Reply to Playing Poker with Federal Funding

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Playing Poker with Federal Funding"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]There is the assumption here that segregating bathrooms by gender identity will reduce bullying as trans-gendered women won't be bullied in the men's bathroom.

What about trans-gendered men? Is there any reason to believe they will be less bullied by the same men that bully trans-gendered women? In an environment where bathrooms are segregated by gender identity, will trans-gendered men be forced to use the men's bathroom?[/quote]

Good question.  Women's restrooms have stalls.  Stalls are also present in male restrooms.  APS has a larger locker room issue since high schools have pools and 4 years of aquatics instruction as part of the PE POS, program of studies, 2 elementary and 2 high school.  FX/FCPS dumped the issue on Bryan Hill for an interview. Hill noted the difference in POS and school board owned sites.  ARL chose to prosecute for indecent exposure at public and private sites.  FX chose not to prosecute.  Different reactions by ARL and FX on new indecent exposure incidents.

Title ix and sports.   What actually happened in CA was removal of opportunities for bio females and it was acknowledged only at the states level for track and field. Top of the competitive interscholastic sports food chain.  Sports like volleyball have defined numbers on the court and roster and it's not explicitly listed as a contact sport under Title ix.

https://www.cifstate.org/news/2025_tf_statement_5.27.25
https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/30/us/ab-hernandez-trump-california-funding-wwk

The language in 2024 Title ix § 106.41 Athletics.  caused the ID F to have an advantage over the cis females which spawned the CA pilot program which did nothing to assist cis F prior to the state ultimate competition.   [b]FCPS had to add male volleyball since no male volleyball meant under Title ix the guys could try out for the female team.[/b]

[/quote]

Wait.  What?  Is this actually true?[/quote]

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106/subpart-D/section-106.41

[i]"§ 106.41 Athletics.

(a) General.  No person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person or otherwise be discriminated against in any interscholastic, intercollegiate, club or intramural athletics offered by a recipient, and no recipient shall provide any such athletics separately on such basis.

(b) Separate teams.  Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, a recipient may operate or sponsor separate teams for members of each sex where selection for such teams is based upon competitive skill or the activity involved is a contact sport. However, where a recipient operates or sponsors a team in a particular sport for members of one sex but operates or sponsors no such team for members of the other sex, and athletic opportunities for members of that sex have previously been limited, members of the excluded sex must be allowed to try-out for the team offered unless the sport involved is a contact sport. For the purposes of this part,[b] contact sports include boxing, wrestling, rugby, ice hockey, football, basketball and other sports the purpose or major activity of which involves bodily contact[/b]."[/i]

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/42549609/inside-san-jose-state-university-2024-volleyball-season-gender-fairness-safety
Note physiological studies.

[/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