Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you OP for posting the link here! I've signed and I agree with the petition completely. It was very well written and it has the common sense that the school board is completely lacking nowadays.

It is not about the potential rapist issue like the other poster mentioned. Rather, it is about protecting the level of privacy that the kids from various background need. The non-discrimination policy protects transgender kids, as well as these other kids from different national origins or religious background.

Policy 1450:
No student, employee, or applicant for employment in the Fairfax County Public Schools shall, on the basis of age, race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, marital status, or disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity, as required by law.

Eh, wrong. Locker rooms are awkward for everyone. Your snowflake can go to the principals office to change.

Why can't the transgender snowflake go to the principal's office to change?

They can if they want. I'm sure regardless of locker rooms most transgender kids will change in a stall for their own safety. Nonetheless, they shouldn't be FORCED to.

Instead, we're FORCED to accept girls in the boys room and vice versa.

Even the Human Rights Campaign, one of the biggest advocates for LGBTQ, recommended the following privacy enhancement for transgender accommodation. But the SB decided that the current FCPS school facilities are good as is for the new regulation.

Privacy in Restrooms

Users of multiple-occupant restrooms might appreciate the following privacy enhancements:

Install flaps on the outer edge of stall doors to cover the gap between the door and the stall wall.

Extend stall doors and walls from floor to ceiling.

Extend privacy dividers between urinals further out from the wall, and to a higher level.

Locker Rooms

Ensure private shower and changing areas in locker rooms and other facilities using stalls or curtains. If this is not possible, provide alternative accommodations that maintain respect and dignity, such as:

use of a private area within the public area, such as a shower stall with a door or an area separated by a curtain;

a separate changing schedule in the public area; or

use of a nearby private area, such as a restroom.

http://www.hrc.org/resources/workplace-gender-transition-guidelines

Nobody LIKES changing with other students. Nobody.

Anonymous wrote:
No, it's like saying "we are having cheeseburgers for lunch. Anyone is welcome to have one. If you would prefer not to eat or see cheeseburgers, you can choose a different lunch you feel comfortable with. The other food choices are down the hall, please pick whichever you like and then return to eat with the rest of us."

Technically the only choice for the second student is the alternate bathroom, which is essence the same discrimination the trans gender kids was facing. Again, the non-discrimination policy is meant to protect all of them.

The point is, it does not have to be this "win-lose" situation between gender nonconforming and the other kids. There are options the SB could have considered, if they took public input, to meet the needs of both gender nonconforming students, and the other kids.

- They could reconfigure bathroom stalls with floor to ceiling dividers and doors without cracks.
- They could take 1/2 the school bathrooms and make them strictly sex segregated, and the other half gender inclusive.
- They could create curtained dividers in locker rooms for those with sex segregation needs, and those without.
- They could time shift the locker room, so those with modesty needs have a private time, and another shift where the rest of the students can change.
- They could provide changing stalls and private individual showers in locker rooms
- They could use IOC Olympic rules for transgender athletes which creates a fair level playing field.
- They could do nothing and make all these spaces strictly sex segregated

But the SB chose to play deaf, again, and forces the transgender kids and other kids with cultural mandates to fight for their own rights, where there could be a win-win solution for this dilemma to begin with!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, it was considered as discrimination to let the Gloucester county transgender teen to use a separate bathroom, while it is not discrimination to force a student with cultural or religious requirement to use a separate bathroom?

It is considered discrimination because the transgender child had no choice. The second student has a choice to use either bathroom.

No, the second student has no choice but to use separate bathroom as well. Their cultural or religious mandate prohibit them to use mix-sex changing room or bathroom.

The second student is determining that, not the school- the school is offering two locations. In the first case, the school was determining it and only offering the one location to the student.

It is like offering a double cheese burger to a vegan and you call it an option. No, that is no option.

No, it's like saying "we are having cheeseburgers for lunch. Anyone is welcome to have one. If you would prefer not to eat or see cheeseburgers, you can choose a different lunch you feel comfortable with. The other food choices are down the hall, please pick whichever you like and then return to eat with the rest of us."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I talked to my SB member. Her comment was the guideline is in line with federal guidelines. They shall ignore the petition.

They would have ignored the petition in any case. The SB never takes citizen input seriously.

They know this change is unpopular, which is why it will be passed in the dead of summer at an non-televised event.

When everyone goes back to school and starts to wake up, it will be a done deal.

I pity the poor school administrators who will have to work within this ill conceived policy.

Unpopular with whom? The crazies on DCUM? I'm an FCPS parent and I don't know one person IRL who has any issue with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you OP for posting the link here! I've signed and I agree with the petition completely. It was very well written and it has the common sense that the school board is completely lacking nowadays.

It is not about the potential rapist issue like the other poster mentioned. Rather, it is about protecting the level of privacy that the kids from various background need. The non-discrimination policy protects transgender kids, as well as these other kids from different national origins or religious background.

Policy 1450:
No student, employee, or applicant for employment in the Fairfax County Public Schools shall, on the basis of age, race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, marital status, or disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity, as required by law.

Eh, wrong. Locker rooms are awkward for everyone. Your snowflake can go to the principals office to change.

Why can't the transgender snowflake go to the principal's office to change?

They can if they want. I'm sure regardless of locker rooms most transgender kids will change in a stall for their own safety. Nonetheless, they shouldn't be FORCED to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, it was considered as discrimination to let the Gloucester county transgender teen to use a separate bathroom, while it is not discrimination to force a student with cultural or religious requirement to use a separate bathroom?

It is considered discrimination because the transgender child had no choice. The second student has a choice to use either bathroom.

No, the second student has no choice but to use separate bathroom as well. Their cultural or religious mandate prohibit them to use mix-sex changing room or bathroom.

Sorry hon, FCPS is a secular school system. Based on secular laws and guidelines they have a choice. They can do what they want. Just like a Jehovah's Witness isn't forced to leave the room if a birthday is celebrated, but they do.

Anonymous wrote:So, it was considered as discrimination to let the Gloucester county transgender teen to use a separate bathroom, while it is not discrimination to force a student with cultural or religious requirement to use a separate bathroom?

They're not forced. They're given an option. That's the difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, it was considered as discrimination to let the Gloucester county transgender teen to use a separate bathroom, while it is not discrimination to force a student with cultural or religious requirement to use a separate bathroom?

It is considered discrimination because the transgender child had no choice. The second student has a choice to use either bathroom.

No, the second student has no choice but to use separate bathroom as well. Their cultural or religious mandate prohibit them to use mix-sex changing room or bathroom.

The second student is determining that, not the school- the school is offering two locations. In the first case, the school was determining it and only offering the one location to the student.

It is like offering a double cheese burger to a vegan and you call it an option. No, that is no option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, it was considered as discrimination to let the Gloucester county transgender teen to use a separate bathroom, while it is not discrimination to force a student with cultural or religious requirement to use a separate bathroom?

It is considered discrimination because the transgender child had no choice. The second student has a choice to use either bathroom.

No, the second student has no choice but to use separate bathroom as well. Their cultural or religious mandate prohibit them to use mix-sex changing room or bathroom.

The second student is determining that, not the school- the school is offering two locations. In the first case, the school was determining it and only offering the one location to the student.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I talked to my SB member. Her comment was the guideline is in line with federal guidelines. They shall ignore the petition.

They would have ignored the petition in any case. The SB never takes citizen input seriously.

They know this change is unpopular, which is why it will be passed in the dead of summer at an non-televised event.

When everyone goes back to school and starts to wake up, it will be a done deal.

I pity the poor school administrators who will have to work within this ill conceived policy.

Hope you have some cheese to accompany all that whine.

Anonymous wrote:I talked to my SB member. Her comment was the guideline is in line with federal guidelines. They shall ignore the petition.

They would have ignored the petition in any case. The SB never takes citizen input seriously.

They know this change is unpopular, which is why it will be passed in the dead of summer at an non-televised event.

When everyone goes back to school and starts to wake up, it will be a done deal.

I pity the poor school administrators who will have to work within this ill conceived policy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you OP for posting the link here! I've signed and I agree with the petition completely. It was very well written and it has the common sense that the school board is completely lacking nowadays.

It is not about the potential rapist issue like the other poster mentioned. Rather, it is about protecting the level of privacy that the kids from various background need. The non-discrimination policy protects transgender kids, as well as these other kids from different national origins or religious background.

Policy 1450:
No student, employee, or applicant for employment in the Fairfax County Public Schools shall, on the basis of age, race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, marital status, or disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity, as required by law.

Eh, wrong. Locker rooms are awkward for everyone. Your snowflake can go to the principals office to change.

Why can't the transgender snowflake go to the principal's office to change?

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you are really concerned about a genetic male being in the locker room of your DDs, have you ever talked to anyone like a principal or counselor about how they would handle that?

My understanding is that the trans child has to live as the other gender for 2 yrs before the school will consider them as the other gender. And even then, the school admins have no interest in making every genetic girl uncomfortable in the girls' locker room. Why don't you ask and get the info. before you assume the worst?

As for bathrooms, there are stalls in the girls' bathrooms... what do you think is going to happen? Any trans child is not interested in drawing more attention to him/herself. They just want to pee in safety! Again, ask the principal or counselor. You will find out that it's not as simple as a teen boy just deciding to prank the girls by pretending to be trans for a day and getting into the girls' bathrooms. It's much more involved than that.

Can you imagine having your own child afraid of being beaten up just b/c he/she has to pee? That's what life is like for a trans kid and parents. No one is going to attack your genetic girl using the girls' room. No one is going to be peaking at her. Really.

HAve a conversation about how this all is managed before you force trans kids into a dangerous situation.

Well, your understanding is completely wrong. According to the proposed policy, the child simply has to identify as transgender. No confirmation from a parent, school employee, or doctor is required. No time limit is required.