Why was the thread on the sexual assault at a Loudoun county school deleted?

[Anonymous]

Jeff, I'm going to stop posting on this topic. However, I wanted to point out that you deleted my post saying that we have been instructed that the first attack does not implicate any transgender issues.

This is copied from earlier in the thread:

jsteele wrote:
As I and other posters have repeatedly pointed out, the two sexual assaults being discussed in this thread do not involve transgender students. The repeated posts about transgender issues are distracting from the main topic of discussion. Due to these repeated disruptions, I am going to start removing all posts addressing transgender topics. Feel free to start a thread to discuss those topics, but do no do it in this thread.

I know that your heart is in the right place in protecting the dignity of all people, including transgender and gender-fluid individuals, from hateful right-wing attacks. I admire that. But some of the policing of thoughts and ideas being done will actually undermine changes to make our society more equitable. People don't want the boy to be transgender or gender fluid because that would feed into the hateful rhetoric that trans people are dangerous, which is no more true than the trope that gay men are likely to be pedophiles. At the same time, if the boy is not transgender, that fact raises legitimate concerns on the part of parents and students about how the legally required policy can be implemented so that it is not acceptable for non-transgender people to use the restrooms for females.

Even if the latter is not a real issue, as parents, we have to help our kids navigate these issues, and discussions about feelings and fears are important. I often tell my kids that it's impossible to be perfectly fair to everyone, and sometimes, it's more important to help certain groups even if there are negative consequences for others. Our kids are conditioned to feel most comfortable in bathrooms with people of the same gender. That might change over time, but for now, there are nuanced feelings about what makes gender-specific bathrooms more comfortable. These are worth discussing. For instance, my daughter has told me that she would be fine with unisex bathrooms, but when she has her period, she is most comfortable around other people who menstruate. In most cases, that is other girls, but she would be more comfortable in a bathroom with a transgender male who menstruates than with a female who does not experience this part of life, which feels deeply private to her. She's not horrible for feeling that way, but feelings like hers might not be the ideal way to assign bathrooms, so she will have to work through her discomfort.

If you start with the proposition that the law requires that transgender and gender-fluid individuals have access to the bathrooms of their gender, there are still issues for non-transgendered people to work through. For women, these include feeling uncomfortable, vulnerable, or even unsafe in a bathroom with people who have penises. The more you deny that these feelings exist, the more people will become entrenched in their positions. Most girls would not allow a boy to come into the girl's restroom and would leave if boys were in it. There are parents who aren't right-wing nut jobs who want assurance that boys won't be able to freely come and go from girls' restrooms in school buildings. That is the safety and privacy interest being discussed, and it is not transphobic.

Obfuscating facts, suppressing discussion, and branding anyone voicing concerns about the implementation of the policy or the extent to whether the district leaders' public statements or lack thereof were intended to avoid scrutiny of the policy as a zealot is dangerous. It unnecessarily feeds into fears that should be acknowledged and addressed. This attack does not prove that transgender women in women's bathrooms are dangerous or that the policy itself is dangerous, but it is worth discussing how potential problems associated with the policy might be addressed in practice at our schools.

[jsteele]

Your post was deleted because I deleted the post to which you replied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This story is scary. But what is even more scarier is the moderators of this board didn't seem the story true until a more liberal newspapers picked up the story.

It wasn't until "more liberal newspapers picked up the story" but rather when certain facts were confirmed. WTOP (which isn't liberal), The Washington Post, and even the Loudoun Times got statements on the record that the Daily Wire did not.

I understand that you may find waiting for confirmation of facts to be scary, but I think it is responsible.

They got statements because the cat was out of the bag and had no choice. You have done no such waiting for confirmation of facts in other circumstances. Horse paste poster is a great example.

What are you talking about? It is a fact that many anti-vaxxers are taking horse paste as a cure for Covid.

Jim Acosta called it a livestock dewormer to Dr. Fauci, when referring to the fact that Joe Rogan took the FDA approved for human form. Beyond disingenuous. Guess you agree with Acosta.

To be clear, the FDA has NOT approved any dewormer -- for humans or livestock -- as a therapy (or prophylactic) for COVID-19.

It's like being told you have diabetes and then trying to treat it with vitamins.

The detail about whether or not the form of the ineffective and unapproved therapy was intended for humans of livestock is a complete red herring (although the tragedy of it all is that morons were absolutely buying dewormer formulated for lifestock and consuming it and ending up very sick as a result).

For the life of me, I don't understand the mentality of rabidly conservative people who go down these rabbit holes and fixate on the most bizarre of things. None of that matters -- you don't treat COVID-19 with any form of dewormer and it's beyond idiotic that you would fall back on ineffective therapies when there were preventative vaccines available. Remember the old adage about an ounce of prevention being better than a pound of cure?

[Anonymous]

^ or a pound of manure…