Anonymous wrote:He didn't seem anti-trans. He seemed anti-AAP.

Agree he isn't anti-trans. Would you mind explaining what AAP is?

He didn't seem anti-trans. He seemed anti-AAP.

Anonymous wrote:Rives is anti-trans, so that's an immediate No for me

Bingo.

Rives is anti-trans, so that's an immediate No for me

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rives spoke out against the APS policy implementation procedure that guaranteed rights and protections for trans kids. Disqualifying.

Link please

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-june-18-2019/ at 3:26:40

Though I support the implementation of the PIP I don't find that to be a damning response. I am voting for Bethany Sutton because I am familiar with her work due to my time at Randolph and feel that she put a lot of hard work into the schools and community already.

I'm not saying it's damning. I'm saying it's disqualifying. The mere fact that Rives didn't speak up in favor of the policy implementation procedure is disqualifying on its own. That he went further and spouted a bunch of pseudo-science on the medical dimensions of issues faced by many trans kids is even more so, even if he did it in an understated way that didn't bash trans kids expressly. It shows he can't be trusted to protect trans and nonbinary kids from ongoing attacks by our governor and his administration.

I believe the policy solution is more complicated than people like to think. Those full-on supporting everything based on gender identity do not consider the feelings of others who may be uncomfortable in open locker rooms and restrooms, for example. I also believe it takes an actual open conversation to really understand Rives' position. He doesn't deny transgenderism per se and I don't think what he says is disqualifying. I think he'll bring a more thoughtful approach to policy-making rather than the knee-jerk all-or-nothing approach the hive mindset board always takes on everything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rives spoke out against the APS policy implementation procedure that guaranteed rights and protections for trans kids. Disqualifying.

Link please

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-june-18-2019/ at 3:26:40

Though I support the implementation of the PIP I don't find that to be a damning response. I am voting for Bethany Sutton because I am familiar with her work due to my time at Randolph and feel that she put a lot of hard work into the schools and community already.

I'm not saying it's damning. I'm saying it's disqualifying. The mere fact that Rives didn't speak up in favor of the policy implementation procedure is disqualifying on its own. That he went further and spouted a bunch of pseudo-science on the medical dimensions of issues faced by many trans kids is even more so, even if he did it in an understated way that didn't bash trans kids expressly. It shows he can't be trusted to protect trans and nonbinary kids from ongoing attacks by our governor and his administration.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rives spoke out against the APS policy implementation procedure that guaranteed rights and protections for trans kids. Disqualifying.

Link please

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-june-18-2019/ at 3:26:40

Though I support the implementation of the PIP I don't find that to be a damning response. I am voting for Bethany Sutton because I am familiar with her work due to my time at Randolph and feel that she put a lot of hard work into the schools and community already.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rives spoke out against the APS policy implementation procedure that guaranteed rights and protections for trans kids. Disqualifying.

Link please

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-june-18-2019/ at 3:26:40

Anonymous wrote:Rives spoke out against the APS policy implementation procedure that guaranteed rights and protections for trans kids. Disqualifying.

Link please

Rives spoke out against the APS policy implementation procedure that guaranteed rights and protections for trans kids. Disqualifying.

I'm also voting for Rives. Sutton seems fine, but I think 1-party rule is harming Arlington.

Rives was at one of the early voting places yesterday and we spoke with him for a bit. He seemed sensible, and his statements he made to the Patch had way more actual positions other than the vague “equity” statement by Sutton. And I also like having a non-Democrat candidate on the local boards (unless I have some indication that they are Maga Republicans or gun nuts)

Anonymous wrote:I'm voting for Rives primarily because he is not the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate. I agree with him that the quality of our schools has suffered. I disagree with him on the need for SROs in school, for example, but in that respect, he will be a lone voice on the SB. One-party rule has been bad for the SB and the CB.

Same. I agree with all of the above, except the stance on SROs.

I'm voting for Rives primarily because he is not the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate. I agree with him that the quality of our schools has suffered. I disagree with him on the need for SROs in school, for example, but in that respect, he will be a lone voice on the SB. One-party rule has been bad for the SB and the CB.

Hey hive. What say you? I’m doing my research on all candidates on my ballot (I don’t blindly vote party lines). What do you love and hate about these candidates?