New VA trans policies for schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if it is indeed true that not calling a child by their preferred name will lead to the child’s suicide, that is a grave medical risk that properly needs to be immediately disclosed to parents.

My kid had a warning sent home when her teacher thought she wasn’t seeing the board properly. Teachers regularly flag potential injuries with far less impact. The idea of a teacher believing that not using a name will lead to a child’s suicide but then not disclosing that to the parents is actually horrifying.

Yup that is exactly what progressives want. And when and adult, especially one in authority have vulnerable children keep secrets from their parents, telling them that they are the only grown-ups that really care and understand them is the exact M.O. of grooming.

Look at every case of adults preying on children, they all follow this recipe. Priests, boy scout leaders, etc all did this to horrific ends.

But for some reason, teachers seem to think they are different when using the same approach.

Teachers don't go into the profession so they can prey on children (except the individual child molesters who seek out professions and opportunities to put themselves in position to do so - and teachers as a group are not those people). Grooming is an intentional and proactive pursuit. Teachers honoring a student's request to use a pronoun or name is not grooming. Grooming also would involve the teacher telling the child to keep the secret, not the other way around. Teachers are not picking children, buddying up to them, asking students who have never considered their gender identity whether they are aware they can change and then encourage and show them how to go about doing it. Teachers aren't looking around and asking kids if they'd like to be called by some name the teacher suggests or pronoun the teacher suggests. That's ludicrous. Grooming is initiated by the groomer. Trans kids asking teachers to call them something different is initiated by the trans kid. And unless the child tells the teacher or the teacher asks the parents, they have no way of knowing whether or not the parents are aware. Or at least they didn't - now they will because they have to have written permission from the parent to honor a student's request.

You are being disingenuous. First of all you are calling the student who is asking for their pronoun to be changed a “trans kid.” Therefore you recognize that this is not the same as a simple nickname change. Why on earth would you affirm this child’s gender identity without telling the parent? This is a medical issue. Presumably a child who has gender dysphoria would need counseling and see an endocrinologist if the medical route of puberty blockers is chosen. This is not something that should be hidden from the parent. It is absolutely disgusting that you think that this should be the case. I agree that Youngkin’s guidance goes too far. But I disagree that a school should hide from a parent that their child is now identifying with a gender different than their biological sex. Gender affirming care is exactly what it sounds like - a treatment path that involves affirming the gender that a child is identifying with. US Medical associations are of the belief that affirming the gender a child is associating with is the best way to deal with gender dysphoria. Whether people agree with this or not is not relevant. What is relevant is it is a treatment path that after numerous studies, US Medical organizations believe to be best practice. It’s a result it makes absolutely no sense for schools hide this information from the parents. Now if schools believe that a child will be subject to harm from the parents then there is already a pathway for that since teachers are mandated reporters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if it is indeed true that not calling a child by their preferred name will lead to the child’s suicide, that is a grave medical risk that properly needs to be immediately disclosed to parents.

My kid had a warning sent home when her teacher thought she wasn’t seeing the board properly. Teachers regularly flag potential injuries with far less impact. The idea of a teacher believing that not using a name will lead to a child’s suicide but then not disclosing that to the parents is actually horrifying.

Yup that is exactly what progressives want. And when and adult, especially one in authority have vulnerable children keep secrets from their parents, telling them that they are the only grown-ups that really care and understand them is the exact M.O. of grooming.

Look at every case of adults preying on children, they all follow this recipe. Priests, boy scout leaders, etc all did this to horrific ends.

But for some reason, teachers seem to think they are different when using the same approach.

Teachers don't go into the profession so they can prey on children (except the individual child molesters who seek out professions and opportunities to put themselves in position to do so - and teachers as a group are not those people). Grooming is an intentional and proactive pursuit. Teachers honoring a student's request to use a pronoun or name is not grooming. Grooming also would involve the teacher telling the child to keep the secret, not the other way around. Teachers are not picking children, buddying up to them, asking students who have never considered their gender identity whether they are aware they can change and then encourage and show them how to go about doing it. Teachers aren't looking around and asking kids if they'd like to be called by some name the teacher suggests or pronoun the teacher suggests. That's ludicrous. Grooming is initiated by the groomer. Trans kids asking teachers to call them something different is initiated by the trans kid. And unless the child tells the teacher or the teacher asks the parents, they have no way of knowing whether or not the parents are aware. Or at least they didn't - now they will because they have to have written permission from the parent to honor a student's request.

You are being disingenuous. First of all you are calling the student who is asking for their pronoun to be changed a “trans kid.” Therefore you recognize that this is not the same as a simple nickname change. Why on earth would you affirm this child’s gender identity without telling the parent? This is a medical issue. Presumably a child who has gender dysphoria would need counseling and see an endocrinologist if the medical route of puberty blockers is chosen. This is not something that should be hidden from the parent. It is absolutely disgusting that you think that this should be the case. I agree that Youngkin’s guidance goes too far. But I disagree that a school should hide from a parent that their child is now identifying with a gender different than their biological sex. Gender affirming care is exactly what it sounds like - a treatment path that involves affirming the gender that a child is identifying with. US Medical associations are of the belief that affirming the gender a child is associating with is the best way to deal with gender dysphoria. Whether people agree with this or not is not relevant. What is relevant is it is a treatment path that after numerous studies, US Medical organizations believe to be best practice. It’s a result it makes absolutely no sense for schools hide this information from the parents. Now if schools believe that a child will be subject to harm from the parents then there is already a pathway for that since teachers are mandated reporters.

I should say identifying with, not associating with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what happens. Back when Northan's VDOE passed their transgender guidelines, the LCPS school board members claimed that they were "required" to update their policies in accoardance with the guidelines. So given the new policies, will they similarly state they are "required" to update their policies?

Either they are required to follow them or they aren't - and if they aren't required now, then they weren't required then and they lied.

Depends which requirement you choose to follow. If school divisions pick federal law, they won't change their policies. If they pick state law/VDOE guidance, they will. The correct answer is to go with federal law as it trumps state. So there may be a legal challenge.

Clearly you are not a lawyer. Federal law doesn’t Trump state law when it comes to education, police etc. These are services that are traditionally under the purview of the state. The way the federal government usually gets around it is through the Commerce Clause or by attaching compliance to some grant money or something like that. But no, federal law doesn’t trump state law. It depends on what the law is and how it is drafted.

Actually I am a lawyer and a good one at that. So your response is hilarious. But I’m not going to waste any more of my time trying to explain this all to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what happens. Back when Northan's VDOE passed their transgender guidelines, the LCPS school board members claimed that they were "required" to update their policies in accoardance with the guidelines. So given the new policies, will they similarly state they are "required" to update their policies?

Either they are required to follow them or they aren't - and if they aren't required now, then they weren't required then and they lied.

Depends which requirement you choose to follow. If school divisions pick federal law, they won't change their policies. If they pick state law/VDOE guidance, they will. The correct answer is to go with federal law as it trumps state. So there may be a legal challenge.

Clearly you are not a lawyer. Federal law doesn’t Trump state law when it comes to education, police etc. These are services that are traditionally under the purview of the state. The way the federal government usually gets around it is through the Commerce Clause or by attaching compliance to some grant money or something like that. But no, federal law doesn’t trump state law. It depends on what the law is and how it is drafted.

Actually I am a lawyer and a good one at that. So your response is hilarious. But I’m not going to waste any more of my time trying to explain this all to you.

Oh please do waste your time. Please explain to us exactly how federal law trumps state law here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So thankful that my BIL & SIL who moved my niece to VA from TX in late 2022 kept the fact that she's trans on the down-low. She's very 'passing' as she's been on hormones for years. FERPA prevents the admins, who do know, from disclosing.

My niece is a cheerleader in the fall & winter and plays girl's soccer in the spring. She uses the girl's locker room and girl's bathrooms. She's a lifeguard this summer. She has friends and dates and currently has a boyfriend. She's living her best teen life and loves that she "occupies so much time & space in the hater's heads" by simply existing.

So her parents know she is trans and are working with admin to make sure she is being treated as a girl. See that’s the way it should be. What should not happen is for a school to affirm a child’s gender identity without that child’s parents being involved in the decision.

Under the Youngkin policy any teacher could still choose to use male pronouns for her and she would have to be on the boys soccer team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what happens. Back when Northan's VDOE passed their transgender guidelines, the LCPS school board members claimed that they were "required" to update their policies in accoardance with the guidelines. So given the new policies, will they similarly state they are "required" to update their policies?

Either they are required to follow them or they aren't - and if they aren't required now, then they weren't required then and they lied.

Depends which requirement you choose to follow. If school divisions pick federal law, they won't change their policies. If they pick state law/VDOE guidance, they will. The correct answer is to go with federal law as it trumps state. So there may be a legal challenge.

Clearly you are not a lawyer. Federal law doesn’t Trump state law when it comes to education, police etc. These are services that are traditionally under the purview of the state. The way the federal government usually gets around it is through the Commerce Clause or by attaching compliance to some grant money or something like that. But no, federal law doesn’t trump state law. It depends on what the law is and how it is drafted.

Actually I am a lawyer and a good one at that. So your response is hilarious. But I’m not going to waste any more of my time trying to explain this all to you.

Oh please do waste your time. Please explain to us exactly how federal law trumps state law here.

Also please explain which federal law you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what happens. Back when Northan's VDOE passed their transgender guidelines, the LCPS school board members claimed that they were "required" to update their policies in accoardance with the guidelines. So given the new policies, will they similarly state they are "required" to update their policies?

Either they are required to follow them or they aren't - and if they aren't required now, then they weren't required then and they lied.

Depends which requirement you choose to follow. If school divisions pick federal law, they won't change their policies. If they pick state law/VDOE guidance, they will. The correct answer is to go with federal law as it trumps state. So there may be a legal challenge.

Clearly you are not a lawyer. Federal law doesn’t Trump state law when it comes to education, police etc. These are services that are traditionally under the purview of the state. The way the federal government usually gets around it is through the Commerce Clause or by attaching compliance to some grant money or something like that. But no, federal law doesn’t trump state law. It depends on what the law is and how it is drafted.

Actually I am a lawyer and a good one at that. So your response is hilarious. But I’m not going to waste any more of my time trying to explain this all to you.

Oh please do waste your time. Please explain to us exactly how federal law trumps state law here.

You don’t have the intelligence and I don’t have the patience.

[Anonymous]

Yup. Ding dongs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So thankful that my BIL & SIL who moved my niece to VA from TX in late 2022 kept the fact that she's trans on the down-low. She's very 'passing' as she's been on hormones for years. FERPA prevents the admins, who do know, from disclosing.

My niece is a cheerleader in the fall & winter and plays girl's soccer in the spring. She uses the girl's locker room and girl's bathrooms. She's a lifeguard this summer. She has friends and dates and currently has a boyfriend. She's living her best teen life and loves that she "occupies so much time & space in the hater's heads" by simply existing.

So her parents know she is trans and are working with admin to make sure she is being treated as a girl. See that’s the way it should be. What should not happen is for a school to affirm a child’s gender identity without that child’s parents being involved in the decision.

Under the Youngkin policy any teacher could still choose to use male pronouns for her and she would have to be on the boys soccer team.

My concern is with APS’ position that parents need not be informed. I disagree with the other parts of Youngkin’s policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will keep calling my kids by what they want to be called
You can fire me Youngkin

Why? What academic value does it provide to students for you to do so vs just calling them their name.

I will answer for you - None.

NP. I disagree. Learning is impacted by environment and the emotional state of the student and the rapport with the teacher. If the student doesn't respect the teacher, their learning will not be optimized. And if a teacher refuses to afford the student the simple respect of calling them by their preferred name, that erodes the student's respect for the teacher and the rapport between the two. If a student feels more comfortable in the class, they will have a better learning experience. And respectfully honoring their preferred name facilitates a more comfortable classroom - for everyone.

I’m not sure the trade off is worth it. Affirming delusions is harmful, a teacher that affirms that humans can change sex is indoctrinating students with dangerous falsehoods.

^^^ Opinion

You may disagree that affirming falsehoods is not harmful. But humans cannot change sex. This is a fact, not an opinion.

This all doesn’t matter. We can agree to disagree. The question is - does calling a child by their pronoun have a profound effect on their mental well being? If it does then the parent should know. We are not discussing nicknames here.

Out of curiosity, where do you stand on trying child suspects as adults for heinous crimes they are accused of?

[Anonymous]

If a parent is so clueless or resistant to awareness of their kids pronouns there are so many more issues than a school supporting their students. Start listening to your kids more. You’ll find there’s a bunch you don’t know. That’s every parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will keep calling my kids by what they want to be called
You can fire me Youngkin

Why? What academic value does it provide to students for you to do so vs just calling them their name.

I will answer for you - None.

NP. I disagree. Learning is impacted by environment and the emotional state of the student and the rapport with the teacher. If the student doesn't respect the teacher, their learning will not be optimized. And if a teacher refuses to afford the student the simple respect of calling them by their preferred name, that erodes the student's respect for the teacher and the rapport between the two. If a student feels more comfortable in the class, they will have a better learning experience. And respectfully honoring their preferred name facilitates a more comfortable classroom - for everyone.

I’m not sure the trade off is worth it. Affirming delusions is harmful, a teacher that affirms that humans can change sex is indoctrinating students with dangerous falsehoods.

^^^ Opinion

You may disagree that affirming falsehoods is not harmful. But humans cannot change sex. This is a fact, not an opinion.

This all doesn’t matter. We can agree to disagree. The question is - does calling a child by their pronoun have a profound effect on their mental well being? If it does then the parent should know. We are not discussing nicknames here.

Out of curiosity, where do you stand on trying child suspects as adults for heinous crimes they are accused of?

I’m not the PP, but I am a parent who thinks it is wrong for schools to hide gender transitions from parents. I do not think children should be tried as adults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that if it is indeed true that not calling a child by their preferred name will lead to the child’s suicide, that is a grave medical risk that properly needs to be immediately disclosed to parents.

My kid had a warning sent home when her teacher thought she wasn’t seeing the board properly. Teachers regularly flag potential injuries with far less impact. The idea of a teacher believing that not using a name will lead to a child’s suicide but then not disclosing that to the parents is actually horrifying.

Yup that is exactly what progressives want. And when and adult, especially one in authority have vulnerable children keep secrets from their parents, telling them that they are the only grown-ups that really care and understand them is the exact M.O. of grooming.

Look at every case of adults preying on children, they all follow this recipe. Priests, boy scout leaders, etc all did this to horrific ends.

But for some reason, teachers seem to think they are different when using the same approach.

Teachers don't go into the profession so they can prey on children (except the individual child molesters who seek out professions and opportunities to put themselves in position to do so - and teachers as a group are not those people). Grooming is an intentional and proactive pursuit. Teachers honoring a student's request to use a pronoun or name is not grooming. Grooming also would involve the teacher telling the child to keep the secret, not the other way around. Teachers are not picking children, buddying up to them, asking students who have never considered their gender identity whether they are aware they can change and then encourage and show them how to go about doing it. Teachers aren't looking around and asking kids if they'd like to be called by some name the teacher suggests or pronoun the teacher suggests. That's ludicrous. Grooming is initiated by the groomer. Trans kids asking teachers to call them something different is initiated by the trans kid. And unless the child tells the teacher or the teacher asks the parents, they have no way of knowing whether or not the parents are aware. Or at least they didn't - now they will because they have to have written permission from the parent to honor a student's request.

You are being disingenuous. First of all you are calling the student who is asking for their pronoun to be changed a “trans kid.” Therefore you recognize that this is not the same as a simple nickname change. Why on earth would you affirm this child’s gender identity without telling the parent? This is a medical issue. Presumably a child who has gender dysphoria would need counseling and see an endocrinologist if the medical route of puberty blockers is chosen. This is not something that should be hidden from the parent. It is absolutely disgusting that you think that this should be the case. I agree that Youngkin’s guidance goes too far. But I disagree that a school should hide from a parent that their child is now identifying with a gender different than their biological sex. Gender affirming care is exactly what it sounds like - a treatment path that involves affirming the gender that a child is identifying with. US Medical associations are of the belief that affirming the gender a child is associating with is the best way to deal with gender dysphoria. Whether people agree with this or not is not relevant. What is relevant is it is a treatment path that after numerous studies, US Medical organizations believe to be best practice. It’s a result it makes absolutely no sense for schools hide this information from the parents. Now if schools believe that a child will be subject to harm from the parents then there is already a pathway for that since teachers are mandated reporters.

I'm not being disingenuous. My point is that teachers aren't "grooming."

My subsequent point is: I'm also not convinced that it's a teacher's responsibility to contact the parents of every child to make sure they're "conforming" to their given birth names/family accepted nicknames/gender. And my last sentence kind of addresses that: if parents need to provide written permission, then teachers will know.

TBH, I don't understand why a teacher can't say to a student without parental permission who is asking to be called a different name, etc., "I'm sorry. I'm not permitted to call you '______' without permission from your parents." But I suppose the teachers will be required to report to the parent the fact that there child even made the request; and I think that's an unnecessary responsibility for teachers. As is a teacher having to notify parents if they hear the kids' friends calling them something else.

Would I want to know if it were my kid? Absolutely. But it's on me, not the teacher. Perhaps I'm being naive; but I see one of two situations: (1) the kid will be happy and comfortable in school and doing well without my knowing about their "secret life" and will ultimately tell me when they're ready and feel comfortable doing so or (2) the kid won't be doing well and the school will notify me that they believe there may be some mental health issues needing addressed, then I follow-up with my child. After all, y'all keep saying parents are the sole responsible parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will keep calling my kids by what they want to be called
You can fire me Youngkin

Why? What academic value does it provide to students for you to do so vs just calling them their name.

I will answer for you - None.

NP. I disagree. Learning is impacted by environment and the emotional state of the student and the rapport with the teacher. If the student doesn't respect the teacher, their learning will not be optimized. And if a teacher refuses to afford the student the simple respect of calling them by their preferred name, that erodes the student's respect for the teacher and the rapport between the two. If a student feels more comfortable in the class, they will have a better learning experience. And respectfully honoring their preferred name facilitates a more comfortable classroom - for everyone.

I’m not sure the trade off is worth it. Affirming delusions is harmful, a teacher that affirms that humans can change sex is indoctrinating students with dangerous falsehoods.

^^^ Opinion

You may disagree that affirming falsehoods is not harmful. But humans cannot change sex. This is a fact, not an opinion.

This all doesn’t matter. We can agree to disagree. The question is - does calling a child by their pronoun have a profound effect on their mental well being? If it does then the parent should know. We are not discussing nicknames here.

Out of curiosity, where do you stand on trying child suspects as adults for heinous crimes they are accused of?

??? why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will keep calling my kids by what they want to be called
You can fire me Youngkin

Why? What academic value does it provide to students for you to do so vs just calling them their name.

I will answer for you - None.

NP. I disagree. Learning is impacted by environment and the emotional state of the student and the rapport with the teacher. If the student doesn't respect the teacher, their learning will not be optimized. And if a teacher refuses to afford the student the simple respect of calling them by their preferred name, that erodes the student's respect for the teacher and the rapport between the two. If a student feels more comfortable in the class, they will have a better learning experience. And respectfully honoring their preferred name facilitates a more comfortable classroom - for everyone.

I’m not sure the trade off is worth it. Affirming delusions is harmful, a teacher that affirms that humans can change sex is indoctrinating students with dangerous falsehoods.

^^^ Opinion

You may disagree that affirming falsehoods is not harmful. But humans cannot change sex. This is a fact, not an opinion.

This all doesn’t matter. We can agree to disagree. The question is - does calling a child by their pronoun have a profound effect on their mental well being? If it does then the parent should know. We are not discussing nicknames here.

Out of curiosity, where do you stand on trying child suspects as adults for heinous crimes they are accused of?

??? why?

My guess is that it is some sort of weird trans rights poster who is comparing children’s ability to elect gender affirming care without parental input to a child’s decision to be criminal and if you believe in trying kids as adults, you also have to be in favor of letting them elect gender affirmative care. Or something like that.

FWIW I don’t think children can adequately consent to any of the medical procedures and I don’t think they should be tried as adults.