Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My workplace has a men's bathroom, a women's bathroom, and an ADA-compliant single person "anyone" bathroom. It is used by many, most often if the other bathroom has no available stalls.

APS and FCPS could have done that solution in all schools for less money than they are paying with legal fees and other costs. It is totally astounding they did not do so.

I disagree with the Grimm decision, but I think it said that Grimm could use the boys' bathroom. (I think Grimm is a trans boy?) I think it said the single sex option was not okay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Sounds like fcps is losing , what a bunch of idiots. Stop the trans and move on

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/judge-dismisses-virginia-schools-lawsuit-over-federal-funding/3984870/?amp=1

It's based on a question of which court has jurisdiction, not on the merits of the case. No one is losing.

How could they file in wrong court? Wilkie is supposed to be one of the best.

The ruling says it is a federal court issue. It wasn't dropped because of merit, but because of jursidicition

Anonymous wrote:My workplace has a men's bathroom, a women's bathroom, and an ADA-compliant single person "anyone" bathroom. It is used by many, most often if the other bathroom has no available stalls.

APS and FCPS could have done that solution in all schools for less money than they are paying with legal fees and other costs. It is totally astounding they did not do so.

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Certainly not Trump or the Republicans who have made our kids pawns in their political games.

Don’t blame APS for following the law while Trump fcks around and pulls these ridiculous stunts.

I suspect there are many of us in Arlington who are those of us appalled by much of the administrations actions. But, I also suspect that there are a lot of people like me who do not believe that gender identity should replace sex identity when it comes to bathrooms and sports, and we think that affording those children who require a private bathroom a reasonable solution to a difficult problem. Painting this issue as a Trump created problem is inaccurate for me at least.

I think it’s really an ACLU-created problem, because they brought the Grimm case that objected to having the trans child use a separate bathroom.

I think most people would consider separate bathrooms and changing spaces as a solution that protects all students, but the ACLU fought against it and won.

Can we designate some trans boy and trans girl bathrooms?

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Certainly not Trump or the Republicans who have made our kids pawns in their political games.

Don’t blame APS for following the law while Trump fcks around and pulls these ridiculous stunts.

I suspect there are many of us in Arlington who are those of us appalled by much of the administrations actions. But, I also suspect that there are a lot of people like me who do not believe that gender identity should replace sex identity when it comes to bathrooms and sports, and we think that affording those children who require a private bathroom a reasonable solution to a difficult problem. Painting this issue as a Trump created problem is inaccurate for me at least.

I think it’s really an ACLU-created problem, because they brought the Grimm case that objected to having the trans child use a separate bathroom.

I think most people would consider separate bathrooms and changing spaces as a solution that protects all students, but the ACLU fought against it and won.

Can we designate some trans boy and trans girl bathrooms?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Certainly not Trump or the Republicans who have made our kids pawns in their political games.

Don’t blame APS for following the law while Trump fcks around and pulls these ridiculous stunts.

I suspect there are many of us in Arlington who are those of us appalled by much of the administrations actions. But, I also suspect that there are a lot of people like me who do not believe that gender identity should replace sex identity when it comes to bathrooms and sports, and we think that affording those children who require a private bathroom a reasonable solution to a difficult problem. Painting this issue as a Trump created problem is inaccurate for me at least.

I think it’s really an ACLU-created problem, because they brought the Grimm case that objected to having the trans child use a separate bathroom.

I think most people would consider separate bathrooms and changing spaces as a solution that protects all students, but the ACLU fought against it and won.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Certainly not Trump or the Republicans who have made our kids pawns in their political games.

Don’t blame APS for following the law while Trump fcks around and pulls these ridiculous stunts.

I suspect there are many of us in Arlington who are those of us appalled by much of the administrations actions. But, I also suspect that there are a lot of people like me who do not believe that gender identity should replace sex identity when it comes to bathrooms and sports, and we think that affording those children who require a private bathroom a reasonable solution to a difficult problem. Painting this issue as a Trump created problem is inaccurate for me at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Certainly not Trump or the Republicans who have made our kids pawns in their political games.

Don’t blame APS for following the law while Trump fcks around and pulls these ridiculous stunts.

I suspect there are many of us in Arlington who are those of us appalled by much of the administrations actions. But, I also suspect that there are a lot of people like me who do not believe that gender identity should replace sex identity when it comes to bathrooms and sports, and we think that affording those children who require a private bathroom a reasonable solution to a difficult problem. Painting this issue as a Trump created problem is inaccurate for me at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Certainly not Trump or the Republicans who have made our kids pawns in their political games.

Don’t blame APS for following the law while Trump fcks around and pulls these ridiculous stunts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems is defining who is what. Trans, Gender fluid, non Binary, etc.
Biological sex is definable.

Yes, that’s at the crux of this whole thing. Replacing objective fact (biological sex) with subjective identity/feeling (gender identity).

And you would have APS do what - do physical checks of kids' genitalia before allowing a kid to use a particular bathroom?

No. But, if there is a complaint, it should be investigated.

Do you really think that people did not complain about the pervert in Arlington and Fairfax locker rooms?

Investigate how - with a genitalia check to ensure the person is female enough for you?

the pervert in the Arlington locker room (outside of school hours) was a sex offender, who never should have been near any locker room of either gender. I don't get your take because unlike you I'm not ok with such a person being in the boys room either. The gender of the room he entered wasn't relevant; he should not have been allowed in to either room.

Why are you people so obsessed with imaginary genitalia checks? Sex can be determined bye eyesight 99% of the time. If there is any question, then a cheek swab will suffice.

Go peddle your hysterics somewhere else.

Or how about we keep the policy to let each student select the restroom that aligns with their gender identity instead of giving someone else the job of monitoring their sexuality. You're the one who's peddling hysterics, most of us are fine with the policy as is.

+1 million

Translated into legal language, you are taking the position that where there is a conflict of rights between sex-based rights and gender-based rights, as there is here, you do not think girls and boys should retain sex-based rights.

I do not think you can truly assert most people are okay with that position.

and yet most in Arlington ARE ok with it.

+1

For now, when things get cut or there are massive legal bills will they still support this tiny minority?

Yes, we will protect our vulnerable kids from the bigots and raging a-hole MAGAs.

And who is protecting the students who will lose special education services and meals due to these policies?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Sounds like fcps is losing , what a bunch of idiots. Stop the trans and move on

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/judge-dismisses-virginia-schools-lawsuit-over-federal-funding/3984870/?amp=1

It's based on a question of which court has jurisdiction, not on the merits of the case. No one is losing.

How could they file in wrong court? Wilkie is supposed to be one of the best.

The ruling says it is a federal court issue. It wasn't dropped because of merit, but because of jursidicition

Do you have A link to the opinion? The article doesn’t say that and it was filed in federal court. Eastern district of Virginia is a federal court. The article says the judge said he lacked jurisdiction. That doesn’t necessarily mean wrong court. I suspect t has more to do with the fact that nothing has actually happened. Dept of Ed told districts that they would withhold finding. They haven’t actually done it yet. But I am speculating bc I haven’t read the opinion

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Sounds like fcps is losing , what a bunch of idiots. Stop the trans and move on

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/judge-dismisses-virginia-schools-lawsuit-over-federal-funding/3984870/?amp=1

It's based on a question of which court has jurisdiction, not on the merits of the case. No one is losing.

How could they file in wrong court? Wilkie is supposed to be one of the best.

The ruling says it is a federal court issue. It wasn't dropped because of merit, but because of jursidicition