This is exactly why the Federal Government has inserted its self into our school system.  Never mind what the taxpayer who pays the taxes wants.

1103bball-385x200.png

Should transgender students have full access to locker rooms?

Uncle Sam isn’t going to let schools place certain restrictions on how transgender students use a single-sex locker room.

A school district near Chicago, Palatine 211, provides numerous accommodations for transgender students.

The district calls the students by requested names, honors selected gender (including allowing them to play on the sports teams of the gender they identify as belonging to), and permits them to use single-sex bathrooms, since stalls ensure privacy.

But the federal government has decided the district is still guilty of violating Title IX, the law prohibiting sex-based discrimination, over certain locker room restrictions.

“District 211 is not excluding transgender students from their gender-identified locker room,” said district superintendent Daniel Cates in a statement. “Though our position has been inaccurately reported, a transgender student may use his or her gender-identified locker room simply by utilizing individual measures of privacy when changing clothes or taking showers.”

The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.  We’ll respect your inbox and keep you informed.

That’s unacceptable to the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

“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,” said Catherine Lhamon, assistant secretary for Civil Rights at the Department of Education, in a statement.

According to the Associated Press, “District 211 has 30 days to change the policy, or risk losing millions in federal funding.”

Terrific.

As Cates, the superintendent, puts it bluntly in his statement: “The students in our schools are teenagers, not adults, and one’s gender is not the same as one’s anatomy. Boys and girls are in separate locker rooms – where there are open changing areas and open shower facilities – for a reason.”

Students should not be forced to share open changing areas with students who retain the anatomy of a different sex, even if such students identify as being the same sex. This is just common sense. It also honors the privacy rights of students, who understandably may feel uncomfortable with open area changing that includes students of both biological sexes.

In a report released Monday, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights acknowledged the arguments made by District 211 regarding the privacy rights of the non-transgender students:

The District raised two specific constitutional privacy concerns. First, the District contends that ‘permitting Student A to be present in the locker room would expose female students to being observed in a state of undress by a biologically male individual.’ The District’s second stated privacy concern is that it would be inappropriate for young female students to view a naked male in the locker room in a state of undress. The District stated that ‘[g]ranting Student A the option to change her clothes in the girls’ locker room would expose female students as young as fifteen years of age to a biologically male body.’

The Department of Education’s response? “OCR [Office of Civil Rights] finds the concerns unavailing in this case.”

It’s clear that the federal government is putting the preferences of transgender students ahead of the privacy rights of other students.  That’s discrimination—against students who, reasonably and fairly, don’t want to be forced into intimate situations with those of the opposite sex biologically.

Courtesy of DailySignal

You need to be a member of The Constitutional Conservatives to add comments!

Join The Constitutional Conservatives

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • All but one transgender person I have known, I have known quite a few both male and female switchers of gender when it comes to them choosing mates oddly they choose a partner that would have been of opposite gender example male switches gender to female she/he still choose a mate of female. Its quite baffling to me. Therefore if what I am asserting is pretty much across the board then a young male who claims to be transgender and is allowed to use a female locker room -- I do question why --

    It is difficult to quantify the numbers of the transgender population. There is evidence that exist from SS that the numbers who changed their names that the higher % are males to female, some 65%. Some do not change the gender and this might suggest that full transition did not occur.

    Gender identity is quite different than sexual orientation. My conclusion is that a male switching to female ways they would be safer in a female locker room. Females in the locker room may not be safer.

  • I'm sure noone cares about my opinion but here it is anyway...IF a female is changing into a male, she is still a female with all the female body parts AND ditto with a male, therefore, IF you have female body parts you should use FEMALE facilities AND IF you are a male with male body parts you should use male facilities......any other discussion about it is ignorant, PERIOD..........Grin.gif

    • Except it's not a matter of discussion, it's being done in our schools.  Excuse me but I want the majority, girls or boys, to share the same locker room and not accommodate a gender "different" person. 

      • The people even the Democrats in Houston Texas have rejected that sick idea . . they went to far, they insisted on too much now there is major push back.

        How did the Texas city that elected a lesbian mayor for three consecutive terms become the most bigoted city in America?
        THEFEDERALIST.COM

        • I literally hate when the only bathroom in a business or hospital hallway etc is unisex. Its somewhat disgusting to me even though many women's bathrooms have stalls with doors that a transgender male would go into the one next to the stall I was in and hike his skirt to pee of course this  assumes not a full transition. 

          I also am amused in some respects that this issue always comes down to one of restrooms, locker rooms and sports. Given that it is reasonable given some data that the high percentage of transgenders are male that this brings fear and even disgust from the majority of folks. 

          Transgender males given the fact they were not accepted in the general population found some acceptance in the gay community and eventually they won having the "T" added to LBGT. I am as turned off as a gay woman with the addition of the "B". 

          I have heard the Mayor of Houston speak and while I don't agree with her politics I was impressed with her. Running for Mayor of Houston no surprise she could succeed. Running for Governor of Texas well that would present her with an election that could very well be more challenging.

        • Thanks for adding, Mangus.  Some just take a bit a longer to each their tolerance rejection point.

          • Good point in your reply Norma. Obviously there are so many examples as of late of pushing the envelope. Americans are tired of it.

    • Donna,

      You make to much sense - what you see is what you don't get - HUH? ;>)

  • P/C is not logical nor is it even close to correct . . what happens when the self identified LBGT male in the girls shower gains an erecti** - does he/she get arrested for what?

    I am not against the policy but no woman can win a basketball game with self identified ex-males. Same with other sports the policy will kill female athletics scholarships in Colleges.

    • YES, probably neither one will be arrested, but the lawyer hiding behind the wall, taking pictures, will have a new lawsuit for the day and taxpayers will pick up the tab, as usual.

      The lawsuit, of course, will be against the School Board or Taxpayers, because they didn't build separate showers and dressing rooms for the various, and only getting weirder, "IT" gender.

      This is the stupidest thing Washington, deCeit has done in the last 5 minutes . . . what will be their next atrocity?

      Oh, I know . . . . . the "IT" genders will go wild in their own dressing rooms and showers, giving more lawyers the ability to make their next boat payment.

      There are so many "genders" that it take a dictionary to keep them straight . . . if that's even possible.

      http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-ge...

      The end of the world can't be far away, but, GOD must have a sense of humor to keep the menagerie going?

This reply was deleted.

Help Support TCC

This is a member-supported website. Your contribution is greatly appreciated!

Follow Us!

Not receiving your emails from us? Internet security continues to tighten in today's hacker world.

Be sure to ADD us to your email provider contacts list. mail@theconstitutionalconservatives.com mail@912communique.com

Don't Forget The Tags

NOTE TO CONTRIBUTORS

Don't forget your tags.  Tags in an article are INCREDIBLY important!    They're the internets way of finding your post in a search.

Without tags - your article is INVISIBLE on the web!

Use keywords found within your post and/or use phrases which a person would enter *IF* they were searching your topic.

For examples click here.

 

Please don't be shy!

1. Read the Rules

2. Read "How To" Add Content/Discussions

TCC Wonders.....

Random, thought-provoking topics.  Take your pick and give us your Conservative view.

 

  • The "fundamental change" to Socialism/Communism?
  • Thoughts on Immigration
  •  TRUE and HONEST Voting
  • The Deep State
  • AOC and the Gang
  • Have any Summer rally plans?  Tell us about them.
  •  There is so much crazieness out there- take your pick- let's talk about it!!