Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) is allowing a biological male into the female locker room.
This is the same district that is currently undergoing a criminal investigation for allegedly helping facilitate abortions of girls who are minors in the schools and allegedly also paying for them. AFN first reported this in August.
Defense of Freedom Institute published a press release last week, notifying that it had filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of the mother of a freshman girl against FCPS. This follows after a series of complaints at West Springfield High School regarding a sophomore boy repeatedly being in the girl’s locker room and watching them change.
The district’s work-around
Instead of removing him, the school told the girls to change in a single-occupancy unisex bathroom.
According to Fairfax County Times, the FCPS Superintendent Michelle Reid kept this quiet and let this slide because the male student proclaimed that he is a girl. The school district’s policy allows bathroom and locker room access based not on biological sex but self-declared “gender identity.” However, the transgender student had “facial hair” and wore clothes that “clearly outlined his genitalia,” The Times reported. The complaint also points out that the biological boy has been choosing any bathroom or locker room he wishes.
Stephanie Lundquist-Arora is the chapter leader of the Independent Women’s Network in Fairfax County and a mom of one of the students. She spoke with Jody Hice on Washington Watch, likening Fairfax County to Tammany Hall in corrupt 1920s New York City.
“District policy allows for bathroom and locker room use based on so-called or proclaimed gender identity and not sex, which is a violation of Title IX. The U.S. Department of Education has already said so,” says Lundquist-Arora. “So, this case is a parents’ absolute worst nightmare.”
Because of the policy, Lundquist-Arora explained that nothing could be done even after the freshman girl who witnessed this told the authorities. It’s hard to lay this on the principal and school staff, who could be fired if they went against district policy, she said.
“This starts from a very, very woke superintendent and a school board, which is 12 members, all Democrat-endorsed. So basically, you have a school district that's sponsoring predatory behavior,” states Lundquist-Arora.
She recalled what a friend, whose daughter was in that locker room, told her about the situation.
“She didn't find out this was happening until it was reported on local news in the evening. They didn't let the parents know that the girls were being subjected to this. She was really upset by that and found out, when she asked her daughter, that her daughter had been changing since the beginning of the month in a bathroom stall,” says Lundquist-Arora.
Lundquist-Arora called this a complete disregard to women and girls' privacy in the most intimate spaces in their schools.
Though the male student proclaimed to be a girl, he did not present himself as anything other than male.
“As far as I know from what's been reported, this boy wasn't even presenting as a girl. He wasn't even pretending he was a girl. He had facial hair, and he was just a boy in there leering because he felt like it,” states Lundquist-Arora.
She turned to the secret-keeping abilities of the school. Part of parental rights is that the school notifies if they give a child Tylenol for a headache, but because of the district’s policy, they are not notifying if a boy with facial hair is leering at females in their locker room.
“What we're seeing is that all policies at the district level that are political in nature, they're keeping from the parents. They're giving our kids really invasive “get-to-know-you” surveys about what are your preferred pronouns,” says Lundquist-Arora.
No legal precedent
Lundquist-Arora noted that this is happening all over the district, not just Springfield High School. Sadly, it seems that people are supporting the district.
“You can look on social media, and these people are just willing to die on this transgender hill. They're putting up these proclamations on social media about this being a matter of transgender rights. They claim that they're abiding by state law, which is not the case,” says Lundquist-Arora.
Lundquist-Arora informs that people often refer to a Fourth Circuit Court case, Grim v. Glouster County School Board, to justify these actions. According to her, this case involved a student who was transitioning and taking puberty blockers over a long period of time, and the final decision allowed the student to use the restroom that aligned with the proclaimed gender identity.
“No matter what you think about the Grimm case, this is far beyond that. It's not supported by any kind of case law, nor is it supported by state law or federal law. So, it's just a complete violation, blatantly,” concludes Lundquist-Arora.
