Feds say locker room policy broke law
Palatine district restricted access for transgender student
BY DUAA ELDEIB CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Illinois' largest high school district violated federal law by barring a trans-gender student from using the girls' locker room, authorities declared Monday.
The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights spent nearly two years investigating Palatine-based Township High School District 211 and found "a preponderance of evidence" that school officials did not comply with Title IX, the federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex.
The student, who has identified as a girl for a number of years, filed a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights in late 2013 after she was denied unrestricted access to the girls' locker room. District and federal officials negotiated for months, and a solution appeared imminent as recently as last week, when the district put up privacy curtains in the locker room.
But talks stalled after school officials said the student would be required to use the private area, as opposed to offering her a choice to use it. Although the student said she intends to use the private area or a locker room bathroom stall to change, the stipulation constitutes "blatant discrimination," said John Knight, director of the LGBT and AIDS Project at American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, which is representing the student.
"It's not voluntary, it's mandatory for her," Knight said. "It's one thing to say to all the girls, 'You can choose if you want some extra privacy,' but it's another thing to say, 'You, and you alone, must use them.' That sends a pretty strong signal to her that she's not accepted and the district does not see her as girl."
For the student at the center of the federal complaint and all other trans-gender students at the district's five high schools, the staff changes their names, genders and pronouns on school records. Transgender students also are allowed to use the bathrooms of their identified gender and play on the sports team of that gender, school officials said.
But officials drew the line at the locker room, citing the privacy rights of the other 12,000-plus students in the district. As a compromise, the district installed four privacy curtains in unused areas of the locker room and another one around the shower, but because the district would compel the student to use them, federal officials deemed the solution insufficient.
The dispute highlights a controversy that a growing number of school districts face. The Department of Education has settled two similar allegations of discrimination against trans-gender students in California, with both districts eventually agreeing to allow the students to use female-designated facilities.
The student's family first contacted District 211 when she was in eighth grade and was told by the superintendent at the time that she would not be allowed to use a restroom stall in the girls' locker room, according to the Office for Civil Rights' investigation. Instead, the student had to use a separate, single-occupancy restroom for physical education, swimming class and sports.
"Student A has not only received an unequal opportunity to benefit from the District's educational program, but has also experienced an ongoing sense of isolation and ostracism throughout her high school enrollment at the school," according to the letter from the Office for Civil Rights.
The student told federal authorities that she takes a circuitous route to get to the gym to avoid standing out.
She said she was once the only person in a gym uniform because she was not with the rest of the class when the teacher informed the students they did not need to change.
Another time, the student, who plays for the school on a girls' sports team, said she broke down in tears after her coaches reprimanded her for using the locker room to change. The coach told her some students felt uncomfortable dressing in front of her.
"All students deserve the opportunity to participate equally in school programs and activities — this is a basic civil right," Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon said in a statement. "Unfortunately, Township High School District 211 is not following the law because the district continues to deny a female student the right to use the girls' locker room."
Superintendent Daniel Cates remains adamant that the district is not in violation of the law and warned that the Obama administration's position "is a serious overreach with precedent-setting implications."
"The students in our schools are teenagers, not adults, and one's gender is not the same as one's anatomy," Cates said in a statement. "Boys and girls are in separate locker rooms — where there are open changing areas and open shower facilities — for a reason."
He went on to emphasize that the district's position should not be seen as discriminatory, saying, "We celebrate and honor differences among all students and we condemn any vitriolic messages that disparage transgender identity or transgender students in any way."
The federal response came as no surprise to district officials, who held a news conference three weeks ago to get ahead of the announcement. At the time, Cates said he hoped to "work collaboratively with the OCR and (that) reasonableness will prevail."
The district has 30 days to reach an agreement with authorities or risk having its federal educational funding suspended or even terminated. The case also could be referred to the Department of Justice.
The student, who the ACLU said does not want to be identified for privacy reasons, said in a statement that the federal ruling "makes clear that what my school did was wrong."
"This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others," she said. "The district's policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a 'normal person.' "
FEDS RULE TO FORCE HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS TO UNDRESS NEXT TO NAKED BOYS WHO THINK THEY'RE GIRLS
by BEN SHAPIRO3 Nov 201511,335
On Monday, the federal government declared itself fit for the madhouse by mandating that a Chicago high school allow a full biological male into the girls' locker room for all purposes, including nudity. This biological male, the feds determined, was different because he thinks he is a female.
The feds have ruled that the presence of a twig-and-berries in the girls' locker room has been mandated by Title IX of the Civil Rights Act. Yes, ladies and gents and non-cisgenders: it turns out that the battle against sexism enshrined in the ill-written Title IX was actually intended to force underage young women to look at the penises and testicles of boys.
Progress.
The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights spent almost two years checking out the Township High School District 211 because of the transgender "girl." He filed a complaint with the feds in 2013 after the school refused "unrestricted access" to the girls' locker room. The district eventually agreed to allow the boy into the girls' room so long as he used a privacy curtain while disrobing.
That wasn't good enough. The feds determined that this still constituted discrimination. Why? As John Knight, director of the alphabet-soup LGBT and AIDS Project at the ACLU, stated, this was "blatant discrimination." He explained (well, we think it's a he, unless he identifies differently today):
It's not voluntary; it's mandatory for her. It's one thing to say to all the girls, "You can choose if you want some extra privacy," but it's another thing to say, "You, and you alone, must use them." That sends a pretty strong signal to her that she's not accepted and the district does not see her as a girl.
Perhaps the district does not see "her" as a "girl" because "she" is not a she, a her, or a girl. Nonetheless, the Office for Civil Rights agreed, with Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon averring:
All students deserve the opportunity to participate equally in school programs and activities – this is a basic civil right. Unfortunately, Township High School District 211 is not following the law because the district continues to deny a female student the right to use the girls' locker room.
The student is not female. But never mind that: the subjective opinion of a person now governs a student body of some 12,000.
So here, in a nutshell, is the government's new policy with regard to sex and sexuality among youngsters:
If you're a boy who shows a picture of your penis to a girl in your class, you have likely violated both federal child pornography laws as well as local sexual harassment laws. If this happens consistently in your school, the school has violated Title IX.
If you're a boy who says he's a girl, the girl must be placed in position to see your penis and testicles. If the school does not allow this, the school has violated Title IX.
If you're an adult who sexually touches a child with the consent of the child, you have committed a crime, since children are incapable of consent.
If you're an adult who gives a child hormone therapy or surgery to prevent normal development of the genitals, with the consent of the child, you are a hero.
If this all makes sense to you, you should be working for the federal Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Education.
This is what happens when a society loses its moral moorings. In its quest to destroy God, the left unhitched its wagon from eternal truths and, instead, decided to substitute its own idea of utopia. To reach that utopia – freedom from social expectations and standards – objectivity itself had to be destroyed, so as to avoid blame. Objective truth lost all meaning; only subjectivity mattered. Science became the enemy, since it establishes provable truths; it had to be quashed and quelled. Language became the enemy, since definitions exclude people and things not covered by those definitions; it had to be perverted and hijacked.
And so we now live through the looking glass, waiting for the next philosophically incoherent ruling from our masters of time and space. Or mistresses. Or whatever.
This really makes no sense to me. What about all those girls who have an expectation of privacy but who are now forced to share a locker room with a male?
The private facility was a reasonable solution.
Quote from: keefe on November 04, 2015, 02:33:35 AM
This really makes no sense to me. What about all those girls who have an expectation of privacy but who are now forced to share a locker room with a male?
The private facility was a reasonable solution.
It was right up until it was mandated that the transgender person use the private facility which marginalizes them. Rightly or wrongly it's about inclusion. The really tough part is even if you have the private facility and say it's optional for whoever wants more privacy if all of the non-trans people use it that also excludes the trans person.
I have no idea what the right answer is, I'm guessing it won't be solved until we go to universal/joint facilities(no male or female distinction) like most sci-fi tv shows/movies seem to predict.
Dogs and cats...living together...mass hysteria!
The right solution is to let them change in the room of their identified gender even if they are trans-gender. Of the 12,000 students that Palatine has, if 2% of them are gay, which is about what the national average says they are, 240 or so gay and lesbians changing in front of people that they supposedly are attracted to. Is this a problem? Have there been incidents of sexual assault, or simple ogling, that have made heterosexual students uncomfortable? How is this different?
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 08:28:42 AM
The right solution is to let them change in the room of their identified gender even if they are trans-gender. Of the 12,000 students that Palatine has, if 2% of them are gay, which is about what the national average says they are, 240 or so gay and lesbians changing in front of people that they supposedly are attracted to. Is this a problem? Have there been incidents of sexual assault, or simple ogling, that have made heterosexual students uncomfortable? How is this different?
The minority, and the LOUD minority, wins. Squeaky wheel and all that.
If a boy can identify himself as a girl, then why can't a white woman identify herself as a black woman and run a chapter of the NAACP?
I know I'm an old grouch, but at some fundamental level, you are what you are, not what you want to be. Sometimes you have to adapt to the world around you, and not expect the world to adapt to you.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 04, 2015, 08:34:13 AM
I know I'm an old grouch, but at some fundamental level, you are what you are, not what you want to be. Sometimes you have to adapt to the world around you, and not expect the world to adapt to you.
+1.
So in other words, no one can really come up with any harm that any of the 12,000 students would face if a transgender student changed in front of them.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 08:59:11 AM
So in other words, no one can really come up with any harm that any of the 12,000 students would face if a transgender student changed in front of them.
It's not a matter of the students feeling uncomfortable or threatened with a transgender student changing in front of them. It's a matter of girls feeling uncomfortable changing in front of a male peer.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 08:28:42 AM
The right solution is to let them change in the room of their identified gender even if they are trans-gender. Of the 12,000 students that Palatine has, if 2% of them are gay, which is about what the national average says they are, 240 or so gay and lesbians changing in front of people that they supposedly are attracted to. Is this a problem? Have there been incidents of sexual assault, or simple ogling, that have made heterosexual students uncomfortable? How is this different?
Allow me to play amateur sociologist for a post or two.
Differences that come to mind:
1) Sexuality can be hidden, a male sex organ cannot
2) Sexuality is genetic, gender (not sex) is a social construct (which, by the way, is why so many feminists are anti-trans)
Quote from: Eldon on November 04, 2015, 09:05:33 AM
Allow me to play amateur sociologist for a post or two.
Differences that come to mind:
1) Sexuality can be hidden, a male sex organ cannot
Tell that to Buffalo Bill.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 08:59:11 AM
So in other words, no one can really come up with any harm that any of the 12,000 students would face if a transgender student changed in front of them.
The harm is pure discomfort. The trans student experiences discomfort by having to use a private facility. The female students in the locker room experience discomfort by having to change in front of someone who is a biological male.
Are you criticizing the females for feeling discomfort? It sounds like you are saying to them "ah, suck it up girls, it's not that bad. Your feelings are irrational."
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 09:05:14 AM
It's not a matter of the students feeling uncomfortable or threatened with a transgender student changing in front of them. It's a matter of girls feeling uncomfortable changing in front of a male peer.
They're not required to change in front of a male peer. If they see this particular student in the locker room and that makes them uncomfortable, they're free to step into a private area or go elsewhere. There's no requirement they get naked in front of anyone, or see something they don't want to see. They have an option.
I'm very familiar with this story, and the funny thing about it is that the vast majority of students either don't care or support the transgender student. The opposition here is being driven entirely by a very conservative school board, not the students and not even most of the parents.
Quote from: Eldon on November 04, 2015, 09:11:23 AM
The harm is pure discomfort. The trans student experiences discomfort by having to use a private facility. The female students in the locker room experience discomfort by having to change in front of someone who is a biological male.
Are you criticizing the females for feeling discomfort? It sounds like you are saying to them "ah, suck it up girls, it's not that bad. Your feelings are irrational."
1. It's not an issue of discomfort for the trans student. It's an issue of being excluded and treated differently/unequally.
2. Preventing discomfort is hardly the standard by which our laws/rights should be created. Some 50-60 years ago, lots of white people in the South were discomforted by having to share lunch counters, drinking fountains and buses with black people. Should their discomfort supersede other people's rights?
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 09:29:01 AM
1. It's not an issue of discomfort for the trans student. It's an issue of being excluded and treated differently/unequally.
He had the option of being treated equally and chose not to. He could have changed in the boys locker room like every other anatomical male.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 04, 2015, 09:31:34 AM
He had the option of being treated equally and chose not to. He could have changed in the boys locker room like every other anatomical male.
The school district recognizes that she is female in every other aspect. She uses the girls' washroom, has a girl's name, participates in athletics as a girl, etc.
Sorry if the increasing acceptance of transgender people is not to your liking. It's happening.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 09:36:16 AM
The school district recognizes that she is female in every other aspect. She uses the girls' washroom, has a girl's name, participates in athletics as a girl, etc.
Sorry if the increasing acceptance of transgender people is not to your liking. It's happening.
Now your argument is moving. You said it wasn't a matter of discomfort, but it is. He is uncomfortable changing in the boys locker room. So the solution is to make a larger number of people uncomfortable by having him change with the girls.
I understand the kid feels the way he feels, but the world doesn't need to bend over backwards to accomodate him at the expense of the feeling of other people, because you think his discomfort is more acceptable than those other people.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 04, 2015, 09:43:46 AM
Now your argument is moving. You said it wasn't a matter of discomfort, but it is. He is uncomfortable changing in the boys locker room. So the solution is to make a larger number of people uncomfortable by having him change with the girls.
I understand the kid feels the way he feels, but the world doesn't need to bend over backwards to accomodate him at the expense of the feeling of other people, because you think his discomfort is more acceptable than those other people.
My argument isn't moving. I've never said it was about discomfort.
What you call his "discomfort," the law calls her "legal right."
And, again, you're ignoring the fact that most students support this person. It's the adults that are making a stink.
Why your insistence on referring to her with a male pronoun? Is this simply about your belief that transgender people aren't real? You're completely entitled to your opinion on that, of course. But if your argument here is that this student is and should be treated as a boy, that's pretty much a non-starter on discussing this further. There's an interesting discussion to be had as to what amounts to reasonable/equitable treatment and access, but there's no point in having that discussion if your argument boils down to genitalia.
Quote from: Eldon on November 04, 2015, 09:11:23 AM
The harm is pure discomfort. The trans student experiences discomfort by having to use a private facility. The female students in the locker room experience discomfort by having to change in front of someone who is a biological male.
Are you criticizing the females for feeling discomfort? It sounds like you are saying to them "ah, suck it up girls, it's not that bad. Your feelings are irrational."
Well that's probably not the wording I would use... ;)
But as others have said, "discomfort" really isn't a good reason not to do this. And maybe it's because my kids are older, but I think my role as a parent here wouldn't be to protect them from this discomfort, but to let them know how they can adapt. Because unless there is something physically or emotionally harming them, I don't see the big deal here. This is stuff they are going to have to deal with eventually anyway.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 09:54:21 AM
Well that's probably not the wording I would use... ;)
But as others have said, "discomfort" really isn't a good reason not to do this. And maybe it's because my kids are older, but I think my role as a parent here wouldn't be to protect them from this discomfort, but to let them know how they can adapt. Because unless there is something physically or emotionally harming them, I don't see the big deal here. This is stuff they are going to have to deal with eventually anyway.
Any parent who's worried about what their teenager might be seeing in a high school locker room better take away that kid's Internet access ASAP. Because chances are there's nothing going on in a changing area that kid hasn't seen online already.
My problem with this whole debate is how do we address this in an educational setting. Over time, culture will slowly accept different or no gender roles at all. But we still teach children about genders mostly based on biology and specifically anatomy. When you're dealing with children, complex thought is difficult. So what would be the best way to approach this?
Thoughts?
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 09:52:58 AM
My argument isn't moving. I've never said it was about discomfort.
What you call his "discomfort," the law calls her "legal right."
And, again, you're ignoring the fact that most students support this person. It's the adults that are making a stink.
Why your insistence on referring to her with a male pronoun? Is this simply about your belief that transgender people aren't real? You're completely entitled to your opinion on that, of course. But if your argument here is that this student is and should be treated as a boy, that's pretty much a non-starter on discussing this further. There's an interesting discussion to be had as to what amounts to reasonable/equitable treatment and access, but there's no point in having that discussion if your argument boils down to genitalia.
and chromosomes.
This situation introduces an interesting legal and societal question regarding the engagement with transgender specifically, but identity generally.
You've got a biological male that identifies as female changing in the female locker room with other females. The trans person is uncomfortable changing in the male locker and she would be uncomfortable changing in a private area of the female locker room. You could also have a biological female that is uncomfortable with a biological male in the locker room with her and she would be uncomfortable changing in a private area of the locker room. Who's "discomfort" takes precedence over the other?
It is similar to rights in a legal setting. I have natural rights as identified by the constitution, etc. however when my rights come into conflict with another person's rights they must be adjudicated and a "win" and "loser" determined. So in the case of this situation, someone is going to potentially be "uncomfortable" how do we determine who that is.
Side note, not trying to be inflammatory, but what makes gender identification vs biological identification any different than any other physical attribute that a person rejects as not their identification? Take race, we do a lot of identification around race for various reasons, which is as of now determined by genetics and biology, but what if people start identifying as another race? Is that different than someone identifying as a different gender? If so why? If the same, should all physical identification be eliminated as a society because it no longer matters and only what you believe yourself to be matters?
When I was in high school, and even today, I'd much rather have been looking at naked women than naked men. Even my own is gross to look at and I'm much more comfortable with looking at the female body. Shouldn't I have been allowed to be comfortable? Honestly, where we are headed seems to be unisex bathrooms and locker rooms.
If the student goes through gender reassignment and gets his what nots removed, the student can use the girl's locker room. Until then, Judge Lighthouse says the school district's compromise wins out.
Quote from: mu03eng on November 04, 2015, 10:19:42 AM
This situation introduces an interesting legal and societal question regarding the engagement with transgender specifically, but identity generally.
You've got a biological male that identifies as female changing in the female locker room with other females. The trans person is uncomfortable changing in the male locker and she would be uncomfortable changing in a private area of the female locker room. You could also have a biological female that is uncomfortable with a biological male in the locker room with her and she would be uncomfortable changing in a private area of the locker room. Who's "discomfort" takes precedence over the other?
It is similar to rights in a legal setting. I have natural rights as identified by the constitution, etc. however when my rights come into conflict with another person's rights they must be adjudicated and a "win" and "loser" determined. So in the case of this situation, someone is going to potentially be "uncomfortable" how do we determine who that is.
That's a great question.
As the law stands - or, at least how the federal government is interpreting the law, because this ultimately will be decided by the courts - the student is a girl who has the same right to use the girls facilities at school as any other female student. The school district admits this to some extent, allowing her to use the girl's bathroom, play on the girls' teams in athletics, use a female name in official records, etc. The only issue is the locker room.
Quote from: mu03eng on November 04, 2015, 10:19:42 AM
This situation introduces an interesting legal and societal question regarding the engagement with transgender specifically, but identity generally.
You've got a biological male that identifies as female changing in the female locker room with other females. The trans person is uncomfortable changing in the male locker and she would be uncomfortable changing in a private area of the female locker room. You could also have a biological female that is uncomfortable with a biological male in the locker room with her and she would be uncomfortable changing in a private area of the locker room. Who's "discomfort" takes precedence over the other?
It is similar to rights in a legal setting. I have natural rights as identified by the constitution, etc. however when my rights come into conflict with another person's rights they must be adjudicated and a "win" and "loser" determined. So in the case of this situation, someone is going to potentially be "uncomfortable" how do we determine who that is.
You said it much better than I did. Thanks.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 10:29:05 AM
That's a great question.
As the law stands - or, at least how the federal government is interpreting the law, because this ultimately will be decided by the courts - the student is a girl who has the same right to use the girls facilities at school as any other female student. The school district admits this to some extent, allowing her to use the girl's bathroom, play on the girls' teams in athletics, use a female name in official records, etc. The only issue is the locker room.
Regarding the ability to play on the girls' teams in athletics, suppose the male who identifies as a female is Henry Ellenson tall and as good a hoops player. How is this fair for opposing teams? How does the state's high school athletic association, or the NCAA for that matter, handle it? Should the team be allowed to win a championship or just be allowed to compete with no post season?
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 10:29:05 AM
That's a great question.
As the law stands - or, at least how the federal government is interpreting the law, because this ultimately will be decided by the courts - the student is a girl who has the same right to use the girls facilities at school as any other female student. The school district admits this to some extent, allowing her to use the girl's bathroom, play on the girls' teams in athletics, use a female name in official records, etc. The only issue is the locker room.
IMO, she should be grateful that the district allows her all of those opportunities despite being a biological male. It also sounds like she is widely accepted by the student body. If the district wants to draw the line at the locker room and gives her a reasonable compromise (which they did), she should accept it. She might not be all that happy about it but there are a lot of school districts who would not give her the opportunities that she has been given at this school.
Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 04, 2015, 10:34:27 AM
Regarding the ability to play on the girls' teams in athletics, suppose the male who identifies as a female is Henry Ellenson tall and as good a hoops player. How is this fair for opposing teams? How does the state's high school athletic association, or the NCAA for that matter, handle it? Should the team be allowed to win a championship or just be allowed to compete with no post season?
On the list of things that are "unfair" about high school and college athletics, having transgender males on female teams ranks about #347 on the list. I don't this has ever been a problem anywhere.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 10:37:31 AM
On the list of things that are "unfair" about high school and college athletics, having transgender males on female teams ranks about #347 on the list. I don't this has ever been a problem anywhere.
I suppose we could go all "slippery slope" and start talking about families of athletic males wanting scholarships to universities where they know they won't get them on male athletic teams but could get them on female teams. So they start playing female sports.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 10:35:00 AM
IMO, she should be grateful that the district allows her all of those opportunities despite being a biological male. It also sounds like she is widely accepted by the student body. If the district wants to draw the line at the locker room and gives her a reasonable compromise (which they did), she should accept it. She might not be all that happy about it but there are a lot of school districts who would not give her the opportunities that she has been given at this school.
I don't think it is acceptable for people to say in a civil rights situation, "hey that should be good enough."
The (admittedly hyperbolic) equivalent is "Hey we let you blacks eat at the lunch counter and go to our integrated schools, and there are plenty of nice houses in that neighborhood over there, so just stay out of this one OK?"
Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 04, 2015, 10:34:27 AM
Regarding the ability to play on the girls' teams in athletics, suppose the male who identifies as a female is Henry Ellenson tall and as good a hoops player. How is this fair for opposing teams? How does the state's high school athletic association, or the NCAA for that matter, handle it? Should the team be allowed to win a championship or just be allowed to compete with no post season?
The Illinois High School Association and NCAA already have rules for dealing with this.
http://www.ihsa.org/documents/equity/equity-transgender_policy_revised.pdf
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Transgender_Handbook_2011_Final.pdf
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 09:52:58 AM
My argument isn't moving. I've never said it was about discomfort.
What you call his "discomfort," the law calls her "legal right."
And, again, you're ignoring the fact that most students support this person. It's the adults that are making a stink.
Why your insistence on referring to her with a male pronoun? Is this simply about your belief that transgender people aren't real? You're completely entitled to your opinion on that, of course. But if your argument here is that this student is and should be treated as a boy, that's pretty much a non-starter on discussing this further. There's an interesting discussion to be had as to what amounts to reasonable/equitable treatment and access, but there's no point in having that discussion if your argument boils down to genitalia.
1) What if there were an anonymous poll and the vast majority of the girls expressed that they were, in fact, uncomfortable changing in front of someone with male body. Would this alter your opinion?
2) Aren't many of the girls legally minors? If so, the parents' concern cannot simply brushed aside as bigotry.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 10:40:25 AM
I don't think it is acceptable for people to say in a civil rights situation, "hey that should be good enough."
The (admittedly hyperbolic) equivalent is "Hey we let you blacks eat at the lunch counter and go to our integrated schools, and there are plenty of nice houses in that neighborhood over there, so just stay out of this one OK?"
That's not an apt comparison because those people are actually black and not simply people who identify as being black.
Quote from: Eldon on November 04, 2015, 10:42:56 AM
1) What if there were an anonymous poll and the vast majority of the girls expressed that they were, in fact, uncomfortable changing in front of someone with male body. Would this alter your opinion?
No.
Quote
2) Aren't many of the girls legally minors? If so, the parents' concern cannot simply brushed aside as bigotry.
Why? Explain further.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 10:45:44 AM
That's not an apt comparison because those people are actually black and not simply people who identify as being black.
It is an apt comparison because the school is saying they are of a certain gender in every instance, except when they are in the locker rooms. Either they are of that gender...or they aren't.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 10:50:42 AM
It is an apt comparison because the school is saying they are of a certain gender in every instance, except when they are in the locker rooms. Either they are of that gender...or they aren't.
So you would feel better if the school dismissed what she identifies as and told her she was a male. Period.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 10:41:37 AM
The Illinois High School Association and NCAA already have rules for dealing with this.
http://www.ihsa.org/documents/equity/equity-transgender_policy_revised.pdf
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Transgender_Handbook_2011_Final.pdf
Looks like the IHSA has a policy, but not a rule. They make the final ruling on student participation. What would they rule in such a case?
Even if they undergo the cross hormone treatment, you can't teach height.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 10:52:22 AM
So you would feel better if the school dismissed what she identifies as and told her she was a male. Period.
No. I never said that.
Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 04, 2015, 10:55:18 AM
Looks like the IHSA has a policy, but not a rule. They make the final ruling on student participation. What would they rule in such a case?
Even if they undergo the cross hormone treatment, you can't teach height.
You're asking me to tell you how the IHSA would rule on your hypothetical of a super athletic 6'10" transgender student? How would I possibly know that?
All I can tell you is that IHSA policy allows transgender students to participate in athletics as the gender with which they identify, which is the case in this particular instance.
Quote from: mu03eng on November 04, 2015, 10:25:27 AM
Side note, not trying to be inflammatory, but what makes gender identification vs biological identification any different than any other physical attribute that a person rejects as not their identification? Take race, we do a lot of identification around race for various reasons, which is as of now determined by genetics and biology, but what if people start identifying as another race? Is that different than someone identifying as a different gender? If so why? If the same, should all physical identification be eliminated as a society because it no longer matters and only what you believe yourself to be matters?
I believe myself to be the President of the United States. Someone tell that Obama guy to get out of my Oval Office.
Transgender student locker room debate goes to Fox News
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20151104/news/151109574/
Quote from: Eldon on November 04, 2015, 09:11:23 AM
The harm is pure discomfort. The trans student experiences discomfort by having to use a private facility. The female students in the locker room experience discomfort by having to change in front of someone who is a biological male.
Are you criticizing the females for feeling discomfort? It sounds like you are saying to them "ah, suck it up girls, it's not that bad. Your feelings are irrational."
Yeah--make all uncomfortable--share the pain--that is the solution.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 09:05:14 AM
It's not a matter of the students feeling uncomfortable or threatened with a transgender student changing in front of them. It's a matter of girls feeling uncomfortable changing in front of a male peer.
Precisely.
Why not have open changing rooms at Nordstroms?
This madness forgets about the actual women whose expectation of privacy is being disregarded.
As a father I would not be pleased with males sharing a locker room with my then teen aged daughter. My daughter is an intelligent, sophisticated, open, liberal minded young women but I rather doubt she would care to share a locker room with men at the university gym. One may argue, 'but they think they are women' but the fact is that they are not.
There's obviously no simple, clear-cut solution to this issue and it's basically uncharted territory for schools. The school appeared to be very accommodating to this student while keeping in mind the privacy of other students. She didn't like changing down the hallway from her teammates, which is understandable and the changing curtain seemed like a fair compromise but she wasn't happy about being singled out in that way. I wonder if, in retrospect, the school could have placed changing curtains in both locker rooms for all students. They wouldn't be singling someone out and all students would have the same guidelines. Would the transgender student have accepted the compromise in that scenario?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 12:45:58 PM
There's obviously no simple, clear-cut solution to this issue and it's basically uncharted territory for schools. The school appeared to be very accommodating to this student while keeping in mind the privacy of other students. She didn't like changing down the hallway from her teammates, which is understandable and the changing curtain seemed like a fair compromise but she wasn't happy about being singled out in that way. I wonder if, in retrospect, the school could have placed changing curtains in both locker rooms for all students. They wouldn't be singling someone out and all students would have the same guidelines. Would the transgender student have accepted the compromise in that scenario?
This is actually not correct.
According to the Dept. of Education's ruling, she was willing to change behind a private curtain or a stall in the locker room, but the district refused and required her to change in a separate room down the hall.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 01:03:35 PM
This is actually not correct.
According to the Dept. of Education's ruling, she was willing to change behind a private curtain or a stall in the locker room, but the district refused and required her to change in a separate room down the hall.
According to the WLS story, she was using a separate room to change but was unhappy about it and the school's solution was a privacy curtain
EDIT: but that was after she complained about being forced to change separately.
Cates said the district drew the line when it came to the student's request for full access to the female locker room.
"She had to go down long hallway to the other bathroom, she noticed she was singled out, it didn't make her feel part of the team," Cates said.
The student, whose identity has not been made public, turned to the American Civil Liberties Union for help and filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights.
The district came up with a solution that it strongly believes is not discrimination -- asking the transgender student to use privacy curtains. Department of Education officials said without full access, the district has violated the student's civil rights.Either way, do you think a "privacy curtains for all!" solution would have satisfied?
Quote from: keefe on November 04, 2015, 12:03:13 PM
Precisely.
Why not have open changing rooms at Nordstroms?
This madness forgets about the actual women whose expectation of privacy is being disregarded.
As a father I would not be pleased with males sharing a locker room with my then teen aged daughter. My daughter is an intelligent, sophisticated, open, liberal minded young women but I rather doubt she would care to share a locker room with men at the university gym. One may argue, 'but they think they are women' but the fact is that they are not.
And that is where the whole argument lies, is it biological > identification or identification > biological. Younger generations are living in a world where it's the latter.
My 1st grader has a transgender girl (biological male) in his class and he would be appalled if she used the boys bathroom, so would I and the majority of parents. He's being brought up in a much different world than we were and doesn't view gender from a biological perspective. I may not have had this point of view 5 years ago but watching his classmate for the past 4 years has shown me that if someone truly identifies as a specific gender it doesn't matter what biological parts they have.
I also have to give the school and fellow parents credit on how they are handling this, it's a new situation for everyone and everyone is taking the approach that we're all learning so ask questions and let's make this as caring an environment - for all the kids - as we can.
The world is changing to be more accepting - always has, always will.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 04, 2015, 01:12:31 PM
According to the WLS story, she was using a separate room to change but was unhappy about it and the school's solution was a privacy curtain.
Cates said the district drew the line when it came to the student's request for full access to the female locker room.
"She had to go down long hallway to the other bathroom, she noticed she was singled out, it didn't make her feel part of the team," Cates said.
The student, whose identity has not been made public, turned to the American Civil Liberties Union for help and filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights.
The district came up with a solution that it strongly believes is not discrimination -- asking the transgender student to use privacy curtains. Department of Education officials said without full access, the district has violated the student's civil rights.
Here's the Department of Education's report. Read pages 2-3, under "Locker Room Access." As you'll see, the student repeatedly said she would change in a stall or behind a privacy curtain, and was refused by the district. I can't cut/paste it, so you'll have to read for yourself.
http://www.dailyherald.com/assets/pdf/DA140167112.pdf
QuoteEither way, do you think a "privacy curtains for all!" solution would have satisfied?
Well, it appears just one privacy curtain would have satisfied the student in question.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 04, 2015, 01:22:35 PM
Here's the Department of Education's report. Read pages 2-3, under "Locker Room Access." As you'll see, the student repeatedly said she would change in a stall or behind a privacy curtain, and was refused by the district. I can't cut/paste it, so you'll have to read for yourself.
http://www.dailyherald.com/assets/pdf/DA140167112.pdf
Well, it appears just one privacy curtain would have satisfied the student in question.
Thanks for the clarification.
The disconnect is that the student supposedly would have been fine with a privacy curtain yet that solution still constitutes a civil rights violation.
The other note I found interesting was that her entering the locker room a handful of times led to complaints from 4 girls and 1 parent.
The problem inherently is any solution requires that identity, gender, and sexuality all be compartmentalized things but they really aren't.
Person 1: biological male, identifies as female, sexually attracted to females
Person 2: biological female, identifies as female, sexually attracted to females
Person 3: surgically female, identifies as female, sexually attracted to females
Person 4: biological female, identifies as female, sexually attracted to males
Person 5: biological female, identifies as male, sexually attracted to females
Person 6: biological female, identifies as male, sexually attracted to males
So which of these persons go to the female locker room and which go to the male locker room. What is the purpose of separate locker rooms....to avoid sexual or biological issues or some other reason?
It may seem weird but we are at the point as a society we need to examine and understand why we have male and female restrooms/locker rooms. That should then inform who goes where.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on November 04, 2015, 08:59:11 AM
So in other words, no one can really come up with any harm that any of the 12,000 students would face if a transgender student changed in front of them.
I think this was the same argument as Separate but equal. If no harm is proven it must be OK.
Maybe we are discussing young people who have lots of pressures and hang ups, body, self esteem, who knows. Why do the youngest have to endure the social engineering/experimentation.
(http://watchdog.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2015/10/Think-of-the-Children.jpg)
nm
nm
Quote from: naginiF on November 04, 2015, 01:17:17 PM
And that is where the whole argument lies, is it biological > identification or identification > biological. Younger generations are living in a world where it's the latter.
My 1st grader has a transgender girl (biological male) in his class and he would be appalled if she used the boys bathroom, so would I and the majority of parents. He's being brought up in a much different world than we were and doesn't view gender from a biological perspective. I may not have had this point of view 5 years ago but watching his classmate for the past 4 years has shown me that if someone truly identifies as a specific gender it doesn't matter what biological parts they have.
I also have to give the school and fellow parents credit on how they are handling this, it's a new situation for everyone and everyone is taking the approach that we're all learning so ask questions and let's make this as caring an environment - for all the kids - as we can.
The world is changing to be more accepting - always has, always will.
Question: What's the birth order for the transgender student?
I ask because my wife and I watched a documentary about 4 transgender kids and in each case, the transgender was the middle child of 3 same-sex siblings. They didn't mention that in the doc, but we both noticed it and found that interesting.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 05, 2015, 08:13:03 AM
Question: What's the birth order for the transgender student?
I ask because my wife and I watched a documentary about 4 transgender kids and in each case, the transgender was the middle child of 3 same-sex siblings. They didn't mention that in the doc, but we both noticed it and found that interesting.
3rd of 4 - Brother, Sister, younger Brother.
Not the exact same as the doc but kinda close....
Quote from: naginiF on November 05, 2015, 09:36:31 AM
3rd of 4 - Brother, Sister, younger Brother.
Not the exact same as the doc but kinda close....
Thanks. The kid is "the middle brother" so like you said, it's pretty similar. I'm not going to overanalyze but that aspect of things does stand out.
I think the way society is going we are about 20 years away from polygamy and and 50 years from bestiality being legal. The left is literally becoming more "anything goes" everyday. The screeching always seems to work too.
Quote from: Sylvester78 on November 05, 2015, 10:39:03 AM
I think the way society is going we are about 20 years away from polygamy and and 50 years from bestiality being legal. The left is literally becoming more "anything goes" everyday. The screeching always seems to work too.
Not sure why we will be waiting that long. Aren't we supposed to be inclusive to allow anyone to marry their brother, sister, mom, dad, cousin, dog, etc., or all at the same time, now?
What about male sportwriters in female locker rooms while they are showering, ainna?
Quote from: naginiF on November 04, 2015, 01:17:17 PM
And that is where the whole argument lies, is it biological > identification or identification > biological. Younger generations are living in a world where it's the latter.
My 1st grader has a transgender girl (biological male) in his class and he would be appalled if she used the boys bathroom, so would I and the majority of parents. He's being brought up in a much different world than we were and doesn't view gender from a biological perspective. I may not have had this point of view 5 years ago but watching his classmate for the past 4 years has shown me that if someone truly identifies as a specific gender it doesn't matter what biological parts they have.
I also have to give the school and fellow parents credit on how they are handling this, it's a new situation for everyone and everyone is taking the approach that we're all learning so ask questions and let's make this as caring an environment - for all the kids - as we can.
The world is changing to be more accepting - always has, always will.
So a 6 year old says I'm a girl and not a boy.... and everyone says it must be so! Go figure. I guess the parents of this child are "consenting" to the choice, but it if a parent of a another child "dissents" and does not want their child sharing the same facilities where do they go?
Quote from: muwarrior69 on November 09, 2015, 05:49:00 PM
So a 6 year old says I'm a girl and not a boy.... and everyone says it must be so! Go figure. I guess the parents of this child are "consenting" to the choice, but it if a parent of a another child "dissents" and does not want their child sharing the same facilities where do they go?
To answer the underlined part......Yep! A couple points on this. First, if you spent a full day in their class I'd bet a hefty dinner tab you wouldn't be able to pick her out. She's a girl, she's not making a choice. I've known her since they were in Toddler class together and by Pre-K it was obvious that she was struggling with her gender identity. In retrospect, it's obvious. Second, her parents have shown more resolve and love than I think 99% of us, including me, are capable of.
To answer your question about "dissents". Our kids go to a private, high demand (therefore expensive), Christian (though not Catholic) day school and when you live on the Missouri side of Kansas City you have no choice but to send your kids to private school (but 65% of the kids live in Kansas). With the administrations actions so far i'd be shocked if they didn't just take the next person on the waiting list and the 'dissents' would find another school.
There are a million reasons why Kansas City has surprised me since moving here, this is #1.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 07, 2015, 08:16:25 PM
What about male sportwriters in female locker rooms while they are showering, ainna?
What about it?
Men are, indeed, allowed in women's locker rooms. Driving into work on Monday I heard a nationally syndicated radio commentator lamenting the fact that he couldn't go in women's locker rooms. Apparently he's never attempted to cover women's sports -- sadly, not too surprising. But as this particular radio talker works for a network that covers both the WNBA and the women's NCAA basketball tournament -- and also employs several high profile women sports reporters -- you'd think he might have checked his facts.
The WNBA -- the playoffs are going on right now -- has the same rules as the NBA. Open locker rooms at designated times. In the NCAA tournament, the same rules govern both men and women's locker rooms -- they're both open at specific times. During the regular season, NCAA institutions can make their own rules about locker room availability, but during the tournament the NCAA has a uniform policy. When Stanford played UConn in last April's championship, if you wanted to see how devastated Jayne Appel was after her terrible shooting night, you needed to be in the locker room. I was there. So were my male colleagues.http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/09/nude-naked-locker-room-nfl-nba-wnba/1#.VkFSG7-LIqI
There is not a single women's sports league that bars male reporters from the locker room unless access is denied to everyone. Not one. Nada. Zero. Several admit all reporters. Both the WNBA and the NCAA women's basketball tournament have open locker rooms.http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/46109716/
Quote from: Pakuni on November 09, 2015, 08:12:20 PM
What about it?
Men are, indeed, allowed in women's locker rooms. Driving into work on Monday I heard a nationally syndicated radio commentator lamenting the fact that he couldn't go in women's locker rooms. Apparently he's never attempted to cover women's sports -- sadly, not too surprising. But as this particular radio talker works for a network that covers both the WNBA and the women's NCAA basketball tournament -- and also employs several high profile women sports reporters -- you'd think he might have checked his facts.
The WNBA -- the playoffs are going on right now -- has the same rules as the NBA. Open locker rooms at designated times. In the NCAA tournament, the same rules govern both men and women's locker rooms -- they're both open at specific times. During the regular season, NCAA institutions can make their own rules about locker room availability, but during the tournament the NCAA has a uniform policy. When Stanford played UConn in last April's championship, if you wanted to see how devastated Jayne Appel was after her terrible shooting night, you needed to be in the locker room. I was there. So were my male colleagues.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/09/nude-naked-locker-room-nfl-nba-wnba/1#.VkFSG7-LIqI
There is not a single women's sports league that bars male reporters from the locker room unless access is denied to everyone. Not one. Nada. Zero. Several admit all reporters. Both the WNBA and the NCAA women's basketball tournament have open locker rooms.
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/46109716/
Reminds me of an amusing (YMMV) thing that happened to my wife and daughter this weekend. My daughter was on a visit to unnamed Big East volleyball program. She got invited into the locker room after the match and a player was topless. My wife said, "we can wait for you to get dressed." Player, "No, come on in" and proceeded to stand there topless and talk with my wife and daughter. Even though everyone was the same sex...awkward. My daughter realizes college ball will be a little different than HS in a lot of ways.
I knew Juwanna Mann should have been able to play in the WUBA all along.