Teachers suing Loudoun County school board - trans policy

Page 1 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 26,539
Location: Long Island, New York

19 Oct 2021, 9:39 am

LCPS Teachers Say They Will Sue School Board Over Transgender Student Policy

Quote:
A group of Loudoun County teachers announced Tuesday that they intend to sue the school district over a measure approved in August which deals with the treatment of transgender students.

“Forcing these radical ideologies under the guise of policies that harm students has to stop," teacher Monica Gill said outside the school board's headquarters. "They are acting like the debate is already over. They've chosen one side in this debate. They have specifically decided that teachers have to use pronouns that students specify without any kind of substantiating evidence."

The school board approved policy 8040 on Aug. 11. It requires all Loudoun County Public Schools staff to undergo inclusivity training, instructs staff to use students' chosen names and pronouns, and allows students to use the restrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their gender identity, among other policies.

The policy became national news after elementary school gym teacher Tanner Cross testified in May that he would not follow it because he believed it would harm children and violate his religious beliefs.

Heated public meetings preceded the policy's approval, including some that saw a teacher quit and a man arrested.

The board approved the policy in a 7-2 vote and it took effect immediately.

This article is remiss in not explaining the legal reasoning behind the suit.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,326
Location: Northern California

19 Oct 2021, 7:55 pm

I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,235

19 Oct 2021, 8:46 pm

the issue is a bit more comicated there:

Quote:
Loudoun County Public Schools responded Wednesday to a bombshell report that it covered up a sexual assault perpetrated by a “gender fluid” male student in the girls’ bathroom.


https://news.yahoo.com/loudoun-county-school-district-breaks-185153597


I readabout this somewhere a few days ago, and it's an ongoing thing and I obviously have no opinion on an open investigation.
But the investigation alone should explain the agitation


_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

19 Oct 2021, 9:23 pm

shlaifu wrote:
the issue is a bit more comicated there:

Quote:
Loudoun County Public Schools responded Wednesday to a bombshell report that it covered up a sexual assault perpetrated by a “gender fluid” male student in the girls’ bathroom.


https://news.yahoo.com/loudoun-county-school-district-breaks-185153597


I readabout this somewhere a few days ago, and it's an ongoing thing and I obviously have no opinion on an open investigation.
But the investigation alone should explain the agitation


It has been an interesting case...
Quote:
A parent who was arrested during a June school board meeting in Loudoun County, Virginia, is accusing the district of trying to cover up an alleged bathroom sexual assault by a gender-fluid individual against his daughter in order to further its transgender rights agenda.

Scott Smith was found guilty of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest in August after he was filmed being dragged by police from the Loudoun County School Board meeting on June 22. He was sentenced to 10 days in jail, all suspended, contingent on a year of good behavior, Loudoun Now reported at the time.

Smith’s image went viral among left-wingers as an example of parents run amok, and the National School Boards Association cited his arrest in a letter last week requesting the Department of Justice to provide federal law enforcement to respond to an increase in violence against school officials across the country. Attorney General Merrick Garland later pledged to have the Department of Justice and the FBI investigate harassment of school board members.

[...]

All juvenile records are sealed, but Smith’s attorney Elizabeth Lancaster told The Daily Wire that the boy was subsequently charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy, and one count of forcible fellatio.

In response to a public records request by The Daily Wire, the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office confirmed that a May 28 report with "Offense: Forcible Sodomy [and] Sexual Battery" at Stone Bridge High School does exist.

The suspect was arrested two months later following an investigation by the sheriff's office.

Minutes before Smith’s arrest at the June 22 board meeting, Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) Superintendent Scott Ziegler declared that "the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist," and that to his knowledge, "we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms," The Daily Wire reported.

Smith told the outlet that he flew into a rage at the meeting after Ziegler's comments, and after a local progressive activist said she did not believe his daughter’s story.

"If someone would have sat and listened for 30 seconds to what Scott had to say, they would have been mortified and heartbroken," Lancaster, Smith's attorney, told The Daily Wire.

On Aug. 11, nearly two months after Smith’s arrest, the school board voted to approve its transgender rights policy, which requires teachers to call students by the pronouns they identify with and requires bathroom renovations in order to make them more private.

Smith said he received a letter before the vote informing him he was banned from the school board building.

Then on Oct. 6, the sheriff’s office said a 15-year-old boy was charged with sexual battery and abduction of a fellow student at Broad Run High School in Ashburn. In an Oct. 7 press release, the sheriff's office said the suspect forced a female victim into an empty classroom where he held her against her will and inappropriately touched her.

The outlet, citing a government official, reported that the boy accused in the Broad Run case had the same name as the student who allegedly assaulted Smith's daughter.

Lancaster, Smith's attorney, also told the outlet the suspect in the Oct. 6 incident was the same boy who allegedly attacked Smith’s daughter.

Source: https://news.yahoo.com/loudoun-county-father-arrested-school-185235249.html


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,269
Location: Seattle-ish

20 Oct 2021, 3:31 am

I've been waiting for confirmation on this story before dropping it here, I've watched it develop on Twitter, it sounds truly atrocious, but so far it's largely been right wing media covering it for obvious reasons, and I know those sources are useless here.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

20 Oct 2021, 8:24 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.

The purpose is to create lawsuits to sow division and fear. I agree innocent mistakes will happen, but this would make such mistakes a crime.



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,326
Location: Northern California

20 Oct 2021, 5:01 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.

The purpose is to create lawsuits to sow division and fear. I agree innocent mistakes will happen, but this would make such mistakes a crime.


I disagree that the purpose is lawsuits and division. My young adult daughter believes firmly in the right to self-identify and choose one’s pronouns; she sees it as a form of progress towards a more fair accepting society that her generation can bring. The desire to take that position is very organic to her cumulative life experiences; it wasn’t manufactured by some outside source.

Obviously she and her compatriots would prefer to simply educate people on it, and have them choose to comply.

Mandating anything always creates problems, especially when it comes to what teachers are allowed to say and do. But it is also worth asking if there would be an attempt to mandate if there hadn’t been the openly resistant and preaching coach.

I think the purpose is to push the adults to follow a direction important to students. I think a common result of any mandate is lawsuits and division, making one wonder if a mandate is the right approach


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,235

20 Oct 2021, 7:39 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.

The purpose is to create lawsuits to sow division and fear. I agree innocent mistakes will happen, but this would make such mistakes a crime.


I disagree that the purpose is lawsuits and division. My young adult daughter believes firmly in the right to self-identify and choose one’s pronouns; she sees it as a form of progress towards a more fair accepting society that her generation can bring. The desire to take that position is very organic to her cumulative life experiences; it wasn’t manufactured by some outside source.

Obviously she and her compatriots would prefer to simply educate people on it, and have them choose to comply.

Mandating anything always creates problems, especially when it comes to what teachers are allowed to say and do. But it is also worth asking if there would be an attempt to mandate if there hadn’t been the openly resistant and preaching coach.

I think the purpose is to push the adults to follow a direction important to students. I think a common result of any mandate is lawsuits and division, making one wonder if a mandate is the right approach


I do agree with self identification - who am I to tell someone what it looks like in their head.
But I have no idea how to weigh the one group's right to identify as another gender against another group's right to safety, when there's a third group which has a bit of a history of ignoring the second group's right to safety. I mean, asking someone capable of rape to please only rape while identifying as male is ... it sounds unlikely.
So, I see the issue as clash of compmetely valid interests. It doesn't help that there's hysteria around it and people fighting for their side with bad and stupid arguments, trying to invalidate the other side's totally valid points.


_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,326
Location: Northern California

20 Oct 2021, 8:02 pm

shlaifu wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.

The purpose is to create lawsuits to sow division and fear. I agree innocent mistakes will happen, but this would make such mistakes a crime.


I disagree that the purpose is lawsuits and division. My young adult daughter believes firmly in the right to self-identify and choose one’s pronouns; she sees it as a form of progress towards a more fair accepting society that her generation can bring. The desire to take that position is very organic to her cumulative life experiences; it wasn’t manufactured by some outside source.

Obviously she and her compatriots would prefer to simply educate people on it, and have them choose to comply.

Mandating anything always creates problems, especially when it comes to what teachers are allowed to say and do. But it is also worth asking if there would be an attempt to mandate if there hadn’t been the openly resistant and preaching coach.

I think the purpose is to push the adults to follow a direction important to students. I think a common result of any mandate is lawsuits and division, making one wonder if a mandate is the right approach


I do agree with self identification - who am I to tell someone what it looks like in their head.
But I have no idea how to weigh the one group's right to identify as another gender against another group's right to safety, when there's a third group which has a bit of a history of ignoring the second group's right to safety. I mean, asking someone capable of rape to please only rape while identifying as male is ... it sounds unlikely.
So, I see the issue as clash of compmetely valid interests. It doesn't help that there's hysteria around it and people fighting for their side with bad and stupid arguments, trying to invalidate the other side's totally valid points.


I confess I've been avoiding the bathroom side of the mandate, and have only been talking about the pronoun side. Two different topics, IMHO.

My comments so far truly only apply to the use of pronouns.

Bathrooms are difficult because a transgender woman is not safe in a male restroom. I had not thought transgender women posed any actual threat to women in a female restroom, but we may have a case that says differently, and I don't know yet how seriously to take that. There remains more I need to know, so I'm sitting back for the time being.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,235

20 Oct 2021, 8:20 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
shlaifu wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.

The purpose is to create lawsuits to sow division and fear. I agree innocent mistakes will happen, but this would make such mistakes a crime.


I disagree that the purpose is lawsuits and division. My young adult daughter believes firmly in the right to self-identify and choose one’s pronouns; she sees it as a form of progress towards a more fair accepting society that her generation can bring. The desire to take that position is very organic to her cumulative life experiences; it wasn’t manufactured by some outside source.

Obviously she and her compatriots would prefer to simply educate people on it, and have them choose to comply.

Mandating anything always creates problems, especially when it comes to what teachers are allowed to say and do. But it is also worth asking if there would be an attempt to mandate if there hadn’t been the openly resistant and preaching coach.

I think the purpose is to push the adults to follow a direction important to students. I think a common result of any mandate is lawsuits and division, making one wonder if a mandate is the right approach


I do agree with self identification - who am I to tell someone what it looks like in their head.
But I have no idea how to weigh the one group's right to identify as another gender against another group's right to safety, when there's a third group which has a bit of a history of ignoring the second group's right to safety. I mean, asking someone capable of rape to please only rape while identifying as male is ... it sounds unlikely.
So, I see the issue as clash of compmetely valid interests. It doesn't help that there's hysteria around it and people fighting for their side with bad and stupid arguments, trying to invalidate the other side's totally valid points.


I confess I've been avoiding the bathroom side of the mandate, and have only been talking about the pronoun side. Two different topics, IMHO.

My comments so far truly only apply to the use of pronouns.

Bathrooms are difficult because a transgender woman is not safe in a male restroom. I had not thought transgender women posed any actual threat to women in a female restroom, but we may have a case that says differently, and I don't know yet how seriously to take that. There remains more I need to know, so I'm sitting back for the time being.


I agree, but there's the third category of a man proclaiming to be trans, to get access to women's spaces.
Plus, there is the right-wing argument about pedophile men trying to get access to children by posing as women. Now, this is of course as unrelated to Trans issues as it always was to gay issues - but in the 60s and 70s, pedophile activists did try to hijack the gay movement, wwith some limited success even.
And again: I don't expect a pedophile would stick to identifying as male, when acting out his harmful drives.

There's a cluster of things coming together, because biological sex is tied to differences in extreme behaviours and gender is the construct on top, and pretending that the transgender movement can't be hijacked is short-sighted.


_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

20 Oct 2021, 9:40 pm

shlaifu wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
shlaifu wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.

Note that I also wouldn't approve of a heavy hand enforcing the standard, given how often people will make innocent mistakes. Shoot, how often does a parent call a child by another child's name? Schools will have to be careful not to turn this into an element of extreme stress for teachers.

The purpose is to create lawsuits to sow division and fear. I agree innocent mistakes will happen, but this would make such mistakes a crime.


I disagree that the purpose is lawsuits and division. My young adult daughter believes firmly in the right to self-identify and choose one’s pronouns; she sees it as a form of progress towards a more fair accepting society that her generation can bring. The desire to take that position is very organic to her cumulative life experiences; it wasn’t manufactured by some outside source.

Obviously she and her compatriots would prefer to simply educate people on it, and have them choose to comply.

Mandating anything always creates problems, especially when it comes to what teachers are allowed to say and do. But it is also worth asking if there would be an attempt to mandate if there hadn’t been the openly resistant and preaching coach.

I think the purpose is to push the adults to follow a direction important to students. I think a common result of any mandate is lawsuits and division, making one wonder if a mandate is the right approach


I do agree with self identification - who am I to tell someone what it looks like in their head.
But I have no idea how to weigh the one group's right to identify as another gender against another group's right to safety, when there's a third group which has a bit of a history of ignoring the second group's right to safety. I mean, asking someone capable of rape to please only rape while identifying as male is ... it sounds unlikely.
So, I see the issue as clash of compmetely valid interests. It doesn't help that there's hysteria around it and people fighting for their side with bad and stupid arguments, trying to invalidate the other side's totally valid points.


I confess I've been avoiding the bathroom side of the mandate, and have only been talking about the pronoun side. Two different topics, IMHO.

My comments so far truly only apply to the use of pronouns.

Bathrooms are difficult because a transgender woman is not safe in a male restroom. I had not thought transgender women posed any actual threat to women in a female restroom, but we may have a case that says differently, and I don't know yet how seriously to take that. There remains more I need to know, so I'm sitting back for the time being.


I agree, but there's the third category of a man proclaiming to be trans, to get access to women's spaces.
Plus, there is the right-wing argument about pedophile men trying to get access to children by posing as women. Now, this is of course as unrelated to Trans issues as it always was to gay issues - but in the 60s and 70s, pedophile activists did try to hijack the gay movement, wwith some limited success even.
And again: I don't expect a pedophile would stick to identifying as male, when acting out his harmful drives.

There's a cluster of things coming together, because biological sex is tied to differences in extreme behaviours and gender is the construct on top, and pretending that the transgender movement can't be hijacked is short-sighted.


You seem to be getting close to the point of conflict between "conservative" and "progressive" views regarding societal change.

On one side (conservative), you have the existing "rules"\framework under which society operates at a given time. When a change is proposed, these people will look to how society is currently functioning to the benefit of the majority, and identify potential issues the proposed change may have on the current state of society\other areas of the population.

On the other side (progressive), you have a proposed change to the existing "rules"\framework in order to benefit\support\etc. a subset of the population, which may or may not have a direct impact on the rest of society. When proposing a change, they will look to what will benefit this group within society, while not neccesarily considering the full impact it may have on others outside the specific group the change is designed to benefit.

Both sides are necessary, and will have legitimate reasons for their opinions regarding the proposed change, but problems occur when either side is unwilling to look for a compromise with the other.

In this case, the progressives laughed at (and ignored) the view of the conservatives that there was a risk of "predators" utilising "bathrooms" for the type of incident as occurred at the Loudon county school, instead of acknowledging their concern and looking to implement some type of "safeguard" - They saw "the needs of the few" as being of more importance\requiring more urgent attention than the potential impact on "the many". Had a more measured approach been taken, though, what option would have been best to avoid this situation:
* Bathroom use based upon biological sex - potential risk to the transgendered
* Bathroom use based upon "gender" - potential risk to (in general, but not restricted to) females through bad actors taking advantage of this new access. Plus, given there are more than 2 "genders", what about those who identify differently to male\female?
* Mixed\shared bathrooms - potential risk to (in general, but not restricted to) females through bad actors taking advantage of this new access...Has the benefit of potential "help" from having more possible users to "defend" potential victim, but also assists cases were a group of "bad actors" are involved.
* transgender people using disabled toilets - potential "embarrasment" to users through being "singled out" by using this. Risk of inconvenience to those who require these facilities.
* Seperate bathroom for "transgender" people - potential "embarrasment" to users through being "singled out" by using this. Considerable cost involved in implementing.

So, which of these options (or some other option?) is the "correct" one? And should society as a whole (not merely the "progressive" portion, or that section for which the change is designed to "benefit") be able to have some say regarding what can be both simple and complex questions (not just on this subject, but on any other issue with potential societal impact) rather than having a "solution" foisted upon them by the beneficiaries\supporters of the "solution"?


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

20 Oct 2021, 9:50 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
Bathrooms are difficult because a transgender woman is not safe in a male restroom. I had not thought transgender women posed any actual threat to women in a female restroom, but we may have a case that says differently, and I don't know yet how seriously to take that. There remains more I need to know, so I'm sitting back for the time being.


Take a step back: Before the changes were made regarding transgender people, was there ever a case of a female being assaulted by a male in a "Rest room"?

If so, maybe you would understand the basis for the conservative viewpoint regarding the issue - the changed status merely provides a "publicly acceptable" reason for the potential offender to enter the room (making access "easier"\"less risky", and potentially opening up the pool of potential offenders as a result), and lessens the chance that they may be noticed, or that action would be taken to safeguard legitimate users of the area.


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,615

20 Oct 2021, 10:47 pm

shlaifu wrote:
the issue is a bit more comicated there:
Quote:
Loudoun County Public Schools responded Wednesday to a bombshell report that it covered up a sexual assault perpetrated by a “gender fluid” male student in the girls’ bathroom.

https://news.yahoo.com/loudoun-county-school-district-breaks-185153597
I readabout this somewhere a few days ago, and it's an ongoing thing and I obviously have no opinion on an open investigation.
But the investigation alone should explain the agitation


shlaifu wrote:
Plus, there is the right-wing argument about pedophile men trying to get access to children by posing as women.


Both of these incidents/issues are not relevant to the teacher's attempt to sue the Loudon County School Board. The first relates to an isolated incident and the second relates to right wing propaganda against trans,



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,615

20 Oct 2021, 11:10 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
I don't see how calling someone as they wish could possibly harm students. It's such a small ask. IMHO the teachers should shut up and respect each student's choice.


It doesn't harm other students or the teachers. Typically conservatives sticking their nose in other people's civil rights. As with the CRT debate these teachers are misinformed about the consequences of the trans policy.

Unlike CRT, the trans issue tends to most frighten religious parents/teachers who perceive this policy as normalising homosexuality. And of course the rest are conservatives who despise gays, blacks and other assorted minorities.



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,326
Location: Northern California

21 Oct 2021, 4:41 am

Brictoria wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Bathrooms are difficult because a transgender woman is not safe in a male restroom. I had not thought transgender women posed any actual threat to women in a female restroom, but we may have a case that says differently, and I don't know yet how seriously to take that. There remains more I need to know, so I'm sitting back for the time being.


Take a step back: Before the changes were made regarding transgender people, was there ever a case of a female being assaulted by a male in a "Rest room"?

If so, maybe you would understand the basis for the conservative viewpoint regarding the issue - the changed status merely provides a "publicly acceptable" reason for the potential offender to enter the room (making access "easier"\"less risky", and potentially opening up the pool of potential offenders as a result), and lessens the chance that they may be noticed, or that action would be taken to safeguard legitimate users of the area.


What part of “I’m sitting back for the time being” do you fail to understand? There is no theoretical argument I haven’t heard. None. There is no need for me to take a step back in the direction you are suggesting, and there is no point in you trying to sell me a position. I am interested in NEW data, not theories based on distinguishable events. If it turns out we do, in fact, have new data, I will need to study the situation to decide what the broader implications might be.

For me, it isn’t about understanding various positions; I do understand the positions out there. Long run my position on the issue will be purely pragmatic: what keeps the most students safe, both physically and mentally. Knowing the DATA.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,419
Location: Melbourne, Australia

21 Oct 2021, 8:28 pm

Brictoria wrote:
shlaifu wrote:
the issue is a bit more comicated there:

Quote:
Loudoun County Public Schools responded Wednesday to a bombshell report that it covered up a sexual assault perpetrated by a “gender fluid” male student in the girls’ bathroom.


https://news.yahoo.com/loudoun-county-school-district-breaks-185153597


I readabout this somewhere a few days ago, and it's an ongoing thing and I obviously have no opinion on an open investigation.
But the investigation alone should explain the agitation


It has been an interesting case...
Quote:
A parent who was arrested during a June school board meeting in Loudoun County, Virginia, is accusing the district of trying to cover up an alleged bathroom sexual assault by a gender-fluid individual against his daughter in order to further its transgender rights agenda.

Scott Smith was found guilty of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest in August after he was filmed being dragged by police from the Loudoun County School Board meeting on June 22. He was sentenced to 10 days in jail, all suspended, contingent on a year of good behavior, Loudoun Now reported at the time.

Smith’s image went viral among left-wingers as an example of parents run amok, and the National School Boards Association cited his arrest in a letter last week requesting the Department of Justice to provide federal law enforcement to respond to an increase in violence against school officials across the country. Attorney General Merrick Garland later pledged to have the Department of Justice and the FBI investigate harassment of school board members.

[...]

All juvenile records are sealed, but Smith’s attorney Elizabeth Lancaster told The Daily Wire that the boy was subsequently charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy, and one count of forcible fellatio.

In response to a public records request by The Daily Wire, the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office confirmed that a May 28 report with "Offense: Forcible Sodomy [and] Sexual Battery" at Stone Bridge High School does exist.

The suspect was arrested two months later following an investigation by the sheriff's office.

Minutes before Smith’s arrest at the June 22 board meeting, Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) Superintendent Scott Ziegler declared that "the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist," and that to his knowledge, "we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms," The Daily Wire reported.

Smith told the outlet that he flew into a rage at the meeting after Ziegler's comments, and after a local progressive activist said she did not believe his daughter’s story.

"If someone would have sat and listened for 30 seconds to what Scott had to say, they would have been mortified and heartbroken," Lancaster, Smith's attorney, told The Daily Wire.

On Aug. 11, nearly two months after Smith’s arrest, the school board voted to approve its transgender rights policy, which requires teachers to call students by the pronouns they identify with and requires bathroom renovations in order to make them more private.

Smith said he received a letter before the vote informing him he was banned from the school board building.

Then on Oct. 6, the sheriff’s office said a 15-year-old boy was charged with sexual battery and abduction of a fellow student at Broad Run High School in Ashburn. In an Oct. 7 press release, the sheriff's office said the suspect forced a female victim into an empty classroom where he held her against her will and inappropriately touched her.

The outlet, citing a government official, reported that the boy accused in the Broad Run case had the same name as the student who allegedly assaulted Smith's daughter.

Lancaster, Smith's attorney, also told the outlet the suspect in the Oct. 6 incident was the same boy who allegedly attacked Smith’s daughter.

Source: https://news.yahoo.com/loudoun-county-father-arrested-school-185235249.html


Well, it got a bit more interesting...

Taking the relevent items from the above report:
Quote:
A parent who was arrested during a June school board meeting in Loudoun County, Virginia, is accusing the district of trying to cover up an alleged bathroom sexual assault by a gender-fluid individual against his daughter in order to further its transgender rights agenda.

Scott Smith was found guilty of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest in August after he was filmed being dragged by police from the Loudoun County School Board meeting on June 22. He was sentenced to 10 days in jail, all suspended, contingent on a year of good behavior, Loudoun Now reported at the time.

[...]

Minutes before Smith’s arrest at the June 22 board meeting, Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) Superintendent Scott Ziegler declared that "the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist," and that to his knowledge, "we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms," The Daily Wire reported.

Smith told the outlet that he flew into a rage at the meeting after Ziegler's comments, and after a local progressive activist said she did not believe his daughter’s story.


the above doesn't align too well with recent news:
Quote:
The superintendent of Loudoun County Public Schools sent a brief, confidential email to school board members on May 28 — the same day a female student at Stone Bridge High School said she was sexually assaulted in bathroom.

In an email obtained by WTOP, Superintendent Scott Ziegler alerted the board that the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office was investigating the incident, but provided few details.

“The purpose of this email is to provide you with information regarding an incident that occurred at Stone Bridge HS. This afternoon a female student alleged that a male student sexually assaulted her in the restroom. The LCSO is investigating the matter,” Ziegler wrote.

[...]

The May 28 assault was not made public until the victim’s father told the Daily Wire that the same 15-year-old charged in his daughter’s attack was later charged with groping a different girl, at Broad Run High School, on Oct. 6.

WTOP is not publishing the May 28 victim’s father’s name to avoid indirectly identifying a sexual assault victim, who is also a juvenile.

Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney Buta Biberaj told WTOP that the same 15-year-old has been charged in both crimes. Biberaj said the boy was on pretrial electronic monitoring for the May 28 sexual assault when he was charged with sexual battery and abduction for the October incident.

Source: https://wtop.com/loudoun-county/2021/10/email-from-loudoun-co-superintendent-alerted-school-board-on-day-of-bathroom-assault/ (relevent details highlighted)


_________________
Quote:
"We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it." - Hillary Clinton

Quote:
"Sometimes I think that this is an era when sanity has become controversial." - Thomas Sowell