2. It was a clarification of existing rules
3. It does not make "supporting your child's gender transition" a jailable offense.
The order says subjecting a child to invasive medical procedure can be abuse, and that doctors and teachers have a legal requirement to report abuse.
Here is the order for your reading pleasure:
https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-dfps...
Where "subject" appears to be the most general form possible, as far as I can tell from context.
Even puberty blockers are on this list! You're not supporting a gender transition if you can't touch hormones at all.
Wow, finally a law against infant male circumcision!
In Texas, of all places; whodathunkit.
Edit: also wtf does that have to do with sex? Do you mean the larger subject of child consent in general? Because contract law would be a less extreme example of children not having power of informed consent.
That means one side thinks the other side is a child abuser, and the other side thinks that bigots are going to throw them in prison for being a supportive parent.
This is not something you can be "polite" about.