Right Wingers file lawsuit against Fairfax County School Board over “Gender Identity”

December 29, 2015

question

What is “Gender”? What is “identify”?

The latest in the ongoing saga of the contentious new transgender student policy at the Virginia district. This is actually pretty funny. Apparently the district never defined the newly protected category of “Gender Identity” but they did warn students in the Student Handbook that they will be suspended if they discriminate against it. The suit, filed December 21 by district resident Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition hinges on that fact, and also that the state has a legal principal, “Dillion’s Rule” that prohibits municipalities from creating their own protected classes.

The LOLsuit’s plaintiffs are Lafferty, Fairfax County high school student Jack Doe, his parents John and jane Doe, and his friends, also John and Jane Doe. [PDF]

From the complaint:

“68. On May 7, 2015 “gender identity” and “gender expression” were added to the Booklet as grounds for student discipline, but Defendant did not define “gender identity” or “gender expression” anywhere in the Booklet. (Exhibit F).

  1. Neither “gender identity” nor “gender expression” are defined in the Virginia Constitution or Code of Virginia, including Section 22.1-279.3 which Defendant cites as the authority for drafting and revising the Booklet.
  1. Jack Doe is particularly distressed about the Board’s decision to add “gender identity” to the non-discrimination policy and to the student code of conduct because “gender identity” is not defined in either the policy or the code, so Jack Doe has no idea what words or conduct might be interpreted as discriminating on the basis of “gender identity,” and therefore does not know what speech or conduct might subject him to discipline, including suspension.
  1. Jack Doe is distressed about the Board’s decision to add “gender identity” to the non- discrimination policy and student code of conduct because he understands that the decision will mean that the restrooms, locker rooms and other intimate spaces set apart, respectively, for boys and girls, will now be open to students who might have the physical features of one sex but are permitted to use the bathroom of the opposite sex which the student “identifies” as, whatever that means.
  1. Because the new policy and code of conduct are not sufficiently defined, Jack Doe has no way of knowing whether he can, for example, question someone who appears to be a girl using the boys’ restroom or locker room, refer to someone by a certain pronoun or even compliment someone on his/her attire without being subject to discipline for “discrimination.”
  1. Jack Doe is nervous about having to think about every statement or action and its potential sexual connotations to third parties before interacting with students and teachers, and the prospect of having to interact in such an uncertain environment creates significant distress to the point that it adversely affects his ability to participate in and benefit from the educational program.
  1. Jack Doe is terrified of the thought of having to share intimate spaces with students who have the physical features of a girl, seeing such conduct as an invasion of his privacy, invasion of fellow students’ privacy and a violation of the though patterns and understanding about male and female relationships which are part of his cultural values.
  1. Because of Defendant’s actions, Jack Doe cannot regard school as a safe place where he can learn what he needs to be a productive and well-educated adult without fear of harassment, being charged with harassment, and having his speech and conduct chilled by the fear of reprisals or of discipline for unknowingly violating the ambiguous code of conduct.
  1. Jack Doe’s ability to fully and freely participate in and benefit from the school’s educational program has been significantly diminished by the Defendant’s actions in adding the undefined terms “gender identity” and “gender expression” to the non-discrimination policy and student code of conduct.”

 

[sic]

 

images

74 Responses to “Right Wingers file lawsuit against Fairfax County School Board over “Gender Identity””


  1. I have a friend who calls these toboggan laws, imagining everyone jumping on the sled with no idea where it’s going, or how to steer, but not wanting to be left out.

  2. Sketcher Says:

    Brilliant – let’s see how the school responds.

  3. Janetwo Says:

    I cant fathom why the progressives cant endorse this. One does not need to be committed to traditional values to embrace plain common sense. I salute the people who filed the suit. In fact, every day that the feminists and the LGB community keeps supporting the trans is contributing to erode all the gains that gays and women struggle for so long to get. Who would have thought that the intellectual masturbation of the post-modernists would have undermined the left to that extent?

    • Sketcher Says:

      @ Janetwo – I absolutely agree. The left has turned into some sort of Frankenstein monster that I don’t recognise any more.

  4. wildwomyn Says:

    I graduated from a FFX County school, and currently live in the County. I think I need to file an amicus brief, on behalf of science and females to not have to share bathroom and locker room space with born males.

  5. southwest88 Says:

    Thank you Gallus for your can-of-worms watch! I know that these right wingers are not doing this out of any concern for the liberation of women but if two enemies of women want to tear each other up while we try to battle each of them on our own fronts, works for me!

    • GallusMag Says:

      Yeah, this group is hideously anti-woman and anti-gay. Still pretty funny though. “..the opposite sex which the student “identifies” as, whatever that means.” LOL

      • Janetwo Says:

        There is a vaccuum left by the systematic silencing and intimidation of the radical feminists. The gist of the argument of the lawsuit is nothing more than many of points discussed at gendertrender. It is deeply unsettling for me to side with people that I otherwise completely disagree with. I find it pretty dangerous for women and gays to leave it to the rightwing to defend sex segregated spaces.

  6. Mortadella Says:

    ???

  7. belinda Says:

    Why are left-wing types so willing to accomodate a very small number of trans at the expense of women?

    • Freyja Says:

      Belinda, here is the best analysis I have ever found about the left’s resentment of feminism:

      http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2015/10/28/4340688.htm

    • Freyja Says:

      Here is a statement from “the left” that I remember hearing as a young teenager. Stokely Carmichael, a leader of the civil rights movement (which was definitely part of the left) said

      “The only place for women in the movement is prone.”

      I thought the civil rights movement was noble, and I idealized the leaders. Carmichael’s contempt for women burned itself into my mind. The men of the left liked it just fine when women were simply there to make coffee and be sexually available. They were scornful and disbelieving when women began to speak up for themselves.

      https://flexner.blogs.brynmawr.edu/2011/10/27/the-only-place-for-women-in-the-movement-is-%E2%80%98prone%E2%80%99-2/

      • Susan Nunes Says:

        His attitude was typical of men on the “left” and still is. These guys are big on porn and prostitution hiding the exploitation and human rights violation under the guise of “civil liberties.” Their disgusting attitude towards women helped spur the so-called “second-wave” feminism of late 1960s and early 1970s.

      • The Adversary Says:

        Prone is a firing position. With a rifle. I would guess Carmichael meant women sharpshooters. Lying on your back is supine, not prone.

      • Susan Nunes Says:

        Nope. It has nothing to do with a “firing position.” Carmichael meant exact what he said. Prone means lying flat. Women’s place is on their back or on their stomach to be used for sex. It was a typical attitude of so-called men on the left back then.

      • GallusMag Says:

        @the adversary- maybe he meant they were prone to catching a cold.😛

      • Susan Nunes Says:

        Supposedly Carmichael said it in jest, but more than one person didn’t see the humor in it.

    • Susan Nunes Says:

      Because the so-called “left,” especially men, are bigger sexists than those on the right. Instead of being anti-feminist for paternal reasons, these “leftist” men care about women only for easier sexual access.

      • Freyja Says:

        Hi, The Adversary. Thank you for your note about “prone” meaning firing position. I googled a few discussion sites, and pretty much everyone agrees that he meant it as a sexual reference. It was not part of a discussion of military tactics. However, several commenters said that this one statement, out of all Carmichael’s life, does not represent his thinking about women in the movement at all.

        It made me realize, his momentary remark was gleefully repeated by *other people* (which means men) for years on end. The misogyny in the left was alive and well, which is why the remark lived on for decades. But it’s unfair to reduce Carmichael to that one statement.

      • Ashland Avenue Says:

        Freyja, I have no problem holding that remark against Carmichael. It was a vile and violent thing to say, singular in its hatred, and one doesn’t say something like that unless one means it. It should be held against him for time immemorial.

        @ The Adversary: Yeeeah…that’s…a stretch.

    • coelacanth Says:

      “Why are left-wing types so willing to accomodate a very small number of trans at the expense of women?”

      For the same reason left-wing types turn a blind eye to mass organized rape of young girls over decades: fear of being called “racist” (or “transphobic”). Racism (and related identarian “phobias”) are to the left-wing worse than being called Nazi or child rapist or pedophile.

      After reading Annemarie Waters’ UK research, you may want to look up what happened to women in Germany (and other parts of Europe) on New Year’s Eve 2015. Mass, organized sexual assaults that the left-wing media will not report because such reports are “racist”. The left-wing is now the right-wing. There is no difference in outcome.

      http://www.annemariewaters.org/rotherham-the-perfect-storm-an-investigation-in-to-muslim-grooming-gangs/

  8. kesher Says:

    I am Jack’s fear of the trans cult.

  9. Bea Says:

    Don’t forget: some of these gendershits “identify” as “faeries” and other fictional characters. So yeah, let’s codify into fucking law faeself’s right to lure your children into their faerie circle with a magic flute.

  10. Meg Says:

    So if I am to understand this correctly, this lawsuit is on behalf of “Jack Doe,” a boy who is afraid of being accused of sexual harassment and whose “free speech” (read: misogynist speech) might be curtailed by the presence of girls in the locker room.

    Sigh.

    It goes without saying that putting girls in the boys locker room is a disaster waiting to happen – FOR THE GIRL. Women and girls are the ones targeted for violence, sexual and otherwise.

    I’m willing to bet dimes to dollars this lawsuit might actually succeed, under the presumption that the rights of boys are too important to compromise for the sake of someone’s gender identity. The rights of girls? Well those are up for debate. Aren’t they?

    • morag99 Says:

      ‘So if I am to understand this correctly, this lawsuit is on behalf of “Jack Doe,” a boy who is afraid of being accused of sexual harassment and whose “free speech” (read: misogynist speech) might be curtailed by the presence of girls in the locker room.’

      Yes! That’s how I read the mealy-mouth stuff about the violation of his “thought patterns” (ha!) and of his “understanding about male and female relationships which are part of his cultural values.”

      And while a girl would complain about the inappropriate sexual connotations — i.e., sexist harassment — of girls having to undress and use toilets in the same room as boys, Jack, on the other hand, is “nervous” about the “sexual connotations” of the things that HE, himself, might be compelled to say. And the problem is not sexual harassment itself, but that he might get into trouble when his “thought patterns” force him to sexually harass the wrong target!

      It’s so cute. Misogynists on the Left, and misogynists on the Right. Meanwhile, feminists get simultaneously blamed and ignored — even as our analyses are being hijacked, bastardized, and twisted — by all sides, and all at the same time! It’s an incredible story. I hope it gets read some day, after its posthumous publication. Jesus.

      • Meg Says:

        Did you catch the part about how females in the locker room would interrupt his “thought patterns” related to his “cultural beliefs” about male and female roles?

        “a violation of the thought patterns and understanding about male and female relationships which are part of his cultural values.”

        This lawsuit is basically saying that sexist beliefs are a matter of religious freedom. Girls in public schools will just have to put up with boy’s “expressing their beliefs” that they’re fit only for kitchen duty and reproduction. No mention of whether girls have a right to NOT be exposed to sexist beliefs.

        Thanks Hobby Lobby and transpolitics. Working hand in hand to screw over women and girls, every time.


  11. We need to be wary of aligning too closely with people who so fundamentally disagree with us (or outright disrespect us and infringe on our rights.) Unfortunately, groups are judged by the company they keep, which is exactly why having T attached to LGB has been so poisonous for us. However, I believe that classic human/civil rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc. Are relevant to all, used by all, and must be vigorously defended by all. They apply even to those one might despise. It’s unfortunate and profoundly unjust that this lawsuit is being taken seriously because the person complaining is a man…But if it succeeds, it sets a precedent that feminists can use and is a victory for those basic rights I mentioned…if feminists can be taken seriously enough to file that kind of lawsuit. Call me crazy, but after Houston, I’m somewhat hopeful.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Speaking of Houston, it’s interesting that the head of the largest $$$ LGBT Org in America: HRC’s Chad Griffin, outlines the sole new tactic in upcoming electoral battles around legalizing male use of female areas of public nudity …..drumroll please…..and the winner is….Silencing the political speech of opponents.

      From here:
      https://www.frontiersmedia.com/frontiers-blog/2015/12/23/hrcs-chad-griffin-looks-ahead-special-report-videos/

      “The other aspect that was not pursued, Griffin says, which could become an important piece of a push-back strategy, is the fact that the horrendous ads the anti-trans forces used “should not have passed the Standards and Practices department of any television station,” Griffin says. “These were not fair political ads, they were lies. Okay fine, that happens in political campaigns. But these ads defamed an entire portion of the population in Houston, Texas.”

      This is not incidental if put to the station managers properly. For instance, during the federal Prop 8 trial, the No on 8 campaign was found to have run ads that were intentionally based on animus, which is one of the reasons the judge ruled against them. Using this as legal precedent, complaints could be brought to the Federal Communications Commission against the station alleging harm or potential harm if the ads are proven to be lies based in animus and are still broadcast. Any complaint that could jeopardize a broadcast license and get publicity that could turn off viewers would be taken seriously.

      Another possible political strategy is to hold accountable and apply pressure on the prestigious American Association of Political Consultants to update their Code of Ethics to include sexual orientation and gender identity for 2016. In 2009, the AAPC honored Frank Schubert and his then-partner Jeff Flint for successfully passing Prop 8.

      Right now, the code reads:

      I will use no appeal to voters which is based on racism, sexism, religious intolerance or any form of unlawful discrimination and will condemn those who use such practices. In turn, I will work for equal voting rights and privileges for all citizens.
      I will refrain from false or misleading attacks on an opponent or member of his or her family and will do everything in my power to prevent others from using such tactics.”
      ————————–

      Mind you, his group spent 3 million dollars on HERO, double the spending of the opposition’s campaign. And it’s the exact same tactic the HRC uses to squelch the concerns of Lesbians and Feminists: Silencing, censoring, and no-platforming. It is literally the ONLY tactic they have. They have NO RATIONAL RESPONSE to the erosion of women’s rights caused by their expansion of male rights.

      I expect to see extreme quasi-legal measures taken by LGBT orgs and the Obama administration whose purpose is to subvert oppositional discourse and the public right of reply. It reminds me of when the office of Medicaid and Medicare funding proposed changing regulations to cover sex-role related cosmetic surgery with federal funds. They launched a 30 day public response period. Within HOURS, it was withdrawn, and the whole thing was pushed through back channels on the down-low.

      https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/medicare/

      • kesher Says:

        “They launched a 30 day public response period. Within HOURS, it was withdrawn”

        The public doesn’t like the idea of an overburdened Medicare paying thousands for cosmetic surgery for the mentally ill. Who woulda thunk it?

  12. hearthrising Says:

    The lawsuit sounds absolutely ridiculous and I can see the progressives slamming it as such, without any awareness of how ridiculous the un-definedness of their words is in the first place. I guess that last sentence itself sounds nonsensical. You can’t take issue with nonsense on its own terms without sounding batty yourself.

  13. drycamp Says:

    Hey whatever. Perhaps at least in a limited way, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This lawsuit apparently points out a big hole in the whole protect-trans argument, one that we saw in Houston as well: no one has defined terms!

    In the Houston law, a trans was anyone who says he is one, which can change from day to day, so let’s let him into the women’s locker room without delay on his unsupported say-so! At least on the days that he declares that he’s “really” a woman! So also here. Wtf is a “gender identity”? Does this cover someone who “identifies” as a “faerie” as Bea says? How about someone who says he’s an elephant? What about a 50 year old father of seven who says he’s a six year old girl? We just take these perverts’ word for anything and everything? A normal person who says that Stefonknee is not a six year old girl will be punished?

    @belinda:

    “Why are left-wing types so willing to accomodate a very small number of trans at the expense of women?”

    Because they are sexists in disguise, now unmasked. It’s the patriarchy all over again. Be warned.

  14. mizknowitall Says:

    Strange bedfellows indeed!

    While I find it beyond repugnant to be endorsing anything The Traditional Values Coalition is doing… The silliness of the Humpty Dumpty Trans Activists and SJWs, “gender (and it’s conflation of sex)” is whatever the heck I say it is, has to stop!

    For example where does the “Demienby” go to pee? I know right? The what? You know! The Demienby! Someone who identifies partially as one non binary gender and partially as another non binary gender…

    I’m sorry, but as someone with a dictionary… just trying to figure out what that seeminly insane phrasing could possibly mean gives me a headache! That anyone could actually be held legally accountable for infringing upon this persons rights by their not having deduced this “non gender mixture” and using “the prefered pronouns” is enough to send you skidding round the bend!

    The irony is, it’s their running full tilt away from having to define “Trans” (and the strong likelihood if they do, the rare sex dysphorics will be classed separately) that’s forcing the issue!

    Because if “Trans” can literally mean anything… and apparently it does. Then it actually means nothing… and nothing hasn’t a leg legal or otherwise to stand on!

    • drycamp Says:

      @ miz I think you’ve said something very perceptive here when you say that the Trans Advocates are affirmatively trying NOT to define “trans” (or any related term)! This insight explains a lot.

      I had assumed they were just being sloppy. The ordinance in Houston is a good example of terrible legal draftsmanship, I thought. But your explanation makes way more sense than thinking this was just a mistake. Any definition will leave someone out, OR, more likely, might make the stupidity of the whole thing just way to obvious by including someone like Steponknee. If the Jenner person can think he’s a 35 year old woman, whyever can Steponknee not think he’s a six year old girl? We would be discriminating against both of them if we did not fully endorse their evaluations not only of their gender but of their age as well! (I have read numerous comments on trans-friendly sites asserting that Steponknee is fictional, cooked up to make them look bad. Well, they see it. He certainly does make them look bad, but he does seem to be a real person.)

      This is surely a situation where looking too closely at what exactly is going on is almost certain to blow the whole thing up. Hence the vague language and the total lack of definition (which this right wing group has shrewdly noticed, and targeted).

      • Sketcher Says:

        @ drycamp.

        How on earth can lawyers define what being a woman/man is, without reference to biology? It’s all then, just, either a brain scan check before you go into the ladies’ room (jury is out on that) or a quick feel of the genitals (cough). Neither of which is quite appropriate or acceptable🙂 I absolutely agree with you, this is a nonsensical and illogical position which in all honesty, cannot be legally supported.

        If MTTrans continue to push, which they will, to be women and have access to women’s and girls’ spaces because they feel they are women ‘on the inside’ – being fully supported in this by the Human Rights Commission and DSM 5- then the whole illusion will come crashing down as it collides with that thing known as Real Life. As in ‘real woman’ vs man who has a fetish and/or hatred for himself. (We’re not allowed to say ‘real woman/man’ in guidelines from the Human Rights Commission as it may make Trans feel bad about themselves.

        It’s time for the feminists and women who support these men to wake up. I’m sure there are people with body dysmorphic disorder, but surely this is a psychiatric disorder.

      • drycamp Says:

        Thank you Sketcher, you are making a very good point here. I am a lawyer myself, and I can testify that definitions is how the law works. We define, we separate. We have to. If we are going to treat, say the elderly, differently than other people, we have to define just how old a person has to be to qualify for that different treatment.

        There is no competent or practical way to define gender but to reference biology. No sane person is going to sit still for a “definition” that says in effect “how you feel about it today.” I am hoping that this whole thing comes crashing down as it relies with that fact.

        I enjoyed, by the way, the film clip of Germaine Greer which was linked earlier. When the interviewer asked if Greer’s position (which is, you cannot change your gender) would make a trans person “feel insulted,” Greer said, “I don’t care.” Right on. The law is not or should not be in the business of ensuring that everyone is protected from “feeling insulted.”

      • mizknowitall Says:

        @drycamp,
        Thank you, and Bingo!

        The reason Arnold Lowman, AKA. Charles Virginia Prince coined the term “transgender” was exactly that! Conflation, Obfuscation and outright misdirection! Did you ever wonder why in the 60s 70s and 80s most Transsexuals, with the rare exceptions of skin transvestites like Renee Richards or Jan Morris transitioned, had surgery, then vanished into the woodwork taking husband’s and looking as most straight women were at the time, for their rose covered cottages? Yet somehow mid 90s it looked like everything suddenly changed?

        It’s because the Transvestites, AKA Pigs in Wigs, led by Dear Ol Arnold had for 30 years been quietly laying the ground work for “Trans*!” Slowly substituting transgender for transsexual, making things like surgery “optional” (having the same intense love of “the precious” as any straight man might?) And substituting g-e-n-d-e-r” for sex!

        Worst of all… they ironically began systematically tying T to L and G. Ironic? Because these straight men wanted to become a part of LGB-T expressly so they could avoid any hint that they might… shudder… desire men! As part of LGB-T, they were then free to put on a dress and suddenly become… drum roll please? Lesbians!

        Cotton Ceilings anyone?

        But all this has always been dependent upon one critical thing. That in the public eye. “Trans- whatever” was equivalent to “Transsexual” ie? Those rare souls who had an intense and intractable dysphoria about their physical sex. Something they’d never understand much less have!

        That’s why they flat out refuse to define anything! Because once it starts. They instantly lose the ability to hide behind the tiny and utterly insignificant Transsexuals. (.008 percent of the US population) Instead? They’d have to face public scrutiny as what they are. Men in dresses… and we all know just how well that’ll play in Peoria!

        Not at all!

        MKIA

    • WTF Is This Nonsense? Says:

      All these males saying “I’m a woman. Reproductive biology doesn’t mean anything at all.”

      But what exactly do they mean by “woman”? They like pink and high heels?

      It seems if the trans cult was so absolutely sure of everything, they would make clear definitions of “man”, “woman”, etc. and post these improved definitions on every trans site, on billboards, on TV ads, etc.

      Then the whole world would see these brilliant new definitions, and the scales would fall off everyone’s eyes, and they would say “Of course! That makes perfect sense! How did anyone ever see it any other way?” Problem solved! All confusion cleared.

      But while rejecting the simple and obvious definitions in the dictionary, they can’t come up with any coherent new definition.

      It’s all “I know because I know because I know”, which I can use to prove I’m really Napoleon Bonaparte, Atlantean Royalty, or an alien from another dimension. They say it doesn’t work like that, but yes, it works exactly like that. It’s magic!

  15. kesher Says:

    Aren’t schools supposed to be preventing bullying regardless of the bullies’ reasons? I was bullied in school, for reasons that had nothing to do with my being a member of a protected class (unless shy, quiet kids other kids intrinsically loathe are now a protected class), and my school’s administration took it very seriously and put a stop to it. Although they weren’t able to put a stop to offhand comments or the social ostracism that my friends and I experienced for being “weird”. So it’s interesting that “trans” requires special protection aside from just prevention of regular bullying.

    I think there are two things going on here: First, this is about penis rights (bullying prevention isn’t going to get confused gay boys or predatory straight boys in girls’ spaces); Second, this is about making sure that everyone properly worships the trans. Bullying prevention isn’t sufficient here because bullying prevention only addresses persistent harassment and abuse. It doesn’t require every single child in a school to be the lone “trans” child’s best friend.

    • gchild Says:

      “Bullying prevention isn’t sufficient here because bullying prevention only addresses persistent harassment and abuse.”

      But Kesher, that is precisely why the are vague about it. To make sure male trans get every opportunity…

      They don’t want to just stop the bullying, etc towards trans kids, they also want to monitor/enforce participation in (trans)gender ideology. Will refusal to use pronouns (at all) be a violation? Will refusal to use the girls locker room while a male is in there be an infraction? Does “not bullying” mean cooperating in, facilitation, and validation of the pretense that a male child is a girl? Calling him “she”? Why, yes. Yes, it does.

      We have already been told that “misgendering is murder”, and that saying “female” is transphobic, and refusing to think of males as “women” is violating their human rights. The groundwork for defining “trans bullying and harrassment” (of male trans) has already been laid.

      I am not surprised that they don’t define the ins and outs of “gender identity” in the student handbook because if they did, it would get to sounding like a shameful pedophilic porn fantasy. How to explain to kids the CORRECT emotional, physical and verbal response to a girl standing up and peeing down the front of her pants in the boys bathroom? A strap on dildo looking “packer” in elementary school? About seeing penis and balls fall out of pink drawers in the girls locker room? About breasts flopping out of binders in the boys shower?

      And since the trans mantra “TREAT me like a woman/girl, SEE me as a woman/girl, THINK of me as a woman/girl” has proven to be as erroneous as it sounds (treat me in a pornographic, misogynistic, sexist manner, AND allow me access to female spaces because I am a male who likes pink, dresses, lipstick, Victoria Secret push up bras, and high heels and oh, I just love pussy!), they want to act as if “treat transgirls like girls” isn’t exactly what they mean by “don’t bully trans students!”.

      Making the policy vague allows them to avoid publishing the specifics which would make them sound like perverted lunatics:

      1. Adherance to sex role stereotypes must take precedent for us all because trans
      2. Students must be punished for using “he” to refer to males. And vise versa. When trans.
      3. Female students must undress/use restrooms in the pesence of males. And vice versa. When trans.
      4. We can no longer speak of biological sex to spare feelings OR because it doesn’t exist OR isn’t important OR doesn’t relate to humanity at all. Choose one of these because trans.
      5. Treat male transgenders like girls (girl =delicate, soft, demure, nurturing, skirt, pink, and rapably hot) This definition is true because trans
      6. Treat female trans like boys (boy =strong, intelligent, self centered, called on a lot in math, blue, and rapily agressive) This definition is true because trans

      Oh what a tangled web…

    • KgSch Says:

      I was also bullied in school for similar reasons, although I wasn’t super shy at first. I did want to interact with the other kids but I wasn’t that good at reading social cues. I did have some teachers who helped me but they did not require all the kids to be my BFF or anything, just leave me alone and not harass me.

      One thing to note was that I came out as a lesbian in high school but I was never seriously bullied for that. It may have helped that there were more “weird” kids in high school and I hung out with them and it’s good to have friends who are more physically fit than you. I actually never got bullied that badly for being a lesbian until I became a grown-ass adult and encountered trans activists, particularly the dudes pretending to be lesbians. It’s kind of a mindscrew that nowadays many of the hetero dudes I have to interact with aren’t disrespectful about me being a lesbian, but if I call myself that in groups that allegedly support me I get all sorts of harassment. They’re the real bullies.


  16. @joannadeadwinter

    “We need to be wary of aligning too closely with people who so fundamentally disagree with us.”

    The Traditional Values Coalition scares me. What have they done for women?

    I briefly scanned through the lawsuit from the Traditional Values Coalition. It includes sexual orientation along with “gender identity”. I think we can all agree that no student should be bullied. Sexual orientation doesn’t direbtly harm anyone, and most gay men and lesbians just want to live their lives in peace. As a lesbian, I really don’t care what conservative people think or me as long as they leave me alone, and I’m not harassed or fired for being a lesbian. “Gender identity”, does, indeed threaten the privacy rights of women. All human beings have a fundamental right to privacy. Males have no business in women’s restrooms or locker rooms. Also, I can understand why a teenage boy wouldn’t want a female in the boy’s locker room. Males have a right to privacy too.

    • Meg Says:

      I agree, males have a right to privacy too. I don’t think anyone here has disputed that both trans and males deserve their own spaces.

      However, the sexist wording of the lawsuit makes it obvious that Jack isn’t worried about feeling vulnerable or unwanted contact or assault. He’s worried about his male privilege being curtailed by the presence of females. His lawyer is framing the rights of boys as the right to be misogynist, and that the presence of females is “terrifying” and incongruent with his “cultural beliefs” (i.e. traditional family values). So we are not to interrupt his “thought patterns” which are misogynist and harmful to girls.

      This lawsuit is a lot like Hobby Lobby – it frames misogyny as a civil liberty and sets a precedent for girls in school to tolerate sexism because the beliefs of boys matter than girl’s human rights.

      It is disturbing how no matter what happens in transpolitics, women and girls lose. Every. Single. Time.

    • Zemskull Says:

      SkyLark Phillips: I don’t blame men and boys for being considered about this issue as well. As you mention, they have the right to privacy too. Also, despite the rarity of this actually happening, men are terrified of the possibility of false rape and harassment accusations made against them by women. A man walking into a men’s locker room should not be obligated to feel he’s taking that risk when there’s a woman in his locker room.

      • Meg Says:

        “Also, despite the rarity of this actually happening, men are terrified of the possibility of false rape and harassment accusations made against them by women. A man walking into a men’s locker room should not be obligated to feel he’s taking that risk when there’s a woman in his locker room.”

        Once again, the feelings of males are more important than women’s lived experiences.

        Thanks for illustrating so succinctly why framing the issue around the rights of men and boys is so utterly and completely failing women and girls everywhere.

  17. Rosemary Says:

    Another situation where religious people seem to be the lone voice of common sense:

    http://www.statepress.com/article/2015/09/muslim-transgender-woman-tempe-mosque-prayer-islam

    • drycamp Says:

      Interesting clip from the mosque. The spokesman for the mosque says, “we’re not talking about how you FEEL, we’re talking about gender biologically.” That kind of puts it in a nut doesn’t it. So far as I can tell Islam has a lot of crazy ideas about women and our roles, but on this common-sense level these Muslims at least seem to have the right idea.

      • Sketcher Says:

        @ drycamp – not sure how they’d tell if a person was male or female wearing the head-to-toe garb? Say if you were a male to trans going to a mosque in a burqua – how would the imam tell? Apart from, you know, being 6’2″ and having a voice like a rugby player. It’s either cough and drop or a brain scan, (because of course, birth certificates are changed legally).

        Some muslim nations also require a sex change for homosexuals (or other choice – death). So they must either recognise mtt as female and can thereby go into the female partitioned off part of the mosque, or as 3rd sex.

      • kesher Says:

        If what I heard about this situation is correct, that dude was going into the women’s section of the mosque and was only challenged after the women complained. So something tipped them off that he wasn’t female. It’s possible that he took off the niqab in the women’s area, but it wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t take it off, which would have been a significant clue to the women that something wasn’t right. Even under extremely conservative Islam (and that mosque is actually fairly mainstream/liberal) women are free to be uncovered with other women.

        It figures that this guy is choosing to adopt the more oppressive versions of Islam (with his donning the niqab which isn’t required by most Muslims) while he also is demonstrating zero respect for how actual conservative Muslims would feel about a man entering the women’s section of a mosque where he’s likely to see women without niqab. And of course he chose a fairly liberal mosque to pull this shit; a mosque where the congregation would politely ask him to leave and not intentionally humiliate him or even possibly resort to violence.

      • Ashland Avenue Says:

        So here we have a white man who converted to Islam so he could participate in one of the more conservative (and subjugating) parts of that religion – having to cover himself from head to toe, in the female role. This served him twofold: it helped him disguise himself, and it fulfilled his forced femme fantasies, which are so common with trannies that it’s a trope. I SERIOUSLY doubt there was any spiritual motivation behind his conversion at all; he just wanted to be even MOAR of a special snowflake! This guy is about as Muslim as my Christmas tree.

      • Zemskull Says:

        Hi Sketcher: I suspect this dude’s hands gave him away.

    • mizknowitall Says:

      Once again,
      Notice the incredible lengths that the TG will go through to avoid one really simple question.

      “Did you have Sex Reassignment Surgery?”

      Simple question, simple answer. Yes or No, Badda Boom, Badda Bing!

      Anything to avoid that definition! Because once the line is finally drawn in the sand as far as the public will tolerate… just like in this Muslim Community. It’s going to exclude > 90% of the transgendered!

      MKIA

      • drycamp Says:

        Exactly! I noticed that! All this hedging around this TG is doing!

        The mosque spokesman talks about “biology” but I think he means genitals, and reading in between the lines, I’m pretty sure the answer to the surgery question in this case is No.

        And what kind of doctor would write a letter saying that a male who has NOT had surgery is nevertheless now a “woman”? Apparently one did. Crazies abound, making the Muslims look sensible. Even Jenner has not had the surgery and has made statements to the effect that no surgery is in the future either. Oh, ok, cosmetic face surgery, but certainly not this other thing, horrors!🙂

        Requiring surgery to qualify would certainly cut this whole problem way down!

      • kesher Says:

        Regular people are going to learn soon enough that if they won’t give you a yes or no answer, the answer is no. Although I suppose the trans might adapt and just start lying and leave it to other people to notice if there’s something a little different going on downstairs.

      • drycamp Says:

        This whole business is awkward. If common sense asserts that merely throwing on a dress once in a while is not enough to make a man into a woman, then what is?

        If surgery is required, how is that to be verified? The mind boggles. Strip searches to qualify for admittance to the women’s locker room?

        My personal opinion is, changing yourself from a man into a woman (or vice versa) simply cannot be done, surgically or otherwise. A post-surgery “trans” male is a mutilated male, which is emphatically NOT the same as a woman. (The notion that women are sort of defective males, while a very old idea, must be forthrightly resisted whenever it raises its ugly head.)

    • drycamp Says:

      Thank you for the links, that first one is a very sensible and complete discussion which deserves a wide readership.

    • Rosemary Says:

      Not trolling. I just mean that in this one scenario Biology > Feelings is common sense. In general, I’m reminded of the dictum that conservative men view women as private property, while liberal men view women as public property.

  18. Hedda Gabler Says:

    I always thought that most conservative people tend to like the exclusionary and gender-binary re-inforcing aspects of the concept of gender identity, but hate the idea to actually have to include them, whereas more liberally minded people may be unhappy about gender, but usually keen on appearing to be inclusive.

    In this particular instance it seems quite clear that we are not seeing the work of somebody who is gender critical, but rather of somebody who wants to enshrine gender as a clearly defined legal concept that puts the gender-perception of the observer above the gender identity of the observed. And probably also above the actual biological reality.

    Jack Doe may be superficially seen as arguing for protecting sex-segregated spaces, but I think what he really wants is to somehow ensure that men are reliably masculine and women reliably feminine.

    In that way he is actually remarkably close to the ideas of Jenner-type conservative “trans” who are so invested in traditional ideas of gender that it is easier for them to believe that their own desires to be feminine magically transform them into women permanently or occasionally rather than to abandon the idea that men always have to be masculine.

  19. Freyja Says:

    You know, I’m hoping that some go-getter publisher in the “progressive” world (I don’t know what that word means any more), will figure out that criticizing the trans narrative is a gold mine. A gold mine for circulation and web hits. Start publishing columns by medical people, lawyers, school administrators, coaches, and, of course, last and definitely least, feminists, all examining the ways that the trans narrative and demands are delusional and destructive. How antithetical they are to rights that [we *thought*] had been previously established. Publish, publish, publish — wait for the hysteria to roll in — publicize, flood social media, and wait for the web hits to skyrocket.

    Since no one gives a flying fuck about actual women’s rights, the best we can hope for is some privileged white guy publisher to see his personal and professional advantage in opposing the trannies. And that at least would be a few degrees better than depending on the right wing alone to fight this battle with us. I think the greatest result would be that women who’ve unthinkingly embraced the trans movement, but who are feeling increasingly queasy, will have the affirmation they need to change their minds, and their votes, and their budgets, and whatever else they can control, to push back.


  20. The feminist narrative is that there is no difference between the brains of girls and the brains of boys anyway so it shouldn’t really matter. They think the same and thus should be able to respect each other in the locker room the same. And if a girl or a boy is violated by the opposite gender, that person who violated them was simply mentally ill and you could be harassed by mentally ill people of your same sex just the same. Gender segregation in 2016 is basically like race segregation. They should do away with gendered bathrooms and have special handicapped bathrooms you lock behind you for the ones who think male and female brains are different and think they will be raped.

  21. Sketcher Says:

    @ Freyja – I think that’s a great idea!! But I think we could do it ourselves with a bit of oomph. We’re underestimating ourselves and our power – it was a woman that set up the Huffington Post, after all.

    In the meantime, if you’re frustrated email: feedback@hrc.org (human rights commission which have just emailed me for a contribution to LGBT etc etc rights) and tell them why you won’t be contributing anymore, as I just did – T rights are pushing women’s rights under a bus. The transgender movement has become increasingly homophobic and misogynistic – with the push to re-assign children as young as 4, it’s also causing lasting psychological and physical harm to children who aren’t able to make an informed decision. We didn’t go through all the lesbian and gay activism in the 70s and 80s to see this happen.

    You can also sign the remove the T from LGB petition if you want to. When the money stops coming in from the big lesbian and gay rights organisations that’s when it’ll hit. (You can find the petition at lgbvoice.org)

    Time for a big push-back.

    Some contributions to this website too, I think🙂

    Thanks Gallus Mag.

  22. WTF Is This Nonsense? Says:

    It’s Freedom of Fashion! A drag-friendly dress code.

    Just use the private spaces designed to accommodate your reproductive biology.

    This goes back to “man/woman/gender” not having any practical definition in the trans cult, other than changing your clothes.

    Those preferred pronouns become meaningless, and language breaks down to gibberish.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: