Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not a fringe issue. Ww know to keep our mouths shut in public. Arlington taxpayers are not all the same. Just because someone doesn’t speak up at a Board meeting doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

You seem to think that there is some sort of “silent majority” that opposes this, but lacks the courage to stand up for its convictions. Sometimes the loudest and most numerous voices do really reflect the majority opinion. I generally keep my mouth shut in public because I don’t want to deal with death threats from MAGA pedophiles in flyover country, but I support 100% what the school board is doing.

Anonymous wrote:It is not a fringe issue. Ww know to keep our mouths shut in public. Arlington taxpayers are not all the same. Just because someone doesn’t speak up at a Board meeting doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

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?

I support ALL kids. Too bad you don't. I doubt you even live in Arlington. If you do, why are you anon? The overwhelming majority of actual Arlington residents supports our board and our policy. We don't care what you outsiders think.

DP. How would you have any idea if the “overwhelming majority” of Arlington residents support this? Talk to some people one on one. Not in a public forum. Any dissenting opinion in public is swiftly met with the person being called a hateful bigot, and that’s the entire conversation.

I live in Arlington. My kids go to school here. I know for a fact that there are liberal Arlingtonians who don’t agree with how APS is handling this and/or do not want biological males in locker rooms with their daughters. It’s not even a fringe opinion.

Yes, the Trump administration is awful, but that doesn’t mean everything APS does is right.

At the school board meeting, the overwhelming majority spoke in favor of the current policy. The trans haters were far fewer and had to import speakers from outside of Arlington. That is how I know. If your dissenting opinion isn't received well, that is itself evidence that it is a fringe opinion in our community.

Anonymous wrote:This will wind up back at the Supreme Court. It will be expensive for APS and FCPS to litigate along the way. Unwise.

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?

APS is, that's the whole purpose of the lawsuit. The Trump Admin is just looking for a reason to take away our funding for these kids.

Or, the school system is picking a fight? They are going to lose.

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?

I support ALL kids. Too bad you don't. I doubt you even live in Arlington. If you do, why are you anon? The overwhelming majority of actual Arlington residents supports our board and our policy. We don't care what you outsiders think.

DP. How would you have any idea if the “overwhelming majority” of Arlington residents support this? Talk to some people one on one. Not in a public forum. Any dissenting opinion in public is swiftly met with the person being called a hateful bigot, and that’s the entire conversation.

I live in Arlington. My kids go to school here. I know for a fact that there are liberal Arlingtonians who don’t agree with how APS is handling this and/or do not want biological males in locker rooms with their daughters. It’s not even a fringe opinion.

Yes, the Trump administration is awful, but that doesn’t mean everything APS does is right.

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?

APS is, that's the whole purpose of the lawsuit. The Trump Admin is just looking for a reason to take away our funding for these kids.

Or, the school system is picking a fight? They are going to lose.

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?

I support ALL kids. Too bad you don't. I doubt you even live in Arlington. If you do, why are you anon? The overwhelming majority of actual Arlington residents supports our board and our policy. We don't care what you outsiders think.

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:

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?

APS is, that's the whole purpose of the lawsuit. The Trump Admin is just looking for a reason to take away our funding for these kids.

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: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?

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?

DNA testing would be much less intrusive and easily covered as part of the K intake process.

most of us don't want a public school division to DNA test our kids just because of your weird obsession with this.

+1

DNA testing? WTAF?