing full well that it isn’t true. Protest the influencer! Ban the teacher’s book! Smash the store windows and burn the rainbow shirt!

These bad actors, funded through Republican think-tanks and donor organizations by billionaires who see anti-gay hate as a way to sway votes, are being well compensated to produce anger. It’s their major product:

And this:

They’re being paid to make you think there’s a war and you have to enlist immediately, lest some amorphous idea of “your way of life” or “your children’s future” or “America as we know it” dies without your action. To make you feel like violence is the best and only answer to these “groomers” and “monsters,” whom they characterize as subhuman.

These are like lessons taken from the oldest fascist playbook on Earth, but they’re playing louder now, on social media, with the sources of these attacks on marginalized people harder to trace for the average person. Following a widely shared online misconception back to its origins isn’t something most consumers have time to do, so cautioning people to be careful about sourcing their information has limited impact, and those pushing these rage-bait stories know that.

They know that between work and kids and hobbies and obligations most people don’t have time for a more than cursory glance at something that looks official. For example, The Daily Wire certainly sounds like a real news source! You’d have to read more than just one story that someone you know shared in passing to understand that it’s a GOP-donor-backed bigot page dedicated to quarter-truth conspiracies about books turning your kids gay and trans, and liberals hating on the flag.

Something shows up at your house that looks like a newspaper, you might be inclined to read it not knowing that it’s produced to push the same anti-equality framework favored by Republicans in Congress.

So it’s all the more critical now that professional reporters, editors, and producers dedicate themselves to providing context to their audiences. Real news outlets’ reach on social media far exceeds that of even the most popular activists, and they’re uniquely positioned to educate people as to why they’re being asked to become outraged now, and who might benefit from that outrage.

This is actually a moment when the press might do work that opens eyes and rouses minds to a deeper understanding of the modern world. Tragically, most corporate media seem satisfied to cover this campaign of terror as a tit-for-tat checkers game between the usual two “opposing sides.”

Teachers reading kids a story or singing a song “trade barbs” or “clash” with unhinged screamers accusing their classrooms of harboring pedophiles. Activists helping AIDS patients are depicted as the equal opposite of an anti-abortion group using those same activists as an excuse to sign up new supporters and gather emails for coming political campaigns.

GOP organizations printing signs and busing in protesters to school board meetings are characterized as having “heated exchanges,” as though the tenor of the words was the most interesting facet of this story. Local TV news covers the “shouting” and “tension” before even beginning to reckon with what anyone was shouting about.

The national press is failing at this moment as hard as they ever have in the past. The New York Times, America’s preeminent traditional news source, spent the past year interviewing prominently dishonest anti-trans activists pushed at them by God knows who and then had the audacity to ask how an anti-trans GOP campaign “happened.”

The Washington Post, which proclaims that “democracy dies in darkness,” stated that trans rights “emerged” as a “political flashpoint,” a pair of words that means absolutely nothing and enlightens no one as to the cause of said emergence.

With each new attack on marginalized people, editors and producers have an obligation to outline the right-wing media pipeline that takes a random social video, launders it through a popular Twitter feed, incites some low-level conservative columnist to make it the topic of the week, which launches it onto the toxic fake news channel, Fox and thus into the dentist’s offices and airport lounges of the world.

How did some individual’s TikTok become so urgent that if we don’t discuss it we risk the downfall of the country? Who keeps asking every minor celebrity to provide some cringeworthy quote about “woke ideology” for the entire right-wing media to amplify and dunk on?

When a group of screamers show up on a bus with pre-printed signs at the municipal meeting, even the busiest local stringer can ask who t told them to be there and provided them with their signs. Journalists can extrapolate bus costs, FOIA protest permits, and query participants about the poisoned game of telephone that led them to a place where they’d accuse school boards of sex crimes.

Describing the origins of these flash mobs of rage will do more to serve audiences than merely repeating the lies told by propagandists, even to debunk them. People don’t just need to know that something they’ve shared isn’t true.

They need to know who had an interest in showing it to them in the first place. Who wanted them to be mad about it, and who’s getting something out of that anger.

Without that understanding, people seeing anti-gay riots on TV or reading a hateful meme online might imagine these campaigns of bigotry are homegrown and normal, examples of the prevailing sentiment of the day. They’ll see the created, coordinated response of a political party on the wrong side of history as the attitude of their friends and neighbors, and far too many people will give in to societal pressure to go along with it, or at least keep silent.

And that’s how authoritarian campaigns win.