According to Fairfax County, Virginia, School Board member Ryan McElveen, transgender “rights” is the “civil rights issue of our day.”
McElveen stated, “Friends, fifty years later we’re fighting the same battles that our fore bearers fought to provide equal access to our facilities for all of our students. The push for protections based on gender identity is the civil rights issue of our day.”
To hear McElveen talk, one would think students did not have “equal” access to “facilities.” Gender is biological, determined by chromosomes resulting in the physical manifestations of either male or female reproductive organs. All schools have “facilities” for males and females. Males access male facilities. Females access female facilities. It’s based on physical gender. So, how does allowing “cross gender” access to “facilities” equate to “protecting” gender identity? How do you know when a male is accessing a female facility for unsavory purposes versus “identifying” as female? Are they going to be issued “papers” to present to validate their “gender identity“? Same thing goes for females accessing male facilities.
As a female, who is protecting my “gender identity” as female? In fact, these policies are inequitable as it is disparaging to those who identify with their biological, physical gender in favor of those who “perceive” to be something else. There are also privacy and safety issues. What’s next? If an individual identifies as a four-legged animal, can they “facility” in the open, outside, in public?
Many would say comparing someone being a “transgender” to someone identifying as an animal is apples and oranges. However, those supporting the “transgender” position use words like “identify as the opposite gender,” “feel” differently, “it’s in the soul,” and “medical needs of trans children” to somehow negate the “identify as an animal” comparison. If someone can “feel” transgender, why can’t someone “feel” trans-species? Yes, it may be a ridiculous argument; but, how is it any more ridiculous than trying to justify a male using a female facility or vice versa – child or adult – under the label “transgender?”
Amid an extremely vocal and raucous crowded meeting of parents last Thursday night at the Fairfax County School Board meeting, the board voted to add “gender identity” to its non-discrimination policy affecting students, staff, and faculty who identify as transgender. This did not sit well with the audience attendees resulting in heated exchanges before the vote. At one point, school board chairman, Tamara Kaufax yelled at parents and threatened them with removal. What is just as disturbing is what prompted the change in policy.
The board, using the rationale of the county “being a leader on civil rights issues,” enacted this policy due to “the federal government” pressuring school districts across the country to “amend their ‘gender identity’ policies” or face “the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) of the US Department of Education” recommending termination of federal funds to the county.
This revelation came about at the board meeting when John Foster, the division counsel for the county, reiterated the district was feeling pressure from the federal government. Foster stated, “The federal government has been very clear that they expect local school divisions to amend their policies to include gender identity.”
According to the only board member in opposition to the policy, Elizabeth Schultz, the county is facing an $8 million shortfall and questions concerning the policy change were unanswered, including costs on “staff development, facility modifications, staffing needs and more.”
Board member Patty Reed shared Schultz’s concerns. Reed accused the FCPS of “not wanting parents involved in the discussion.” In her statement at the meeting, Reed indicated the FCPS did not publicize any information regarding the gender policy change or the upcoming vote, adding, “I was a little confused why I hadn’t heard about this vote and why it was not publicized.” Despite these facts, Reed was still in support of the policy.
It’s very clear this school board “bowed” to strong-arm threat tactics from the Obama administration’s Department of Education. The board took only two months to make this policy change while attempting to keep it hidden from the parents and the tax-payers. In contrast, it took the FCPS 10 years to change the high school start times and for five years the board has talked about hiring an independent school board auditor, which is still ongoing. Ryan McElveen, the board member who sponsored the transgender proposal, admitted there had not been a complaint, concern or incident of discrimination by a transgender staff member or student. Never.
This school board, in essence, sold out the parents, the school children and the taxpayers for the money – they might as well have strapped a mattress on their back and walked along the sidewalk in front of the White House.
The unconstitutional US Department of Education is removing, or has removed, parental input from school systems by bribery, threats, and coercion of school board members. Another disturbing fact is the individuals comprising the school board are members of the community. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
While some would contend that because the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed transgender and homosexuality from the DSM, these “behaviors” are now considered normal. They should be reminded that it’s not called “the practice of medicine” for nothing. In fact, the APA bows more to political pressure in adding or removing mental illness diagnoses than it does based on “science” or millenniums of societal norms.
As we have seen, this issue is not just confined to schools. There are cities across the nation that seek to “change” the rules regarding “cross-gender” use of public facilities. Government has decided it is in charge and “we the people” are expected to go along like good little sheep, accepting a change in societal norms for approximately 2% of the population. In all the push to achieve these “rights for transgenders,” no one has looked at logistics as far as monetary and societal costs, determining if an individual who is accessing the facilities is truly “transgender,” how that compliance is to be monitored, if at all, and maintenance of the privacy/security of individuals who are uncomfortable with the opposite gender in the same facilities as they are.
The easiest, most equitable, and most rationale application is as simple as taking a survey of your own plumbing. If you have a penis and testicles, you do not belong in the female facilities. If you do not have a penis and testicles, you do not belong in the male facilities.