Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

OK people. Here's what I think they are talking about.

They are talking about having one toilet bathrooms that lock for transgender individuals. This is not about having girls and boys go into bathrooms together at the same time.

The problem is that the transgendered person does not feel comfortable going into the bathroom that matches the person's parts, yet cannot go in the bathroom for the sex that the person identifies with. The solution is to have a "unisex" one toilet room that the person can go in, lock the door, and use the toilet.

I hope you can all stop being hysterical now.

It is like the Family bathrooms that were installed in the Rec centers. I do not have a problem with them. For many schools it will involve a sign in front of a bathroom that already exists.

+1. We've all seen what I believe they're talking about... the single, self contained restroom with toilet and sink behind the same door. My interpretation was that they meant something similar to a mall family restroom, or the style of restroom in most gas stations. If one person goes in there at a time, why the need for assigning different ones to different genders? Just put "restroom" on the sign and then anyone of any of the infinite gender identities possible can comfortably use it. Not a big deal or inconvenience to cisgender individuals but could mean a lot to others who are different in their gender identity and could go far to help with a general feeling of acceptance and comfort. Isn't that a decent ultimate goal?

Nope, that is not what they are talking about. Not at all.

They are saying they can use whichever bathroom they identify with. So a male teacher, who feels female, can use the girls room. They say, you can't discriminate against them by saying they are prohibited from the girls room if they "identify" as a female.

Ok. Why is that a problem? What do you think people are going to be doing in the restroom? Because I think that a person who goes into the "girls" restroom will... go into the stall and use the restroom. I don't care about the body parts of the person in the stall next to me when I am in there doing what needs to be done in a restroom. It's totally irrelevant to me who else is in there.

It is an unsupervised place. They shouldn't allow group bathrooms to be mixed. Single bathrooms I'm ok with.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, I want unisex staff bathrooms! As a teacher, there is a 10:1 ratio of female to male teachers, but a 1:1 ratio of bathrooms! I just want a single stall bathroom that is designated for "STAFF" regardless of sex!

You want to go from 2 to 1? Single seat rooms should be unisex for sure. The issue is the kids who have large shared bathrooms.....

Every staff restroom in all 3 schools I've taught in has been single seat, and every. single. one. has had a sign on the door that said "MEN" or "WOMEN". It's stupid.

Ours doesn't. It says "adult restroom". I guess they could just change it to say "restroom"

A single, locking bathroom with both a toilet and sink that anyone can use? We have that at my office - in addition to male and female-designated bathrooms. It works well enough, why not have that in schools also? I don't get the outrage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are voting about this tomorrow at the school board meeting.

Funny, no email blasts from the district to let parents know or give input on the proposed changes.

Seems like they are trying to slip this in under the table with as little parent input as possible.

No matter where you fall on the political and social spectrum, that alone should bother you.

I will be there, but standing on the side of love and supporting the proposed nondiscrimination policy.

Whatever your perspective, make your voice heard. I happen to think that you can be against this policy and still be compassionate. I think it is far less loving and supporting of these troubled children to push through an ill conceived and undeveloped policy without working through all the what ifs and potential problems just to be trendy. Why put those kids through the controversy that we all know is going to ensue the first time a "gender fluid" high school student decides he/she is going to start switching between the hoys and gils locker rooms? Why not let the parents know in advance what sort of punishment might occur for the child who decides they are not comfortable changing next to the student who is anatomically a different gender but who decides to use that other locker room? Will the first kid be branded a bully? Under the policy will that kid be "reeducated" to fall in line with the new policy? All these kinks should be worked out and debated BEFORE fcps locks down a policy that they know has the potential to be very controversial.


If you really believe that this is important then take the time to do it right.

If the district truly believes that this is the right thing to do then there is zero need for secrecy. They should proudly publicize it and do it out in the open, not slip it in secretly hoping parents don't notice until a controversy occurs after tue fact.

For them to push this through under the rug and without parent input is wrong. How many months did they spend publicly debating the start time for HS kids before nailing down a policy? This is far more serious and far reaching and to push it through without time to listen to the opinions of the 100,000+ parents in the district is wrong.

This is too important to rush through without genuine reflection and respect for the views of the people of this district.

Anonymous wrote:They are voting about this tomorrow at the school board meeting.

Funny, no email blasts from the district to let parents know or give input on the proposed changes.

Seems like they are trying to slip this in under the table with as little parent input as possible.

No matter where you fall on the political and social spectrum, that alone should bother you.

I will be there, but standing on the side of love and supporting the proposed nondiscrimination policy.

They are voting about this tomorrow at the school board meeting.

Funny, no email blasts from the district to let parents know or give input on the proposed changes.

Seems like they are trying to slip this in under the table with as little parent input as possible.

No matter where you fall on the political and social spectrum, that alone should bother you.

At DD's high school many of the girls' room stalls do not lock and some don't have doors. They'd have to fix all that first. Right?

The Board decision could lead to mixed sex bathrooms and locker rooms at our schools. We need to fight so that this doesn't happen.



Privacy Policy | More Newsletters
NBC Washington
Charlie Cranford Teague
Updated at 8:00 AM EDT on Saturday, Apr 25, 2015

Charlie Cranford Teague feels respected and accepted at South Lakes High School. Now, the gender-fluid teen from Reston, Virginia wants the same respect for transgender and gender-fluid students throughout Fairfax County schools.

"No one's entitled to take away my rights based on who I am," said Charlie, 16, who identifies as a girl and a boy. "I am not confused. I am not going through a phase."
Supporters Push Fairfax to Include Gender Identity in Nondiscrimination
[DC] Supporters Push Fairfax to Include Gender Identity in Nondiscrimination
Transgender rights supporters want Fairfax County schools to include gender identity in the district's nondiscrimination policy. (Published Friday, Apr 24, 2015)

Charlie attended the Fairfax County School Board meeting last night, where the board heard public comment on a proposal to add gender identity to the district's non-discrimination policy. That policy already included age, race, national origin, disability and religion; last November, the board added protections based on sexual orientation.

The comments at the podium seemed evenly split between support for the proposal and concern.
Fairfax Co. Schools Looks at "Gender Identity" and Discrimination
[DC] Fairfax Co. Schools Looks at "Gender Identity" and Discrimination
The largest school district in the DC region is considering adding "gender identity" to its non-discrimination policy. (Published Friday, Apr 24, 2015)

Supporters said the change would be a powerful statement of acceptance from the school district.

Transgender and gender-fluid students "would take that as complete support from the adults in their community," said Tara Cranford Teague, Charlie's mother, in an interview. "They need that support."

Charlie's father, Jason Cranford Teague, said, "It's difficult to see people who are so against a lifestyle that doesn't harm them in any way."

Some opponents voiced concerns that a policy change could lead to mixed-sex bathrooms.

"Providing such access is a safety issue," said Andrea Lafferty, president of the Traditional Values Coalition, at the meeting. "It endangers children and violates the rights of both students and parents."

Several other Virginia school districts have recently dealt with transgender students. In Stafford County, an elementary school was permitting a transgender fourth-grader to use the bathroom of the gender with which the child identified. But some parents complained.

In March, the Stafford County school board responded by approving a superintendent's directive giving that student two choices: the bathroom that matched the student's sex assigned at birth or an adult restroom in the school.

Now a group called "Save our Schools" is urging the Stafford school board to formally bar any mixed-sex restrooms.

The Fairfax County school board will vote on the proposed amendment May 7. If it passes, the school district says it would hire a consultant to help plan policies, including bathroom use and locker rooms.

Meanwhile, Charlie, who has identified as a boy and a girl since second grade, believes that the Fairfax policy has to change.

"Why would you want to punish somebody for being who they are?" Charlie asked.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Fairfax-Co-Schools-Consider-Adding-Protections-for-Transgender-Students-301266251.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people "trans" people do you really think are in FCPS, students included? Surely you could count on one hand, if that. This is getting blown WAY out of proportion thanks to the media.

No, actually, thanks to the board. They should just drop this. The media has just brought light to it.

If some of us want to fight this, then what are we going to do? Let's get involved and fight this.

Fairfax parents and taxpayers must also speak up before this policy change is approvedand Fairfax County opens the door to the same quandary. You can email all Fairfax County School Boardmembers at: fairfaxcountyschoolboard@fcps.edu.


All children need a school environment that is safe and comfortable. Clearly, schools must protect vulnerable students from bullying and harassing behavior. Staff must identify such behavior and address problems as they arise. Students can also play a role in notifying adults of problem behavior. Children can be taught to be kind and compassionate toward one another.

The current FCPS Nondiscrimination Policy already prohibits discrimination based on sex, thus it already protects transgendered youth from harassment. The School Board does not need to add more categories to an already sound policy. They certainly do not need to allow students who are biologically male to use female facilities, or vice versa, under the guise of preventing bullying. This is a violation of student and staff privacy and could be a safety concern.

Additionally, FairfaxCounty also has a very sound dress code policy. In part it says, “Any clothing that interferes with or disrupts the educational environment is unacceptable…”


Let’s keep the focus on education in a safe, andorderly environment.



The Stafford and Gloucester County School Boards did the right thing to state that students must use the restrooms according to their biological gender and to provide an accommodation for the affected student.



Fairfax County parents, grandparents and taxpayers can stop this scenario from happening here by voicing their concerns to the School Board.



The School Board willvote on May 7 to add “gender identity” to the FCPS Nondiscrimination Policy1450.



YOUR URGENT ACTION ISNEEDED:



1. Share this information with others and implore them to speak up.

2. EMAIL all Fairfax County School Board Members at: fairfaxcountyschoolboard@fcps.edu.

3. Attend the two School Board meetings where this will be discussed, April 23 and May 7 at Luther Jackson MS, 3020 Gallows Rd., Falls Church 7PM

4. To speak before the Board on this topic sign up online at the link below. http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/meetings/requestspeak-online-rm.shtml Sign up begins at 6am on April 20th for the April 23 meeting or May 4 for the May 7th meeting.



Background Information

Attorney General Mark Herring produced an Opinion on March 4, 2015, saying that VA School Boards have the authority to add sexual orientation and gender identity to their nondiscrimination policies. Herring’s recent opinion contradicted a 2002 AG Opinion, which said school boards need General Assembly approval for the change.

(http://ag.virginia.gov/files/14-080_Ebbin.pdf

Anonymous wrote:How many people "trans" people do you really think are in FCPS, students included? Surely you could count on one hand, if that. This is getting blown WAY out of proportion thanks to the media.

No, actually, thanks to the board. They should just drop this. The media has just brought light to it.

How many people "trans" people do you really think are in FCPS, students included? Surely you could count on one hand, if that. This is getting blown WAY out of proportion thanks to the media.

That suit was dismissed quickly. If it becomes "discrimination" though, it will not be dismissed and will be a big problem.

Anonymous wrote:Well, the board is only voting on "non discrimination" statement. They don't know what it means for the bathrooms yet (will hire consultant, will Cost more $).

I don't think extra unisex bathrooms are viewed as the "answer" for transgender students. The argument is that other students will see the person using "special bathroom" and that is already discrimination. In another county a lawsuit is filed, and unisex bathrooms are specifically called out as "non solution".

http://www.gazettejournal.net/index.php/news/news_article/aclu_proceeds_with_complaint_against_gloucester_schools


In California, transgender students can use bathrooms of the sex they identify with... I'm not sure we are as liberal in FC, but the county has been leaning liberal for a long long time.

The biggest issue I see are more with the locker rooms than bathrooms -- no really stalls there. I'm worried about piping Toms going to girls bathroom/locker room and claiming that "today I identify with a girl and go ahead and prove otherwise"...

You are correct. The citizens may not be that liberal but the board is. Even as bad as is in CA they want more.

A Spa World in Centerville got sued last year when a "girl" with boy parts wasn't allowed in the woman's locker room.

Well, the board is only voting on "non discrimination" statement. They don't know what it means for the bathrooms yet (will hire consultant, will Cost more $).

I don't think extra unisex bathrooms are viewed as the "answer" for transgender students. The argument is that other students will see the person using "special bathroom" and that is already discrimination. In another county a lawsuit is filed, and unisex bathrooms are specifically called out as "non solution".

http://www.gazettejournal.net/index.php/news/news_article/aclu_proceeds_with_complaint_against_gloucester_schools


In California, transgender students can use bathrooms of the sex they identify with... I'm not sure we are as liberal in FC, but the county has been leaning liberal for a long long time.

The biggest issue I see are more with the locker rooms than bathrooms -- no really stalls there. I'm worried about piping Toms going to girls bathroom/locker room and claiming that "today I identify with a girl and go ahead and prove otherwise"...

Anonymous wrote:

They are saying they can use whichever bathroom they identify with. So a male teacher, who feels female, can use the girls room. They say, you can't discriminate against them by saying they are prohibited from the girls room if they "identify" as a female.

If you believe that any male teacher would use the girls room in FCPS, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Aren't you worried about the female teachers using the boys room?

Aren't FCPS restrooms like restrooms in public schools in DC and MCPS, where teachers and kids don't share? So a male teacher, or a female teacher who was born male, wouldn't be "using" either the "girls" room or the "boys" room, he or she would be using the "staff" bathroom, which is probably already unisex.

I've worked in many schools, and the only time I've ever entered a student restroom were

1) Professional development days when there were no kids in the building, and every single staff member is trying to use the handful of staff restrooms because we all have the same 5 minute break.

2) When I've gone into a student restroom to deal with a student related issue, e.g. once I went in the boy's room during a fire drill to retrieve a kindergartener with special needs who was scared of the noise and was cowering with his hands over his ears.