The Obama administration has decided to meddle in school toilets
And so he—that is, his Departments of Justice and Education—have issued this letter of “guidance.”
I sometimes wonder whether Obama is trying to sabotage Hillary Clinton’s chances of getting elected. Because I think that this “decree” is the sort of thing likely to anger a lot of people, even many liberal Democrats:
The Obama administration is planning to issue a sweeping directive telling every public school district in the country to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity.
A letter to school districts will go out Friday, adding to a highly charged debate over transgender rights in the middle of the administration’s legal fight with North Carolina over the issue. The declaration ”” signed by Justice and Education department officials ”” will describe what schools should do to ensure that none of their students are discriminated against.
It does not have the force of law, but it contains an implicit threat: Schools that do not abide by the Obama administration’s interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.
A great many schools have been already allowing transgender students to use the facilities of that person’s self-identified gender, but this has been mainly done through decisions made at the local level. I don’t think there are all that many parents—even liberal ones—who will be very happy at the Obama administration’s letter, and the Times comments section bears this out, with plenty of people saying the equivalent of “I’m a liberal, but this makes me mighty uneasy.”
Obama’s reaction: tough. Your discomfort, or that of your child, is quite irrelevant:
“A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so,” according to the letter [from the administration], a copy of which was provided to the New York Times. A school’s obligation under federal law “to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of sex requires schools to provide transgender students equal access to educational programs and activities even in circumstances in which other students, parents, or community members raise objections or concerns,” the letter states. “As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students.”
As soon as a child’s parent or legal guardian asserts a gender identity for the student that “differs from previous representations or records,” the letter says, the child is to be treated accordingly ”” without any requirement for a medical diagnosis or birth certificate to be produced.
In this case—as in so many others—the process by which Obama is trying to do this is very problematic. Under what authority is the federal government interfering with school rules about bathrooms? Obama’s argument is that it’s a civil rights issue and therefore not a local issue:
Under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, schools receiving federal money may not discriminate based on a student’s sex, including a student’s transgender status. The guidance makes clear that both federal agencies treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for purposes of enforcing Title IX.
Would the courts, including the Supreme Court, actually enforce this in the particular way envisioned here? I don’t think it’s at all clear that this comes under the banner of discrimination by sex as it is usually defined, because it applies equally to transgender boys and transgender girls. That wouldn’t stop the highest court from saying it does, however, but the proper way to approach it is to duke it out in the courts. Don’t do this by executive fiat. But executive fiat is the way Obama prefers to do everything he can’t accomplish through Congress or the courts, or that he can’t accomplish fast enough to suit him. We can expect him to keep on pushing his agenda in this manner until his very last moment in office.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump (at least, in one of his comments) have seemed to favor something similar. Trump’s most recent statement, however, is that he thinks it should be a state issue, which is a rare instance of Trump defending federalism (which would be encouraging—that is, if he actually means it). If you want to read much more on the subject of what this means beyond the particular issue of transgendered children in school bathrooms, read this and this.
Whatever is going on with transgender students psychologically and physically (and we can, and have, argued about that on this blog, because it’s not completely clear) the schools they attend face a very difficult dilemma. Various accommodations have been made by states, or by administrators on a district-by-district or a school-by-school basis, and there have been a number of lawsuits from unhappy students, as well. The issue is working its way through the legal system. Until courts rule otherwise, there’s no reason it couldn’t have been allowed to play out that way—except, of course, that Obama and the left didn’t feel like leaving it that way and saw no reason not to use their muscle to make it happen. Yes, they can; after all, who’s going to stop them?
In an earlier statement (October 18, 2015, on Fox News Sunday), Donald Trump said he would abolish the Department of Education.
How many transgendered students are there? Why has this not been a problem, like forever, until now?
These transgendered students have been going to the bathroom, apparently without any issues until now. What makes this an issue that is so important the President has to issue a tyrannical decree from on high?
Letting male/female transgendered students use bathrooms that don’t correspond to their biological gender may not be a big problem. They can use the stalls for privacy and no one would be the wiser. It has been going on, I presume, since people have been aware of their transgender tendencies. That is one thing.
Here’s another thing. Here in Washington state they have now declared it necessary to accommodate transgendered people in not just bathrooms, but in locker rooms as well. That means I can go into a women’s locker room and no one can deny me that access. All I have to do is declare myself transgendered. Is this whacky? What is the matter with people who believe we have to turn our culture upside down to accommodate a very small minority group?
There must be a bigger issue behind this. Like destroying all cultural norms so that anything goes, especially if the state decrees it so.
Slowly, but surely, the state is working itself out of the job of providing schooling, as these things add up.
@JJ – We are dealing with first world problems now.
We’ve run out of the huge and obvious issues, so the focus gets to be on “micro-aggressions”, “safe-spaces”, and “transgendered” bathrooms.
We’ve gone from freedom and equal opportunity to special accommodations for every definable group.
Who knows where the event horizon is with this, where it collapses upon its own self, but we are now seeing signs of “cannibalization” amongst the left (this being an example: need for privacy and safe-spaces for females vs that for males who “self-identify” however loosely and for however long as females), and that is a good thing.
“Why has this not been a problem, like forever, until now? ”
J.J.
Its not a problem, its an agenda. They want to punish Americans who dare not tow the line on Progressive decreed “fashionable thought”. The so called tolerant liberals are some of the most intolerant peoples on the planet. No wonder they admire the muslim world.
There is ZERO statutory or constiutional authority for this. Pure lawlessness.
Bookworm Room also has a very good piece on this topic today. I’m happy to see the Catholic church getting involved. Maybe this will bring back another Dagger John era (Google the name at City Journal) and a revival of Catholic schools. I don’t care what your religion is, but it is a good idea to have a big and powerful alternative to to public schools with their rubber rooms and lack of discipline. It is absolutely abusive to play this transgender game before a kid’s hormones kick in. Psychological counseling should be made available for the tiny number of older kids who do have a problem.
I wore uniforms to school. We had boy’s and girl’s side of the parking lot that was our playground in elementary school. Boys and girls worked together on all sorts of projects in high school. All 50 members of our class took different routes in life and we all turned out fine. We all stay in touch. I wish every kid could have the same chance we had.
It surely does look like Obama wants to lose the election for Clinton. On the other hand, he may believe that the election is already lost, and he’s having a little cram-down temper tantrum while he still can do big damage; and so that it will take the new president even longer to reverse, cancel or remediate all the damages.
Or perhaps his narcisism tells him that NOBODY could ever be as awesome as him, so he has to “save” the country before we lose his amazing leadership. Whatever his motives and regardless his successor, it will be a happy day when Obama is no longer POTUS.
Obama now wants to turn this into Governor George Wallace at the schoolhouse door with the Lt. Governor of Texas as George Wallace.
Big mistake.
TransgenderIsm is not a civil rights issue.
I see this as another federal power grab. If they–the Obama Admin–can prevail on this issue, which is widely opposed, and has no perceivable merit, where can they be stopped?
I should think that this could be rather easily defeated in an honest court. Oh, there I go. To have legal status as an aggrieved minority, there must be some means to verify membership in the group. Surely. What are the definable characteristics of transgender? One’s verbal assertion is not sufficient. Is it?
Ironically, I knew a family that went through a long ordeal. It was not only wrenching, it was very private. They would have never sought to be part of the circus we see today. In this case an operation was conducted, and was apparently successful. (BTW the change was from female to male.) Anyone who is truly experiencing this rare and difficult situation deserves understanding and emotional support, including first of all counseling in their efforts to resolve the dichotomy. That is all they are owed by society.
Back in the ’60s some of the Black Civil Rights Leadership advocated civil disobedience; and they were fairly widely supported. I do believe that it is time to put the shoe on the other foot if that is what is required to take back our culture.
I wonder how Blacks feel about this moral equivalence?
Bruce Jenner is no Rosa Parks.
“he may believe that the election is already lost, and he’s having a little cram-down temper tantrum”
That was sort of my first thought:
that, just in case this is the last hurrah of a Democratic presidency for the foreseeable future, he’s taking advantage of the North Carolina spat over gender “identity” or “fluidity” to toss out every social “reform” he can – like throwing spaghetti against a wall, to see if anything sticks.
I don’t for a moment think Obama thinks the election is.lost.
https://pjmedia.com/blog/every-single-one-since-2009-obamas-doj-civil-rights-division-hired-only-leftist-lawyers-hundreds/
I suspect the percentages in the Civil Rights division of the DOE are exactly the same.
Critical Theory on the march. More to come.
Fundamental. Transformation. The only alternative is Trump.
What to do? You’d almost think that they’ve got us where they want us.
How many transgendered students are there? Why has this not been a problem, like forever, until now?
I would guess that it’s partly because the LGBT activists have moved on to their next issue now that the gay rights fight was pretty much won with the SCOTUS ruling on SSM. They have this great organizing apparatus in place, tried-and-true tactics, and willing radicals in government, so why not go for broke?
I’m also wondering how much the incidence of transgenderism in children has increased in the last decade or two. It seems that having a trans kid is the latest rage among parents who want to prove they’re the most progressive, loving parent on the block (Munchausen by Proxy.). We’re seeing a lot more kids like Coy Mathis in schools, with parents who will stop at nothing to ensure their snowflake’s identity is validated (as well as blogging about it, writing about it & dragging the kid onto talk shows, etc.) I think this was dealt with privately in the past, either treating it like a phase (to see if it will pass), as a mental health issue (getting them to therapy), or just letting it happen naturally, postponing the decision until adulthood.
And yet, the NeverTrump folks here and elsewhere think that 30-40 years more of this PC erosion of federalism, democratic government, Judeo-Christian values, and the United States of America — and it will be that long, if not forever, with the Evil Empress’s Supreme Court appointments — is redeemable and preferable to what Trump MIGHT do.
That is just unfathomable to me.
I don’t think Obama wants to harm Hillary, I think he just wants to use his last months in office to so totally transform everything/ establish a new “normal” that the next president would have to fight tooth and nail just to get back to pre-2008 norms. The next president will be so overwhelmed with the poor economy, the looming Obamacare bust, a nuclear Iran, and complete distrust from America’s allies he won’t have the energy to take on the Left’s activists in attempting to undo things like SSM, transgender bathrooms policy, HHS birth control mandate, etc.
Also, blogger Bookworm identified what was behind all of this mainstreaming of abnormal sexual stuff years ago, and she revisits in in her post today: http://www.bookwormroom.com/
JJ:
“There must be a bigger issue behind this. Like destroying all cultural norms so that anything goes”
Well yeah. The activist game is the only social cultural/political game there is. Again (h/t G6loq):
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/the_quiet_revolution_how_the_new_left_took_over_the_democratic_party_.html
mezzrow:
“The only alternative is Trump.”
The better alternative to the Left should be conservatives on the basis of ideas and principles, ethic. The problem is that conservatives have self-abnegated in the activist game by chronically refusing to compete for real.
Whereas the belief that the Trump phenomenon is the “only” alternative to the Left is rooted in the activist character of the Left-mimicking alt-Right that’s the creative engine of the Trump phenomenon. To their credit, the alt-Right is competing for real in the only social cultural/political game there is.
Conservatives can be activist, too. Activism is method, not ideology, available to anyone for any cause.
The better alternative to the Democrat-front Left than the Trump-front alt-Right is for conservatives to collectively adopt the necessary activist mindset, adapt the necessary activist skillset, and attack aggressively into the arena versus all comers, Left and alt-Right, with the permanent commitment, zeal, and vigor necessary to compete for real, reclaim the GOP enroute, and win the necessary social dominance to make a difference.
Conservatives need to become fully activist now for a chance to make a difference for current events.
I think this mistake will cost the Dems the election.
The Dems will push. There are two lawsuits. We need to keep up the pressure. We need a champion. Maybe NC Governor. Maybe Lt. Gov of TX. Maybe Trump VP.
When school starts again in the Fall there will be incidents.
We also need outraged Blacks. A Selma marcher saying I didn’t march for this.
Richard Saunders,
FYI … you said:
“Eric – I usually agree with you, but what leads you to believe Trump’s foreign policy will be a continuation of Obama’s simply eludes me. Can you elucidate?”
My response, a bit slipshod, but the gist should hopefully communicate:
http://neoneocon.com/2016/05/07/more-on-the-ben-rhodes-flap/#comment-1158814
Add: Trump’s foreign policy outlook is difficult to grasp, consistent with his ambiguous shifting rhetoric over-all, but themes in his rhetoric, in light of pre-conditions and trends brought about under Obama, point to a continuity from Obama to Trump.
mezzrow:
“The only alternative is Trump.”
I’m not saying it like it’s a good thing. We maneuvered ourselves into this position as a party, because the prize looked too available.
Now this is what we’re looking at. Do not want.
Cornhead:
“We also need outraged Blacks. A Selma marcher saying I didn’t march for this.”
If it’s not harnessed as a driving force in the form of a sufficient social (counter-)activist action, that would be no more effectively moving than outraged Whites, Reds, Browns, Yellows or anyone else blowing off steam into the sky.
The 20th century civil rights movements didn’t make a difference primarily with ‘outrage’. They worked primarily from activists who applied the correct method to cultivate, marshal, and utilize ‘outrage’ strategically to bring about the desired social political effect, in the same vein of the Trump-front alt-Right activists who applied a like method to harness ‘outrage’ to usurp the GOP nomination race.
You’re not wrong, but you’re not right yet, either.
For the right answer, you need sufficient activism to cultivate, marshal, and utilize that ‘outrage’ in the arena. But right now, the only viable activist alternative to the Democrat-front Left is the Trump-front alt-Right. Unless, until conservatives become sufficiently activist to offer We The People a competitively viable 3rd alternative.
I would guess that it’s partly because the LGBT activists have moved on to their next issue now that the gay rights fight was pretty much won with the SCOTUS ruling on SSM. They have this great organizing apparatus in place, tried-and-true tactics, and willing radicals in government, so why not go for broke?
Plus the mighty media’s in their corner. Amazon Studios now streams an award-winning sitcom, Transparent, which is about “Maura Pfefferman (born Morton Pfefferman), a retired college professor of political science who finally opens up to her family about always identifying as a woman”.
It’s undoubtedly hoping to work some Will & Grace magic.
This issue is a direct consequence of the Left winning on SSM. Difference this time is they have ZERO law in agreement and even Tony Kennedy can’t stretch the constitution to include transgender persons.
Obama thinks he can win in the courts again.
What J.J. and Lizzy said – how many actual students does this affect, and how much of it is over-involved parents jumping on the latest trendy band-wagon?
My own personal take on it is -not many, and likely a few. It’s just the latest means for Obama to slap around the general American people. Because he just loves us so much, and has our interests so much at heart.
Yes – install bitterly satiric quotes around that last sentence.
In the meantime, Sec. of State John Kerry is busy drumming up business for Iran:
That’s the ticket — let’s help a state sponsor of terrorism make money.
Issuing the toilet decree right now is a pretty good distraction from all that.
When I was in elementary school the janitor was female, and she was the only female that entered the boys washroom, granted it was after school hours or if there was any bathroom mishaps during the day.
Also, speaking of meddling, Obama and Secretary Julian Castro of Housing & Urban Development are looking into ways to move Section 8 housing into mostly white suburbs. Both think that white suburbs are insular and need of diversity and racial integration.
>>Yes, they can; after all, who’s going to stop them?
This is the same attitude that very eager and true-believer types of the (D)/leftist makeup have displayed. It’s “We want this. We going to get it. And gosh, I bet there’s some law, some vagueness in the amendments, that will propel our goals forward.” Of course, if not, they’ll say the law is a bad law and proclaim that it’s archaic and non-inclusive.
If the Republican Congress had the slightest sense, they would issue a public threat to persecute any school that follows this unconstitutional usurpation after Obama leaves office.
@ J.J: “How many transgendered students are there? Why has this not been a problem, like forever, until now?”
The election of Obama, especially the 2nd term, signaled a cultural buffet for The Left. I’ve said it before, that the passing of Obergefell v Hodges (originally about healthcare benefits, not civil unions, really) would enter an era of social nihilism unless otherwise noted by The Left. The LG(B) were the “new” blacks, but since same-sex “marriage” was federally recognized it’s down the line, like a coke junky. “T” – transgender – was next.
Since same-sex relationships have become the new norm, SJW’s need a new superstar for their cause. I’ll also add that Muslims have somewhat taken the place of LG(B)s as well, though not a sexuality, they are indeed being treated as a victim class.
The Left’s cry is diversity and inclusion. Of course, how can one not want such things?
@ Cornhead: “Bruce Jenner is no Rosa Parks.”
It’s the logic of activists and The Left. They’ll “make it work.” Even if you articulate it as clearly as possible, that their reasoning is irrational and not nearly as sound & reasonable, they’ll tend to say, “Well, so what. 10 years from now we’ll be looking back on this and wonder what they big deal was.” The Left’s social dreams succeed because they all depend on indifference and lack of discernment.
The Left also depends on more conservative voices becoming the minority with aided silence. They are conscious of their own bullying of the opposition. They feel conservatives “deserve” contempt and animosity for all the “bad” and ignorant things they’ve done. It’s not hard to know what ticks of a leftist since each one is a parrot of the next leftist in line.
Great piece by David French at NRO — “The Transgender Straw Broke the Camel’s Back: It’s Time to Declare Independence from Public Schools”:
The rest is here.
“That is just unfathomable to me.”
I hear ya Richard Saunders. But whats generations of Americans sunk into the dark ages compared to Trump being rejected for being an arrogant asshole? We all have our priorities.
The Obama crowd is not just evil. It is creepy evil.
What I meant to say was the Obama crowd likes sexual deviants. Pretty soon they’ll come out in favor of pedophilia.They’re agitating for every other perversion, and slaughtering babies as they go.
SteveH:
You know, I’m really really sick and tired of strawman arguments like “whats generations of Americans sunk into the dark ages compared to Trump being rejected for being an arrogant asshole?”
I don’t think there’s a commenter here who’s “rejecting Trump for being an arrogant asshole.” So stop acting like that’s the case, and insulting people who are soul-searching on this issue.
“Arrogant asshole” he is. But if you pay any attention at all to what most people here are actually saying about why they won’t vote for him, it’s not that. If it were just “arrogant asshole,” that would be a much easier decision to make.
Most people who reject him believe that he would be as bad or worse than Hillary Clinton for the country and the world. Disagree with them—that’s fine. But stop setting up strawmen and insulting people who are struggling with some very difficult reading of the future tea leaves about a loose cannon who is a liar, changes his mind all the time so that it’s almost impossible to tell what he would actually do as president, has no experience of governing whatsoever, has little interest in or understanding of the Constitution, has impulses that are as tyrannical as Obama’s in terms of executive actions, supports many leftist positions, is drunk on personal power, is an extreme narcissist, and is ALSO an arrogant asshole (that last part is the least of it).
Eric — see my response below yours.
Cornhead — there are numbers from the latest primaries showing that Trump may get as much as 15% of the black vote. If that happens, (or even if 15% of the expected black voters stay home) it’s “Bye-bye, Hillary!”
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
Not just of what Obama will do in these his final months, but just a hint, a precursor of what Hillary will do if elected.
She is at least as ambitious as Obama.
She lusts for a Presidential record that will be so historic, as to eclipse Obama’s. And those who doubt, not her ambition but her Presidential impact upon society, will look back in wonder at how they could have been so blind.
She will have an army of lawyers and a permanent liberal majority Supreme Court that will ‘find’ Constitutional ‘support’ for whatever the left desires.
She will have an army of true believers to call upon and through leftist activist groups, mobs in every city at her beck and call. And a political party drunk with ideological power.
Open borders will continue and the flood of illegals will be unending and a ‘path to citizenship’ be declared a Constitutional ‘right’.
And, by the time that she and the forces she’ll direct are done, all that will remain of the America that once was… will be a distant memory.
RS
Blacks hate SSM. All polls and votes confirm that. They can’t be happy with this trans stuff.
In principle, though not on specifics, I’m in agreement with Trump’s original positions on illegal immigration, Muslim migration into the U.S. and harmful trade agreements.
But to see Donald Trump clearly is to be appalled at his fundamental unsuitability for the office he pursues. I’m in basic agreement with every negative about Trump that neo cites.
Yet to think that a Pres. Trump will be as bad or possibly worse than a Pres. Hillary Clinton is to fail to see the forest for the trees.
Absent truly unforseen events, one or the other will be the next President.
But this is not actually a choice between an overblown, unprincipled egotist and an entitled, ruthless Alinsky acolyte.
This is a choice between an overblown, unprincipled egotist and… an utterly committed, massive infrastructural network of Marxist/socialist organizations, who have infiltrated every level and aspect of American life. Who hate all that America seeks to stand for and, who are totally dedicated to her dissolution and ‘transformation’.
Hillary Clinton simply wants to lead the parade. And she’s willing to do whatever it takes to get there.
Trump is backed by a frustrated mob. Hillary by ideologically dedicated organizations. Any military strategist can tell you which is the more dangerous.
Geoffrey Britain:
I understand your points. I agree that it’s one of the things that gives me pause, and as I’ve said before I might end up voting for Trump, although that would be a sad and sickening day.
But I think you very much underestimate the damage a frustrated mob can do, if the mob is big enough, frustrated enough, and led by someone unscrupulous enough. As one example, I’ll just offer the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution.
Curiously, GB, a forest is just a piece of land large or small filled with trees, pretty trees perhaps, but just trees; while a tree is just a tree. I know when I am in a forest, just as I know a tree when I see one, two, or a dozen on my street. Bottom line, I have always found that a rather silly idiom.
With hrc we know exactly what to expect. With djt we have no clue what the donald will do. He walks back on every one of your key issues (which happen to be some of my key issues) and he seems set on abusing presidential power just like bho and hrc would do, or perhaps double down. To assume djt would operate with restraint is, well, sailing without any map, star chart, sextant, or compass. There be dragons out there.
By the way, the “stalls are private” idea? Maybe they’re different in men’s rooms, but in every single ladies’ room I’ve been in, they’re NOT. There’s a gap along either side of the doors that you can almost fit your finger into, and it will be extremely easy for a pervert to put his eye to that slot and see everything he wants to.
And of course, there’s the hand under the side wall with the cell phone.
Nope, no privacy AT ALL.
Besides, why the hell should we put up with this? It’s literally insanity.
One of the hallmarks of a dictator is that he forces the little people to do some small thing, not because it needs to be done, but only to demonstrate his power to make them do it. Richard Fernandez occasionally tells the story
“In the foundation-legend of the Swiss confederacy, Alberect Gessler was a cruel and tyrannical overlord installed by the Austrians, who installed his hat atop a pole in the public marketplace and decreed that all should bow to it . . . to his hat, not merely his person. Such a declaration was, I think, a way of rubbing in his authority over the common citizens — indeed, rubbing their noses in the fact that he could make them do so, and do so in front of everyone else.
“Ignoring Gessler’s hat got William Tell into trouble because it is the nature of Gesslers that they cannot afford to be ignored. They need to be noticed. The problem facing conservative organizers is to find that Gessler’s Hat as a starting point.”
I should add that legend has it that William Tell had two arrows in his quiver. In case he missed, the second was for Herr Gessler.
Beverly,
I just discovered I am a woman. Next trip to Target I will not be shopping, instead I will seek out the store manager and look him straight in the face and tell him I identify as a woman and will use the female restroom. I will ask him/her if that is a pproblem and if not, I will enter the female restroom and tell every female present that this is what you get when your vote democrat/progressive. Hundreds of thousands of men need to do this.
neo,
When I vote for Trump, it will certainly be a sad & sickening day for me because the consequence of either Trump or Hillary is almost certainly the end of what has made America, America.
There is no acceptable, much less good choice available, at least in swing states like mine (Fl).
I assure you that I am not underestimating the damage that Trump and his mob will very likely do, as I expect the damage to ultimately be… fatal.
There’s simply no doubt in my mind however that Lenin will be much worse than Caesar*.
*substitute whatever personages you prefer
parker,
Feel free to also substitute whatever metaphor/idiom works for you. But my point remains, regardless of how painful it’s contemplation may be.
As I’ve repeatedly explained, I not only don’t expect Trump to act with restraint, I expect him to act just as you fear. Given that if he is even somewhat sincere, I see no way for him to accomplish his promises without “cutting down all the laws” i.e. unconstitutional executive orders imposed through force.
So yes, I agree that his ‘cure’ is likely to be fatal. It’s just that a chaotic, “might makes right” world… beats the hell out of Marx’s vision of humanity. As, while in the first you may die on your feet, in the second, we will be forced to live on our knees.
parker @ 1:54,
Brilliant…
Second that. To wit:
I see this is as all divide and conquer politics. The Democrats have got to slow walk the server investigation past the Philadelphia convention to get Hillary’s nomination secure. This action is meant to separate America so that all people against this issue can be painted as “haters”. In the last eight years I have become so cynical . . . there is a sadness to all of this that is so sickening.
Late to the thread as usual, but I want to note that mezzrow’s comment from 3:56PM yesterday points to the real and permanent damage done to the republic by this administration (and by the Clinton administration before that): The Administrative State is a permanent feature (and by far the most powerful element) of our government. And it is staffed by ever-growing legions — an army, if you will — of employed-for-life and unaccountable employees who literally RULE us. And almost all of them are Leftists. Obama et al have packed even more of them into every single federal agency and will keep adding more until mid January 2017.
Ronald Reagan could come back to life to serve us in his finest form, and the GOP could have majorities in both the House and Senate and there wouldn’t be a god-damned thing they could do to change that. It’s a permanent, worsening, incurable and terminal condition.
It’s an activist pushing through an agenda. I hate to say it, but I actually laughed that Obama is saying alternate bathrooms aren’t enough. The single-bathroom alternative was used as a panacea for the LGBTQ “guidelines” being put forth for Michigan schools. (I put “guidelines” in quotes because everyone involved is quick to say that they’re suggestions, not regulations.)
I weighed in on them this week, before comments were closed. Most of the 1200+ commenters were against them. I wasn’t terribly surprised that the guidelines are championed by social workers (who IMO lose sight of “normal” after years of working with atypical situations) and a lawyer for LGBTQ rights who often works with/against the state. The MEA also sent a private e-mail encouraging members to support these guidelines. Most of my colleagues just deleted the message, but I’m a dope who didn’t. (I hope I’m just paranoid, but I’m bracing myself for blowback if/when the activists track naysayers down.)
The most asinine aspect of the guidelines: the sole criteria for identifying gender was a student’s self-identification. The guidelines specified that no medical or psychological statement will be required. In fact, the guidelines state that “extenuating circumstances” (no examples given) may make it impossible for former students to officially change their identities, so schools should change student records without any matching documentation.
On the flip side, staff MUST refer to the official name and sex of the student when calling home or making other contacts because otherwise it violates the student’s “right to privacy.” This “right” magically supersedes the right of parents to information, according to the guidelines document. Its writers view parents as monsters who would abuse their children for being anything but heterosexual “cisgendered” (an insulting word!) Considering how much effort teachers and administrators put into encouraging parental involvement in our schools, it’s clear the writers haven’t a clue about how a successful community school works.
These are problems with the guidelines without even addressing the bathroom and sports team issues.
Eric,
You might appreciate this article about how some conservatives are turning Leftist tactics against the SJWs in the bathroom wars. For survivors of sexual assault, the presence of any male (trans or not) in a female locker room or bathroom is “triggering”:
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2016/05/anti_trans_conservatives_borrow_left_wing_rhetoric.html
Of course, Slate is aghast at this turn of events, and conservatives are not merely conservatives but “anti-Trans” conservatives.
Heh.
CV,
Thanks. That’s a start.
I’ll reiterate that there needs to be a collective adoption of the necessary activist mindset among conservatives to build a viable social activist movement, more than just a few scattered outliers whose effect can be neutralized by counter-activism.
Without implying criticism, but just as general advice, competitive activism in the arena for beginners – like any other competitive endeavor – involves a learning curve of trying things out and exploring, which includes simply at first copying more experienced activists, mapping out the arena, and learning why and how different strategies, techniques, tactics, and procedures work. Becoming proficient in their use, layering progress, and scaffolding strategy, techniques, tactics, and procedures. Again, becoming a serious activist isn’t mystical. It’s just like seriously undertaking any competitive endeavor.
Which is to say, I hope they approach the competition in the arena seriously with an eye on winning the long term and big picture and aren’t only cargo-cult’ing on a shortsighted whim. That’s a concern because of the Tea Party movement, which was on the right track and doing relatively well on their learning curve. But they shortcircuited and gave up discouraged in the face of normal competitive pushback – counter-activism – when the Tea Party members were actually experiencing normal progress on their learning curve. They seemed not to grasp the essential competitive character of their undertaking.
Richard Saunders’ admonishment, “the NeverTrump folks here and elsewhere think that 30-40 years more of this PC erosion of federalism, democratic government, Judeo-Christian values, and the United States of America … is redeemable and preferable to what Trump MIGHT do”, is harsh but fair criticism, with the implicit recognition that conservatives who oppose the alt-Right’s Trump phenomenon alternative to the Left are yet failing to deploy a constructive 3rd alternative to the Democrat-front Left Gramscian march and Trump-front alt-Right that’s establishing their own Gramscian long march.
Complaining is fine, it’s part of diagnosis, but conservatives collectively need to progress to prescription and apply treatment in order to compete for real in the activist game versus the Left and alt-Right.
The Slate example is a start. A conservative activist phenomenon, more robust and willing to compete than the Tea Party, needs to snowball. A lot and quickly.
Does this “guideline” also apply to the restrooms and locker facilities that the teachers use?
Re Target and Parker’s suggestion, I am tempted to select some outfits to try on and then just leave everything in the dressing area with a note that I didn’t feel safe to try them on. Bet the workers would get upset about the additional work they had to do to return everything to the racks.
Witness the power of the Leftist alliance. This isn’t even half of their strategic reserves. They got plenty more weapons to show the people what the Ruling Class is really about.
But they shortcircuited and gave up discouraged in the face of normal competitive pushback — counter-activism —
That’s not what happened.
Cornhead Says:
May 13th, 2016 at 10:54 pm
RS
Blacks hate SSM. All polls and votes confirm that. They can’t be happy with this trans stuff.
%%%%
Latinos hate it even more.
It only makes sense for the mentally ill: Jenner.
blert:
“Mentally ill”? No. Transgender people have a higher incidence of depression and some other disturbances (certainly of suicide) but plenty of them are not mentally ill, and it’s a simplification and an error to think so.
I have written at length on the subject here.
Pingback:schools | local control | civil rights | DOJ