8 minute read
see PROPOSED
Continued from pg. 6 and disciplinary history before being allowed to use the bathroom of their choice. First, juvenile criminal records are normally sealed, but the school board is proposing to potentially go against this norm. Secondly, do cisgender students have to submit similar records, or does the school board believe that all cisgender students do not have criminal or disciplinary records? Why the discrimination and inequality between what is required for transgender and non-binary students and cisgender students? Is it implied that transgender and non-binary students must have committed criminal acts or been disciplinary problems due to their gender identity?
The proposed policy also may require medical or therapeutic records attesting to the student’s gender dysphoria. Thus, is the school board assuming that the student who identifies as transgender or non-binary suffers from some type of discomfort or distress because of their gender identity? And why may a student’s family be subject to produce such personal documents simply to use the bathroom of their choice? Do cisgender students have to produce such records to show that they are not in some type of distress or discomfort so that they can use the bathroom they identify with? Seems like more discrimination and unequal treatment. Why can’t a student and/or their family simply state to the school which bathroom the student prefers to use, or better yet, set up those gender-neutral bathrooms and the school board can avoid this issue. It seems the school board is implying that a transgender or non-binary student must prove they are mentally, emotionally and intellectually capable of deciding which bathroom they want to use, yet a cisgender student does not have to prove this to use the bathroom of their choice.
Advertisement
For parents who fear for the safety of their cisgender student, I seriously doubt a male or female would dress up in the clothes of their opposite sex just to go into the bathroom of that sex. These are thoughtful, intelligent, caring students who identify as transgender or non-binary; simply because that is who they are – no more, no less. They are different than cisgender students but not that different – it is only their gender identity that is different than the cisgender student. Perhaps those parents might want to take the time to learn about transgender, nonbinary, gay, lesbian, queer, bisexual identities and then have an intelligent discussion with their student.
The world has changed in my 68 years – people have changed. I don’t pretend to understand all that has occurred with gender identity. But I do know one thing: I love my grandchild as much today as the day they were born and will continue to do so, and I will always respect and honor their decisions in life. I will support them 100% and if they protest again, I will support that action as it is a small price to pay to seek the respect, dignity and equality they deserve! It is time for the Hanover County School Board to come into the 21st century and understand we are all equal, no matter our gender identity, race, color, religion, nationality and we are all different. Andrew Molloy Jr. Ashland
PROPOSED
Continued from pg. 1 and relevant information will remain confidential, and the school board will provide their decision in writing to the parent or guardian of the student. The board can request additional information if necessary and wait to resolve the request until it obtains all relevant information.
Citizens voiced both opposition to and support of the policy, with audience members audibly expressing their opinions while some speakers took the podium. Chair John Axselle intervened on a number of occasions to remind citizens of the procedures for public comment that prohibits speakers from addressing the audience and audible responses from the audience.
Tensions in the board room elevated when speaker Wendy Kersey, who spoke in opposition of the Hanover Patriots group, was cut off by Axselle, who stated that she must speak of the policy in question. The two began to speak over one another, with Kersey mentioning ADF, before she was escorted out of the building by security.
The ADF’s legal guidance was met with both support and condemnation, with speakers in support of the drafted policy arguing it represented a “majority” of Hanover County and others arguing the out-of-state, Christian organization cannot adequately craft policy for the county and its diverse school district.
Throughout the evening, much disagreement centered on whether or not the proposed policy accomplishes a unified goal: ensuring the safety of all students.
Supporters of the proposed policy argued that the process offers a compromise, arguing that it complies with the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) model policy while protecting the “bodily privacy” of students.
In 2020, the VDOE issued model policies for the treatment of transgender students in Virginia’s public schools, which requires all state public schools to adopt policies consistent with those outlined by VDOE. In reference to facilities, the VDOE policy states that “students should be allowed to use the facility that corresponds to their gender identity.”
Todd Gathje of the Ashland District was among the speakers who argued that VDOE’s model policies “violate the bodily privacy and safety of students” and undermines parental authority over the safety of their children. He and others argued that the HCPS proposed policy includes parents in the decision-making process and outlines a series of “necessary requirements” that ensure the safety of students.
Gathje and others referenced a sexual abuse case in Loudoun County, arguing that transgender inclusive policies can be misused by students who seek to access certain bathrooms in order to sexually assault another student. “In this policy, the school board must take all the necessary steps to protect the bodily privacy and safety of all students, including from those who may try to misuse the policy,” Gathje said, arguing that, if the policy passes, additional measures should be taken of amending the proposed policy to only apply to bathrooms and high school students.
The case in question involved a Loudoun County male student who sexually assaulted a female student in the girl’s bathroom while wearing a skirt. The girl testified that they had sexual relations in the bathroom previously, but she did not consent to sexual relations during the meeting when the assault occurred.
As mentioned by Nancy Patterson of the South Anna District, the assault occurred prior to the school district’s adoption of transgender inclusive bathroom policies. While the attacker was wearing a skirt, he did not choose the girl’s bathroom because of his gender identity and his attire did not grant access to the bathroom.
“One thing we can all agree on is that all children should feel safe in the bathroom,” said Galit Fraser of the South Anna District, who furthered that school bathrooms are “generally not safe spaces to begin with.”
Several opponents of the proposed HCPS policy argued that the listed process aligns with “irrational fears” that derive from a lack of understanding of transgender and non-binary youth.
“They ask ‘what if a boy dresses up as a girl just to use the girl’s bathroom and then attacks them?’” Fraser said. “That is frightening to be sure, but that’s not a trans student. That’s a criminal.”
“The best of leaders help dispel these fears, and I hope going forward that this board will try to dispel the fears that my neighbors have of trans youth,” said Sarah Gragnani-Butler of the South Anna District.
Johnny Davis of the Ashland District argued that many of the listed documentation, specifically referencing a criminal background check, will not pose an issue for most students.
“You all have created a policy that asks for information, so that you can make a plausible decision that allows my students and every other student in the system to be protected,” Davis said.
Others argued the language of the proposed policy alone invites harmful implications of transgender and non-binary youth as being dangerous and, overall, targets already-marginalized students.
“…Often they are actually the ones at risk for harassment and targeted attacks,” said Cheryl Perry of the Chickahominy District and mother of a transgender student. “My son has been harassed and bullied on a consistent basis at school. What you are requiring of the very kids who are the most vulnerable in the situation is unethical at best.”
Perry also argued that the policy’s requirement of a parent or guardian’s written request is a “dangerous assumption that all transgender and non-binary youth come from supportive families.”
Several speakers argued the policy’s language is too vague and invites a series of unanswered questions, such as how long the process may take if additional documents are requested or if transgender and non-binary students who already have permission to use their preferred bathroom must undergo the process.
Baker McClanahan of the Mechanicsville District and others argued the policy is not consistent with VDOE’s model policies and, if passed, may result in a series of costly lawsuits.
McClanahan furthered that the policy does not account for the “dignity” or “self-esteem” of the students that will be affected by it.
“I mean, have you ever thought for a moment what it would be like to be a child in this situation or a parent in this situation?” he said.
Cameron Carter, a resident of the Ashland District and mother of a 6-year-old nonbinary student, asked her child to write a request to use the bathroom of their choice in accordance with the proposed policy. The note read: “Please let me use the bathroom.”
“This is their simple request, and I cannot bear to ask my child to justify their existence to you,” Carter said.
“Please help us show our child that leaders in our community can listen to other perspectives with an open mind,” Carter said. “Try on that perspective… create a learning environment where each child can thrive and be fully themselves.”
The school board is scheduled to vote on the proposed policy on Aug. 30.
Christina Amano Dolan/The Local
