Playing Poker with Federal Funding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The insistence on purposefully misgendering them always peeks its ugly head and lets us know, again it has nothing to do with locker rooms or bathrooms, it’s that they simply want to live.

Pretending to be a girl doesn't make you a girl, and vice versa. Everyone knew this until like five minutes ago, even you.

Trans people have always existed, it’s a concept that exists across cultures and time. It’s present in indigenous history, Polynesian history, European, etc. It’s present in historical moments like Albert Cashier, trans Civil War soldier, Dr. James Berry, trans Irish physician of the early 1800s, Dr. Alan Hart, renown physician and tuberculosis researcher, etc.

Gender is a social construct.

Some of us read books and don’t just put our mouths up to the propaganda faucet. There is an entire world beyond “five minutes ago” but I wouldn’t expect those unable to see beyond 5 inches in front of their face to recognize that.

Your examples all have something in common that is not the issue that concerns most of us. Do you not see it?

No I see your bigotry and assumptions that male to female transgender people are threats despite absolutely zero evidence.


I’ll just let them know they can’t have any basic human dignity because you have “concerns” and that apparently is just as good as facts….

Funny that you specifically carve out male to female. Because you know the problem here is the invasion of female spaces by biological men.

I specifically “carved it out” because the poster I was quoting alluded to it by stating that the historical female to male transitions I referenced weren’t the same.


That’s got to be the laziest gotcha attempt, just simply read the preceding posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As for the “historical examples” a PP gave… women presenting themselves as men 100+ years ago as the only way they would be allowed to hold certain jobs/professions is not really the same thing. And yes— I’m sure there were a tiny number of people who were actually trans, just like there have always been people who are depressed, anxious, have OCD, etc. But nothing like today’s numbers.

And saying that being trans isn’t based on feelings… then what is it based on? It’s not based on biology or fact. It’s based on how a person feels. This doesn’t make it invalid, but it does make it hard to quantify.

Literally 10 seconds of Google would’ve shown you that all those specific examples were all people who continued to live as trans people outside their professional life. They were not doing it to pursue professional gain.

I thought doing your own research was kinda your guys whole thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The insistence on purposefully misgendering them always peeks its ugly head and lets us know, again it has nothing to do with locker rooms or bathrooms, it’s that they simply want to live.

Pretending to be a girl doesn't make you a girl, and vice versa. Everyone knew this until like five minutes ago, even you.

Trans people have always existed, it’s a concept that exists across cultures and time. It’s present in indigenous history, Polynesian history, European, etc. It’s present in historical moments like Albert Cashier, trans Civil War soldier, Dr. James Berry, trans Irish physician of the early 1800s, Dr. Alan Hart, renown physician and tuberculosis researcher, etc.

Gender is a social construct.

Some of us read books and don’t just put our mouths up to the propaganda faucet. There is an entire world beyond “five minutes ago” but I wouldn’t expect those unable to see beyond 5 inches in front of their face to recognize that.

Your examples all have something in common that is not the issue that concerns most of us. Do you not see it?

No I see your bigotry and assumptions that male to female transgender people are threats despite absolutely zero evidence.


I’ll just let them know they can’t have any basic human dignity because you have “concerns” and that apparently is just as good as facts….

In the DMV area, it didn't help that a girl that was raped in a school bathroom by a boy in a dress, then when the father went to a school board meeting to complain about it being swept under the rug, he was blocked and dragged out of a school board meeting for complaining about his daughter being raped in a bathroom by a boy in a dress. The whole time, horrible people like you kept yelling that he was lying about his raped daughter in order to prevent the school board from adopting a resolution to allow boys that identified as girls to use girls bathrooms.

That combined with school boards telling staff that they can keep secrets from parents about their children's sexuality and help them transition without parental knowledge.

It cost McAuliffe the governorship and probably boosted Trump more than a little bit.

But you go ahead and keep banging that drum. Keep telling everyone who disagrees with you how stupid, horrible and ridiculous they are. If you can't make your point respectfully, be prepared to see your candidate suffer for it. It is because of people like you that the Democratic party is pulling back on trans rights as much as they have. Because the ambassador for trans rights are the worst people in the world.

Again, one singular instance that is often misrepresented as a random attack and then used to extrapolate to some greater threat. Don’t ya think it’s a bit odd that in the now 5+ years of this transpanic m, this apparent crisis, there isn’t any other cases ever rolled out? It’s just this one.



Don’t get me wrong, this story is absolutely terrible, never should’ve happened, it was a complete failure by that school system. That said there is also nothing in that story that is in anyway indicative that this is part of a broad threat or trend. The facts of the story are seldom shared, but they’re important.

https://archive.is/20231008192320/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/05/magazine/loudoun-county-bathroom-sexual-assault.html


The attacker and victim had a pre-existing relationship, the attacker made arrangements to meet with the victim in the handicap stall of the girls bathroom under the pretense of sex (I share this not imply any responsibility, but to underscore it was not random violence), the sexual assault then occurs and is interrupted by a staff member.

The attacker in this case, had a history of touching people non-consensually and disregarding directions to not.


Why are these important details? Because they very clearly demonstrate that aside from the location, nothing here is tied to a person’s gender identity. All the preceding information lends us to the logical conclusion that had the attack not taken place in a bathroom it would’ve taken place somewhere else. This wasn’t someone using their gender identity to gain access to a space where they can now attack vulnerable people, it was them trying to find a space they believed would be unsupervised.


I know the nuance of that is absolutely going to be lost here, but there are dozens of other unsupervised locations in a school. The issue here was the school failed to act when the attacker had previously been identified as a problem, it is not that they had access to one specific unsupervised location.



I know I’m wasting my breath because none of this is in good faith. I’m talking to people who have pivoted from it being a safety concern to being now there own unsolicited commentary on mental health (because of there’s one thing I want more than wild legislation opinions that has no basis in facts, statistics, or sources, it’s medical opinions that have no basis in facts, statistics, or sources!)


Again, this comes down to a resentment that different people exist. There’s not a singular piece of meaningful data to support any of these legislative acts beyond it making people feel upset that trans people are real.


If you choose to perceive it as mental illness, that’s your call (much like mine is to call you bigoted, ain’t that beautiful). No one is making even change one iota about your life. However your hang ups don’t mean the world around you now needs to operate under different circumstances because you have feelings.

You don’t like the facts, that’s different than the facts not existing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The insistence on purposefully misgendering them always peeks its ugly head and lets us know, again it has nothing to do with locker rooms or bathrooms, it’s that they simply want to live.

Pretending to be a girl doesn't make you a girl, and vice versa. Everyone knew this until like five minutes ago, even you.

Trans people have always existed, it’s a concept that exists across cultures and time. It’s present in indigenous history, Polynesian history, European, etc. It’s present in historical moments like Albert Cashier, trans Civil War soldier, Dr. James Berry, trans Irish physician of the early 1800s, Dr. Alan Hart, renown physician and tuberculosis researcher, etc.

Gender is a social construct.

Some of us read books and don’t just put our mouths up to the propaganda faucet. There is an entire world beyond “five minutes ago” but I wouldn’t expect those unable to see beyond 5 inches in front of their face to recognize that.

Your examples all have something in common that is not the issue that concerns most of us. Do you not see it?

No I see your bigotry and assumptions that male to female transgender people are threats despite absolutely zero evidence.


I’ll just let them know they can’t have any basic human dignity because you have “concerns” and that apparently is just as good as facts….

In the DMV area, it didn't help that a girl that was raped in a school bathroom by a boy in a dress, then when the father went to a school board meeting to complain about it being swept under the rug, he was blocked and dragged out of a school board meeting for complaining about his daughter being raped in a bathroom by a boy in a dress. The whole time, horrible people like you kept yelling that he was lying about his raped daughter in order to prevent the school board from adopting a resolution to allow boys that identified as girls to use girls bathrooms.

That combined with school boards telling staff that they can keep secrets from parents about their children's sexuality and help them transition without parental knowledge.

It cost McAuliffe the governorship and probably boosted Trump more than a little bit.

But you go ahead and keep banging that drum. Keep telling everyone who disagrees with you how stupid, horrible and ridiculous they are. If you can't make your point respectfully, be prepared to see your candidate suffer for it. It is because of people like you that the Democratic party is pulling back on trans rights as much as they have. Because the ambassador for trans rights are the worst people in the world.

Again, one singular instance that is often misrepresented as a random attack and then used to extrapolate to some greater threat. Don’t ya think it’s a bit odd that in the now 5+ years of this transpanic m, this apparent crisis, there isn’t any other cases ever rolled out? It’s just this one.



Don’t get me wrong, this story is absolutely terrible, never should’ve happened, it was a complete failure by that school system. That said there is also nothing in that story that is in anyway indicative that this is part of a broad threat or trend. The facts of the story are seldom shared, but they’re important.

https://archive.is/20231008192320/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/05/magazine/loudoun-county-bathroom-sexual-assault.html


The attacker and victim had a pre-existing relationship, the attacker made arrangements to meet with the victim in the handicap stall of the girls bathroom under the pretense of sex (I share this not imply any responsibility, but to underscore it was not random violence), the sexual assault then occurs and is interrupted by a staff member.

The attacker in this case, had a history of touching people non-consensually and disregarding directions to not.


Why are these important details? Because they very clearly demonstrate that aside from the location, nothing here is tied to a person’s gender identity. All the preceding information lends us to the logical conclusion that had the attack not taken place in a bathroom it would’ve taken place somewhere else. This wasn’t someone using their gender identity to gain access to a space where they can now attack vulnerable people, it was them trying to find a space they believed would be unsupervised.


I know the nuance of that is absolutely going to be lost here, but there are dozens of other unsupervised locations in a school. The issue here was the school failed to act when the attacker had previously been identified as a problem, it is not that they had access to one specific unsupervised location.



I know I’m wasting my breath because none of this is in good faith. I’m talking to people who have pivoted from it being a safety concern to being now there own unsolicited commentary on mental health (because of there’s one thing I want more than wild legislation opinions that has no basis in facts, statistics, or sources, it’s medical opinions that have no basis in facts, statistics, or sources!)


Again, this comes down to a resentment that different people exist. There’s not a singular piece of meaningful data to support any of these legislative acts beyond it making people feel upset that trans people are real.


If you choose to perceive it as mental illness, that’s your call (much like mine is to call you bigoted, ain’t that beautiful). No one is making even change one iota about your life. However your hang ups don’t mean the world around you now needs to operate under different circumstances because you have feelings.

You don’t like the facts, that’s different than the facts not existing.

NP: Like others in our area I have concerns about spaces and sports in relation to gender. I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to write the above response - you share some thoughts, clarifications, and information I find informative. It doesn't change my reservations - but I do think I understand your (and probably others) position a bit better.

.

[Anonymous]

This still about subjugating the rights of the vast majority to the rights of the very few. Most policy decisions are made in this manner, every group can't have it their way. I know 30 females in a classroom setting who do not want a boy using their bathroom & locker room. I also know 1 male, who identifies as a female who would like to do just that. At the end of the day it's upholding the wishes of 30 over the wishes of 1. There is no perfect policy that can accommodate every group.

The school board needs to stop wasting taxpayer dollars for lawsuits that are filed on poor logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gender is not a social construct construct. Women wearing certain things and men wearing others is a social construct. Clothes, for that matter, are a social construct. Different roles in a family like women cooking and cleaning and men going to an office or factory is a social construct for the most part but is derivatkve of an actually biological difference which is that a heavily pregnant women or nursing mother of a newborn that needs to here every two hours actually cannot go hunt or work in a factory or plow a field all day. Can a woman do it otherwise? Yes. But those divisions regarding home and work duties exist because of actually biological differences that are NOT constructs. I am a woman and a lawyer and let me tell you I wear pants and mow the lawn and fold laundry and my husband does a ton of stuff that was precious for women. But when it came time to nurse our children, only I could do it. Only my. When we moved to bottles, he helped yes, but for nursing it was me. That is NOT a a social construct. And monthly periods are not a social construct. And osteoperosis is not a social construct. Prostate cancer is not a social construct. These are real biological differences that most of us respect.

[phone]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gender is not a social construct construct. Women wearing certain things and men wearing others is a social construct. Clothes, for that matter, are a social construct. Different roles in a family like women cooking and cleaning and men going to an office or factory is a social construct for the most part but is derivatkve of an actually biological difference which is that a heavily pregnant women or nursing mother of a newborn that needs to here every two hours actually cannot go hunt or work in a factory or plow a field all day. Can a woman do it otherwise? Yes. But those divisions regarding home and work duties exist because of actually biological differences that are NOT constructs. I am a woman and a lawyer and let me tell you I wear pants and mow the lawn and fold laundry and my husband does a ton of stuff that was precious for women. But when it came time to nurse our children, only I could do it. Only my. When we moved to bottles, he helped yes, but for nursing it was me. That is NOT a a social construct. And monthly periods are not a social construct. And osteoperosis is not a social construct. Prostate cancer is not a social construct. These are real biological differences that most of us respect.

[phone]

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the “historical examples” a PP gave… women presenting themselves as men 100+ years ago as the only way they would be allowed to hold certain jobs/professions is not really the same thing. And yes— I’m sure there were a tiny number of people who were actually trans, just like there have always been people who are depressed, anxious, have OCD, etc. But nothing like today’s numbers.

And saying that being trans isn’t based on feelings… then what is it based on? It’s not based on biology or fact. It’s based on how a person feels. This doesn’t make it invalid, but it does make it hard to quantify.

Literally 10 seconds of Google would’ve shown you that all those specific examples were all people who continued to live as trans people outside their professional life. They were not doing it to pursue professional gain.

I thought doing your own research was kinda your guys whole thing.

I did “research” these people. And in at least 2 of the 3 cases, it’s not at all clear they were actually trans. It’s hard to know, because people with an agenda (pro or anti trans) trying to determine their motivation decades after their deaths is what we have to go on. Of course a woman impersonating a man to be allowed to have a certain profession will continue to do so in personal life. Otherwise the person would be outed/discovered and kicked out of the profession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The insistence on purposefully misgendering them always peeks its ugly head and lets us know, again it has nothing to do with locker rooms or bathrooms, it’s that they simply want to live.

Pretending to be a girl doesn't make you a girl, and vice versa. Everyone knew this until like five minutes ago, even you.

Trans people have always existed, it’s a concept that exists across cultures and time. It’s present in indigenous history, Polynesian history, European, etc. It’s present in historical moments like Albert Cashier, trans Civil War soldier, Dr. James Berry, trans Irish physician of the early 1800s, Dr. Alan Hart, renown physician and tuberculosis researcher, etc.

Gender is a social construct.

Some of us read books and don’t just put our mouths up to the propaganda faucet. There is an entire world beyond “five minutes ago” but I wouldn’t expect those unable to see beyond 5 inches in front of their face to recognize that.

Your examples all have something in common that is not the issue that concerns most of us. Do you not see it?

No I see your bigotry and assumptions that male to female transgender people are threats despite absolutely zero evidence.


I’ll just let them know they can’t have any basic human dignity because you have “concerns” and that apparently is just as good as facts….

Funny that you specifically carve out male to female. Because you know the problem here is the invasion of female spaces by biological men.

I specifically “carved it out” because the poster I was quoting alluded to it by stating that the historical female to male transitions I referenced weren’t the same.


That’s got to be the laziest gotcha attempt, just simply read the preceding posts.

Historically, most transgender people were male to female. These days it is largely female to male. The point is that nobody is concerned about women invading male spaces because men aren't choosing the bear, women are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gender is not a social construct construct. Women wearing certain things and men wearing others is a social construct. Clothes, for that matter, are a social construct. Different roles in a family like women cooking and cleaning and men going to an office or factory is a social construct for the most part but is derivatkve of an actually biological difference which is that a heavily pregnant women or nursing mother of a newborn that needs to here every two hours actually cannot go hunt or work in a factory or plow a field all day. Can a woman do it otherwise? Yes. But those divisions regarding home and work duties exist because of actually biological differences that are NOT constructs. I am a woman and a lawyer and let me tell you I wear pants and mow the lawn and fold laundry and my husband does a ton of stuff that was precious for women. But when it came time to nurse our children, only I could do it. Only my. When we moved to bottles, he helped yes, but for nursing it was me. That is NOT a a social construct. And monthly periods are not a social construct. And osteoperosis is not a social construct. Prostate cancer is not a social construct. These are real biological differences that most of us respect.

[phone]

YEEESSSSSSSS!!!!! This is so spot on! How other people can't understand this makes me really think there is a lot of mental issues going on.

[Anonymous]

This is a serious and complicated issue, and I think it deserves a respectful conversation that considers all perspectives. Why can’t schools simply provide some single-use restrooms and private changing areas for transgender and non-binary students? That would respect their rights to gender identity while also protecting the privacy, comfort, and safety of students who are not comfortable sharing restrooms or locker rooms with the opposite biological sex.

There are also valid concerns in athletics. Biological males do have physical advantages over biological females, and it is not fair to female athletes to have to compete under those conditions. At the same time, no one wants to see students discriminated against or treated without dignity.

I wish our country could find more moderate solutions instead of swinging between extreme positions. Respecting rights on both sides should not mean risking $167 million in funding. Many parents and community members do not agree with how FCPS and the School Board are handling these issues, and more people need to speak up and vote for leaders who will listen to all perspectives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a serious and complicated issue, and I think it deserves a respectful conversation that considers all perspectives. Why can’t schools simply provide some single-use restrooms and private changing areas for transgender and non-binary students? That would respect their rights to gender identity while also protecting the privacy, comfort, and safety of students who are not comfortable sharing restrooms or locker rooms with the opposite biological sex.

There are also valid concerns in athletics. Biological males do have physical advantages over biological females, and it is not fair to female athletes to have to compete under those conditions. At the same time, no one wants to see students discriminated against or treated without dignity.

I wish our country could find more moderate solutions instead of swinging between extreme positions. Respecting rights on both sides should not mean risking $167 million in funding. Many parents and community members do not agree with how FCPS and the School Board are handling these issues, and more people need to speak up and vote for leaders who will listen to all perspectives.

I think that was offered in the Grimm case, but turned down by Grimm.

Problem: the trans community does not want what you suggested. Your suggestion makes good sense, but there appears to be no compromise on their part. Honestly, anyone who claims men can get pregnant has a very different point of view from most people.
I think the claim is that trans women ARE women and want to be treated as such.

There are so many issues now with this belief. How do we know who is trans and who is not. Do we allow the "gender fluid" to vary from day to day in their bathroom choices? How is the school to determine who is trans and who is not?
How do we know if a male in a women's restroom is trans or perverted? This was the issue with Richard Cox. He was a registered sexual pervert, but claimed to be trans, so he was not arrested.

In the Loudoun case, I read in one report that the trans boy in the boys' bathroom presented as a female. Is this true? Who knows?

But, the issue that really displays the problem is girls' sports. That is easy to understand.

[Anonymous]

Any discussion of trans rights has to be separated from boys and girls. I will not give up my rights as a female to trans girls. They can be protected without taking my rights. They can have their own bathrooms, locker rooms, sports teams. That’s fine with me. But they are NOT biological females and when they say they are and demand some of my stuff, the discussion is over because that is when my rights as a female suddenly become second class. You will never convince women to give up their rights. We fought hard for them and will not give them up easily. Until trans activities understand that basic fact, there is no discussion to be had. It is a zero sum game when you insist that you actually are a female or male. If you want safety, that’s fine. If you want my rights, the conversation is over.

[Anonymous]

They need to make the rule that sex gender etc is for adult age, anything younger is ignored

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any discussion of trans rights has to be separated from boys and girls. I will not give up my rights as a female to trans girls. They can be protected without taking my rights. They can have their own bathrooms, locker rooms, sports teams. That’s fine with me. But they are NOT biological females and when they say they are and demand some of my stuff, the discussion is over because that is when my rights as a female suddenly become second class. You will never convince women to give up their rights. We fought hard for them and will not give them up easily. Until trans activities understand that basic fact, there is no discussion to be had. It is a zero sum game when you insist that you actually are a female or male. If you want safety, that’s fine. If you want my rights, the conversation is over.

+1