Students Who Refuse to Affirm Transgender Classmates Face Punishment

again, what precautions are being used to protect other kids from ********s that will just say they are transgendered so they can get a peep. The fact that teachers can't even tell parents that johnny is using the girl's lockerroom when Johnny is openly bragging about how he's just saying it so he can go in and check out Mary.

This law is idiotic because it has no way to question validity, verify that this isn't some typical teenager trying to get a peep, and actually makes the girl who complains about comfort the bad guy.

 

First of all the school can consult with the parents. There is nothing that prohibits this and, in fact, the school would have to do this to ensure that the criteria that the child was virtually always behaving as the "opposite-gender" would need to be confirmed. The parents are not opposed to this so I don't know where the problem is. As in the case I cited the child, now 6-years old, has been fundamentally living as a girl since "she" was 18 months old.

The criteria itself which requires the child to be living as the opposite gender is more than adequite to keep "Johnny" from getting a free peep show. Johnny isn't going to dress and behave like a girl all of the time just to get into the girl's bathroom.

 

Obviously they are, and were born with the wrong body...lol.

 

We can revisit this when it actually happens. Until then, you're making up stupid hypotheticals that are completely meaningless.

 

except it's not meaningless. Its the slippery slope liberals deny exists...


but you MUST think of the what-if's when it comes to passing laws.

what's the plan if/when a boy abuses this policy. Since teachers can't tell parents, so no school punishment can occur. Even if a person could get on board with the entire tranny thing, the law still does not address the possibility of abuse. A "We can revisit this when it actually happens" is like saying, "we know there's a loophole we will only address it AFTER someone has fallen victim to it"

That loophole is my biggest argument against. Staff not being able to question any validity of a claim is just leaving a door wide open for abuse of the law.

 

Transgenderism exists. That is an undeniable fact. It's rare, but it exists. Trans-horseism does not. Ergo, the analogy is idiotic.

 

In the case of genuine physiological hermaphrodites, you are surely correct. We appear to have one of those situations in, of all places, Conservative Colorado Springs! It's the sort of nauseating nonsense you'd expect to see pop up in a hyperlib hotbed like Boulder, Colorado, but here's this Rocky Mountain tempest-in-a-teapot: http://www.gazette.com/articles/denver-151566-1st-year.html

The child was "thought" to have two sets of genitals, one male, one female, but evidently (for some reason) that hasn't quite been determined yet. In a country where a hyperlib nothingness like Barack Obama could be elected -- twice -- to the presidency, we'll probably have to start rebuilding every public place in the United States, with bathrooms for "Men", "Women", and "Whatever"....

 

I'm talking about how noone wants to deal with a potential problem until it happens.

proactive > reactive

you even said that you'd just wait and deal with it when it happens.

A very REAL concern is teenage boys that will abuse this policy since there is no consequence to saying they are transgendered for the sole purpose of getting to go into the girl's lockerroom. If he's questioned about going in, he simply says "I'm transgendered" and teachers and staff can't even question it.

So why must we 'wait and see' before we are allowed to address this situation. I wouldn't want my daughter to be the girl that falls victim to a teenager peeping tom just because we don't want to risk hurting a cross-dresser's feelings.

The law is broken as it's written. Hell, demanding a third, unisex bathroom would make more sense than letting males go into a lockerroom unchallenged.

 

Can't even imagine what they do for homework. No wonder so many of them drop out.

 

Is it more or less idiotic than encouraging a child to eventually have healthy body parts amputated by recommendations from the APA that was taken over by a political coup in the 1970s?

More or less? I'll await your answer...

 

More like a major break in.

 

Who said they wanted to change. Their just out for fun.

 

I hear ya. People who are saying that guys peeping wouldn't matter since the shower stalls are individual. But I rebutted that by saying they don't change in individual stalls for dressing out and back in from PE.

That doesn't even mention I went to schools (and since I have even worked at some of my formerschools, I can verify they have not been renovated) that not ALL schools have individual showers. New schools are making them that way, but old schools (built in the 70's and prior) may not always have individual stalls to shower in.

I also realize most of your comments are tongue in cheek cracks on supporters, though.... lol

 

The same people who say that, dont seem to question just why we still segregate boy vs girl bathrooms at all. If those stalls are so good...perhaps all we need are unisex bathrooms? That crowd is too tied up with "feelings" to think things through.

 

I wonder how moderate democrats are pondering this topic in their private thoughts outside the pressures of social conformity in the main stream media? ie: I wonder how they'll vote for this or that Congressperson in the 2014 election behind the privacy of the voting booth?

 

Probably they will vote, just as they have always voted, for the intelligent thoughtful politician who does not become obsessed over "wee-wees" and "who-whoos" and how badly warped kids will be if they somehow got a glimpse of the one that is not their own, and instead would continue to spend their time as a leader addressing issues like the economy, crime, improvements to education and the workplace.

 

I'd think being concerned with child safety wouldn't instantly qualify one to be demonized. Perhaps moderate dems will take offense to that too...

You think every person in that Chic-Fil-A protest was a registered republican? Think again...

 

this issue is more than just pee-pees and who-whoos, it falls under the education umbrella that concerns people, though. With this law, a girl who's been told her entire life, not to take pictures and send pictures to boys from her phone, of naughty parts, is now not allowed to be concerned that a wolf is now in the chicken coup.

I don't think for an instant, a gay guy is going to cause problems in a locker room. Who I think WILL cause problems are the perfectly heterosexual horndog males when one realizes he not only can't get in trouble for doing it so long as he says the 'right thing' (ie- that he's transgendered), but that a teacher can get in trouble if they try to stop it, and the girl will be disciplined if she objects.

I also am concerened with when one boy gets away with it for the 'wrong' reasons, how long before that empowers the rest of the boys to join in.

What this will ultimately lead to is noone will dress out, and the school will be forced to not take off points for dressing out.

 

You have the right issue, but the wrong solution. The idea that men and women seeing each other neeked is bad is a ridiculous holdover from stupid victorian-era morals. It's an idea that is no longer reasonable.

 

Hmm...I thought we were talking about boys and girls, not men and women...how forgetful and blurry the gay cabal gets when talking about getting naked...

 

Of course, that this ridiculous fantasy of how such rules work makes no difference to homophobes,

They simply jump from needing to avoid their horny homosexual fantasies to fantasizing that simply "claiming they are transgender" will be the golden hall pass to the girls' locker room.

And sorry guys, there IS a difference between "gym locker rooms" and "bathrooms". And there will be difference policies for each purpose.

 

Why? Wont' the "transgender" child feel bad about himself if he's forced to "uncomfortably" use the boys gym? How confusing, he gets to use the girl's bathroom but can't use the girl's gym? When crazy gets the reins, it can't even see what it's saying anymore. Sometimes when I hear this type of talk it feels like I'm talking to someone in the last stages of dementia..

 

everything is always goes back to 'surpressing homo tendancies" huh? lol


for one's comfort (usually the broken one) everyone else has to accommodate....


how about the one get their crap together.

 

if I were to ever hear about a boy being allowed in the girls lockerroom, my daughter would never dress out again in public school. And her P.E. grade would not be affected either by refusal to dress out. plain and simple.


no boy, gay, straight, pretending to be gay to get a peep show..... no boy goes to a lockerroom with my daughter