Mr. "Cristan" Williams has repeatedly written on the subject, and now Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has taken up the cause, having produced at least
I suspect, AB 1266, a law that takes an extremist approach to protecting "transgender" students in California public schools will be overturned next year. I have said, repeatedly, that the smart move would be to have it amended to take out the excessive features (in particular sharing locker rooms) or at least include provisions concerning privacy (i.e. something similar to rules in San Francisco that address "inevitable nudity"). Now, I don't even know what the situation is in school locker rooms. It has been a very long time since I was in one, and that may not even be an issue. But, whether it is, or not, addressing it would defuse the objections to the law.
But, given that this has not once been addressed in anything I have seen, I suspect that it may well be a issue. And I also strongly suspect that transgender extremists have no problem with the issue, even though I have no doubt it would cause even more upset for students who are legitimately transsexual (who are really not a concern for the kooks like Sandeen and Williams).
I do find it amusing that, while the Pacific Justice Institute has made the claim that the Colorado student was harassing female students, the only ones who has applied terms like "attacking," "predator," and "monster," have been trans extremists attempting, desperately, to create straw man arguments.
Now, honest people can disagree on whether or not what has occurred in that Colorado high school amounts to harassment. Arguments can be made both ways. But the simple truth is, no one, not even the Pacific Justice Institute has actually referred to that child using words like "predator" or "monster" except the trans extremists. The really bad thing is, I can imagine this child reading some of the articles in support, and actually believing that people have used those terms...when they haven't.
I have been attacked by people I would normally support because I have declined to accept extremists positions on this case. I am saddened that this child is being used by either side to further a political agenda. I am saddened that this child's privacy has been invaded by having photos posted online. It seems odd...much has been made about people making death threats, and yet, something that might lead to someone spotting the child and attacking has been posted. Without the photos being posted, the chances of someone identifying the child are much less. But, anyone who is obsessive enough to actually carry out such an attack now has more information to use.
In spite of what some, in fits of irrational rage, have suggested, I don't want this child harmed. Sadly, if it does happen, it may well be more the fault of the trans extremists than those they try to smear while pushing their agenda.
.jpg)
15 comments:
How, pray tell, is sharing locker rooms with people of the same gender an "excessive feature"? What alternative would you suggest?
I think their in a panic because people and society is finally waking up and seeing for their own eyes, what these so called Transgender people are all about. Their in a panic because people are waking up and finally exposing their SCAMS and house of Lies. It's going to sooner or later come crashing down on them and in the end, it ain't going to look pretty when the Transgender fallacy is exposed for the public to see.
So, you see nothing wrong with someone who has not had surgery being nude in a locker room? You don't think that might violate the privacy of others? You, I suppose, think someone who is female, who objects to being in the presence of a nude mail ( albeit a nude male who claims to be a female) is a bigot? Seriously? What do I think the alternative is? Common sense, sir...common sense.
There is not one single incident where a nude TS girl with male bits has been in front of other girls in a locker room or any such facility in the California school systems and that includes those school districts that have had the same policy for years.
So just who is lying now?
Okay...
That is good to know. And it means nothing. I never said that had happened, and quite frankly, I never said it would happen. You see, we don't disagree about TS kids. I cannot imagine anyone who is transsexual doing that. But this law is not limited to transsexual students. That is what I have a problem with.
And if you remotely think Mr. Williams or Mr. Sandeen want to limit this law to TS kids, or that they even care about TS kids beyond exploiting them for political gain, I think you are naive.
Elizabeth is indirectly referring to testimony of Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (the sponsor of AB 1266), and Judy Chiasson, Ph.D, a representative of the Los Angeles Unified School District. Both, in their California State Senate Education Committee testimony on June 12, 2013 spoke about the lack of incidents from having the policies in place.
Excerpt from Dr. Chiasson's testimony:
At first we had our concerns. Would letting students participate in activities and facilities that were consistent with their gender identities create problems? What would happen? And, ultimately we decided that we as the adults needed to manage our fears and give the students the respect and dignity that they deserved. And I’m pleased to say none of our fears have been materialized. Our transgender students use facilities, participate in gym class and play on sports teams in a way that corresponds with their gender identity.
We treat our transgender students — our boys, our transgender boys and girls — simply like any other boys and girls with the same rights and responsibilities, rules, and obligations.
In the eight years that we’ve had our policy we’ve not had any problems. On the contrary, it has solved many problems. It’s a nonissue on our campuses. Our transgender students use the bathrooms for the same reasons as everybody else. They do their business, fix their hair and make-up, and gossip with friends.
So when we instituted this policy we had no idea how many students that this would effect. In 2011, we conducted a survey in conjunction with the YRBS, the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, and we learned that point-five percent of our students self-identified as transgender. In a district of our size, that’s about thirty-five-hundred students. We were shocked. We had no idea that we had that many transgender students.
For most of them, this is their private secret. But, we want them to know that we’re here for them whenever they’re ready.
Excerpt from Assemblymember Ammiano's testimony:
Although current California law already protects students from discrimination in education based on sex and gender identity, many school districts are not in compliance with these requirements. AB 1266 clarifies existing law by requiring all students in K-12 be permitted to participate in school programs, activities, and use facilities in accordance with that student's gender identity -- to ensure compliance with current law and guarantee transgender students have the same opportunities to participate and succeed as others.
No student can learn if they feel like they have to hide who they are in school, or if they are singled out for unequal treatment. Denying transgender students equal treatment based on their gender identity denies them the right to a safe and supportive learning environment.
Schools across California, including some of the state's largest school districts, are in compliance with existing law by already accepting and supporting their transgender students and allowing them equal access to school activities and facilities based on their gender identity.
No harm has ever been documented when schools permit transgender students common sense, equal access on the same basis as all other students, treating transgender girls like all other girls and transgender boys like all other boys.
ROTFL! Ah, poor man, hoist by your own petard.
Two words in Ammianno's testimony... "Common sense." Something the extremists, like you, and Mr. Williams, have no concept of. You think allowing perverts like "Colleen" Francis is "common sense." You think lying and claiming females have penises is "common sense." Iike Tom, but I think he gave kooks like you too much on this law.
@Jennifer
Are you kidding me? This law is limited to kids in grades K-12. There is no linkage to anyone other than kids.
Do me a favor and explain to what facts you would like Jane Doe and her family to provide that would make you change your mind about this child? Please enlighten us all.
Sometimes you just need to look in the mirror and recognize you are clueless and it is where you are on this beautiful little girl who is now on suicide watch thanks to your pals at PJI who you support because surprisingly you have never asked them to provide proof of their allegations which have all been proven to be lies.
@Jennifer
What you are talking about has nothing to do with transsexual kids or transsexual teenagers which is the subject. You are the one making the false linkage.
This is children and teenagers we are dealing with and fortunately they actually have more common sense than adults. Kids like Jane and me would no sooner hurt another girl than ever admit we are or ever were boys. Why can you not understand that?
IF the law were limited to transsexual children, I would have no problem. It is not. And if you cannot see that, you are very naive. In fact, if it were limited to transsexual children, I imagine Mr. Williams would be raising a ruckus about it.
If you think Mr. Williams would limit this to just children, well again, you are naive
I am not interested in "judging" that child. I do wish the transgender kooks would leave the family be, but that is not going to happen. I have no doubt that Mr. Williams was quite delighted to be able to report that the child is on suicide watch. Funny how he has no qualms about sharing information that should be personal and private. Especially given other developments that I am not happy about. Sadly, something that should not have been has apparently been leaked. I've no doubt Mr. Williams will exploit that as well.
And no, I do not support PJI. But no, Mr. Williams usual round of straw men arguments have not proven PJI has lied. All it is has proven is Mr. Williams is a buffoon who again does more harm to transsexuals than good.
Unlike some, I look at both sides of an issue and avoid making ideological, knee jerk reactions. As I said, some lack empathy. If someone does not share their viewpoint, they reject things out of hand.
I don't do that. Even in Williams' case.
Jane Doe is a transsexual child so why can't you support her?
Both sides of the issue? Would you remind us all why PJI has any validity in this nightmare.
I am staying neutral. I haven't enough facts to draw a conclusion. I don't share your dogged belief that age is an absolute indication of validity. I simply don't know enough facts.
As I have said, I don't wish the child ill, which is why I wish kooks like Williams would but out.
Oh, and I would say that PJI has the same validity as Mr. Williams.
Again, I simply do not buy the idea that age provides incontrovertible proof of anything. You are projecting tour self onto a child. I simply admit that I don't have enough info to be dogmatic. As I said, I would say PJI and Williams are about equal in validity. Make of that what you will.
Post a Comment