GOP endorsed school board candidates

[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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

What are u talking about.
PP was commenting about school priority. Didn't even mention LGBTQ kids.
It is you who are victimizing LGBTQ kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Maureen Brody was TEAR GASSED on January 6th during the riots. On what planet do you think that’s the type we need on the school board??

The people who are on the board now aren't even running again, they are that unpopular. The bar is low. I don't think these are the greatest people, but unless we get more balance on the board, no one remotely logical will want to run. Who wants to sit on a board with reasonable thought and have a board think they are too far right for something like textbooks in the classroom? There has to be some balance in order for there to be divergence of thought. The people on the board now are extreme. The people running on the democratic side are extreme. It's not about each of them. it's about restoring some balance.

You can’t get a reasonable balance with nutters.

Look at what the nutters in Congress are doing right now. They aren’t going to fix anything, only make things worse.

I disagree. They can stall radical change and eventually bring in people more reputable. FCPS is headed in the wrong direction academically for all students. It's affecting the local economy and affecting our students well being. Even the lgbtq ones aren't doing better because of their radicalization. A balanced board will eventually bring balanced people.

[Anonymous]

All of Fairfax knows that the board will remain democratic. The real worry is that the board will not have any dissenters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

What are u talking about.
PP was commenting about school priority. Didn't even mention LGBTQ kids.
It is you who are victimizing LGBTQ kids.

The AAP recommends affirming which is why FCPS will prioritize affirming over ignoring.

“We encourage families, schools and communities to value every child for who they are in the present, even at a young age,” said Cora Breuner, MD, FAAP, the chairperson for the AAP Committee on Adolescence. “As pediatricians and parents, we also appreciate how challenging, and at times confusing, it can be for family members to realize their child’s experience and feelings.”

The AAP recommends taking a “gender-affirming,” nonjudgmental approach that helps children feel safe in a society that too often marginalizes or stigmatizes those seen as different. The gender-affirming model strengthens family resiliency and takes the emphasis off heightened concerns over gender while allowing children the freedom to focus on academics, relationship-building and other typical developmental tasks.”


This is what all of the legit medical associations recommend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of Fairfax knows that the board will remain democratic. The real worry is that the board will not have any dissenters.

Still waiting to hear we’ve found anyone who isn’t a nutter.

Dissent is one thing. Disruption/destruction is another. Just look at what the nutters in Congress are doing right now. They just want to tear it all down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Maureen Brody was TEAR GASSED on January 6th during the riots. On what planet do you think that’s the type we need on the school board??

The people who are on the board now aren't even running again, they are that unpopular. The bar is low. I don't think these are the greatest people, but unless we get more balance on the board, no one remotely logical will want to run. Who wants to sit on a board with reasonable thought and have a board think they are too far right for something like textbooks in the classroom? There has to be some balance in order for there to be divergence of thought. The people on the board now are extreme. The people running on the democratic side are extreme. It's not about each of them. it's about restoring some balance.

You can’t get a reasonable balance with nutters.

Look at what the nutters in Congress are doing right now. They aren’t going to fix anything, only make things worse.

I disagree. They can stall radical change and eventually bring in people more reputable. FCPS is headed in the wrong direction academically for all students. It's affecting the local economy and affecting our students well being. Even the lgbtq ones aren't doing better because of their radicalization. A balanced board will eventually bring balanced people.

LOL, no it’s not.

Adding nutters to school board will not bring balance or improve academics. Quite the opposite.

The nutters want to tear things down and push for vouchers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Maureen Brody was TEAR GASSED on January 6th during the riots. On what planet do you think that’s the type we need on the school board??

The people who are on the board now aren't even running again, they are that unpopular. The bar is low. I don't think these are the greatest people, but unless we get more balance on the board, no one remotely logical will want to run. Who wants to sit on a board with reasonable thought and have a board think they are too far right for something like textbooks in the classroom? There has to be some balance in order for there to be divergence of thought. The people on the board now are extreme. The people running on the democratic side are extreme. It's not about each of them. it's about restoring some balance.

You can’t get a reasonable balance with nutters.

Look at what the nutters in Congress are doing right now. They aren’t going to fix anything, only make things worse.

I disagree. They can stall radical change and eventually bring in people more reputable. FCPS is headed in the wrong direction academically for all students. It's affecting the local economy and affecting our students well being. Even the lgbtq ones aren't doing better because of their radicalization. A balanced board will eventually bring balanced people.

A balanced school board needs a balanced population. Election is people's choice. Voters will
have to swallow all the consequences. I will be surprised if any conservative candidates win in Fairfax. Let's wait and see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Maureen Brody was TEAR GASSED on January 6th during the riots. On what planet do you think that’s the type we need on the school board??

The people who are on the board now aren't even running again, they are that unpopular. The bar is low. I don't think these are the greatest people, but unless we get more balance on the board, no one remotely logical will want to run. Who wants to sit on a board with reasonable thought and have a board think they are too far right for something like textbooks in the classroom? There has to be some balance in order for there to be divergence of thought. The people on the board now are extreme. The people running on the democratic side are extreme. It's not about each of them. it's about restoring some balance.

You can’t get a reasonable balance with nutters.

Look at what the nutters in Congress are doing right now. They aren’t going to fix anything, only make things worse.

I disagree. They can stall radical change and eventually bring in people more reputable. FCPS is headed in the wrong direction academically for all students. It's affecting the local economy and affecting our students well being. Even the lgbtq ones aren't doing better because of their radicalization. A balanced board will eventually bring balanced people.

A balanced school board needs a balanced population. Election is people's choice. Voters will
have to swallow all the consequences. I will be surprised if any conservative candidates win in Fairfax. Let's wait and see.

The BOS is not all D. You know that, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

What are u talking about.
PP was commenting about school priority. Didn't even mention LGBTQ kids.
It is you who are victimizing LGBTQ kids.

The AAP recommends affirming which is why FCPS will prioritize affirming over ignoring.

“We encourage families, schools and communities to value every child for who they are in the present, even at a young age,” said Cora Breuner, MD, FAAP, the chairperson for the AAP Committee on Adolescence. “As pediatricians and parents, we also appreciate how challenging, and at times confusing, it can be for family members to realize their child’s experience and feelings.”

The AAP recommends taking a “gender-affirming,” nonjudgmental approach that helps children feel safe in a society that too often marginalizes or stigmatizes those seen as different. The gender-affirming model strengthens family resiliency and takes the emphasis off heightened concerns over gender while allowing children the freedom to focus on academics, relationship-building and other typical developmental tasks.”


This is what all of the legit medical associations recommend.

Literally it’s too bad they lost the public’s trust by mishandling low risk kids in the pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

What are u talking about.
PP was commenting about school priority. Didn't even mention LGBTQ kids.
It is you who are victimizing LGBTQ kids.

The AAP recommends affirming which is why FCPS will prioritize affirming over ignoring.

“We encourage families, schools and communities to value every child for who they are in the present, even at a young age,” said Cora Breuner, MD, FAAP, the chairperson for the AAP Committee on Adolescence. “As pediatricians and parents, we also appreciate how challenging, and at times confusing, it can be for family members to realize their child’s experience and feelings.”

The AAP recommends taking a “gender-affirming,” nonjudgmental approach that helps children feel safe in a society that too often marginalizes or stigmatizes those seen as different. The gender-affirming model strengthens family resiliency and takes the emphasis off heightened concerns over gender while allowing children the freedom to focus on academics, relationship-building and other typical developmental tasks.”


This is what all of the legit medical associations recommend.

Literally it’s too bad they lost the public’s trust by mishandling low risk kids in the pandemic.

No, the pandemic response was not the problem (and that was the CDC and NIH, not the AAP).

This is a problem. They're now way over their skis. They need to be pulling back on this yesterday. And they aren't, yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

What are u talking about.
PP was commenting about school priority. Didn't even mention LGBTQ kids.
It is you who are victimizing LGBTQ kids.

The AAP recommends affirming which is why FCPS will prioritize affirming over ignoring.

“We encourage families, schools and communities to value every child for who they are in the present, even at a young age,” said Cora Breuner, MD, FAAP, the chairperson for the AAP Committee on Adolescence. “As pediatricians and parents, we also appreciate how challenging, and at times confusing, it can be for family members to realize their child’s experience and feelings.”

The AAP recommends taking a “gender-affirming,” nonjudgmental approach that helps children feel safe in a society that too often marginalizes or stigmatizes those seen as different. The gender-affirming model strengthens family resiliency and takes the emphasis off heightened concerns over gender while allowing children the freedom to focus on academics, relationship-building and other typical developmental tasks.”


This is what all of the legit medical associations recommend.

Not necessarily so:

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/4070174-why-europe-and-america-are-going-in-opposite-directions-on-youth-transgender-medicine/

An American expert who disagrees with the gender-affirming care approach as applied to young people:

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aeol2x6BA78


2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaAa9WGtlwM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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/

So the Republicans want FCPS to push for conversion therapy now?

Is that why they keep bringing up sexuality and gender topics?

Again. "Yes, we did it! But you stop talking about it!"

No, the school board did not select those books.

You can stop using LGBTQ kids as pawns in your political games.

What are u talking about.
PP was commenting about school priority. Didn't even mention LGBTQ kids.
It is you who are victimizing LGBTQ kids.

The AAP recommends affirming which is why FCPS will prioritize affirming over ignoring.

“We encourage families, schools and communities to value every child for who they are in the present, even at a young age,” said Cora Breuner, MD, FAAP, the chairperson for the AAP Committee on Adolescence. “As pediatricians and parents, we also appreciate how challenging, and at times confusing, it can be for family members to realize their child’s experience and feelings.”

The AAP recommends taking a “gender-affirming,” nonjudgmental approach that helps children feel safe in a society that too often marginalizes or stigmatizes those seen as different. The gender-affirming model strengthens family resiliency and takes the emphasis off heightened concerns over gender while allowing children the freedom to focus on academics, relationship-building and other typical developmental tasks.”


This is what all of the legit medical associations recommend.

Not necessarily so:

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/4070174-why-europe-and-america-are-going-in-opposite-directions-on-youth-transgender-medicine/

An American expert who disagrees with the gender-affirming care approach as applied to young people:

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aeol2x6BA78


2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaAa9WGtlwM

I’m sure opinion of an anti-trans activist from an extremely conservative think tank with no medical training is unbiased.

Hard pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of Fairfax knows that the board will remain democratic. The real worry is that the board will not have any dissenters.

Still waiting to hear we’ve found anyone who isn’t a nutter.

Dissent is one thing. Disruption/destruction is another. Just look at what the nutters in Congress are doing right now. They just want to tear it all down.

What you fail to realize is the entire current board are nutters.

[Anonymous]

Did you sign their recall petitions? No? Then you have no issue with nutters on the school board.