GOP endorsed school board candidates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson won't win as his district is the most liberal in the county and is a nut job who is just a distraction but isn't representative of the other people running this year who are much more reasonable and needed on a board that is simply not in tune with the educational needs of students.

Who are those reasonable people?

Most of the at large independent and GOP people running are reasonable. Honestly it doesn't matter. I don't have to go home to these people or go out to dinner with them. I need them to vote down idiotic ideas like SBG and spending on things that don't improve academics. Their special needs changes have forced out much of the workforce because they didn't listen to the teachers. School performance is declining. Violence increasing. More teachers resigning. Kids playing on computers during classes.

I mean Meren is almost just as much of a nut job as Jackson bullying her assistant and moving three different times in 10 years for not getting along with the local neighbors and even the preschool her child attended where they were asked to leave. She will win the election. What difference does it make if Jackson or she wins in terms of having a reasonable person on the board? The people on the board are not people I want to work with or socialize with or have a lot of respect for. I'm merely voting to get some sanity back closer to the educational system we used to have.

[Anonymous]

I read through the thread and got feeling that Ds are indeed taking gender ideology as priority.
This is not right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202012/new-book-irreversible-damage-is-full-misinformation?amp

New Book “Irreversible Damage” Is Full of Misinformation

Shrier did not interview most of the transgender adolescents she wrote about.
The author’s note points out that she only interviewed their parents, who uniformly did not accept their children’s transgender identities. Many of them were estranged from their kids because the children were so hurt by their parents' rejection. To actually understand the psychology of these young people, one would need to talk to them, not simply rely on stories from parents with whom they do not speak.

Further arguing against Shrier’s objectivity is her crass and offensive language throughout the book.

Shrier claims that “in most cases—nearly 70 percent—gender dysphoria resolves," and thus youth should not be provided gender-affirming medical care. That statistic is false.

Shrier claims that a large number of kids who say they are transgender are actually LGB and afraid to say so because transgender identity carries less stigma than being LGB. Actual data suggest otherwise.

Shrier states there is evidence that providing adolescents with puberty blockers makes them more likely to continue to identify as transgender. That’s false.

Shrier ignores all of the data showing that gender-affirming medical care results in improved mental health outcomes for transgender youth.


It’s anti-trans political propaganda.

Since your posting is based on a piece by Jack Turban MD MHS, allow me to share a different perspective about his input:

…In a field known for its weak methodologies and even weaker scientific conclusions, Turban’s study sets a new low. Even trans activists in the academy who detest the ROGD hypothesis wrote a letter in which they take Turban to task. While the Turban study’s intentions are “admirable,” these authors write, its “results were overinterpreted and . . . the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of the article run the risk of being more harmful than supportive.

That a study like this can pass the peer-review process unscathed, especially at a time when European countries are shutting down or putting severe restrictions on pediatric transition, is a sorry statement about the quality of knowledge gatekeeping in the medical research community. American journalists tout its findings without giving readers relevant information about its flaws, while left-of-center journalists in Britain have been busy blowing the whistle on the pediatric gender-medicine scandal. The U.S. has a long way to go to bring medical practice in line with scientific knowledge and common sense.

Full text:
https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-new-low

Furthermore, allow me to share a more reliable source that references the work of Abigail Shrier by experts on the field. You may really want to take your time to read it :
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/09/71296/

Deflection. Her book is full of misinformation. It's not based on data or even accurate case studies. If you actually checked her sources you'd realize that it's not based on peer-review scientific journals, it's based on partisan op-eds. If you actually look to the science and medical community, she's wrong on almost everything.

She's an anti-trans political hack pushing conservative propaganda.

Doctor Jack Turban, the person you are basing your accusation on, is personally invested in debunking Abigail Shrier’s work, which represents a deep conflict of interest. If I were you, I would take anything he says with a grain of salt:

….In many of Turban’s published papers, the sources of the funding for his research reveal conflicts of interest. Particularly, his past work was made possible by a grant from the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), where Turban is a member of its media committee and where “it’s hard to get any contrary opinions on the symposia,” according to Levine.
Most notably, AACAP is financially supported by pharmaceutical companies Arbor and Pfizer. Both produce off-label puberty blockers that inhibit the onset of physical changes aligning with a person’s sex.
Given that even progressive European nations, such as England, France, Finland, and Sweden, have started to adopt an increasingly cautious approach towards minor gender transitioning, the relationship between Turban’s funding and his conclusions has come under scrutiny.

Full text:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/advocate-rather-than-a-scientist-the-compromised-research-of-child-gender-transition-doctor-jack-turban/

Unfortunately the activists at the FCPS School Board seem to believe that our students are more interested in drawings of strap-on dildos than information that will help them develop critical thinking skills, such is the case of the work of Abigail Shrier.

Specifically which point did he get wrong. Oh right, he didn’t. Have you checked her sources yet?

He’s just one of many people who called out her book for what it is: anti-trans propaganda devoid of real data or analysis.

The Rs are the people fixated on LGBTQ books. Who keeps bringing them up? Not the Ds. Not the school board.

You want to stop talking about sexuality/gender so much? Then stop the R’s relentless attack on LGBTQ youth.

Ds and school board created the school LGBTQ book issue. This forces parents point out the issue.

No. The Ds aren’t in charge or publishing books and the school board doesn’t pick out each individual book in the HS libraries.

You want to stop talking about sexuality/gender so much? Then stop the R’s relentless attack on LGBTQ youth.

DP. Yes, these are issues that the school board controls. Usually not directly, but they set policies that the superintendent and administration implement.

Asking for some balance is not attacking LGBTQIA+ youth. It's asking for balance.

School boards should not be picking out specific books for the HS libraries.

Conservatives are absolutely attacking LGBTQ youth across the country. If you can’t see that then maybe you’re part of the problem.

PP is trying to blame the SB for things that the SB didn’t do.

Many feel the real attack on trans and gender dysphoric youth are the activist adults who want to isolate these vulnerable kids away from their parents and push them towards internet and activist strangers who do not know them, love them, or have their best interests in mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read through the thread and got feeling that Ds are indeed taking gender ideology as priority.
This is not right.

Reread the thread. “Gender ideology” has been aggressively pushed as an issue by conservatives.

It’s how Rs campaign. They don’t have any actual plans so they push manufactured wedge issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202012/new-book-irreversible-damage-is-full-misinformation?amp

New Book “Irreversible Damage” Is Full of Misinformation

Shrier did not interview most of the transgender adolescents she wrote about.
The author’s note points out that she only interviewed their parents, who uniformly did not accept their children’s transgender identities. Many of them were estranged from their kids because the children were so hurt by their parents' rejection. To actually understand the psychology of these young people, one would need to talk to them, not simply rely on stories from parents with whom they do not speak.

Further arguing against Shrier’s objectivity is her crass and offensive language throughout the book.

Shrier claims that “in most cases—nearly 70 percent—gender dysphoria resolves," and thus youth should not be provided gender-affirming medical care. That statistic is false.

Shrier claims that a large number of kids who say they are transgender are actually LGB and afraid to say so because transgender identity carries less stigma than being LGB. Actual data suggest otherwise.

Shrier states there is evidence that providing adolescents with puberty blockers makes them more likely to continue to identify as transgender. That’s false.

Shrier ignores all of the data showing that gender-affirming medical care results in improved mental health outcomes for transgender youth.


It’s anti-trans political propaganda.

Since your posting is based on a piece by Jack Turban MD MHS, allow me to share a different perspective about his input:

…In a field known for its weak methodologies and even weaker scientific conclusions, Turban’s study sets a new low. Even trans activists in the academy who detest the ROGD hypothesis wrote a letter in which they take Turban to task. While the Turban study’s intentions are “admirable,” these authors write, its “results were overinterpreted and . . . the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of the article run the risk of being more harmful than supportive.

That a study like this can pass the peer-review process unscathed, especially at a time when European countries are shutting down or putting severe restrictions on pediatric transition, is a sorry statement about the quality of knowledge gatekeeping in the medical research community. American journalists tout its findings without giving readers relevant information about its flaws, while left-of-center journalists in Britain have been busy blowing the whistle on the pediatric gender-medicine scandal. The U.S. has a long way to go to bring medical practice in line with scientific knowledge and common sense.

Full text:
https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-new-low

Furthermore, allow me to share a more reliable source that references the work of Abigail Shrier by experts on the field. You may really want to take your time to read it :
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/09/71296/

Deflection. Her book is full of misinformation. It's not based on data or even accurate case studies. If you actually checked her sources you'd realize that it's not based on peer-review scientific journals, it's based on partisan op-eds. If you actually look to the science and medical community, she's wrong on almost everything.

She's an anti-trans political hack pushing conservative propaganda.

Doctor Jack Turban, the person you are basing your accusation on, is personally invested in debunking Abigail Shrier’s work, which represents a deep conflict of interest. If I were you, I would take anything he says with a grain of salt:

….In many of Turban’s published papers, the sources of the funding for his research reveal conflicts of interest. Particularly, his past work was made possible by a grant from the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), where Turban is a member of its media committee and where “it’s hard to get any contrary opinions on the symposia,” according to Levine.
Most notably, AACAP is financially supported by pharmaceutical companies Arbor and Pfizer. Both produce off-label puberty blockers that inhibit the onset of physical changes aligning with a person’s sex.
Given that even progressive European nations, such as England, France, Finland, and Sweden, have started to adopt an increasingly cautious approach towards minor gender transitioning, the relationship between Turban’s funding and his conclusions has come under scrutiny.

Full text:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/advocate-rather-than-a-scientist-the-compromised-research-of-child-gender-transition-doctor-jack-turban/

Unfortunately the activists at the FCPS School Board seem to believe that our students are more interested in drawings of strap-on dildos than information that will help them develop critical thinking skills, such is the case of the work of Abigail Shrier.

Specifically which point did he get wrong. Oh right, he didn’t. Have you checked her sources yet?

He’s just one of many people who called out her book for what it is: anti-trans propaganda devoid of real data or analysis.

The Rs are the people fixated on LGBTQ books. Who keeps bringing them up? Not the Ds. Not the school board.

You want to stop talking about sexuality/gender so much? Then stop the R’s relentless attack on LGBTQ youth.

Ds and school board created the school LGBTQ book issue. This forces parents point out the issue.

No. The Ds aren’t in charge or publishing books and the school board doesn’t pick out each individual book in the HS libraries.

You want to stop talking about sexuality/gender so much? Then stop the R’s relentless attack on LGBTQ youth.

DP. Yes, these are issues that the school board controls. Usually not directly, but they set policies that the superintendent and administration implement.

Asking for some balance is not attacking LGBTQIA+ youth. It's asking for balance.

School boards should not be picking out specific books for the HS libraries.

Conservatives are absolutely attacking LGBTQ youth across the country. If you can’t see that then maybe you’re part of the problem.

PP is trying to blame the SB for things that the SB didn’t do.

Many feel the real attack on trans and gender dysphoric youth are the activist adults who want to isolate these vulnerable kids away from their parents and push them towards internet and activist strangers who do not know them, love them, or have their best interests in mind.

The “many” who are anti-trans and like to push lies and hysteria? Like “the activists are coming for our kids!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jackson won't win as his district is the most liberal in the county and is a nut job who is just a distraction but isn't representative of the other people running this year who are much more reasonable and needed on a board that is simply not in tune with the educational needs of students.

Who are those reasonable people?

Most of the at large independent and GOP people running are reasonable. Honestly it doesn't matter. I don't have to go home to these people or go out to dinner with them. I need them to vote down idiotic ideas like SBG and spending on things that don't improve academics. Their special needs changes have forced out much of the workforce because they didn't listen to the teachers. School performance is declining. Violence increasing. More teachers resigning. Kids playing on computers during classes.

I mean Meren is almost just as much of a nut job as Jackson bullying her assistant and moving three different times in 10 years for not getting along with the local neighbors and even the preschool her child attended where they were asked to leave. She will win the election. What difference does it make if Jackson or she wins in terms of having a reasonable person on the board? The people on the board are not people I want to work with or socialize with or have a lot of respect for. I'm merely voting to get some sanity back closer to the educational system we used to have.

Be specific. Which GOP candidates are “reasonable”?

[Anonymous]

Compared to someone like Meren? all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Compared to someone like Meren? all of them.

Is anyone happy with her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this is fun and interesting and I probably wouldn't want to be friends with anyone on the board, but at the end of the day, I just care about the education of my child. The current board is passing legislation that is harming my kid's academic growth and that is their job.

“Legislation” - haha

[Anonymous]

Maureen Brody, Cassandra Aucoin, and Saundra Davis are all stronger than Meren or any of the at large women on the school board. I don't know why you think the current school board is anything to admire that any new person has to overcome. The current board has very little substance beyond having a political background. These new people are running to replace absolute horrific destructive at large school board members like Omeish, Gamarra, and Heizer all who are not running because they did such a poor job. The new women are easily better than the current board and offer a new direction. That's all they need to be.

[Anonymous]

Finally the chicks are coming home to roost!

Do we want to elect candidates that will occupy our resources on defending the School Board from liability caused by them, or to do the job they were elected for, which is to educate our children?


https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/25/lawsuit-over-sex-trafficked-teen-could-stop-schools-from-hiding-kids-dysphoria/

[Anonymous]

Not sure how many people read the metropolitan board but there is a thread discussing how for the first time since near the start of our country, Virginia is losing population specifically in Northern Virginia. This is way more than just LGBTQ books. There are major economic issues at stake for the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Not sure how many people read the metropolitan board but there is a thread discussing how for the first time since near the start of our country, Virginia is losing population specifically in Northern Virginia. This is way more than just LGBTQ books. There are major economic issues at stake for the county.

The Democrats have run down all the local jurisdictions. Fairfax is just playing catch up now with Montgomery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202012/new-book-irreversible-damage-is-full-misinformation?amp

New Book “Irreversible Damage” Is Full of Misinformation

Shrier did not interview most of the transgender adolescents she wrote about.
The author’s note points out that she only interviewed their parents, who uniformly did not accept their children’s transgender identities. Many of them were estranged from their kids because the children were so hurt by their parents' rejection. To actually understand the psychology of these young people, one would need to talk to them, not simply rely on stories from parents with whom they do not speak.

Further arguing against Shrier’s objectivity is her crass and offensive language throughout the book.

Shrier claims that “in most cases—nearly 70 percent—gender dysphoria resolves," and thus youth should not be provided gender-affirming medical care. That statistic is false.

Shrier claims that a large number of kids who say they are transgender are actually LGB and afraid to say so because transgender identity carries less stigma than being LGB. Actual data suggest otherwise.

Shrier states there is evidence that providing adolescents with puberty blockers makes them more likely to continue to identify as transgender. That’s false.

Shrier ignores all of the data showing that gender-affirming medical care results in improved mental health outcomes for transgender youth.


It’s anti-trans political propaganda.

Since your posting is based on a piece by Jack Turban MD MHS, allow me to share a different perspective about his input:

…In a field known for its weak methodologies and even weaker scientific conclusions, Turban’s study sets a new low. Even trans activists in the academy who detest the ROGD hypothesis wrote a letter in which they take Turban to task. While the Turban study’s intentions are “admirable,” these authors write, its “results were overinterpreted and . . . the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of the article run the risk of being more harmful than supportive.

That a study like this can pass the peer-review process unscathed, especially at a time when European countries are shutting down or putting severe restrictions on pediatric transition, is a sorry statement about the quality of knowledge gatekeeping in the medical research community. American journalists tout its findings without giving readers relevant information about its flaws, while left-of-center journalists in Britain have been busy blowing the whistle on the pediatric gender-medicine scandal. The U.S. has a long way to go to bring medical practice in line with scientific knowledge and common sense.

Full text:
https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-new-low

Furthermore, allow me to share a more reliable source that references the work of Abigail Shrier by experts on the field. You may really want to take your time to read it :
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/09/71296/

Deflection. Her book is full of misinformation. It's not based on data or even accurate case studies. If you actually checked her sources you'd realize that it's not based on peer-review scientific journals, it's based on partisan op-eds. If you actually look to the science and medical community, she's wrong on almost everything.

She's an anti-trans political hack pushing conservative propaganda.

Doctor Jack Turban, the person you are basing your accusation on, is personally invested in debunking Abigail Shrier’s work, which represents a deep conflict of interest. If I were you, I would take anything he says with a grain of salt:

….In many of Turban’s published papers, the sources of the funding for his research reveal conflicts of interest. Particularly, his past work was made possible by a grant from the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), where Turban is a member of its media committee and where “it’s hard to get any contrary opinions on the symposia,” according to Levine.
Most notably, AACAP is financially supported by pharmaceutical companies Arbor and Pfizer. Both produce off-label puberty blockers that inhibit the onset of physical changes aligning with a person’s sex.
Given that even progressive European nations, such as England, France, Finland, and Sweden, have started to adopt an increasingly cautious approach towards minor gender transitioning, the relationship between Turban’s funding and his conclusions has come under scrutiny.

Full text:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/advocate-rather-than-a-scientist-the-compromised-research-of-child-gender-transition-doctor-jack-turban/

Unfortunately the activists at the FCPS School Board seem to believe that our students are more interested in drawings of strap-on dildos than information that will help them develop critical thinking skills, such is the case of the work of Abigail Shrier.

Specifically which point did he get wrong. Oh right, he didn’t. Have you checked her sources yet?

He’s just one of many people who called out her book for what it is: anti-trans propaganda devoid of real data or analysis.

The Rs are the people fixated on LGBTQ books. Who keeps bringing them up? Not the Ds. Not the school board.

You want to stop talking about sexuality/gender so much? Then stop the R’s relentless attack on LGBTQ youth.

Ds and school board created the school LGBTQ book issue. This forces parents point out the issue.

No. The Ds aren’t in charge or publishing books and the school board doesn’t pick out each individual book in the HS libraries.

You want to stop talking about sexuality/gender so much? Then stop the R’s relentless attack on LGBTQ youth.

FCPS has a book review committee. After reading FCPS book recommendation about Lawn Boy: A Novel, I finally understand the root cause of the disagreement between FCPS and conservative parents. On one side, the conservative parents, think school should focus on academic. On the other side, FCPS has a different focus.
"The book aligns with the FCPS priority to affirm individuals in their identity. " -- FCPS Book review committee.

https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/policies-regulations-and-notices/school-library-collections/library-books-challenge-0

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11604233/Author-banned-book-describes-sex-act-children-says-never-meant-children.html

https://thespringmagazine.com/2022/01/28/lawn-boy-is-pedophilic-heres-why-explicit/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Finally the chicks are coming home to roost!

Do we want to elect candidates that will occupy our resources on defending the School Board from liability caused by them, or to do the job they were elected for, which is to educate our children?


https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/25/lawsuit-over-sex-trafficked-teen-could-stop-schools-from-hiding-kids-dysphoria/

ThE fEdERaLiSt.