Agreed. Does your© policy help or hinder those attacks?
conan:Well whatever the case…I did not like the way the school board or the cops handled it.
They apparently handled it by the books. But “by the books” isn’t always the right way.
Transferring Xi to another school is problematic.
I can agree with that. Thus the problem in some cases.
Sknyluv: WuWei:Until a girl gets raped.
People have been attacked in bathrooms prior and will in the future. The only difference now is that people can blame scary “bathroom accommodation” policies for the attacks.
Agreed. Does your© policy help or hinder those attacks?
It does neither. The policy does not apply, in any way, to people who going to attack someone.
It does neither. The policy does not apply, in any way, to people who going to attack someone.
Obviously it does. Xi had a right to be where he attacked.
Sknyluv:It does neither. The policy does not apply, in any way, to people who going to attack someone.
Obviously it does. Xi had a right to be where he attacked.
And not having that right wouldn’t have stopped him in the least.
There has to be a line somewhere. Does “feels like a girl” make sense as that line?
Of course big picture, it’s not about where that line is, but who gets to draw it.
WuWei: Sknyluv:It does neither. The policy does not apply, in any way, to people who going to attack someone.
Obviously it does. Xi had a right to be where he attacked.
And not having that right wouldn’t have stopped him in the least.
Perhaps. But that’s counterfactual because Xi does have that right.
Obviously it does. Xi had a right to be where he attacked.
He always had the right to be in there
Perhaps. But that’s counterfactual because Xi does have that right.
Could a student who doesn’t identify as gender-fluid have entered that bathroom and attacked that girl? Yes or no.
WuWei:So you used 2b?
I gave you the link, of course I used 2b.
Why not 1?
After thinking about this, I am going to disagree.
“Tolerance” is not “allowing to participate by their own rules”.
Tolerance is simply not attempting to destroy. For example, tolerating your existence does not require me to feed you. I am just waiting for you to starve.
Pardon the crude analogy.
WuWei:Perhaps. But that’s counterfactual because Xi does have that right.
Could a student who doesn’t identify as gender-fluid have entered that bathroom and attacked that girl? Yes or no.
Did a student, yes or no?
WuWei:Obviously it does. Xi had a right to be where he attacked.
He always had the right to be in there
No, Xi didn’t.
No, Xi didn’t.
There was a bathroom law?
Did a student, yes or no?
Please answer my question.
Before this wokism, if a male went into a female restroom, there were but a few possibilities, mostly unacceptable.
There was an expectation and concern expressed.
Now you© have normalized what once was a deviation. Forced a majority to accept the feelings of a minority, to adapt to them.
Of course that is the whole purpose of the “culture war”, to cancel a culture and replace it with a different one.
And yes, the expectation is submission to the new sensibility. Complete submission. If one doesn’t, then one is “bad” and must be repressed.
Yes…but school and public action would have been much different.
WuWei:Did a student, yes or no?
Please answer my question.
Answer your counterfactual? Why?
WuWei:No, Xi didn’t.
There was a bathroom law?
Yes. It has been a law for thousands of years.
It’s called “An act that little girls get to go to the restroom without being raped”
Answer your counterfactual? Why?
Could a student who doesn’t identify as gender-fluid have entered that bathroom and attacked that girl? Yes or no.