AB 957 Debate Panel, Part 2

AB 957 Debate Panel, Part 2

First part of the debate is here, Part 1.

AB 957 Debate Panel

This week I appeared on a debate panel with India Willoughby and Dr. Gideo Karplus.  The debate aired Global Eye on i24News, filmed in Tel Aviv.  Ellie Hochenberg was the moderator.

Below is the video (part 2) and transcript.

Moderator: Welcome back to the summit.  Will with us, India Willoughby, Kelly Chang Rivkert, and dr. Gideon Karplus.  Thank you all so very much for staying with us. We’re also staying on topic, of course, but before we get back to our conversation, let’s hear it from the initiator of the legislation herself, the mother who pushed for this bill. Let’s take a quick lesson.

Video of ASM Lori Wilson: I know that parents affirm their children they have since the dawn of time.  Typically it happens when their gender identity expression matches their biological gender, but what happens if when it doesn’t.

That’s when the affirmation starts to wane and that’s what we’re dealing with here.  Although it’s called the TGI bill, they’re not mentioned anywhere in the law. What’s mentioned in the law is the child’s gender identity and expression and the parents affirmation of that – whatever it is – because that is our duty as parents to affirm our children.

Moderator: All right. Let’s get to it another quick fire round.  30 seconds each.  Nothing happens in a political vacuum, Are trans rights being hijacked for political gains?  Kelly, please take the lead.

Are Trans Rights Being Hijacked for Political Gain?

Kelly: Absolutely, I think this bill has nothing to do with supporting trans rights. I think it’s disguised that way, but really it’s an attack on parents who are already suffering parents in custody.  Parents are suffering.

They’re probably there because they disagree on certain issues already. And so to have this blanket rule that whoever is gender affirming gets the child is just it’s going to be abused because you’re going to have a father who comes out of prison and suddenly is “gender affirming”.

And now you’re going to give the kid to an abusive father just because he’s “gender affirming”

So I just think it’s a horrible bill.

Moderator: Dr. Karplus, your thoughts.

Dr. Karplus: Well I think both sides both the extreme. I think both the extreme right wing and the extreme left wing are using LGBT rights as a tool to gain more power in their bases.

And if you look at laws being passed in Mississippi, our South Dakota laws that are actually against LGBTQ and you see what’s going on in Tennessee with the rights and Ron Desantis that actually forbids talking about the issue.

Moderator: Right, right, right. Last, but not least, India.

India: Yeah. I totally agree with Dr. Gideon there, and you know this is about trans rights. Whatevers said back in 2019, there’s a big conference in the US called Values Voters Conference and somebody stood at the podium and said. Forget about attacking LGB. They’re too protected, go home and attack T by whatever means possible.

And this is just one of those prongs of attack that they’re using here. They will use all types of scare stories to try and stop people. Try and socially eradicate trans people from society. And yet –

Moderator: India and again, dear panelists, let’s feel free to to, to interact and yet again.

India, Is it an attempt of the government to intervene in parenting? Or can you understand this claim?

Is it an attempt of the government to intervene in parenting?

India:  No. I actually I think it actually strengthens parenting. You know all parents want what’s best for their child and let’s be honest here.  Being trans is a complex thing, even for somebody like myself who is trans.

It’s a complex subject to get your head around, but you don’t actually have to understand what it feels like to be trans to accept somebody as I said at the beginning here providing that child has met the diagnostic criteria of persistent and consistent and that’s who they’re saying they are. Then I think that should be accepted.

Obviously we’ve had Elon Musk in the news who’s tweeted on this subject and Elon Musk, you may or may not know you know his daughter Vivian is actually trans and they had a big bust up. Vivian’s estranged from Elon now she says she doesn’t want his money, she doesn’t want anything to do with him.

Elon has taken this really personally and is waging a war on trans people. He’s even said in his new autobiography that one of the reasons he bought Twitter for 40 billion dollars was to get at trans
people, so that’s just how dedicated to the cause.

Moderator: Yeah. Dr. Karplus, please chime in.

Dr. Karplus: Yeah. I, I definitely agree. I mean the problem here is just accepting people for what they are, and giving them the support that they need and the love that they need and affirming them and accepting them.

And if a parent can do that, he has a problem with parenting and I don’t think the government is interfering with parenting. I think once you have a custody issue, the government always interferes with parenting and looks for the best place for the child.

And in my opinion, the best place is of course having custody for both parents and both parents, taking care of the child in a loving way. But if it can’t be and only one parent can, then it had to be a parent that can accept the child what it is.

Moderator: Kelly.

Kelly: Okay, so I’m going go back to this. This bill hasn’t got anything to do with trans rights. Okay, you guys have to understand it. This isn’t about awarding custody to a transgender parent.

That’s not what this is. This is awarding custody to the “gender affirming” parent is in the best interest and that’s where we can have foul play. So I’ll give you an example.

Currently in California, we have this law that if you have a restraining order against you, you have a presumption against custody.  So there’s a presumption that arises if you have a restraining order against you that you lose custody.

And so what happened? Tons of people raced to the courthouse and file fake restraining orders because why? You can get custody! And that’s what’s going to happen with this bill.

Suddenly you’re going to have parents that really aren’t “gender affirming, that really don’t care about the best interests and the health, safety and welfare of their children. They just want custody, so they’re going to come out of prison or wherever they are and get custody –

Moderator:  – but Kelly, in legislation, one must think about the I don’t know. I’m thinking that when it comes to legislation Kelly, one must at least try to think about how many people will benefit and not how many people will abuse it.

And my question to you is whether these are merely social growing pains, so to speak.

Social Growing Pains?

Kelly: No. I don’t think it’s a social growing pain when you instill such a hardline law and family law. I’ve been a family law attorney for 25 years.

I know that people abuse the law and so I know.  You know, India and the Doctor, I can tell you guys are loving people and you care about the children – I do too!  That’s why I don’t do cussdy battles because I think it’s really heartbreaking for those kids.

And you know, I think Doctor, you mentioned something that parents always want what’s right for their children. I think that’s true, but in custody battles (which I’m intimately familiar with), that’s what’s fighting.

So know you have one parent that thinks it’s good, and you know, the parent that think is not good.

And so I had a case where it’s like one parent didn’t want the child to eat pork because she’s Muslim. The other parent is like the child must eat pork because there’s protein.

And so historically the courts don’t want to inject themselves on ideologically beliefs. They want to be able to say when the child was with mom’s, she can eat pork when the child was at Dad’s. You know the child doesn’t have to eat pork something like that, and so I think it’s the same with gender affirming right the child’s going to go and be, and LIKE whoever is more gender affirming if the child is confused.

But if you make this hardline rule that they always good the gender for me parent, then you’re going to have people pretending they’re gender-affirming.  And then they’re actually abusing the child –

Dr. Karplus:  – t hat’s not what the law says. That’s not what, what, what’s written you read, you read the you read the law and it doesn’t say that it just said that it’s going to be one of the issues. That’s going to be examined to see way.

What’s the best interest of the child?  It’s only one of the issues, so it’s not fair to say that par totally irresponsible will have the child just because he’s gender affirming. That’s not what the law says at all.

Kelly: It IS what the law says. Because right now there’s no factor that determines health, safety and welfare. It now only wants to add gender affirmation. Now, if you want to propose more like gender affirmation, like exercise, or teaching the child about money, or whatever.

But there’s no other factors. They just want to add gender, and will lead to abuse-

Moderator: India.

India:  I think the problem here is.  I think, the problem here here. Kelly, you obviously see trans as a belief. Well, let me tell you as somebody who’s trans. I tried for the best part of my first life not to be trans. Genuinely. I didn’t want to be trans. I fought it with everything I can. It’s just a natural occurring aspect of humanity. It’s not a belief, it’s not a choice. It’s not a faith, anything like that. And as Dr. Gideon saying there, this is all about accepting your child.

Moderator: Well, that’s it.  Well. I wish it was that simple for parents to simply accept their children. Wherever they may be, whatever they may be.

Dearest Panelists, thank you so very much for your time for your insight. We truly appreciate it. Two minutes and we’re back.