Decision Time for DEI

[Anonymous]

How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

It is also about locker rooms and sports. Not just bathrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

It is also about locker rooms and sports. Not just bathrooms.

The PP recognized that.

[Anonymous]

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

How are people to know? He wore a skirt.

[Anonymous]

Case will be too challenging for in-house counsel so will add a several hundred thousand for outside counsel to lose this case.

So even less money for actual instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Case will be too challenging for in-house counsel so will add a several hundred thousand for outside counsel to lose this case.

So even less money for actual instruction.

That is the real bottom line here. No winners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

Counterpoint: if it’s really only a couple of kids in the entire state and the bathrooms are a non-issue why would we give up funding and impact thousands of students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

Counterpoint: if it’s really only a couple of kids in the entire state and the bathrooms are a non-issue why would we give up funding and impact thousands of students?

Sadly, there are more than two. There should not be any.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you know a kid is trans?

Are kids peeing in open stalls these days? Are there genital checks?

I don't really care if my kid uses the bathroom with a trans kid. Everyone pees. And schools have stalls.

But dang, seems like Republicans are getting really worked up about it. Sure, bring up the Loudoun County boy -- who was not trans. Bring up the one or two trans kids who play sports in an entire state.

I just wonder, since trans are pretty rare, why can't schools handle the cases all on their own. Why does the federal government have to get involved?

Or maybe it's just a reason to have Republicans bond together in their collective hate.

Counterpoint: if it’s really only a couple of kids in the entire state and the bathrooms are a non-issue why would we give up funding and impact thousands of students?

Sadly, there are more than two. There should not be any.

Go Trump yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider who is the fascist here. The federal government attempting to defend Title IX or our School Board spending taxpayer funds on legal defense and foregoing federal funds for Title I and other programs?

+1000
Just astounding that this has to be spelled out.

First of all, you really have no clue how unhinged the "+1000" posts sound, do you?

Second of all, yes, you need to spell out your lies. The idea of this administration genuinely "defending Title IX" is a fascism fig leaf. The blackmail threat of cutting off funds as a way to coerce compliance is textbook authoritarian state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider who is the fascist here. The federal government attempting to defend Title IX or our School Board spending taxpayer funds on legal defense and foregoing federal funds for Title I and other programs?

+1000
Just astounding that this has to be spelled out.

First of all, you really have no clue how unhinged the "+1000" posts sound, do you?

Second of all, yes, you need to spell out your lies. The idea of this administration genuinely "defending Title IX" is a fascism fig leaf. The blackmail threat of cutting off funds as a way to coerce compliance is textbook authoritarian state.

It is a federal law and it is federal dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider who is the fascist here. The federal government attempting to defend Title IX or our School Board spending taxpayer funds on legal defense and foregoing federal funds for Title I and other programs?

+1000
Just astounding that this has to be spelled out.

First of all, you really have no clue how unhinged the "+1000" posts sound, do you?

Second of all, yes, you need to spell out your lies. The idea of this administration genuinely "defending Title IX" is a fascism fig leaf. The blackmail threat of cutting off funds as a way to coerce compliance is textbook authoritarian state.

It is a federal law and it is federal dollars.

Yes, a federal law which is being misconstrued (per prior court ruling), and federal dollars which are being used to coerce a political point of view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider who is the fascist here. The federal government attempting to defend Title IX or our School Board spending taxpayer funds on legal defense and foregoing federal funds for Title I and other programs?

+1000
Just astounding that this has to be spelled out.

First of all, you really have no clue how unhinged the "+1000" posts sound, do you?

Second of all, yes, you need to spell out your lies. The idea of this administration genuinely "defending Title IX" is a fascism fig leaf. The blackmail threat of cutting off funds as a way to coerce compliance is textbook authoritarian state.

It is a federal law and it is federal dollars.

Yes, a federal law which is being misconstrued (per prior court ruling), and federal dollars which are being used to coerce a political point of view.

Or, a better way to put it:
a federal law which was misconstrued by a prior court ruling, and federal dollars which are being withheld because the law is not being followed.

There is absolutely nothing in Title IX about "gender identity."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider who is the fascist here. The federal government attempting to defend Title IX or our School Board spending taxpayer funds on legal defense and foregoing federal funds for Title I and other programs?

+1000
Just astounding that this has to be spelled out.

First of all, you really have no clue how unhinged the "+1000" posts sound, do you?

Second of all, yes, you need to spell out your lies. The idea of this administration genuinely "defending Title IX" is a fascism fig leaf. The blackmail threat of cutting off funds as a way to coerce compliance is textbook authoritarian state.

It is a federal law and it is federal dollars.

Yes, a federal law which is being misconstrued (per prior court ruling), and federal dollars which are being used to coerce a political point of view.

Or, a better way to put it:
a federal law which was misconstrued by a prior court ruling, and federal dollars which are being withheld because the law is not being followed.

There is absolutely nothing in Title IX about "gender identity."

Well said!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, according to our leadership: Boys in girls' spaces > Title I kids, Special Ed kids, etc. and I am assuming lots of other programs.

Boys don't want girls in their bathrooms and locker rooms either. Why can't fcps just have a dedicated unisex bathroom/locker room area for the gender changing people?

They tried that, and a student sued the school, claiming that being directed to use the neutral bathroom was mean and harmful. Unfortunately, she won the case.