Obama Directs Schools To Put The “Rights” Of Boys Who Think They’re Girls Over Real Biological Girls

Obama is once again imposing his hardcore leftist vision on America, to the detriment of females who are actually biologically female. Once again, I’ll note this from Todd Starnes

Fox Business anchor Trish Regan asked a profound question on her show this week regarding the transgender bathroom controversy that has gripped the nation.

“What about the civil rights of women who don’t want men in their bathrooms,” she asked. “Do their rights matter at all?”

I’m afraid the answer to that question is no – the rights of women do not matter.

And any woman or young girl who complains about sharing locker rooms or shower stalls or bathrooms with a biological male — risks being labeled a transphobic bigot.

To Obama, the rights of women do not matter in this Progressive World

(NY Times) 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.

What about the discrimination against those women who do not want boys in their bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers?

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.

So school systems that do not want the gender confused peeing, changing, and showering with those with the correct biological plumbing could see Dear Leader withhold the money that was forcibly taken out of their paychecks. Sorry, ladies, the big Obama bus has formally run you over.

“No student should ever have to go through the experience of feeling unwelcome at school or on a college campus,” John B. King Jr., the secretary of the Department of Education, said in a statement. “We must ensure that our young people know that whoever they are or wherever they come from, they have the opportunity to get a great education in an environment free from discrimination, harassment and violence.”

Perhaps the DOE should worry more about the violence that occurs within the school systems in Democratic Party run schools, such as Chicago.

“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, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times.

The latter would be the proper method, instead of having little girls exposed to little boys in the changing rooms. The DOE has a 25 page advisory on “best practices” for dealing with the gender confused, which fails to encompass the notion of respecting the privacy of women, because schools won’t be allowed to ask if the biological men are really gender confused. No one would ever take advantage of this policy, right?

Team Obama doesn’t care about your opinion. They don’t care about going through the proper Constitutional channels. They don’t care about the beliefs of parents who want to protect their children. They do not care about the civil rights of biological women. All they care about is force applied for a tiny interest group.

Seriously, who thought this would become such a huge issue, all because a few idiots in Charlotte, NC passed a TG ordinance, one which they were warned about prior?

WTVD has a copy of the letter.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

19 Responses to “Obama Directs Schools To Put The “Rights” Of Boys Who Think They’re Girls Over Real Biological Girls”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Way to go, Obama!

    It’s admirable that conservatives pretend to be concerned about women. It’s a first. What’s not so admirable is their motive, using women’s rights as a tactic to attack the transgendered, whom they hate.

    And why no mention ever of men being made uncomfortable by transgendered in men’s rooms? Don’t men have the right to not be discomfited?

    We know the reason, lol. White men already vote Republican. This is a ploy by conservatives to trump up a woman’s issue. Good luck.

  2. Dana says:

    And this defines the real problem: the federal government can only threaten to take away federal funds from individual schools because those individual schools receive federal funds in the first place!

    It wasn’t that long ago that the public schools were funded primarily by localities, and secondarily by the states. But both Republicans and Democrats went right along with getting federal funding into local schools, and, naturally, that meant federal strings.

  3. Dana says:

    Jeffrey wrote:

    And why no mention ever of men being made uncomfortable by transgendered in men’s rooms? Don’t men have the right to not be discomfited?

    Men think differently, and most guys wouldn’t mind someone with a pussy peeing in their bathrooms. Of course, you knew that, all along.

  4. Dana says:

    The Jeffrey who has never been in a fistfight wrote:

    And why no mention ever of men being made

    uncomfortable by transgendered in men’s rooms? Don’t men have the right to not be discomfited?

    And then there’s the other part of the answer: males are normally bigger and stronger than females. Females would feel more threatened by a male in their restrooms and locker rooms, while men would just kick the pervert’s ass if there was a problem in their bathrooms.

  5. Jeffery says:


    Back to trying to understand…

    What kind of “help” would you and your wife seek for your transgendered child?

  6. Jeffery says:

    Dana typed:

    The Jeffrey who has never been in a fistfight…

    Not true, but it’s been a long, long time. Most, but not all, adult issues can be settled without violence. Unlike conservatives, wrestling with men doesn’t appeal to me.

    Fortunately, my size and countenance appear to dissuade a lot of fistfighters from trying.

  7. Dana says:

    Jeffrey asks a question already answered:

    Back to trying to understand…

    What kind of “help” would you and your wife seek for your transgendered child?

    You get him psychiatric help, Jeffrey, to make him understand that he is what he is, and not what he might want to be.

    I’ve pointed out many times before that if I was just really, really convinced that I was a Vulcan, and could find some quack plastic surgeon to give me pointed ears, you would never, ever go along with my delusions; you’d just say that I was looney tunes. Why, then, would you go along with the delusions of a boy who thinks he’s a girl?

  8. Hank_M says:

    What most news outlets are not mentioning is that this includes locker rooms.

    Still, this is nothing more than a continuation of the lefts goal to keep Americans distracted from the real issues affecting the country.

    The LGBT community will eventually be thrown under the bus by the left when it’s convenient to do so.

  9. Jeffery says:


    So you would abandon your own child. Got it.

    Do you really think that kind of psychotherapy would do any good?

    Did you happen to read any of the discussions regarding sex development?

  10. Dana says:

    Jeffrey wrote:

    Do you really think that kind of psychotherapy would do any good?

    It might, and it might not; no one can know how a given situation will turn out. And a person afflicted with these delusions might remain deluded and unhappy his entire life.

    But going along with his delusions, telling a boy that, yeah, sure, he really is a girl, when he isn’t, and never can be, regardless of the amount of hormone treatment and surgery he gets, is not a cure, and it will never be a cure.

    Sometimes the truth is not a very pleasant thing, but the truth remains the truth.

  11. Jeffery says:

    Why are you not interested in the biological foundations of sex development? Read part of the papers supplied.

    It’s possible that doctors and the State have made mistakes in assigning a sex to babies with ambiguous genitalia, and have burdened them with a State document guessing at their sex.

    It seems the conservative conclusion is that the doctor and State authorities have made their guess and that’s good enough.

  12. jl says:

    93 million or so people out of the work force, but president zero is focusing on the important stuff-the mentally ill and bathrooms

  13. Jeffery says:

    Yes, you’re right, sometimes the federal government has to protect citizens from mentally ill legislators and governors.

    People have been able to navigate bathrooms forever without the meddling of lunatic Republicans.

    This is a solution in search of a problem.

    I searched your 93 million number and got the traditional red flag that the references were from right-wing websites, Breitbart, CNSNews, DailyCaller etc… Ruh roh.

    Turns out the number includes kids and retirees! There are 6 million looking for work, not 92 or 93 million. Of course the number of retirees is increasing as the population ages.

  14. jl says:

    It was “out of the work force”, not looking for work. But back to president zero. Funny, he thinks schools should be forced to have transgendered bathrooms but cites shouldn’t be forced to enforce immigration laws. Again, on top of the important stuff

  15. Jeffery says:

    So you think making retirees and kids look for work is important?

    Do you think ending unfair discrimination against a vulnerable minority is unimportant?

  16. drowningpuppies says:

    Do you think ending unfair discrimination against a vulnerable minority is unimportant?

    -the confused little guy who exaggerates often who gets to define what unfair discrimination is and also what a vulnerable minority is

  17. Jeffery says:

    Teach headlined: Real Biological Girls

    Can you define “real biological girls”?

    Here’s what science is showing (excerpt from Nature):

    Sex can be much more complicated than it at first seems. According to the simple scenario, the presence or absence of a Y chromosome is what counts: with it, you are male, and without it, you are female. But doctors have long known that some people straddle the boundary — their sex chromosomes say one thing, but their gonads (ovaries or testes) or sexual anatomy say another. Parents of children with these kinds of conditions — known as intersex conditions, or differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs) — often face difficult decisions about whether to bring up their child as a boy or a girl. Some researchers now say that as many as 1 person in 100 has some form of DSD.

    That’s not to say that all transgenders biologically “straddle the boundary”, but it at least should give conservatives pause in their quest to throttle transgenders.

    Is it possible that your cocksure attitude about the transgendered is a bit blunt?

    When genetics is taken into consideration, the boundary between the sexes becomes even blurrier. Scientists have identified many of the genes involved in the main forms of DSD, and have uncovered variations in these genes that have subtle effects on a person’s anatomical or physiological sex. What’s more, new technologies in DNA sequencing and cell biology are revealing that almost everyone is, to varying degrees, a patchwork of genetically distinct cells, some with a sex that might not match that of the rest of their body. Some studies even suggest that the sex of each cell drives its behaviour, through a complicated network of molecular interactions. “I think there’s much greater diversity within male or female, and there is certainly an area of overlap where some people can’t easily define themselves within the binary structure,” says John Achermann, who studies sex development and endocrinology at University College London’s Institute of Child Health.

    It appears that the determinants that make a child either a boy or a girl are much more complex than once thought. A baby can have barely enough “equipment” at birth, as determined by a doctor (and State Authorities), who then issue State “papers” assigning “sex”. Yet, the more subtle characteristics of ovarian vs testicular tissues (or both!), chromosomal analysis and the even more subtle impact of maternal and fetal hormone exposure are ignored until later.

    We understand it’s simpler just to let the State declare boy vs. girl at birth based on the best guess of a physician, but simpler is always fairer.

    Those who hate transgendered people dismiss them as “mentally ill” or “gender confused”. They recommend coercive psychotherapy to get the child to accept the best guess of the physician and to submit to the Authority of the State. And of course, that WOULD be simpler.

    These discoveries do not sit well in a world in which sex is still defined in binary terms. Few legal systems allow for any ambiguity in biological sex, and a person’s legal rights and social status can be heavily influenced by whether their birth certificate says male or female.

    By our nature humans (and probably most animals) live in a binary world, hot/cold, up/down, in/out, black/white, boy/girl, here/there, normal/conservative, tall/short, wet/dry, fast/slow… this seems innate and likely has a distinct survival advantage regarding rapid and vital decision making, e.g., friend vs foe, predator/prey . Yet much of the real world exists as shades of gray, a continuum or a series of steps, not necessarily all or none.

    What does it hurt to listen to a 7 year old, called a boy at birth, who for 7 years thinks/feels/lives as a girl? Is she that big of a threat?


  18. jl says:

    “So you think making retirees and children look for work is important? Only if you consider those 16 and over children. “Do you think ending unfair discrimination against a vulnerable minority is important?” No. First, you start from the false premise that it’s discrimination. Second, “vulnerable minority”? These people voluntarily chose to do what they did, nobody forced them to. Let me ask you, do you think it’s important that certain segment of society is in effect trying to normalize this behavior, knowing the fact that the suicide rate is about 20 times higher for these people? As discrimination is discrimination, do you think ending unfair discrimination against Asians and whites via Affirmative Action is important?

  19. jl says:

    According to the FBI, over 800 active ISIS cases here in the U.S., but…bathrooms. President Zero is on top of his game

Pirate's Cove