Charlotte Observer: Girls must overcome ‘discomfort’ of seeing ‘male genitalia’ in locker ro

a reply to: Gryphon66

You don't get it Gryphon66. I think there is some kind of mental block and many of us on this thread could explain it in a hundred different ways, and you still wouldn't understand. So....no more.

Is there a mental block in understanding what transgender is?

Why is it some posters can only focus on body parts?

a reply to: luthier
Do you read or just make crap up?

Although Title IX does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation14

www2.ed.gov...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier
Do you read or just make crap up?

Although Title IX does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation14

www2.ed.gov...

A recent issue involving Title IX concerns its application to transgender students. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Education began to weigh in on the issue, and in 2014, the Department issued guidelines asserting that transgender students are protected from gender discrimination under Title IX. This article provides a short overview of Title IX and explains how that law applies to transgender students.

Title IX's Protections

Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools and other education programs that receive federal funding. Given that the vast majority of schools receive some form of federal funding, Title IX's reach is wide. Although many people associate Title IX with college and high school athletic programs, the law applies to participation in other extracurricular activities such as school bands and clubs, and it protects students from sex-based discrimination in general.

Transgender Students

A transgender person is one who identifies with a gender different from the one marked on his or her birth certificate. For example, a person born as a female, but who identifies as a male, is considered transgender. Students who are transgender face unique difficulties and appear to be at a far higher risk of suicide than other students, with some studies showing that roughly half of all transgender students attempt suicide at least once by the age of 20.

In recent years, as the issue of gender identity has become less taboo, there has been discussion regarding how to classify transgender students under the law. For example, there have been lawsuits and other disputes concerning whether Title IX's prohibition against sex discrimination should apply to transgender students, and if so, how.

Recent Developments

In the past few years, a number of lawsuits have been filed by transgender students against school districts. In 2014, the U.S. Department of Education resolved a complaint alleging harassment and discriminatory treatment filed by a California transgender student against her local school district. In that complaint, the student, who was born male but identifies as female, alleged that the school district tolerated harassment against her, discouraged her from wearing makeup, and advised her to transfer to a different district. In another case, a transgender student who identifies as male but was born as a female successfully sued his school district after the district refused to allow him to use the boy's restroom.

The U.S. Department of Education has issued guidelines clarifying the federal government's position regarding Title IX and transgender students. Through these guidelines, the Department asserts that Title IX's prohibition against sex-based discrimination extends to claims of discrimination based on gender identity. In other words, the Department's position is that Title IX applies to transgender students and protects them from sex-based discrimination.

In addition, several states have passed laws that parallel Title IX's protections or go even further. For example, California passed a law in 2013 allowing a transgender student to use school facilities and to participate in sports teams based on his or her identified gender, regardless of the gender listed on the student's school records.

As education policies relating to gender identity continue to be debated, we can expect more disputes and lawsuits over the federal government's interpretation of Title IX and over state laws that provide similar protections to transgender students


education.findlaw.com...

a reply to: Gryphon66

No they don't belong to me, but as a taxpayer public school space partly belongs to me.
And as such, I don't want a man, with all the male attributes, in my daughter's locker room.
Neither would I want a female to access the male locker rooms.

Whatever hanky-panky you (or I) may have had in the past notwithstanding.
A guy will be a guy ...

Or let's just throw everything open - public nudity for all.
No more male and female spaces.

But South Africa is the rape capital of the world, and yes, I'd like especially for girls and women to be safe in their space.
Particularly in an intimate space like a locker room.

I even want transgender people to be safe.
Forcing them into a locker room doesn't sound safe to me.

But hey, I'm the crazy one.
But that's OK, people see through you.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier
Do you read or just make crap up?

Although Title IX does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation14

www2.ed.gov...

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: luthier

Thanks. I was checking for updates.

Seems you've got that covered

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Gryphon66

You don't get it Gryphon66. I think there is some kind of mental block and many of us on this thread could explain it in a hundred different ways, and you still wouldn't understand. So....no more.

Interesting that you make such a simplistic claim and can't even state your reasons for doing so.

The answer is, of course, that there is no difference in danger levels to the straight girls if there are people in the room who are sexually attracted to them.

Your argument falls completely flat unless you want to exclude Lesbians and bisexual girls from the showers.

If not state why instead of the histrionics.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: luthier

Thanks. I was checking for updates.

Seems you've got that covered

Yeah I am spraying laquer today which is done in small short sessions. So I have a lot of small intervals of time here and there. That and this whole thing is driving me crazy.

Wonder where Brody went? He never even apologised for the falacy.

originally posted by: halfoldman
a reply to: Gryphon66

No they don't belong to me, but as a taxpayer public school space partly belongs to me.
And as such, I don't want a man, with all the male attributes, in my daughter's locker room.
Neither would I want a female to access the male locker rooms.

Whatever hanky-panky you (or I) may have had in the past notwithstanding.
A guy will be a guy ...

Or let's just throw everything open - public nudity for all.
No more male and female spaces.

But South Africa is the rape capital of the world, and yes, I'd like especially for girls and women to be safe in their space.
Particularly in an intimate space like a locker room.

No, in the United States, there is no sense in which public school property belongs "to you." It's not a timeshare or a commune.

Your taxes basically pay a "use fee" for the facilities.

You don't get to say who has the right to be in the shower. Or in the school.

Said another way, your will does not limit the rights of anyone, straight, gay, bi, or trans* students.

I have no problem with public nudity. I find the entire idea that we cannot control our urges around each other while naked absurd. Ever been to a nude beach? It's not even interesting after an hour or so.

You want women and girls to be safe, but you don't care about trans* women or trans* girls being safe in "their space"?

Isn't that the primary issue?

a reply to: luthier

The Dept of education doesn't get to write law any more than the EPA does

I quoted NC state law

There is no way you are going to stretch a govt regulation to make minors of the opposite sex change in the same locker room.

Had it not been clearly marked in the regulation that title 9 doesn't not prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation the may have gotten to stretch it.

That's why it's not intended to prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation because the authors knew some circumstances were a crime.

a reply to: Gryphon66
No in the US I can't say who goes to what showers, do you?

So how do you imagine locker rooms in future?
No more sacred male and female spaces and all?

Considering what a slut you've admitted being with men (I don't blame you bro), how would it work, oh gracious one?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier

The Dept of education doesn't get to write law any more than the EPA does

I quoted NC state law

There is no way you are going to stretch a govt regulation to make minors of the opposite sex change in the same locker room.

Had it not been clearly marked in the regulation that title 9 doesn't not prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation the may have gotten to stretch it.

That's why it's not intended to prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation because the authors knew some circumstances were a crime.

Oops wrong again Brody.

A federal appeals court ruled in favor of 16-year-old Gavin Grimm, reversing a lower district court's decision. Grimm claimed the Gloucester County School Board violated Title IX, a law banning sex discrimination in schools, when the board prevented him from using boys' restrooms.



Uh no. Did you actually read title 9? Originally made for black athletes.

This is very much how law works Brody. People use a prior case to support cases. Legal precedence is set and then it becomes the standard ruling and a law.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier

The Dept of education doesn't get to write law any more than the EPA does

I quoted NC state law

There is no way you are going to stretch a govt regulation to make minors of the opposite sex change in the same locker room.

Had it not been clearly marked in the regulation that title 9 doesn't not prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation the may have gotten to stretch it.

That's why it's not intended to prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation because the authors knew some circumstances were a crime.

The Roles of Federal and State Government in Education

The federal laws with the most impact on education concern equal access to education and safeguarding students' and teachers' constitutional rights. Education is not exactly a constitutional right, like free speech and assembly, but it is an important enough interest to warrant constitutional protection. Students are therefore protected against discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or disability, or ethnicity. - See more at: education.findlaw.com...[/qu ote]

Wait are you guys saying indecent exposure to a minor is no longer a crime because the Dept of education says so?

a reply to: luthier

I don't remember saying anything about using a restroom

Are we seriously talking about trans students intentionally exposing themselves?

Lesbians and Gays feel free to ogle all you want.

But, beware of a body part a trans hides and would be horrified if exposed.

Some people really need to get out of their heads.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Wait are you guys saying indecent exposure to a minor is no longer a crime because the Dept of education says so?

Do you understand the legal process at all?

Did you read and comprehend? It's not just the Dept of Ed. It's the DOJ. Do you know what a federal apeals court is?

Yes the state will absolutley be shut down by a federal apeals court if they prosecute a kid for using the bathroom of their gender identity in a school. . 100 percent chance. Thats legal precedence. They will also loose fed funding.

Unless they have actual exposed themselves in a sexual manner.

Ironically I live in SC a news article just came on of all the jobs lost by the NC bathroom bill. All the part time concert workers, new businesses, tournaments, etc billions.

a reply to: Annee

Yeah
So Congress enabled the Dept of Ed to regulate Ed
Congress had to sign off on title 9 hense the lack of protection from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation

That protects chlidren from being abused

Congress hasn't changed that, they could have but they haven't
The Dept of Ed hasn't changed it, they have interpreted it but not changed it because they alone cant

Yeah, you ask them for the eventual plan or outcome they'd like.
And you get zero answers.
They know they don't want their 13-old-old daughters in locker rooms with men.
Have a child, and we speak again.
It's simply social agitation.
And society can make exceptions.

A real transgendered kid would probably be quietly welcomed.
But heading for a blanket law that allows anyone with some make-up in the opposite gender's locker room is just nonsense.
And we are talking about general laws here, not specific cases.
We're talking about issues that seriously disrupt the male and female binary in society.
And most cisgender people like those laws, and especially to women they offer some protection.