Dear Editor,
It amazes me that anyone is surprised that the whole gender blender thinking would not end up discriminating against the ones it initially chose to favor. If one wants to play on a girls’ team, they need only show up wearing a shirt that has buttons on the left because to ask as their gender would be a violation of that person’s rights. “What gender do you think I am?!!! Look at the buttons.” If a boy is criticized for playing on the girls team by another student or adult it would be considered sexual harassment and punishable to the full extent of the law.
Rob WoodLas Cruces, NM From the WSJ Opinion page, Jan 2021
On Wednesday President Biden delivered a blow to the rights of women and girls: the Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation. On day one, Mr. Biden placed all girls’ sports and women’s safe spaces in the crosshairs of the administrative state.
Any school that receives federal funding—including nearly every public high school— must either allow biological boys who self-identify as girls onto girls’ sports teams or face administrative action from the Education Department. If this policy were to be broadly adopted in anticipation of the regulations that are no doubt on the way, what would this mean for girls’ and women’s sports? Done.
Rick
Maybe we need to start looking at the positive side of the self destructive nature of these policies. By federal and Constitutional law (which is rendered null and void by our School Board in this case) it is unlawful to discriminate or give preferential treatment to an individual or group based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.
As far as JBC and it’s supposedly cultural and linguistically sensitive format it is entirely illegal as is any form of CRT.
Now I really like the combination of JBD and JBC because JBD protects the right of the individual to self identify as to gender no matter what their physical attributes are. This opens the door to self identification as to race, color, ethnicity and national origin because one can just say they identify with that group.
As far as discriminated against groups, the left always likes to only highlight the poor in certain non white races. According to Victor Davis Hansen there are far more white poor than there are of any race and in fact when all nonwhite poor are combined, the white poor way outnumber the other
. So where is affirmative action in this? No way are they letting what are called “poor white trash” into their program solely based on them being white even though a PWT could self identify with any marginalized group they choose and get the benefits of that group that they need.
Where am I going with this? if a white kid is struggling in school or a straight kid is being bullied can the white, Asian, Punjabi or South Islander kid say he identifies with the native American one that is struggling in school and receive equal access to prioritized educational treatment?
Or on the gender identity policy, if bullied by a binary kid will the bullied straight kid get the same fair and equitable restorative justice or does the binary one get preferential treatment just because they are the outliers. These policies as you well have highlighted contradict themselves. If a boy is not good at a sport can he just self identify as a girl (even though he is not actually leaning in that way) and get on the gils team and into the girls locker room?
I have no idea how to straighten the minds out of policy makers because as far as equal and fare treatment of affirmative action, across the board, it completely revolves around what the liberals choose as their group of choice from the NBA to our most prestigious universities.
Just follow he money.
Rob
