The harm gender insanity causes

2016-05-04-WP-ill-group-sues-obama-administration-over-transgender-students-bathroom-access

Illinois group sues Obama administration over transgender students’ bathroom access
by Emma Brown
Washington Post, 2016-05-04

A group of Illinois students and parents sued the Obama administration Wednesday over its stance on transgender students’ access to school bathrooms and locker rooms, arguing that the U.S. Education Department is illegally forcing local authorities to let children use facilities that correspond to their gender identity.

The complaint alleges that the federal government has violated students’ fundamental right to privacy and parents’ constitutional right to instill moral standards and values in their children.

The lawsuit represents the first legal challenge to the Obama administration’s interpretation of Title IX, a federal anti-discrimination law, as providing transgender students with the right to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity instead of their biological sex.

The plaintiffs include female students who go to a high school that, under pressure from the Education Department, allowed a transgender girl to change in a girls locker room, according to the lawsuit, which concerns Palatine Township High School District 211.

The complaint says that
the plaintiffs are afraid of seeing a “male in a state of undress”
and “are afraid of being seen by,
and being forced to share intimate spaces with, a male
while they are in various states of undress.”

[Does that mean the weirdo in question has the visibly distinctive physical, biological equipment of a male,
but is using the girls' locker room?
How disgusting.
How perverted.
How queer.
Screw the queer lobby and their media supporters!]

“Every day these girls go to school,
they experience embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, fear, apprehension, stress, degradation and loss of dignity
because they will have to use the locker room and restroom with a biological male,”

the complaint says.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois with the support of two nonprofit legal advocacy groups, the Thomas More Society and the Alliance Defending Freedom.

...

The plaintiffs in the new lawsuit are 51 families from Palatine, Ill., where the U.S. Education Department last year found schools in violation of Title IX because of their policies on locker room access.

The Palatine school system, as well as the federal departments of education and justice, are named as defendants.

2016-05-04-ADF-51-families-sue-feds-chicago-area-school-district-for-violating-student-privacy

51 families sue feds, Chicago-area school district for violating student privacy
ADF Legal Foundation, 2016-05-04

CHICAGO – Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing 51 families in the Palatine area filed suit Wednesday against two federal agencies and [Palatine] Township High School District 211 for disregarding student privacy and safety. ADF is announcing the lawsuit at a press conference at 2 p.m. CDT, which will be streamed live online.

The district secretly opened its schools’ restrooms to the opposite sex
and then opened the girls’ locker room to a boy
after the U.S. Department of Education threatened the district’s federal funding.
The agency based its threat on its inaccurate interpretation of Title IX,
a 1972 federal law that, contrary to the agency’s opinion,
actually authorizes schools to retain single-sex restrooms and locker rooms.
The lawsuit, filed by families representing 73 parents and 63 students,
contends that the DOE is unlawfully redefining the terms of Title IX,
something that only Congress can alter,
and is illegitimately forcing its political will on school districts.

“Protecting students from inappropriate exposure to the opposite sex
is not only perfectly legal,
it’s a school district’s duty,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jeremy Tedesco.
“Allowing boys into girls’ locker rooms,
a setting where girls are often partially or fully unclothed,
is a blatant violation of student privacy.
The school district should rescind its privacy-violating policies,
and the court should order the Department of Education to stop bullying school districts with falsehoods about what federal law requires.”

“No government agency can unilaterally redefine the meaning of a federal law to serve its own political ends,”
added ADF Legal Counsel Matt Sharp.
“The Department of Education is exceeding what it is legally and constitutionally allowed to do.
In fact, at least five other federal and state courts have rejected the DOE’s interpretation of Title IX.”

As the lawsuit explains, no law—
including Title IX, the federal law concerning sex discrimination at schools and colleges that receive federal education funds—
requires schools to allow boys into girls’ restrooms or girls into boys’ restrooms.
In fact, Title IX and its regulations specifically state that
a school receiving federal funds can “provide separate toilet, locker room, and shower facilities on the basis of sex”
without putting that funding at risk.
The lawsuit also explains that the DOE did not comply with the Administrative Procedure Act when it adopted its rules.

Attorneys with the Thomas More Society are serving as local counsel in the case,
Students and Parents for Privacy v. United States Department of Education,
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

“It’s a massive step backwards to force women to give up their inherent right to bodily privacy,”
said Thomas More Society attorney Jocelyn Floyd.
“To impose such a rule on still-developing teenage girls,
as they’re already struggling with puberty’s changes on their bodies and social pressures to look a certain way,
undermines their dignity and tells them that their rights don’t matter.
This isn’t a message our schools should be sending to our girls.”

The lawsuit asks the court to halt the school district’s policy that opens up restrooms and changing areas to the opposite sex, declare the policy and the district’s agreement with the DOE to be unconstitutional and illegal under both federal and Illinois law, and invalidate the DOE’s rule that illegitimately redefines “sex” in Title IX.

2016-05-04-DailySignal-50-families-sue-over-illinois-high-schools-transgender-bathroom-policy

51 Families Sue Over Illinois High School’s Transgender Bathroom Policy
by Kelsey Harkness
Daily Signal (Heritage Foundation), 2016-05-04

2017

2017-03-16-WashTimes-transgender-issue-indoctrinating-the-public-child-abuse

Transgendered child abuse
The trend of medicating children toward their ‘authentic selves’
is wrong and dangerous
by Kelly Riddell
Washington Times Opinion, 2017-03-16

[1] Last year, NBC News did a two-part series dubbed “transgender kids,” that featured “the stories of 5-year-old Jacob Lemay and 8-year-old Malisa Phillips, two children transitioning to live as their authentic selves.”

[2] In December, Good Housekeeping wrote an essay detailing a family with two transgender children, both a son and a daughter, who swapped roles. And while the parents “didn’t totally understand it, they knew their love was unconditional.”

[3] In January, National Geographic put a photo of a nine-year-old transgender girl on its cover, simply labeled “The Gender Revolution,” and The New York Times did a report on “Raising a Transgender Child.”

[4] Then in February, Katie Couric profiled families with transgender children for a documentary, and the Huffington Post wrote a column on how “Transgender kids are changing the world.”

[5] The Washington Post followed it up, with a personal essay:
“My 7-year-old daughter Henry is transgender.
She’d change Trump’s mind,”
lamenting President Donald Trump’s decision to rescind Barack Obama’s bathroom executive order.

[6] And then this month, HBO is ran a special called “Trans Youth” which provided “an inside look at the families of transgender youth and how they are coming to terms with the gender identity of their children,” weeks before the Supreme Court’s decision to send the bathroom case back to the Appeals court.

[7] If you think you’re being indoctrinated — or even manipulated — by the mainstream media and Hollywood telling you how you should feel about transgender kids, it’s because you are.

[8] Rarely, if ever, do any of these news stories highlight the dangers of chemically transitioning a child, or depict the parents as using their kid as a political prop. As a grown adult, I would be horrified if my parents allowed NBC to film my 5-year-old self-grappling with such a question as gender for the nation to see.

[9] And yet, we’re not supposed to think this way. We’re supposed to feel for these families, and then change our way of thinking about the centuries-old paradigms of male and female.

[10] Sorry, as a mother of three boys five and under, I view these child transgender exposes as exploitative, and yes, down-right abusive.

[11] First, there is no way a five-year-old knows if they are indeed transgender. Although most brain development occurs during the first three years of life, throughout a kid’s youth, neurons are being made and synapses developed.

[12] Five-year-olds are still learning things like how to set the table, directions to and from their school, the alphabet, how to play sports, skip, and what goes where in the toy room.

[13] The impulse control and judgment parts of their brains haven’t even been developed yet, and aren’t completely activated until after adolescence.

[14] That’s why a parent’s role is so important.

[15] All of my boys at one time have asked why they can’t wear a dress, high-heel shoes, or paint their nails.
I simply reply:
Because you’re a boy.
Everyone seems satisfied, and we move on the next activity.

[16] In the Post’s essay, written by Jen Aulwes
(which the paper conveniently leaves out is a communications director at Planned Parenthood),
she pens:
“The first time we knew that Henry was different, she was 2.
When she found her cousin’s Barbie doll, she lit up like a Christmas tree.
‘The hair, Mama,’ she cooed.
‘Look at her looong hair!’
Henry continued to show us, in every way she could, that she wanted to live as a girl.
This was new territory.
What do you say when your 3-year-old boy asks to be Rapunzel for Halloween?
In our house, you say yes.”

[17] In my house, we say “no,” and instead direct him to the boys section of the store where he can dress up like Thor if he likes long hair.

[18] Because that’s what adults do.

[19] They set parameters for their children, they teach them about their God-given sex and social norms.
They don’t let the child dictate to them, or indulge the kid’s every whim.
Being a parent means being responsible.

---

[20] Which brings me to my second point:
How is it responsible—or even sane—to chemically alter your child before puberty?

[21] Last year, the American College of Pediatrics reached a politically incorrect decision which concluded that “transgenderism” of a child amounts to child abuse.
It argued facts, not ideology, determine reality.

[22] In its policy statement, written by Johns Hopkins Medical School Psychology Professor Paul McHugh, it laid out eight arguments why transgendering a child was harmful, including the basic fact that everyone is born with a biological sex, so if a child is born a boy but thinks he’s a girl, the problem is with the mind, not the body, and should be treated as such.

[23] Moreover, “transitioning” children with hormones is hazardous to their health.

[24] “Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous.
Reversible or not, puberty-blocking hormones induce a state of disease—the absence of puberty—and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child,”
Dr. McHugh wrote.

[25] Perhaps the most devastating argument is that as many as 98 percent of gender-confused boys and 88 percent of gender-confused girls accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.

[26] In other words—it may just be a phase.
It’s important for parents, before chemically altering their children, know whether it is or not.
These kids, after all, are too young to sign off on the medical procedures themselves.

[27] And there’s a reason for that.
There’s a reason why you have to be 18 to volunteer for the military, or even enter a contract that’s enforceable—because minors are notorious for making bad, uninformed, and/or impulsive decisions.
They’re simply immature.

[28] And that’s not a bad thing.
Trial and error is all a part of growing up.

[29] But imagine making a decision as a five-year-old that would alter the course of your life—all in part, because your parents thought it was cool to have a transgender kid or wanted to be a social justice warrior.

[30] To me, that’s sickening.
That’s the definition of abuse.

---

Kelly Riddell is a columnist for the Washington Times.