Gender identity vote tonight, What does it mean? Are you allowed to switch teachers if they are tran

[Anonymous]

It's been widely noted among FCPS students that an auditorium of students would have behaved better, and that the parents who heckled last night were an embarrassment to their own children.

[Anonymous]

The Massachusetts Board of Education recently issued formal “guidance” to the state’s public schools, telling them how to implement new laws protecting against gender identity discrimination.

The result? Transgender children must be allowed to use the restrooms and locker rooms of the opposite sex, if they so choose. Teachers will “work with” other students who object to the invasion of privacy, helping them over come their “discomfort” and embrace the agenda of tolerance. In addition, schools must “eliminate” gendered policies such as dress codes (e.g., rules requiring girls, but not boys, to wear dresses to prom, or traditions that dress boys in blue graduation robes while girls wear white) and classroom management strategies that divide children by gender (e.g., a boys’ line and a girls’ line for the water fountain). Transgender children will have the right to insist on being called by any name or pronoun they choose, regardless of its biological mismatch. And other students must go along with it or face “discipline.”

In its rush to support the “progressive” agenda for transgender rights, the Board of Education has thrown privacy and safety – for the other students – right out the window. That’s bad enough. The full impact of its decision, however, is even worse.

It’s an insidious strategy that promotes a view of the human person utterly incompatible with Christianity.

The indoctrination (“education and training”) will be part of every Massachusetts school’s “anti-bullying curriculum, student leadership trainings, and staff professional development.” And the Massachusetts Board of Education clearly expects all students and teachers to get with the program.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/cw/post.php?id=698

[Anonymous]

It's been widely noted among FCPS students that an auditorium of students would have behaved better, and that the parents who heckled last night were an embarrassment to their own children.

Maybe, if they had not bee treated like children, they would have behaved differently. However, I am not excusing the behavior. There should have been better communication about this from the start. On the other hand, how do you think the proponents would have acted if they were not given a voice? How do you think they would have acted if it had not passed?

This whole thing should have been handled differently. The School Board should have determined a policy before it was passed. Backwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's been widely noted among FCPS students that an auditorium of students would have behaved better, and that the parents who heckled last night were an embarrassment to their own children.

Maybe, if they had not bee treated like children, they would have behaved differently. However, I am not excusing the behavior. There should have been better communication about this from the start. On the other hand, how do you think the proponents would have acted if they were not given a voice? How do you think they would have acted if it had not passed?

This whole thing should have been handled differently. The School Board should have determined a policy before it was passed. Backwards.

Both sides had a voice. Both sides were heard. Stop promoting the notion that the people who were against the change in policy did not get a voice and were not heard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's been widely noted among FCPS students that an auditorium of students would have behaved better, and that the parents who heckled last night were an embarrassment to their own children.

Maybe, if they had not bee treated like children, they would have behaved differently. However, I am not excusing the behavior. There should have been better communication about this from the start. On the other hand, how do you think the proponents would have acted if they were not given a voice? How do you think they would have acted if it had not passed?

This whole thing should have been handled differently. The School Board should have determined a policy before it was passed. Backwards.

Both sides had a voice. Both sides were heard. Stop promoting the notion that the people who were against the change in policy did not get a voice and were not heard.

They did not get heard. 10 slots at each meeting that could be filled from either side for a total of 3 minutes a slot. How is that getting heard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's been widely noted among FCPS students that an auditorium of students would have behaved better, and that the parents who heckled last night were an embarrassment to their own children.

Maybe, if they had not bee treated like children, they would have behaved differently. However, I am not excusing the behavior. There should have been better communication about this from the start. On the other hand, how do you think the proponents would have acted if they were not given a voice? How do you think they would have acted if it had not passed?

This whole thing should have been handled differently. The School Board should have determined a policy before it was passed. Backwards.

Both sides had a voice. Both sides were heard. Stop promoting the notion that the people who were against the change in policy did not get a voice and were not heard.

They did not get heard. 10 slots at each meeting that could be filled from either side for a total of 3 minutes a slot. How is that getting heard?

10 slots per meeting for Citizen Participation about any new business or action item -- not anything about "from either side."

Citizens who want to address either a new business or an action item, as listed on the School Board regular meeting agenda, may sign up online beginning at 6 a.m. three (3) business days prior to the meeting, or by calling the School Board office at 571-423-1075 during normal business hours. For more information, please visit: http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/meetings/requestspeak.shtml. A maximum of ten (10) speaker slots are available, first come, first served. The speakers list closes at 4:30 p.m. on the last business day prior to the meeting date. Unfilled spaces may be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis between 6:30 and 7 p.m. before the meeting is called to order. Requests should be made to the deputy clerk of the School Board. Citizens signing up for these unfilled spaces may address any school-related topic. The School Board will not hear statements involving issues that have been scheduled for public hearings (such as Capital Improvement Program, budget, and boundaries), or personal attacks on any person. Complaints regarding individual students or school-based employees should not be raised at public meetings. Any such concerns should be directed to the appropriate school principal or other school official. Citizens are encouraged to write the School Board on any school-related topic.

[Anonymous]

Both sides had a voice. Both sides were heard. Stop promoting the notion that the people who were against the change in policy did not get a voice and were not heard.

Nevertheless, they knew ahead of time--as did everyone, except the parents who showed up--that it was going to pass. Please tell me when the School Board has not made a decision until the meeting. The public participation is just optics.

I am not against a policy. I am against passing a resolution without a policy that considers unintended consequences. And, I would still like to understand why we need a "consultant".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Both sides had a voice. Both sides were heard. Stop promoting the notion that the people who were against the change in policy did not get a voice and were not heard.

Nevertheless, they knew ahead of time--as did everyone, except the parents who showed up--that it was going to pass. Please tell me when the School Board has not made a decision until the meeting. The public participation is just optics.

I am not against a policy. I am against passing a resolution without a policy that considers unintended consequences. And, I would still like to understand why we need a "consultant".

Maybe they need a consultant to address the safety and privacy concerns that parents in this thread have raised? Certainly there seems to be a lot of misinformation that needs to be remedied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if I, a white female, wish to identify as a black female and I take action to darken my skin and proclaim that I am black. Will I Have the same rights? Can I be hired as a bkack female? Can I check black on the census form?

Of course, to say otherwise would be racist.

Actually, my kids are mixed race (Black/Asian) and the rules allow us to "self-identify" however we want. Normally they identify as Asian but for school and Government stuff, it's black all the way, I must admit it it's fun watching the bureaucrats squirm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Both sides had a voice. Both sides were heard. Stop promoting the notion that the people who were against the change in policy did not get a voice and were not heard.

Nevertheless, they knew ahead of time--as did everyone, except the parents who showed up--that it was going to pass. Please tell me when the School Board has not made a decision until the meeting. The public participation is just optics.

Have you ever gone to a school board meeting prior to this? Do you expect them to come in without an idea of how they are going to vote on every subject? The public participation is not just optics. It starts well before the SB meeting. It is not a one night stand.

[Anonymous]

NP here who's initial response was that I supported the change but understood some parents' concerns about bathroom issues.

I just watched the board meeting and that was an embarassment. Not the behavior of the school board, but the audible behavior of parents disrespecting the advocates speaking for. Particularly in light of some of the reprehensible reasons behind some of the parents reasons. The OBGYN managed to articulate in a non-prejudicial and reasonable way her concerns. And yet there were also parents cheering about an gentleman making statements about the higher HIV infection rate in trangendered children and teachers (what relevance?) and how it was a racist measure that was prejudicial towards blacks and hispanics? Or the woman who claimed that this would increase sexual abuse of small children? Appalling. Embarassing. Prejudical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here who's initial response was that I supported the change but understood some parents' concerns about bathroom issues.

I just watched the board meeting and that was an embarassment. Not the behavior of the school board, but the audible behavior of parents disrespecting the advocates speaking for. Particularly in light of some of the reprehensible reasons behind some of the parents reasons. The OBGYN managed to articulate in a non-prejudicial and reasonable way her concerns. And yet there were also parents cheering about an gentleman making statements about the higher HIV infection rate in trangendered children and teachers (what relevance?) and how it was a racist measure that was prejudicial towards blacks and hispanics? Or the woman who claimed that this would increase sexual abuse of small children? Appalling. Embarassing. Prejudical.

I liked the OB's stance but I guess the school board didn't care. Either way no one has explained whether the federal funding issue is it at play or this is just a measure drawn up by the school board.

[Anonymous]

I think this is all a waste of time and money over a tiny tiny portion of students and teachers, but hearing the opposition at the school board meeting is just making my skin crawl. I am firmly on the side of passing this now, and hopefully it will not waste too much money.

[Anonymous]

If the school board had allowed parents to give feedback prior to rushing through this vote while blatantly trying to exclude parents from the process, if tuey had presented a plan built with parent input and collaboration PRIOR to the vote, if they had explained and examined the budget implications particularly regarding the "consultant", and if they had at least pretended like they wanted to listen to and consider parent concerns at and prior to their meetings, they would have had a much better and more cordial end result.

It was if they wanted to have the ugliest and worst possible reaction that painted all sides in the worst possible light (including themselves). The school board's handling of this whole process is just inexplicable and made it far uglier than it needed to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the school board had allowed parents to give feedback prior to rushing through this vote while blatantly trying to exclude parents from the process, if tuey had presented a plan built with parent input and collaboration PRIOR to the vote, if they had explained and examined the budget implications particularly regarding the "consultant", and if they had at least pretended like they wanted to listen to and consider parent concerns at and prior to their meetings, they would have had a much better and more cordial end result.

It was if they wanted to have the ugliest and worst possible reaction that painted all sides in the worst possible light (including themselves). The school board's handling of this whole process is just inexplicable and made it far uglier than it needed to be.

Great post, couldn't agree more!