Header Image (book)


Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Obama's DOJ Invades The Girls' Shower

Perhaps most ironic of all is this statement from the Chicago Tribune article cited in full below the fold: The student...does not want to be identified for privacy reasons!

Apparently, this one student's privacy concerns trump the privacy concerns of all the other students.

It's now the law of the land — a civil right — that transgenders who have male genitalia must be given full access to the girls' showers and the girls' locker rooms in a public school.

From the Daily Caller:
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has ordered a taxpayer-funded school district in the suburbs of Chicago to allow a male transgender student who dresses like a girl and otherwise identifies as female to use the girls locker room and shower on school premises.

The feds delivered the edict against Township High School District 211 in Palatine, Ill. on Monday [November 2, 2015], the Chicago Tribune reports.

The Department of Education has given the school district one month to let the student use the girls locker room. If the district does not capitulate, it risks losing federal funding....
The complete Chicago Tribune article is below the fold. Emphases mine.
Illinois' largest high school district violated federal law by barring a transgender student from using the girls' locker room, authorities concluded Monday.

The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights spent nearly two years investigating Palatine-based Township High School District 211 and found "a preponderance of evidence" that school officials did not comply with Title IX, the federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex.

The student, who has identified as a girl for a number of years, filed a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights in late 2013 after she was denied unrestricted access to the girls' locker room. District and federal officials negotiated for months, and a solution appeared imminent as recently as last week, when the district put up privacy curtains in the locker room.

But talks stalled after school officials said the student would be required to use the private area, as opposed to offering her a choice to use it. Although the student said she intends to use the private area or a locker room bathroom stall to change, the stipulation constitutes "blatant discrimination," said John Knight, director of the LGBT and AIDS Project at ACLU of Illinois, which is representing the student.

"It's not voluntary, it's mandatory for her," Knight said. "It's one thing to say to all the girls, 'You can choose if you want some extra privacy,' but it's another thing to say, 'You, and you alone, must use them.' That sends a pretty strong signal to her that she's not accepted and the district does not see her as girl."

For the student at the center of the federal complaint and all other transgender students at the district's five high schools, the staff changes their names, genders and pronouns on school records. Transgender students also are allowed to use the bathrooms of their identified gender and play on the sports team of that gender, school officials said.

But officials drew the line at the locker room, citing the privacy rights of the other 12,000-plus students in the district. As a compromise, the district installed four privacy curtains in unused areas of the locker room and another one around the shower, but because the district would compel the student to use them, federal officials deemed the solution insufficient.

The dispute highlights a controversy that a growing number of school districts face as they struggle with an issue that few parents of today's teens encountered. The Department of Education has settled two similar allegations of discrimination of transgender students in California, with both districts eventually agreeing to allow the students to use female-designated facilities.

The student's family first contacted District 211 when she was still in eighth grade and was told by the superintendent at the time that she would not be allowed to use a restroom stall in the girls' locker room, according the Office for Civil Rights' investigation. Instead, the student had to use a separate, single-occupancy restroom for physical education, swimming class and sports.

"Student A has not only received an unequal opportunity to benefit from the District's educational program, but has also experienced an ongoing sense of isolation and ostracism throughout her high school enrollment at the school," according to the letter from the Office for Civil Rights.

The student told federal authorities that she takes a circuitous route to get to the gym to avoid standing out. She said she was once the only person in a gym uniform because she was not with the rest of the class when the teacher informed the students they did not need to change. Another time, the student, who plays for the school on a girls' sports team, said she broke down in tears after her coaches reprimanded her for using the locker room to change. The coach told her some students felt uncomfortable dressing in front of her.

"All students deserve the opportunity to participate equally in school programs and activities — this is a basic civil right," Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine Lhamon said in a statement. "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."

Superintendent Daniel Cates remains adamant that the district is not in violation of the law and warned that the Obama administration's position "is a serious overreach with precedent-setting implications."

"The students in our schools are teenagers, not adults, and one's gender is not the same as one's anatomy," Cates said in a statement. "Boys and girls are in separate locker rooms — where there are open changing areas and open shower facilities — for a reason."

He went on to emphasize that the district's position should not be seen as discriminatory, saying, "We celebrate and honor differences among all students and we condemn any vitriolic messages that disparage transgender identity or transgender students in any way."

The federal response came as no surprise to district officials, who held a news conference three weeks ago to get ahead of the announcement. At the time, Cates said he hoped to "work collaboratively with the OCR and (that) reasonableness will prevail."

The district has 30 days to reach an agreement with authorities or risk having their federal educational funding suspended or even terminated. The case also could be referred to the Department of Justice.

The student, whom the ACLU said does not want to be identified for privacy reasons, said in a statement that the federal ruling "makes clear that what my school did was wrong."

"This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others," she said. "The district's policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a 'normal person.'"
What's next?


  1. The city of Houston voted against this yesterday.
    For naught?

    "This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others," she said. "The district's policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a 'normal person.'"

    One: not a "she"
    Two: not a "normal person"

    1. Ed,
      Can the city of Houston afford to lose federal funding?

      Federal funding in education = control of the public school system.

    2. It would be unlawful to withold federal funding (according to Justice Roberts). :)

    3. Joe,
      Will federal funds be withheld anyway? Until the case climbs the ladder of courts, that is.

    4. I can't answer the question. I suppose until a ruling on "coercion" is made, anything is possible.

    5. NORMAL:
      a : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle

      b : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern

      So I guess that the term "ABNORMAL" has been rendered meaningless!

      To me, this is just one more reason for the Department Of Education to go. All of this just suggests that our Federal Government is in the business of 'BLACK MAIL' which I always thought was illegal.

  2. We are on the same page today. Anything to make the insane look sane. Amazing creativity of this regime shown in spades.

  3. Sexuality and agendas aside, what I find most disconcerting on a macro level is our increasing inability to accommodate and tolerate one another's behaviors and beliefs, and it goes both ways.

    Obama jailed a county clerk in Kentucky for refusing to comply with the law and issued marriage certificates to gay couples. Why couldn't they accommodate her by simply have someone else issue and sign the certificate?

    In the case of transgendered, why can't a public place such as a school simply offer them a separate facility for showering and going to the bathroom?

    1. "Reasonable" accommodation, much like "obscenity" lies in the eye of the beholder...

  4. This only makes sense from the perspective many of us have already come to hold. It isn't about fairness, privacy, or even right and wrong. It's about a totalitarianism that is committed to "re-engineering humanity". Whether we call it creeping socialism, "liberalism", fascism, or some other thing, it continues boldly on.

    In regard to this specific, humiliating and abusive (to the young girls) issue, AOW said it right in her comment at 7.02am above, Federal funding in education = control of the public school system.

    Make people, businesses, special interest groups, etc, dependent on government funds, and then you can move all of your re-educational agendas forward without a hitch. Bellyaching and apparent minor setbacks are assumed and built into the plan. It's good for people to think they have a voice. As long as the plan continues to advance, all is well.

    And it IS continuing to advance, isn't it.

  5. This is getting totally out of hand... There is no common sense left. Regardless of how one 'self-identifies', the biological facts still trump all the feel good nonsense. Would you as a parent of a 15 year old girl want a biological male showering with her everyday??? Apparently according to the administration that's perfectly fine! Gah...

  6. Activist groups of all stripes are unhinging out society, and its been going on for decades.

    What is different now is that our government is helping them.

    I can't help but see all this as a larger project by global elites to sap the foundations of traditional society, collapse it, and rebuild it on their terms.

  7. Pastorius pointed out the following in his blog post on this same topic:

    When young boys take pictures of themselves engaged in sex acts with young girls, and then post these pictures or videos on Instagram, they can be prosecuted for distribution of Child Pornography.

    Given that such a charge is possible, does this new [DOJ] ruling mean that Obama has legalized Pedophiliac behavior in the United States?

    If a boy (who is supposedly a girl) turns 18 while he is in High School, will he still be allowed to shower with underage girls?

  8. You just caused a weird thought to enter my head. Redefine the law to reflect not gender, but what sex organs you possess, and label the doors of bathrooms and locker rooms with cartoon genitalia. If you don't possess what's drawn on the door, you don't go in.

    I think that would go well with our dumbed-down idiocracy...

  9. So, does this open a vast new opportunity for teenage voyeurism? Hey, just "self identify" as female then view all of the girls in various stages of undress. WHY NOT!

  10. Can such transgenders get prostate cancer?

  11. I wonder if this is what B.O. wants for his two daughters? Oh wait, [they] attend an elite [private] school. Great, no worries for them!

    1. I don't know, Jon ... maybe they want to grow up as transgenders too, just like their mother.

    2. Mustang, I wish blogger had a like button on comments...

  12. What's next? Mandated gender assignment to 'experience' the change others 'feel'?

    Tell the Feds to take their money and shove it, and fire all the useless ancillary consultants that don't contribute to activities in the classroom to help pay for whatever funds they take away. Have children conduct daily cleaning of the classroom and grounds to save more money and build better values to boot. And learn to stay away from the big daddy money trap.

    1. Here is another potential silver lining. Refuse the federal money long enough and parents may start wondering why they need the feds involved in their school in the 1st place and then take them back locally. As long as they're footing the entire bill, why not tell the feds to get out.

    2. Kid,
      Great point about that silver lining!

    3. Baysider,
      What's next? Mandated gender assignment to 'experience' the change others 'feel'?

      Role playing taken to the extreme. But why not in this mad, mad world?

    4. I'm curious, having never been in a women's rest room but isn't the booty going to be out of view in stalls? I assume there aren't any urinals.

      In the case of showers couldn't they work out shifts. I assume in the rare cases were this occurs the kids could manage it if the adults butted out.

      It's pretty clear this is adults getting their knickers in a twist for no particularly good reason.

    5. Duck,
      Yes, there are stalls on ladies' rooms. However, few stalls are built so that peeping toms can't peer in -- especially between the door and the door jamb. Also, some stall doors don't lock,

      As for shifts for the showers, shifts won't work with most school schedules.

      Taking showers has become optional in many schools. What is not optional is changing out for P.E. In the case discussed in this blog post, the student objects to curtains. Locker rooms, where the changing out is done, are wide open.

  13. "The student...does not want to be identified for privacy reasons! "

    AOW, That's Rich and Perfectly libtard retardedness.

    So any dude who will put on a wig and a skirt and claim to be a girl gets into the girls shower and locker room. I can see the future fun already. Girls file complaints of being groped and photographed. The dude in the wig becomes physically and obviously excited then claims "Yes, I'm a girl but I'm lesbian!"
    I'm going to start laughing at this stuff. It's over the edge now. The country is in the toilet.
    Though I do feel for he young ladies who will have top put up with this nonsense.
    The flip side of this is at least the girls will have in their face life experience to question liberal policy. Maybe the first glimpse of a society that starts learning how * up libtards are.
    Of course they'll also have to be smart enough to not believe the media who will tell them this is all the fault of repubblekins/conservatives/Christians/etc.

    1. Kid,
      Girls file complaints of being groped and photographed.

      And the pretend-girl who is actually a guy gets hauled in for statutory rape and perhaps pedophilia (if he's 18 but any of the girls are not).

      BTW, already high school kids are not regularly using the showers after P.E. classes. Poor teachers! Stuck with stinkies in their classrooms!

  14. I think it's time for victims of outrages such as this to take the initiative, keep a sense of humor, get creative, become aggressive, and turn the tables on these imbecilic federal bullies.

    CONSIDER THIS: If "concerned parents" got together with their children of both sexes and decided that all the GIRLS should loudly insist they were "REALLY" boys, and, therefore, have a RIGHT to use the boys toilets, locker rooms and showers, while at the same time all the BOYS publicly declared that they were "REALLY" girls, etc. The impact would be both hilarious and highly effective in combatting the outrageous idiocy imposed from On High. Pandemonium would reign supreme.

    Three ancient precepts apply:

    1. The best defense is a good attack.

    2. Sometimes, we have no choice but to fight fire with fire.

    3. All's fair in love and war.

    Making a MOCKERY and a merry, rollicking TRAVESTY of Federal Inanity may be an unusual form of rebellion, but if enough citizens engaged in lampooning the law the Feds would eventually HAVE to back off.

    1. FT, Problem with that one is the boys would not mind that a bit.

    2. Fine with me, Kid. ;-) Very frankly I think we take this garbage much too seriously. The crap coming out of D.C. today sounds like self PARODY. It just CAN'T be real –– yet there it is!

    3. I have no problem with much in FT's suggestion.

      But there's fallout from it: classrooms will become even more of a discipline problem and even less learning will occur.

      Already, too large a percentage of time in taken up with every classroom teacher having to get the classroom under control at the beginning of every single class period. In fact, even back in the 1970s, we teachers lost about 10 minutes of each class period on admin stuff and disciplinary matters.

  15. Wouldn't have these problems with public schools if their were no public schools.

  16. "Problem with that one is the boys would not mind that a bit."

    Another problem is after too much of "that" the "boys" will cease to give a damn. Then what?

  17. Jus kick him in his balls until he feel like a man damn. I don't know why ya'll don't feel like you black people trapped in white body and demand yo rights


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.