The real bullying at Fremd High School is spewing from the LBGT crowd

Even if your daughter doesn't attend Fremd, this is a battle that is coming to your public school*

Without surcease,  the progressive law-givers scold the rest of us about the evils of bullying. Much of it, they say, is the bullying of gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender, questioning and gender fluid children by those ugly, ignorant little monsters who can't stand change and who are on the wrong side of history.

The latest reprimands are directed at parents, students and anyone who objects to a transgender male who, under federal edict, has been given unfettered access to the Fremd High School locker rooms and bathrooms in Chicago's northwest suburban Palatine. And if you read Edwin C. Yohka's Chicago Tribune op-ed ("Taunting transgender children is off limits," May 6, 2016) you'd definitely get the idea that straight, narrow-minded and mean-spirited straight children are the only kids who are doing the taunting.

(Chicago Tribune)

(Chicago Tribune)

This, of course, is right in line with the progressive ultimatum that anyone who disagrees with their agenda, even gently so, is homophobic and transphobic.

The only problem is that Yohka, director of communications and public policy at the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, has got this only half-right. The straight Fremd girls, their parents and friends are being viciously targeted by other students for trying to defend their right to bodily privacy.

According to a lawsuit filed by Students and Parents for Privacy, the girls "experience embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, fear, apprehension, stress, degradation, and loss of dignity...."

Trans students aren't the only ones who are hurt

According to the Obama administration's gender definition cops, five "changing stalls" in the girls' narrow locker room should be enough to protect the privacy rights of girls who don't want to change in the presence of a biological male. Yet bullying is a two-way street at Fremd. The lawsuit alleges:

A Girl Plaintiff in [transgender] Student A’s PE [physical education] period used one of the changing stalls on a single occasion because she is uncomfortable changing in the same locker room with a biological boy. While she was in the changing stall, other girls who were in the locker room began calling her names, including “transphobic” and “homophobic.” Word spread that she had used the stall to change during PE class and she began being harassed by other students in the hallways. Both boys and girls called her names, yelled derogatory, slang words for female body parts at her, and accused her of being transphobic and homophobic. As a result of the ridicule and harassment this Girl Plaintiff received over her use of the stalls, she has not used them again.This Girl Plaintiff is the student described above who now wears two sets of clothes to school so as to avoid having to undress at all in the locker room.

The school, at the prodding of the Obama administration, is making sure that "any objection to the Locker Room Agreement (or the Restroom Policy) will be viewed by District administration as intolerance and bigotry." To make sure the message is drilled into everyone's head, the school district is holding meetings in each district school and in the community, run by  "experts on gender identity issues." One not need to ask whether experts from the other side will be there for a more informed discussion. The answer is obvious, because we are instructed from on high that there is no other side.

Experts such as Yohnka, objected in his Tribune op-ed to what he would have everyone believe is concerted homophobic attack by anyone who disagrees with him and the Obama administration. He intoned:

In three decades of working on public policy, there were a few rules that every thoughtful person in this work followed. On top of that list was the principle that personal attacks on children are off limits. No matter how fierce the advocacy, you never single out or demean a child in order to advance a particular position. Not any longer, apparently.

Yohnka made clear in the next paragraph that the Parents and Students lawsuit constituted this kind of "personal attack on children."

Why the girls are embarrassed 

It should be interesting to hear how Yohnka and others of the like mind will respond to the lawsuit's statement of how the girls are being intimidated and embarrassed. The suit lays out the complaints:

Because of Defendants’ Policies and actions, the girls are afraid of having to attend to their most personal needs, especially during a time when their body is undergoing often embarrassing changes as they transition from childhood to adulthood, in a locker room or restroom with a male present.

The embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, fear, apprehension, stress, degradation, and loss of dignity these girls experience because of Defendants’ Policies and actions are heightened because as adolescents they are at a time in their lives when they are the most shy, embarrassed, and aware of their bodies and the differences between their bodies and the bodies of their male classmates.

The Locker Room Agreement and Restroom Policy have had and continue to have a profoundly negative effect on the girls’ access to educational opportunities, benefits, programs, and activities at their schools:

(a) some girls actively avoid the locker rooms at school; (b) one girl has started wearing her gym clothes underneath her regular clothes all day, so she only has to peel off a layer instead of exposing her unclothed body in the presence of a biological male in the locker room; (c) other girls are changing as quickly as possible in the locker room, avoiding all eye contact and conversation, all the while experiencing great stress and anxiety over whether a biological male will walk in while they are unclothed; (d) some girls are avoiding the restroom altogether, and others are waiting as long as possible to use the restroom, so they won’t have to share it with a biological male, thus risking certain health problems; and (e) still other girls are risking tardiness by running to the opposite end of the school, during short 5 minute passing periods, to try to find an empty restroom.

None of this matters to the so-called gender experts who say that bodily sexual characteristics should make no difference to a 14-year-old girl--clearly a ridiculous statement to many women and parents of those young girls.

Among those to whom its matters not is reliably liberal Chicago Tribune columnist Rex Huppke, who ignores any assertions that young girls might be damaged. Huppke, like others, concocts a ridiculous straw man of opponents:

While I’m sure protectors of the sanctity of bathrooms will conjure scenarios in which horny teen boys try to get into the girls washroom, those already unlikely scenarios become pure fiction with the caveat that a parent must confirm a student has come out as transgender.

No, that's not the point. And if Huppke and others could just momentarily consider both sides of the argument in an honest way they'd understand what the girls are afraid of. They shouldn't be, we're told, because their discomfort or embarrassment should not prevent someone from exercising their "rights"--as if it is a right to self-define where you can change your clothes, shower or use the toilet. It's a measure of the how ignorant and   heartless we have become.

Related: Thomas More Society argues that the Obama administration lacks any federal legal backing or authority for the bathroom guidelines issued today to public schools and universities nationwide.

*I warned in a Weekly Standard article that this battle was about to come to a high school near you. Here is the Obama administration's directive as reported by the Tribune.

Read why Americans need to learn about the nation's most ignored war.

Find out what freelance editorial services I can provide for you.

Find me on Facebook and Twitter.

Want to be notified by email when I post? Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • You have quoted the language of the plaintiffs' lawyers in the complaint they filed in this Federal District Court civil suit. Do you intend to quote from the answers filed by the defense lawyers too? It may tell a different story.

  • In reply to jnorto:

    What does the story below tell you?

  • In reply to Chef Boy RD:

    It doesn't tell me anything about the case Dennis is writing about. It does affirm that children should avoid being alone anywhere with adult strangers and those who commit sexual assault should be prosecuted.

  • In reply to jnorto:

    I might, if no one has heard them before. I quoted the plaintiff's language because no one else has. Because one side totally ignores these arguments, as if they didn't exist. Because most stories I have read repeat over and over again the arguments of Student A. But I'm sure that you'll alert me with the defense files its answers. I hope that this time it addresses the plaintiff's arguments. If they do, I'll certainly respond to the defendants answers.

  • Even if the sparse transgerdered child --or fluid child-- is not a threat, but a cause of anxiety to girls, the more prevalent pervert or sex offender might be.

    Of course this is pooh-poohed by the new transgendered-friendly crowd, but let's see what happens in reality, like this story from the obviously anti-transgender: ABC TV News:

    http://abc7chicago.com/news/man-chokes-8-year-old-girl-in-south-loop-bathroom-police-say/1336656/

    No transgender he, but a pervert yes. Must be the only one in Chicago. Yes, surly the only one.

    Why no rush of fluid or fluid-filled women to use the men's restrooms? Maybe during peak season at the ballgames.

  • In reply to Chef Boy RD:

    I don't understand what your point is there, Chef Boy RD. A man, not transgender, choked a girl in the bathroom.

    Is if that permitting transgender men and women to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with led to this? Please explain.

  • In reply to Jimmy Greenfield:

    My post, Jimmy, was NOT about the transgendered person.

    It is about the suddenly "fluid" person -- a "man" if you will --who will not be questioned about using the restroom/ locker room of the opposite sex.

    Please tell me, is it not easier for a "man", a man, to now use the women's washroom/locker room? Or won't it become easier? And nobody will question his use? Or DARE ot question his use?

    To answer in the negative and just assume that a sexual deviant will not take advantage of this kind of situation is not realistic. If you think that won't be the case I appeal to your common sense.

    Please explain to me how this won't happen?

    Thanks.

  • In reply to Chef Boy RD:

    Of course your comment was about the transgendered person, that's what all this is about.

    First of all, deciding that something is "so" because of one event or isolated events is the height of lunacy. Much like deciding voter ID is needed because a few dozen people voted illegally.

    You are making the leap that this man was somehow empowered by transgender people invoking their rights. That's just you leaping to an unwarranted conclusion based on your own unwarranted fears.

    If's always been incredibly easy for anyone to go into any public bathroom they want. Nobody was keeping an eye on bathrooms before and sexual predators didn't see bathrooms as some nirvana to commit their crimes there.

    This bathroom hysteria is just based on what's been viewed as the norm starting to change.

  • In reply to Jimmy Greenfield:

    I am so glad, Jimmy, that you are a mind reader. If you can get the idea out of my opening statement that it's about transgendered people then you are not being intellectually honest. My opening paragraph: "Even if the sparse transgerdered child --or fluid child-- is not a threat, but a cause of anxiety to girls, the more prevalent pervert or sex offender might be."

    Notice the word "not"? Of course you did. Be friggin' honest. Try.

    I am not making any leaps out "this man", but speculating future situations. Your hysterica is incredible and your innuendo is insulting.

    While public washrooms have always had easy access, it has not always been the case that women and little girls will find themselves in the presence of a man using their facilities. With nothing to stop a predator, not even a raised eyebrow from a store clerk or counter person, regarding a washroom to use, you will increase the chance of a predator finding easy targets. Especially if the possible predator, the man, can on any given day "decide" he is a woman. No woman's clothing dress needed.

    I think you have a family. I think you even have young girls. If not, I am recalling wrong. However, if you do have a thirteen year daughter or niece and she goes into the washroom and a man dressed as a man follows her in, and if you don't have a tiny bit of discomfort, that, Jimmy, is lunacy.

    A transgender person who uses a washroom/lockerroom of their choice is NOT likely a threat, but to pretend that this situation won't be used to the advantage of prerdator is folly. Please notict "NOT". Try. For once.

  • It seems to me that Chef RD is making essentially the same data-free arguments as the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit against District 211 and expecting readers to treat it as if it were something new. In my blog on the same topic, I linked to the entire complaint so my readers could easily reference the 200+ items, most of which were about things that supposedly might happen; and cited no corroboration for the things that were alleged to have happened. The idea that letting a male-to-female transgender 14 year old use a girls' locker room makes it easier for a man to go into a go into a girls restroom and choke someone is simply mindboggling. Give us a break Chef RD and blog on something you know about.

  • In reply to moflo:

    Yes, it's data free now. Get back to me in five years.

    Give me a break and don't be so smug about opening a can of slimy worms that can lead to all sorts of uncomfortable and dangerous situations.

  • High school teacher here. I've seen this issue unfold at my own school and have been there long enough to see the gradual acceptance of homosexuality step out of the closet and into the hallways. Transgender students are following, and thank goodness. Anyone who went to high school knows the degree to which cliques and outright bullying takes place. In my school, while certainly there are those few who step into that arena and sling subtle and not-so-subtle barbs at transgender students, there aren't many standing with them. I see that teenagers have a much greater acceptance of each other and their differences than the adults. For that degree of bullying to go on at Fremd says more about the overall culture of that building rather than any real threat from a transgender student and its bathroom policies. Why is it that their students are so free to behave that way with each other? It sounds like a mob mentality has taken over, likely fueled by other sources outside the immediate school environment. I'm thinking of transgender students who have passed through my classroom. None deserve the demonizing that's going on with this issue. Like everyone else, they just want a place to live their lives. This is PUBLIC education. For those who do not want their children to be educated with the PUBLIC, choose another option that more comfortably fits with your own values and belief system. Like it or not, school is more than academics, simply by virtue of the fact that so many from so many different backgrounds and perspectives, are thrown together in one place for eight hours a day. School is also about helping students navigate through the social issues of our times in ways that help them develop compassion and tolerance and the critical thinking to sift out the fear-mongering stances in order to get to those places. How can we ever be better if we don't learn to do that?

  • I think you missed my point. There's no question that LGBT students are bullied and it ought to stop. But my point was that it's a two-way street, with girls who don't want to shower or change in front of a biological male now are being bullied and ridiculed.

  • In reply to Dennis Byrne:

    No, I didn't miss that at all. I expanded on what you said, based on experiences I've had. I asked the question, Why is it that students are so free to behave the way they do? The operative word being, students. Plural. Further, dealing with bullying requires a triangular approach which includes students, their parents and admin, regardless of who said what to whom and why. The two-way street mentality is limiting and oversimplifying the issue. It suggests that if the occupants of one street are engaged in a particular behavior, then the occupants of the other street get the green light to do the same. The issue travels over many more streets than that.

  • I agree. Whether it's a two-way street or a many-traveled path of streets, it shouldn't happen. But I'm waiting for the LGBT community to urge its people to lay off the students who want to protect their body privacy.

  • This is the best article I have ever read since couple of months. Thankful to you for sharing such a kind information. assignment writing services UK you can find more articles from here.

Leave a comment

  • Advertisement:
  • Advertisement:
  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Visit my new website

    I'm a freelance writer, editor and author. I can help you with a wide variety of projects. Check out my new website at www.dennisbyrne.net

  • Subscribe to The Barbershop

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Dennis Byrne’s Facebook Fan Page

  • Like me on Facebook

  • Our National Debt

  • Twitter

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

  • /Users/dennisby/Desktop/trailer.mp4
  • Latest on ChicagoNow

  • Advertisement: