GOP endorsed school board candidates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

I also want an return to an emphasis on academics over solely focusing on gender issues.

Agree.

I also agree, but I would restate it as wanting a return to an emphasis on academics with NO focus on gender issues, whatsoever.
DP

Must be nice to move through the world without having to deal with discrimination or have a kid who worries about getting bullied because they’re gay or trans. You’re awesome.

Oh, here we go. Does the narcissism ever stop?

Please stop using words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not a good look.

Also, it’s not a zero-sum game. You can work on academics AND ensure that kids are not mistreated because they’re queer or trans. This may be difficult for some here to understand, but work in both areas can happen at the same time.

Of course it’s a zero-sum game when people only have limited bandwidth and their personal agendas.

How many times over the past four years did SB meetings drone on well after 10 or 11 PM because members were pushing their silly “equity resolutions” or projects, only for academic matters to either get ignored completely or dealt with in a hasty manner as it got close to midnight?

[Anonymous]

Thanks to this thread, I read Lawn Boy over the weekend. I actually mean the "thank you" because I really liked it. A lot. This book is absolutely not, at all, in any definition of the word, pornographic. It is a pretty gentle and ultimately uplifting coming-of-age story that is more about class issues than sexuality - though obviously (SPOILER) the "coming out" part at the end is a big deal.

I had to come back to this thread to try to decipher what ban-worthy aspect people might be referring to. The flashback with his childhood friend? Really?! What's especially hard to believe about identifying that scene as the big problem is that there is a similar level of explicit, also very short but *straight* flashback a couple of chapters later.

There must be thousands of more sexually explicit books in the libraries! Should I start naming classics?!

If those asking for Lawn Boy to be banned from HS libraries want all sexually explicit books to be banned, then I respect your position. I also respectfully disagree.

I hate graphic novels, but I'll read Gender Queer next.

This is an anonymous forum and you all don't know me, but for the record. I am not an activist. I have kids at FCPS including high schoolers who have gone all the way through. I don't like the way my daughter wants to dress and all the other fuddy-duddy things of my generation and, still, Lawn Boy is not pornographic. It does portray a world in which, for the characters the reader likes and identifies with, it is ok to be gay.

In any case, now that I have read it, I can't help but assume that anyone who wants to ban it either a) has not read it or b) doesn't want books where it is ok to be gay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

I also want an return to an emphasis on academics over solely focusing on gender issues.

Agree.

I also agree, but I would restate it as wanting a return to an emphasis on academics with NO focus on gender issues, whatsoever.
DP

Must be nice to move through the world without having to deal with discrimination or have a kid who worries about getting bullied because they’re gay or trans. You’re awesome.

Oh, here we go. Does the narcissism ever stop?

Please stop using words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not a good look.

Also, it’s not a zero-sum game. You can work on academics AND ensure that kids are not mistreated because they’re queer or trans. This may be difficult for some here to understand, but work in both areas can happen at the same time.

Of course it’s a zero-sum game when people only have limited bandwidth and their personal agendas.

How many times over the past four years did SB meetings drone on well after 10 or 11 PM because members were pushing their silly “equity resolutions” or projects, only for academic matters to either get ignored completely or dealt with in a hasty manner as it got close to midnight?

Please give examples of these academic matters that were ignored completely at these meetings. Just because you assert this has happened doesn’t mean it actually happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks to this thread, I read Lawn Boy over the weekend. I actually mean the "thank you" because I really liked it. A lot. This book is absolutely not, at all, in any definition of the word, pornographic. It is a pretty gentle and ultimately uplifting coming-of-age story that is more about class issues than sexuality - though obviously (SPOILER) the "coming out" part at the end is a big deal.

I had to come back to this thread to try to decipher what ban-worthy aspect people might be referring to. The flashback with his childhood friend? Really?! What's especially hard to believe about identifying that scene as the big problem is that there is a similar level of explicit, also very short but *straight* flashback a couple of chapters later.

There must be thousands of more sexually explicit books in the libraries! Should I start naming classics?!

If those asking for Lawn Boy to be banned from HS libraries want all sexually explicit books to be banned, then I respect your position. I also respectfully disagree.

I hate graphic novels, but I'll read Gender Queer next.

This is an anonymous forum and you all don't know me, but for the record. I am not an activist. I have kids at FCPS including high schoolers who have gone all the way through. I don't like the way my daughter wants to dress and all the other fuddy-duddy things of my generation and, still, Lawn Boy is not pornographic. It does portray a world in which, for the characters the reader likes and identifies with, it is ok to be gay.

In any case, now that I have read it, I can't help but assume that anyone who wants to ban it either a) has not read it or b) doesn't want books where it is ok to be gay.

+10000. Thanks PP. It’s nice to see actual readers here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks to this thread, I read Lawn Boy over the weekend. I actually mean the "thank you" because I really liked it. A lot. This book is absolutely not, at all, in any definition of the word, pornographic. It is a pretty gentle and ultimately uplifting coming-of-age story that is more about class issues than sexuality - though obviously (SPOILER) the "coming out" part at the end is a big deal.

I had to come back to this thread to try to decipher what ban-worthy aspect people might be referring to. The flashback with his childhood friend? Really?! What's especially hard to believe about identifying that scene as the big problem is that there is a similar level of explicit, also very short but *straight* flashback a couple of chapters later.

There must be thousands of more sexually explicit books in the libraries! Should I start naming classics?!

If those asking for Lawn Boy to be banned from HS libraries want all sexually explicit books to be banned, then I respect your position. I also respectfully disagree.

I hate graphic novels, but I'll read Gender Queer next.

This is an anonymous forum and you all don't know me, but for the record. I am not an activist. I have kids at FCPS including high schoolers who have gone all the way through. I don't like the way my daughter wants to dress and all the other fuddy-duddy things of my generation and, still, Lawn Boy is not pornographic. It does portray a world in which, for the characters the reader likes and identifies with, it is ok to be gay.

In any case, now that I have read it, I can't help but assume that anyone who wants to ban it either a) has not read it or b) doesn't want books where it is ok to be gay.

+10000. Thanks PP. It’s nice to see actual readers here.

+1

Amazing what happens when people actually read the books!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

Other books banned by activists that are worth reading to understand the genuine concern of parents at FCPS about gender ideology activism at our schools, particularly because of its effect on kids who identify as experiencing body dysmorphia:

1. Lost in Trans Nation: A Child Psychiatrist's Guide Out of the Madness by Miriam Grossman, MD.
2. Parents with Inconvenient Truths about Trans: Tales from the Home Front in the Fight to Save Our Kids by Josie A. and Dina S.
3. Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters by Abigail Shrier.

This book isn't based on data -- it's an opinion piece by someone who is anti-trans.

So it should be banned?

Banned where? By whom?

ttps://www.thefp.com/p/the-books-are-already-burning

A library in Canada that doesn’t want to support anti-LGBTQ bigots? Ok…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

I also want an return to an emphasis on academics over solely focusing on gender issues.

Agree.

I also agree, but I would restate it as wanting a return to an emphasis on academics with NO focus on gender issues, whatsoever.
DP

Must be nice to move through the world without having to deal with discrimination or have a kid who worries about getting bullied because they’re gay or trans. You’re awesome.

Oh, here we go. Does the narcissism ever stop?

Please stop using words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not a good look.

Also, it’s not a zero-sum game. You can work on academics AND ensure that kids are not mistreated because they’re queer or trans. This may be difficult for some here to understand, but work in both areas can happen at the same time.

Of course it’s a zero-sum game when people only have limited bandwidth and their personal agendas.

How many times over the past four years did SB meetings drone on well after 10 or 11 PM because members were pushing their silly “equity resolutions” or projects, only for academic matters to either get ignored completely or dealt with in a hasty manner as it got close to midnight?

Please give examples of these academic matters that were ignored completely at these meetings. Just because you assert this has happened doesn’t mean it actually happened.

Declining SAT scores - never addressed.

The pros and cons of AAP centers vs. LLIV - never addressed.

The suitability of IB for schools with large concentrations of ESOL/FARMS kids - never addressed.

Severe overcrowding at schools like Chantilly - very rarely addressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

I also want an return to an emphasis on academics over solely focusing on gender issues.

Agree.

I also agree, but I would restate it as wanting a return to an emphasis on academics with NO focus on gender issues, whatsoever.
DP

Must be nice to move through the world without having to deal with discrimination or have a kid who worries about getting bullied because they’re gay or trans. You’re awesome.

Oh, here we go. Does the narcissism ever stop?

Please stop using words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not a good look.

Also, it’s not a zero-sum game. You can work on academics AND ensure that kids are not mistreated because they’re queer or trans. This may be difficult for some here to understand, but work in both areas can happen at the same time.

Of course it’s a zero-sum game when people only have limited bandwidth and their personal agendas.

How many times over the past four years did SB meetings drone on well after 10 or 11 PM because members were pushing their silly “equity resolutions” or projects, only for academic matters to either get ignored completely or dealt with in a hasty manner as it got close to midnight?

Please give examples of these academic matters that were ignored completely at these meetings. Just because you assert this has happened doesn’t mean it actually happened.

Declining SAT scores - never addressed.

The pros and cons of AAP centers vs. LLIV - never addressed.

The suitability of IB for schools with large concentrations of ESOL/FARMS kids - never addressed.

Severe overcrowding at schools like Chantilly - very rarely addressed.

So these items were on the agenda and the board didn’t get to them because too much time was spend on transgender issues? Because that’s what you’ve asserted above. Or are you now moving the goal posts?

[Anonymous]

Stop trying to focus on facts. PP needs a good narrative regardless of whatever actually happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

Other books banned by activists that are worth reading to understand the genuine concern of parents at FCPS about gender ideology activism at our schools, particularly because of its effect on kids who identify as experiencing body dysmorphia:

1. Lost in Trans Nation: A Child Psychiatrist's Guide Out of the Madness by Miriam Grossman, MD.
2. Parents with Inconvenient Truths about Trans: Tales from the Home Front in the Fight to Save Our Kids by Josie A. and Dina S.
3. Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters by Abigail Shrier.

This book isn't based on data -- it's an opinion piece by someone who is anti-trans.

So it should be banned?

Banned where? By whom?

ttps://www.thefp.com/p/the-books-are-already-burning

A library in Canada that doesn’t want to support anti-LGBTQ bigots? Ok…

You must have lack reading comprehension skills. The library does support the book. Activists with your attitude want to ban it from that library, removed it from Amazon and Target in the past, and will continue to do anything not to see it in our libraries in FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to focus on facts. PP needs a good narrative regardless of whatever actually happened.

Yes, parents should watch a few school board meetings so they can see exactly what that poster is talking about.

The school board could significantly shorten ther meeting times if they stopped focusing on social issues and got back to focusing on academics and facilities.

It would probably make the principals' jobs a lot easier too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

Other books banned by activists that are worth reading to understand the genuine concern of parents at FCPS about gender ideology activism at our schools, particularly because of its effect on kids who identify as experiencing body dysmorphia:

1. Lost in Trans Nation: A Child Psychiatrist's Guide Out of the Madness by Miriam Grossman, MD.
2. Parents with Inconvenient Truths about Trans: Tales from the Home Front in the Fight to Save Our Kids by Josie A. and Dina S.
3. Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters by Abigail Shrier.

This book isn't based on data -- it's an opinion piece by someone who is anti-trans.

So it should be banned?

Banned where? By whom?

ttps://www.thefp.com/p/the-books-are-already-burning

A library in Canada that doesn’t want to support anti-LGBTQ bigots? Ok…

You must have lack reading comprehension skills. The library does support the book. Activists with your attitude want to ban it from that library, removed it from Amazon and Target in the past, and will continue to do anything not to see it in our libraries in FCPS.

Oh. So the books aren’t actually banned then?

The book is not data-based. It’s an opinion piece by an anti-trans activist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to focus on facts. PP needs a good narrative regardless of whatever actually happened.

Yes, parents should watch a few school board meetings so they can see exactly what that poster is talking about.

The school board could significantly shorten ther meeting times if they stopped focusing on social issues and got back to focusing on academics and facilities.

It would probably make the principals' jobs a lot easier too.

So did the board get to the topics listed or not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

I also want an return to an emphasis on academics over solely focusing on gender issues.

Agree.

I also agree, but I would restate it as wanting a return to an emphasis on academics with NO focus on gender issues, whatsoever.
DP

Must be nice to move through the world without having to deal with discrimination or have a kid who worries about getting bullied because they’re gay or trans. You’re awesome.

Oh, here we go. Does the narcissism ever stop?

Please stop using words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not a good look.

Also, it’s not a zero-sum game. You can work on academics AND ensure that kids are not mistreated because they’re queer or trans. This may be difficult for some here to understand, but work in both areas can happen at the same time.

Of course it’s a zero-sum game when people only have limited bandwidth and their personal agendas.

How many times over the past four years did SB meetings drone on well after 10 or 11 PM because members were pushing their silly “equity resolutions” or projects, only for academic matters to either get ignored completely or dealt with in a hasty manner as it got close to midnight?

Please give examples of these academic matters that were ignored completely at these meetings. Just because you assert this has happened doesn’t mean it actually happened.

Declining SAT scores - never addressed.

The pros and cons of AAP centers vs. LLIV - never addressed.

The suitability of IB for schools with large concentrations of ESOL/FARMS kids - never addressed.

Severe overcrowding at schools like Chantilly - very rarely addressed.

So these items were on the agenda and the board didn’t get to them because too much time was spend on transgender issues? Because that’s what you’ve asserted above. Or are you now moving the goal posts?

It’s just as offensive that some of these items never make it to an agenda as the fact that, when they do, they end up getting discussed in a perfunctory manner in the wee hours.

If you want to accuse me of “moving the goal posts,” I’d suggest that, when you find yourself digging yourself into a hole, the best thing to do is stop digging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Echoing some PPs, I am open to voting for any candidate, no matter the party endorsement.

Issue that I care the most about: the quality of academics at FCPS. (Doing something about the lack of quality.)

Caveats:
*I do not care about punishing people who closed the schools during the pandemic. Move on.
*I will NOT vote for someone who makes a priority of creating a hostile environment for LGBTQ kids.
(And for those who make assumptions about me based on this statement: I have ordered the two books mentioned and will read them with an open mind. But even if I find them wholly inappropriate, I cannot imagine making two books in high school library shelves into a catalyst issue. I haven't read every post but, from what I have, this thread has covered: a couple controversial books, a proposed but not implemented plan to refer to kids by their "gender assigned at birth," and the notion that referring to gay people at all might be considered in elementary school as reference to sex and therefore inappropriate. I am by no means a political activist nor a nutty liberal, but any candidate who underlines these three points as their big identifying issues has lost me.)

Please tell me which candidates are genuinely invested in working to raise academic standards without emphasizing those particular gender/sexuality points.

I also want an return to an emphasis on academics over solely focusing on gender issues.

Agree.

I also agree, but I would restate it as wanting a return to an emphasis on academics with NO focus on gender issues, whatsoever.
DP

Must be nice to move through the world without having to deal with discrimination or have a kid who worries about getting bullied because they’re gay or trans. You’re awesome.

Oh, here we go. Does the narcissism ever stop?

Please stop using words you don’t know the meaning of. It’s not a good look.

Also, it’s not a zero-sum game. You can work on academics AND ensure that kids are not mistreated because they’re queer or trans. This may be difficult for some here to understand, but work in both areas can happen at the same time.

The word was apt and if recent experience has taught us anything it’s that the clowns on the 12-0 D School Board have neglected academics and attention to the basic functioning of a public school system because they were so caught up in their various “social justice” initiatives and their pro-trans advocacy.

We need more balance on this board, including more parents and fewer LBGTQ lobbyists without either degrees or kids like Frisch.

Yes, I agree with this wholeheartedly.