Also, there was not (and may still not be) a policy granting bathroom access of choice to declared TG students. If its a he, he was not in the bathroom assigned.
Virginia: Father arrested at school board meeting. Claims his daughter was raped in school bathroom by boy in a skirt.
Non-Running
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
So, right wingers are now down with "believe women" as long as the perpetrator is trans?
I don't believe the boy was trans, I believe that if the allegations are true, that he was an opportunist taking advantage of the poorly thought out inclusive policies that would allow for him to freely enter the bathroom. I also don't know why you have to be a "right winger" in order to be mad about this. I guess liberals don't really care who gets hurt because of their policies, just as long as it sounds good in theory.
I find the story too wacky to believe so I would have no reason to be mad. There are absolutely no details in any of the articles. It just the statements from the guy at the meeting and his attorney. Is the father arguing that if transgender people weren't allowed in the girls' bathroom, the alleged assault would not have happened? Was there any security that would prevented any guy from going in?
No, SDSU, you're missing the point entirely as usual. If the boy in question was wearing a skirt, then obviously he thought that would have helped him, because he would be allowed to be in the bathroom without getting kicked out. Pretty obvious to see at this point the significance of him wearing a skirt. -
Let it Rupp wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
So, right wingers are now down with "believe women" as long as the perpetrator is trans?
I don't believe the boy was trans, I believe that if the allegations are true, that he was an opportunist taking advantage of the poorly thought out inclusive policies that would allow for him to freely enter the bathroom. I also don't know why you have to be a "right winger" in order to be mad about this. I guess liberals don't really care who gets hurt because of their policies, just as long as it sounds good in theory.
I find the story too wacky to believe so I would have no reason to be mad. There are absolutely no details in any of the articles. It just the statements from the guy at the meeting and his attorney. Is the father arguing that if transgender people weren't allowed in the girls' bathroom, the alleged assault would not have happened? Was there any security that would prevented any guy from going in?
No, SDSU, you're missing the point entirely as usual. If the boy in question was wearing a skirt, then obviously he thought that would have helped him, because he would be allowed to be in the bathroom without getting kicked out. Pretty obvious to see at this point the significance of him wearing a skirt.
I don't believe any school employees monitor people going into bathrooms. Any guy could hang out and go in when the coast was clear, no skirt required. He could just hide in a stall until a victim arrived. -
Let it Rupp wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
So, right wingers are now down with "believe women" as long as the perpetrator is trans?
I don't believe the boy was trans, I believe that if the allegations are true, that he was an opportunist taking advantage of the poorly thought out inclusive policies that would allow for him to freely enter the bathroom. I also don't know why you have to be a "right winger" in order to be mad about this. I guess liberals don't really care who gets hurt because of their policies, just as long as it sounds good in theory.
I find the story too wacky to believe so I would have no reason to be mad. There are absolutely no details in any of the articles. It just the statements from the guy at the meeting and his attorney. Is the father arguing that if transgender people weren't allowed in the girls' bathroom, the alleged assault would not have happened? Was there any security that would prevented any guy from going in?
No, SDSU, you're missing the point entirely as usual. If the boy in question was wearing a skirt, then obviously he thought that would have helped him, because he would be allowed to be in the bathroom without getting kicked out. Pretty obvious to see at this point the significance of him wearing a skirt.
It's confirmed the boy isn't trans but I'm not sure you're onto anything. Rapists will use any cover available to them. It's not the first time someone has disguised themselves for the purposes of committing a crime.
As for trans people, they are far more likely to be victims than perps. Imagine someone wearing a skirt in the boys and how unsafe they would feel. -
Tatar.. wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
So, right wingers are now down with "believe women" as long as the perpetrator is trans?
I don't believe the boy was trans, I believe that if the allegations are true, that he was an opportunist taking advantage of the poorly thought out inclusive policies that would allow for him to freely enter the bathroom. I also don't know why you have to be a "right winger" in order to be mad about this. I guess liberals don't really care who gets hurt because of their policies, just as long as it sounds good in theory.
I find the story too wacky to believe so I would have no reason to be mad. There are absolutely no details in any of the articles. It just the statements from the guy at the meeting and his attorney. Is the father arguing that if transgender people weren't allowed in the girls' bathroom, the alleged assault would not have happened? Was there any security that would prevented any guy from going in?
No, SDSU, you're missing the point entirely as usual. If the boy in question was wearing a skirt, then obviously he thought that would have helped him, because he would be allowed to be in the bathroom without getting kicked out. Pretty obvious to see at this point the significance of him wearing a skirt.
It's confirmed the boy isn't trans but I'm not sure you're onto anything. Rapists will use any cover available to them. It's not the first time someone has disguised themselves for the purposes of committing a crime.
As for trans people, they are far more likely to be victims than perps. Imagine someone wearing a skirt in the boys and how unsafe they would feel.
+1.
The same boy allegedly assaulted another girl in an empty classroom. (The article does not say what he was wearing, so I guess he was not wearing a skirt.) -
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
Tatar.. wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
So, right wingers are now down with "believe women" as long as the perpetrator is trans?
I don't believe the boy was trans, I believe that if the allegations are true, that he was an opportunist taking advantage of the poorly thought out inclusive policies that would allow for him to freely enter the bathroom. I also don't know why you have to be a "right winger" in order to be mad about this. I guess liberals don't really care who gets hurt because of their policies, just as long as it sounds good in theory.
I find the story too wacky to believe so I would have no reason to be mad. There are absolutely no details in any of the articles. It just the statements from the guy at the meeting and his attorney. Is the father arguing that if transgender people weren't allowed in the girls' bathroom, the alleged assault would not have happened? Was there any security that would prevented any guy from going in?
No, SDSU, you're missing the point entirely as usual. If the boy in question was wearing a skirt, then obviously he thought that would have helped him, because he would be allowed to be in the bathroom without getting kicked out. Pretty obvious to see at this point the significance of him wearing a skirt.
It's confirmed the boy isn't trans but I'm not sure you're onto anything. Rapists will use any cover available to them. It's not the first time someone has disguised themselves for the purposes of committing a crime.
As for trans people, they are far more likely to be victims than perps. Imagine someone wearing a skirt in the boys and how unsafe they would feel.
+1.
The same boy allegedly assaulted another girl in an empty classroom. (The article does not say what he was wearing, so I guess he was not wearing a skirt.)
That's another odd part of this story. The first assault was forced sodomy and fellatio which is as about as bad as it gets for sexual assault. Rather than being imprisoned until he was at least 18, his punishment was to be transferred to another school. If true, that should be the story and not transgender bathroom policies. -
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
-
dullard wrote:
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
The story is a wet dream for the far right and various outlets have run with it despise there being few details. Is not even clear why the father was at the meeting or what he wants. If he wants justice for his daughter, shouldn't he be speaking with the police? -
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
Tatar.. wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
So, right wingers are now down with "believe women" as long as the perpetrator is trans?
I don't believe the boy was trans, I believe that if the allegations are true, that he was an opportunist taking advantage of the poorly thought out inclusive policies that would allow for him to freely enter the bathroom. I also don't know why you have to be a "right winger" in order to be mad about this. I guess liberals don't really care who gets hurt because of their policies, just as long as it sounds good in theory.
I find the story too wacky to believe so I would have no reason to be mad. There are absolutely no details in any of the articles. It just the statements from the guy at the meeting and his attorney. Is the father arguing that if transgender people weren't allowed in the girls' bathroom, the alleged assault would not have happened? Was there any security that would prevented any guy from going in?
No, SDSU, you're missing the point entirely as usual. If the boy in question was wearing a skirt, then obviously he thought that would have helped him, because he would be allowed to be in the bathroom without getting kicked out. Pretty obvious to see at this point the significance of him wearing a skirt.
It's confirmed the boy isn't trans but I'm not sure you're onto anything. Rapists will use any cover available to them. It's not the first time someone has disguised themselves for the purposes of committing a crime.
As for trans people, they are far more likely to be victims than perps. Imagine someone wearing a skirt in the boys and how unsafe they would feel.
+1.
The same boy allegedly assaulted another girl in an empty classroom. (The article does not say what he was wearing, so I guess he was not wearing a skirt.)
That's another odd part of this story. The first assault was forced sodomy and fellatio which is as about as bad as it gets for sexual assault. Rather than being imprisoned until he was at least 18, his punishment was to be transferred to another school. If true, that should be the story and not transgender bathroom policies.
But the wheels of justice don't work as quickly as you seem to think, The boy in these cases has not yet been convicted of the forcible sodomy, fellatio and rape in the first alleged attack that is said to have taken place in May - he's only been charged with these offenses. So the fact that he hasn't been imprisoned until at least 18 doesn't mean he didn't commit the first attack or that it didn't occur.
The boy who's been accused of these sex attacks was transferred from the first school to another school as a pro forma move pending the outcome of the police investigation into the first reported assault. The transfer to another school wasn't "his punishment" for the first attack.
It was whilst the first assault was still being investigated and charges had not yet been filed that the boy allegedly committed the second attack in the school he'd been transferred to after the first alleged assault.
In any event, the boy is now being held in a juvenile detention facility, pending the resolution of both cases.
As to whether he was or is "really trans," how can one tell? There is no objective, verifiable, measurable criteria for being trans today. It's simply a matter of self-declaration.
Also, there's no evidence for the claim that males who identify as trans "are far more likely to be victims than perps." Males who identify as trans have the same offending patterns as other males. Adopting an opposite-sex identity does not suddenly turn people into saints, and males who identify as trans pose the same safeguarding risks to females as all others of their sex do.
In fact, a worrying number of the male inmates in US state and federal prisons - and the prisons in other countries like Canada and the UK - who say they are trans today have convictions for sex offenses. Responding to FOI requests, the UK's Ministry of Justice released figures that show more than half of the male prisoners in England and Wales who say they "identify as" women in 2018-2019 had been convicted of sex crimes. -
SDSU Aztec wrote:
dullard wrote:
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
The story is a wet dream for the far right and various outlets have run with it despise there being few details. Is not even clear why the father was at the meeting or what he wants. If he wants justice for his daughter, shouldn't he be speaking with the police?
Stories like this might be a "wet dream" in your eyes, but they are nightmares for girls & women who are being told we must forfeit our right to female-only toilets, locker rooms, change rooms, hospital wards, shelters, prisons etc in order to placate all the males who nowadays are declaring they are trans.
These nightmares are especially troubling for the many girls & women who've experienced sexual assault, whether in schools or other places. Used to be, the ladies' room was a sanctuary where we could turn to in order to get away from creepy, predatory guys. But now rules are being put in place that say objecting to the presence of males in previously female-only intimate spaces is bigotry, hate and "transphobia."
But thanks for likening what's going on to "a wet dream." Nothing illustrates that the demands of trans activists impinges upon girls' & women's rights to safety, privacy & dignity quite so well as a guy bringing up penises, male ejaculation and semen to make his point. -
SDSU Aztec wrote:
dullard wrote:
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
The story is a wet dream for the far right and various outlets have run with it despise there being few details. Is not even clear why the father was at the meeting or what he wants. If he wants justice for his daughter, shouldn't he be speaking with the police?
The school hadn't enacted any 'policies' at the time of the assault. A meeting held was disrupted by the alleged victim's father where bathroom policy was discussed. The case is being investigated by police and because of this and because they are all minors we don't have much detail.
The policies proposed are described as 'transgender bathrooms' but in reality are 'gender-neutral' and the school wanted to renovate them and make them more private like having a sink and mirror inside a fully enclosed stall.
It would make sexual assault less likely in all honesty but for some people that isn't nearly as important as bashing trans people. -
From WTOP Wednesday October 13, 4:20 pim:
A Loudoun County, Virginia, high school student who allegedly groped a girl at Broad Run High School last week was on electronic monitoring after being charged with sexually assaulting a young girl in a bathroom in an Ashburn high school in May.
Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney Buta Biberaj told WTOP that the same 15-year-old has been charged in both crimes, and is being held at the Loudoun County Juvenile Detention Center.
The name of the suspect is not being released because of his age. He is currently charged in Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court.
The young suspect is charged with felony sexual assault counts in connection with the May 28 incident at Stone Bridge High School. While the juvenile complaint details the allegations, nothing in the charges indicates how the teen ended up in the girl’s bathroom.
The sheriff’s office was contacted “within minutes of receiving the initial report on May 28,” Wayde Byard, public information officer for Loudoun County Public Schools, said in a statement Wednesday afternoon.
The teen, then 14, was charged with two counts of forcible sodomy for bathroom assault on July 8. Biberaj said DNA samples were submitted to the Department of Forensic Science for analysis.
In juvenile cases, an investigating deputy brings the case to the juvenile court services unit, and meets with an intake officer. The intake officer — whose role can be compared to a magistrate in an adult case — levied the charges in July.
A juvenile court judge “ordered electronic monitoring for the suspect, to be monitored by the probation office,” Biberaj said. “He was still under the terms of at electronic monitoring at the time” of the October incident.
Biberaj said prosecutors had been in touch with the victim of the May 28 assault, her family, and their lawyer, Elizabeth Lancaster. Lancaster has not immediately responded to a WTOP request for comment.
https://wtop.com/loudoun-county/2021/10/teen-charged-in-loudoun-co-school-groping-was-on-electronic-monitoring-for-earlier-charges/ -
Trans or not, how does the school and/or father get the police involved immediately?
We had two kids caught with vapes at school today and police were immediately brought in.
I feel terrible for the young woman who was attacked, and I hope she’s able to find some comfort in therapy and a well-deserved lawsuit.
Complete failure by all adults involved. -
the macdaddy og yo wrote:
Trans or not, how does the school and/or father get the police involved immediately?
We had two kids caught with vapes at school today and police were immediately brought in.
I feel terrible for the young woman who was attacked, and I hope she’s able to find some comfort in therapy and a well-deserved lawsuit.
Complete failure by all adults involved.
Dear Imbecile,
Did you not read the post directly above yours? The police were involved "immediately".
And do you go to an LDS school or something? Police called for vaping? My kids school thats probably a Saturday detention (school 9-12 Saturday), a suspension, or for repeat offending problem kids, bye bye. Police? -
RunRagged wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
dullard wrote:
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
The story is a wet dream for the far right and various outlets have run with it despise there being few details. Is not even clear why the father was at the meeting or what he wants. If he wants justice for his daughter, shouldn't he be speaking with the police?
Stories like this might be a "wet dream" in your eyes, but they are nightmares for girls & women who are being told we must forfeit our right to female-only toilets, locker rooms, change rooms, hospital wards, shelters, prisons etc in order to placate all the males who nowadays are declaring they are trans.
These nightmares are especially troubling for the many girls & women who've experienced sexual assault, whether in schools or other places. Used to be, the ladies' room was a sanctuary where we could turn to in order to get away from creepy, predatory guys. But now rules are being put in place that say objecting to the presence of males in previously female-only intimate spaces is bigotry, hate and "transphobia."
But thanks for likening what's going on to "a wet dream." Nothing illustrates that the demands of trans activists impinges upon girls' & women's rights to safety, privacy & dignity quite so well as a guy bringing up penises, male ejaculation and semen to make his point.
Thank you. -
ldgzjhx wrote:
the macdaddy og yo wrote:
Trans or not, how does the school and/or father get the police involved immediately?
We had two kids caught with vapes at school today and police were immediately brought in.
I feel terrible for the young woman who was attacked, and I hope she’s able to find some comfort in therapy and a well-deserved lawsuit.
Complete failure by all adults involved.
Dear Imbecile,
Did you not read the post directly above yours? The police were involved "immediately".
And do you go to an LDS school or something? Police called for vaping? My kids school thats probably a Saturday detention (school 9-12 Saturday), a suspension, or for repeat offending problem kids, bye bye. Police?
1) No, I did not read every post in this thread. Hard pass on sifting through the LGBTQ hate.
2) The article I read said otherwise (granted, it was a quote from the father). Not sure about my faith in this report as it’s essentially a school/district employee providing a PR statement. We’ll see. I hope it wasn’t a complete let down from all involved.
3) Nah, I work in the best district in my state. We have our resources and we use them to keep our kids safe. It’s a weird flex to say your school doesn’t take underage drug use seriously. Nevertheless, as it turns out, through an investigation, they busted some kid who was selling vapes/pills to middle school kids. My school and community is a better place. -
Adultintheroom wrote:
Coevett wrote:
Disko Eric wrote:
This will be a shock so please take a seat. Men. Women. Trans. Gender fluid. All colors. Rape people. Whether this boy had a skirt or is trans does not matter. You’ll also be shocked to know that trans people have been using the bathroom of their gender since indoor plumbing was invented. You guys really need to get out more.
Really?
Women rape more than men rape?
Lefties are so weird these days.
How the actual fck did you draw that conclusion from what the poster typed?
Baffling.
How did you not? -
RunRagged wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
dullard wrote:
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
The story is a wet dream for the far right and various outlets have run with it despise there being few details. Is not even clear why the father was at the meeting or what he wants. If he wants justice for his daughter, shouldn't he be speaking with the police?
Stories like this might be a "wet dream" in your eyes, but they are nightmares for girls & women who are being told we must forfeit our right to female-only toilets, locker rooms, change rooms, hospital wards, shelters, prisons etc in order to placate all the males who nowadays are declaring they are trans.
These nightmares are especially troubling for the many girls & women who've experienced sexual assault, whether in schools or other places. Used to be, the ladies' room was a sanctuary where we could turn to in order to get away from creepy, predatory guys. But now rules are being put in place that say objecting to the presence of males in previously female-only intimate spaces is bigotry, hate and "transphobia."
But thanks for likening what's going on to "a wet dream." Nothing illustrates that the demands of trans activists impinges upon girls' & women's rights to safety, privacy & dignity quite so well as a guy bringing up penises, male ejaculation and semen to make his point.
This story isn't even real. It's completely made up so that people like you read it and get scared of the boogeyman. -
Tatar.. wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
dullard wrote:
The American culture wars are so entertaining to watch from afar.
The story is a wet dream for the far right and various outlets have run with it despise there being few details. Is not even clear why the father was at the meeting or what he wants. If he wants justice for his daughter, shouldn't he be speaking with the police?
The school hadn't enacted any 'policies' at the time of the assault. A meeting held was disrupted by the alleged victim's father where bathroom policy was discussed. The case is being investigated by police and because of this and because they are all minors we don't have much detail.
The policies proposed are described as 'transgender bathrooms' but in reality are 'gender-neutral' and the school wanted to renovate them and make them more private like having a sink and mirror inside a fully enclosed stall.
It would make sexual assault less likely in all honesty but for some people that isn't nearly as important as bashing trans people.
How does making previously female-only communal toilets, locker rooms and other similar facilities mixed-sex - which is what the obfuscating term "gender neutral" means - "make sexual assaults less likely"?
Since the vast majority (over 95%) of people who commit sexual assaults are males, and those they sexually assault are most often female (85%), I don't see how opening up female toilets, locker rooms, change rooms, to males etc will lower the rates of sexual assault - or can & will make girls & women safer. On the contrary, this seems to be throwing safeguarding for half the human race out the window entirely.
Expressing concerns about policies that threaten to diminish the safety, dignity and privacy of girls & women in places outside our homes where we have to remove part or all of our clothes and are especially vulnerable to sexual harassment, voyeurism, exhibitionism, predation and assault, is not the same as "bashing trans people."
If some people have gender identities that make them uncomfortable using the single-sex facilities for their sex, then the solution is to create additional third spaces that can be used by persons of all gender identities of either sex safely and with dignity. But it's not fair to make sweeping changes suddenly removing single-sex provisions from girls & women at schools and other places outside the home, especially not without allowing discussion & debate, and without understanding why women of earlier generations fought and lobbied hard for separate provisions in certain limited circumstances in the first place.
Due to our different urinary anatomy, the additional reproductive functions that biology has endowed us with, the fact that we are physically weaker than males, and the fact that most males are sexually attracted to females, often powerfully, and some males are inclined to behave inappropriately and disrespectfully towards us, and some males are sexually abusive, girls & women require separate toilets from males for reasons you might not be aware of. Pointing this out isn't "bashing" anyone.
A lot of males don't want their toilets and locker rooms to become mixed-sex, either. -
This is just complete nonsense. Any assault on our children at school by boys or girls is against every school policy and usually becomes very well known in the community, although sometimes the crimes do not become known for some weeks. Whether the assailant was or was not wearing a skirt is immaterial to rape. Rape's rape. No policy ever approved rape in any way, by any assailant--except men, of course, who as husbands could rape their wives without any legal category acknowledging it as rape until the mid 1960s.
