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.
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.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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?
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
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.
This post was removed.
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:
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:
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:
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.
This post was removed.
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.