From Miseducation to “Soft Eugenics"

Laurel Libby, Gold Medal Parents, Abelism, and Special Education

Apr 05, 2025

I’m sad to have missed the “Hands Off” rally in Portland, ME today. I was sick on Monday, and had some sort of relapse beginning yesterday afternoon. It’s not COVID. I rest and the fever subsides. I do too much and the postnasal drip, sore throat, headache, and chest congestion remind me not to. Perhaps this is what “springtime” allergies look for me now.

I feel as if I should be doing something for my country besides convalescing. I have spent a little time dragging Laurel Libby for her intransigent stance on her censure in the Maine House. I had her in mind when I wrote the post below, which for me documents that the issue of trans girls in youth sports as a wedge issue the GOP Regime is exploiting for division, and Libby for the advancement of her career to the national level. I wonder if that’s the reason she’s acting as if she has so little regard for her actual constituents, and her position in Augusta.

What is so insidious about this moral panic is that it twists the “woke” argument of equality for girls, echoing the federal Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights threatened Title IX suit against the State of Maine and other entities within. Twisting rights around is in the Regime playbook.

Indeed, I made this argument in the throes of my personal emergency. (By the way, look at how much more beautifully BlueSky posts are expressed in Substack than Instagram posts. Just sayin’.)

Superkids

As a sociologist, I could not stop at merely dragging Libby, and locating her personally within the authoritarian agenda. Apart from weighing the inconclusive evidence that trans athletes may not have overall advantage in sports, a worthy exploration, I needed to examine the cultural resonance of this charge that trans girls posed a competitive disadvantage to cis girls in youth sports. I have been continually returned to, nay, haunted by, a book I read when my own children were younger. It is David Elkind’s Miseducation: Preschoolers At Risk (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006; 1987). Elkind argues that the contemporary zeitgeist attempts to produce “superkids,” despite research that indicates that children who grew to eminence had no specialized preparation from their parents. In the second chapter of the book, he proposes that particular themes in childrearing and the origins of these themes, while not mutually exclusive, are at least analytically distinct. I expect I have friends who would be disquieted by these characterizations of their childrearing.

Gourmet Parents, having achieved occupational and financial success, believe that they can do just as good a job in childrearing, and seek to give their children an advantage with material possession. This theme has a dilemma: having humble beginnings, these parents both want their children to benefit from their success and have the same motivation to achieve that they did (34-36)

College Degree Parents likely had parents who emphasized the value of eduction as a path of upward mobility. Here the contradiction is that these parents can take credit for their childrens’ success but deny responsibility for their failure (37-39).

Gold Medal Parents are of particular interest here, and I shall return to expand upon them in this case. Elkind says that these parents seek to escape their uninteresting routines of career, homemaking, and childrearing by their children’s participation in athletic training and competition, despite the clear risks to their young bodies (39-40).

Do–It–Yourself Parents have a “back–to–nature bent.” To their credit, they “want to create “want to create superkids who will be protective of the environment, of nature, and of animal life.” But like “Sensitive New Age Guys,” who are in the end “not that sensitive,” they still buy into the mentality that for the “superkid,” “earlier is better.” (42)1

Outward Bound Parents seek to provide children with skills to survive in a hostile world, figuratively and literally throwing them into the deep end. I would imagine, like many of my generation and preceding ones that these parents romanticized the time when kids could “disappear for hours, yet still survive.” The trouble with the current superkid twist on this theme is the shift of responsibility for the protection of children from caregivers to the children (43-44).

Prodigy Parents are couples who have become financially successful but not through education. I have taught college students at institutions with a preponderance of students whose parents were general contractors or small business owners. They see education as providing polish to the drive for success, which overall education undermines. One hears the complaint of this kind of parent in the charges that universities are somehow “radicalizing” students with “useless” views (46).

Encounter Group Parents seek to create students who are “psychologically sensitive and perceptive.” Given the contemporary emphasis on social–emotional learning, discouraging bullying, and the apparent increase in (or increased identification of) affective disorders among youth, who could argue with this? I’m proud of the times my children had given and received empathy among their peers. Ethical behavior is often a way for kids without outstanding other talents to distinguish themselves in highly competitive suburban pressure cookers. But

Encounter Group parents have come to believe that it is never too early to tell children about death, about the dangers of nuclear war and of the potential abductor and molester; that it is healthy for young children to see parents nude. This can sometimes backfire (48).

Finally, we have Milk–And–Cookies Parents, who do not fall prey to the “superkid” ethos, though they may worry their kids may fall behind.

They have the feeling that if children are well cared for, are talked to, played with, and provided with a safe environment filled with interesting objects to observe and explore, they will do just fine. And these parents are right. The child who leaves the early years with a strong sense of security, a healthy feeling of self–esteem, and an enthusiasm for living and learning is well prepared for an admittedly rapidly changing and difficult world (54)

That sounds great! We all want to be the Milk–And–Cookies Parents. And Elkind does acknowledge that not all parents have the wherewithal. Structural pressures like employment insecurity mitigate against that. More likely each parent or set of parents combines some mix of the themes in the culturally resonant “superkid” ethos.

As a sociologist I would like to locate this culture within structure, and Elkind is there too, albeit in passing.

The contemporary concern with exceptionality (with having superkids) stems from a variety of factors and causes. First of all, our families today are smaller, and parents feel considerable pressure to do a good job with their child or children because they have so little margin for error. Then too, having a child in today’s world is very expensive (in 1986, the total cost of rearing a child was estimated at upwards of $143,000), and parents want to have something special to show for that investment. And the current “brain” race both within and between countries also helps drive parents to make their child as bright as possible (36).

We’re in a globalized economy, in which parents find their careers precarious. From the standpoint of the first week in April 2025, we feel that precarity even more. I think we’ll be more likely to emphasize our children’s distinctiveness.

Cooper Flagg Craze

Alongside this drama, some Pine Tree State Pride is playing out over the success of Cooper Flagg, a local boy done good. Flagg is from Newport, up by Bangor. As a Freshman at Duke, he’s a wunderkind who’s helped lead his team to the Final Four in the college basketball championship this year. I’m inclined to believe that he got there out of his natural ability and sheer love of the sport. I do love to see parents supporting their kids’ passions, short of them pushing them in a direction they personally don’t want to go. Having been involved in youth sports, and scouting, I’ve seen both kinds of parents. Maine is a largely rural, sparsely populated state. It relishes the opportunity to celebrate those who’ve achieved eminence outside the state, from Patrick Dempsey, to Anna Kendrick, and Steven King. The reliance on one’s neighbors in such a sparsely populated state tends to make Mainers conflict–averse. This affects its politics, expressing itself in Angus King’s “independence,” and Jared Golden’s funny way of caucusing with Democrats.

This Moral Panic Appeals to Gold Medal Parents

I apologize for the ornately discursive way I’ve come to this point. While I do think Libby’s moral entrepreneurship is personally and politically strategic in all the ways I mention above, including the insidious twisting of DEI, I’m not sure the appeal to Gold Medal Parents is intentional. But the appeal is there: trans girls’ participation in youth sports supposedly threaten your child’s ability to gain eminence and bring pride to the family, and to this small but mighty state.

I’m interested in structural change, because so few people even perceive social structure, much less see the need for change in its dimension.

While we may be busy critiquing culture we must also attend to repairing or replacing what’s being dismantled. That’s a great deal more difficult to envision and enact. At the same time, I cannot hesitate to point out the cultural cracks into which the GOP Regimes strategic wedges are driven: the desire for gender equality and for our progeny to succeed.

Abelism

When I rose to a need for coaches in youth soccer by pursuing training, I discovered a leveling feature of “the world’s game,” “the beautiful game” that is entirely within the spirit of Elkind’s Miseducation. Kids develop lower body coordination well before upper body coordination. This is because of how early it is that most kids learn to walk and run. Sports requiring upper body coordination—most American ones—advantage kids that can master them earlier. This is not unlike the way Malcom Gladwell observed that Canadian hockey leagues tended to have more players born in January, February, and March.

Why, for instance, do a disproportionate share of hockey players have birthdays in January, February, and March? Answer: Canadian youth hockey programs are organized by age cohorts, and each cohort contains kids born in the same calendar year. Thus, a boy born in January will be placed in the same program as a boy born in December of the same year—they are, for organizational purposes, considered to be the same age. But of course, just by virtue of being older, one boy is likely to be bigger, faster, stronger, and better coordinated.
…
Americans tend to attribute success to the personal qualities of individuals. They think of those who make it to the top as having worked especially hard, as having sacrificed, as being determined, dedicated, and therefore deserving. That is, they view success as a product of good character, of particular personality types—the result of psychological differences among people. This makes intuitive sense. Ask successful people—and this certainly includes successful sociologists—what it takes to succeed and they will almost invariably talk about the importance of working hard. Success, whether in ice hockey or academia, rarely comes to those who don’t work for it. But, Gladwell argues, hard work isn’t the whole story. Timing matters.
—Joel Best, “Sociologists as Outliers.”

Incidentally, like the case of “tiger moms,” this is a structural advantage that appears as a cultural one.

The implication of this cultural resonance is clear. Not only is your trans kid threatening my kid’s “superkid” status, and undermining my sacrifice, my kid is determined, dedicated, and therefore deserving. Yours has gained “unfair” advantage by a “psychological difference” it’s not in my interest to understand.

The Slippery Slope of Ableism

What of those kids who have not the athletic prowess of the children of Gold Medal Parents? What if your eminence lies in art, the curriculum is so narrow you have to repeat electives, there is no art club, and the kiln is crowded? Indeed, some have suggested that postsecondary competitive athletics drive up the cost of higher education. Were we to pursue the European model of subsidized public higher education, that would include relegating those with any prowess to club teams to pursue their dreams. We could devote resources to lifelong fitness and intramural sports, as avocations not to be abandoned in adulthood.

What also, of the neurodivergent kids, who might not have the social skills or inclination to participate in team sports. We try to find them options, individual sports like track and field or martial arts. We miss opportunities for their “least restrictive education,” particularly as the Department of Education, defined in part by the need to support that, is being dismantled.

“Soft” Eugenics

The slippery slope ends at ~~Aushwitz~~ RFK’s “summer camps.” It’s often said of the GOP Regime’s policies “the cruelty is the point.” This was reinforced by Imara Jones in a recent episode of The Bitchuation Room podcast. I think we have to be clear–eyed about this.

I think that if you really look this party in the eye and you see what they're up to and what their intent is, it is deeply frightening. It is deeply disconcerting. And so it's just easier [for centrist Democrats] to say it doesn't exist.
From The Bitchuation Room: Group Chat Warmongering and Building Beyond Bernie with Kate Willet & Imara Jones (Ep 273), Mar 26, 2025
This material may be protected by copyright.

Yesterday,

Francesca Fiorentini

interviewed the filmmaker Cameron Mitchell of “Disposable Humanity,” for a thoroughly chilling perspective on Nazism and the parallels of today. Culturally and structurally, I have tried to argue, we are on this precipice.

rachelboyce65

A post shared by @rachelboyce65

They are tactics to them. They're not even people.

FF: But we have RFK Jr. now, the head of HHS, and it truly is probably one of the most chilling, upsetting appointments as there's been mass layoffs.
And as you see, this is someone who, number one, wrongly links autism to vaccinations, but also isn't clear that he actually even has empathy for autism, just as a condition, right? And sort of continually blames the victims for their own situation. And again, this fat phobia, this, it's what I think others have called soft eugenics.
It's not quite eugenics yet, but it certainly is leading there. And many people have drawn parallels between obsessions with fat, like how one looks, you know, the body, like working out all the time, the alpha male and sort of the, you know, the Nazi obsession with the same.
CM: Yeah. You know, there's so many things I want to say about that. It's just, it really is like a loss of empathy, you know?
And also we have to recognize that these politicians, these figureheads, they have openly admitted that they are using these tactics. They are tactics to them. They're not even people.
They're tactics that they use to, Trump said that Republicans a few weeks before the next election, they should bring up trans people as a tactic. So there's a complete loss of empathy and even a realization that these are also humans like you.
From The Bitchuation Room: Being Disabled Under Fascism & Trump Tarriffs Backfire with Cameron Mitchell & Doug Henwood *FRANTASTIC FRIDAY*, Apr 4, 2025
This material may be protected by copyright.

Of course,

Francesca Fiorentini

may be referring to Conspirituality’s recent exploration of “soft eugenics.”

The Feminist Adage Holds True: The Personal is Political

College teaching opportunities are not open to me right now. But I am a survivor. I’ll make no secret of the fact that I’m mostly making it as a substitute teacher in an area school system. Opportunities keep arising in situations in which I support adolescents with significant cognitive and/or behavioral challenges. Their stories are not mine to tell, except to say that my work is valued, people keep saying so, and I work each day where I’m made to feel I belong. Also wherever the education system meets these kids, they have each have uniquely and deeply redeeming qualities, sometimes seen and met by an array of adults and other children in their lives, and sometimes not. For now, I “fight” each day for them. Each day I fight for everything from my own empathy, energy, and patience, to understanding among those they encounter. Fighting in this way for particular others has built my commitment.

I write against this cultural loss of empathy, and structural dismantling, at the federal level, of their supports. I write for the alternative of Jubilee.

When first I was arrested by the Rumi quote with which I led, “Where there is ruin, suspect a treasure,” I thought “ruin” referred to these kids’ circumstances. But I was always disquieted by that idea. I still think of them as treasure, but I realize the ruin is in the world we are making for them, with supports dismantled due to greed, and the hyperindividualist dance of the pursuit of one’s own “superkid.” In a world redefined by Jubilee, rather than scarcity and precarity, we need not cast our children into this Hobbesian “war of each against each.”

Libby bothers me and I ridicule her as a tactic. But I do so knowing that she won an election in her district. I also know she raised about six times what her Democratic opponent raised, and spent about ten times as much. Thus she is a symptom of a structural imbalance in campaign financing. The election was decided by 154 votes. Having more Republicans than Auburn, where Libby lives, one could say that the Minot part of her district had outsized influence. Her opponent remains a cipher. Given how much closer this election was than previous ones, perhaps the State Democrats should not rest on its “laurels,” pardon the pun.

Questions

Here are some questions I have for strategizing.

We know how the Democratic majority in Augusta has responded to Libby. What is appropriate public response? Few of us live in her district, but her actions have had influence well beyond it.
How do we mount an effective defense of trans and neurodivergent kids, rehumanizing them beyond their use by the GOP Regime as “tactics,” as pawns?
How do we honor hometown pride without giving in to the “Gold Medal Parents” in particular, and the “superkid” ethos, knowing full well that we ourselves may have participated in it? How do we love our children, and all children with equal access to educational opportunities across the life course.
How do we mount an effective defense of federal supports for education and beyond?
How do we build alternative structures when this cannot be accomplished.

I’d love to see some discussion of any of these questions. Alternatively, suggest some topics you’d like to see me cover.