Reply to The Five school districts with Title IX violations, how much money do they stand to lose?

Forum Index » VA Public Schools other than FCPS

Reply to "The Five school districts with Title IX violations, how much money do they stand to lose?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Replies in this thread should tell you how this issue is going to go. APS et al. are going to lose in court, badly, because even the courts now understand the insanity of these policies. There's a decent chance the 4th circuit reverses itself just to prevent SCOTUS from making a more sweeping and durable precedent (and to spare themselves the embarrassment). This is an 80/20 issue that even the Gen-z high schoolers are turning against. NOVA is so far out over its skis on this and it's a shame. The admins would rather stick their thumbs in the eye of the administration because it costs them nothing, but losing federal funds is going to hurt a lot more students.

You could have just let a half-dozen kids use the single-shot adult bathrooms/changing areas on an informal basis, and this would have been a total non-issue. But that wasn't enough.

Just like with school re-opening, just like with masking, you people insist on turning school administrators into avatars for your own revenge fantasies against national political figures. It's a pipe dream. You're going to lose, and rather than lose gracefully you're going to lose as ugly as possible, and somehow each time it happens you manage to pick an issue to lose ugly on that's even dumber and less popular. The funds will get cut off, the school year will be disrupted, and students will bear the brunt of it, and you and the school administrations are going to pat themselves on the back, feel good about yourselves, nominate the Superintendent for a few more awards, while claiming you bear none of the blame for the damage that this exceedingly stupid fight caused.

No one seriously thinks the schools are going to win this. You have to deal with reality as you find it, not as you wish it would be. [/quote]

Say that last sentence again louder for the people in the back. The private sector has already figured this out. The reason so many companies are bending the knee (Apple, Paramount, AMD, etc...) is because it's a simple calculation - pay some millions now to save billions worth of headache later. And banking on all of this dumb-assery passing in 3.5 years. APS would do well to take a lesson here - take the L now, which costs very little (but not nothing! it's still gross what the admin is doing), in order to save a much larger sum being taken away later on.

tl;dr - utilitarianism[/quote]

Neville Chamberlain would like a word about the dangers of appeasement. [/quote]

Perhaps a poorly written policy that already enabled at least one creep to freely access the women’s locker room is not the hill to die on. [/quote]

And now all adults have to show ID to confirm they are not sex offenders. Good policy, long overdue. Don’t need to attack 12-year old trans kids anymore. [/quote]

And if the perpetrator is a student…? [/quote]

Then they would know that already?

But let’s not forget - for pretty much the entirety of human history, girls have faced the greatest risk of sexual assault from - get this - BOYS and MEN claiming to be nothing other than BOYS and/or MEN.

A woman’s sign on the wall hasn’t stopped them from barging in the past when they decide they wanted to be raped and it hasn’t stopped them barging in now when they want to transvestigate. Bathrooms aren’t suddenly more dangerous because a kid in estrogen wants to get dressed without getting beat down. [/quote]

A policy that states “Access to facilities that correspond to a student’s gender identity will be available to all students” means that staff can’t actually do anything to the person barging in as long as they say they are the gender matching the sign. There’s no room for judgment about intentions. You are assuming everyone has good intent and will use the policy in good faith. Clearly, that is not true. [/quote]

Except in the single example cited, the person was in fact a known sex offender with a history of being creepy. He should never been allowed in any school or any public facility with a locker room.

But if you want to pull your examples showing that no woman was ever raped or assaulted in a single sex bathroom or locker room prior to the current GOP trans panic,  I’ll gladly consider them.

Having actually used women’s rooms for the last 40 or so years, I’ve never counted a sign on the wall to protect me. Social norms don’t mean crap when you’re in there by yourself, as every rapist knows. And as every woman knows, you’re more likely to be raped by someone you know, like a trusted adult, a boyfriend or male “friend,” or your youth minister.

just on pure statistics alone, the most dangerous “man in a dress” that a child will ever encounter is a priest. I wish the GOP would react to the epidemic of child abusing ministers like they do innocent trans children. [/quote]

I’m seeing a lot of strawmen. If the policy was simply to provide a private place for any transgender person, that would be fine. Having policy that allows anyone in any locker room or bathroom, no questions asked or allowed is bad. That’s where public opinion is on this. APS is going to lose badly and give ammunition to the republicans, but you obviously don’t care as long as you can prove your own political purity to your friends. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics