Fox's O'Reilly Fear Mongers About MA School Policy To Protect Transgender Studen

[Shana A]

Fox's O'Reilly Fear Mongers About MA School Policy To Protect Transgender Students
February 27, 2013 5:47 PM EST ››› CARLOS MAZA

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/02/27/foxs-oreilly-fear-mongers-about-ma-school-polic/192825

Fox's Bill O'Reilly condemned a new Massachusetts school policy protecting transgender students, suggesting that teachers should be allowed to out their transgender students to their families and fear mongering that "wise guys" might use the policy to infiltrate girls' restrooms.

During the February 26 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly railed against a new directive for Massachusetts schools concerning the treatment of transgender students.

The directive - which is aimed at encouraging non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity - instructs school officials to acknowledge students by their preferred gender identity and respect transgender students' privacy when discussing their gender identity with their parents.

O'Reilly called the directive "insane," suggesting that "wise guys" would casually alter their gender identity in order to enter the locker rooms of the opposite sex. He went on to argue that that schools should be required to inform parents about their children's "lifestyle" choices: 

[Madisyn]

Like everything else he spouts off about, he has zero clue about transgendered individuals.  Sadly there are many like him who cannot understand that people don't make the decision to transition easily.

[tomthom]

He does make a valid point about people casually claiming they are transgendered for the sake of being a voyeur. That is an issue that must be addressed.

[suzifrommd]

He does make a valid point about people casually claiming they are transgendered for the sake of being a voyeur. That is an issue that must be addressed.

I've heard this a lot.

Has this ever happened in real life?

[~RoadToTrista~]

Um, is it really as easy as just going to the principal and saying "Hey, I'm transgendered"?

[brainiac]

This is the same asinine argument that opponents of same-sex marriage use. "Oh, straight people will pretend to be gay to get X benefits!" Yeah, right. Show literally any proof that people have done this or would be actually willing to do this, and we can address the problem AFTER we give rights to the majority affected--trans people--who would not be abusing this. The exception should not determine rights for all. Why should all trans people be punished if one person who is not being discriminated against is breaking the rules, if this is even a realistic problem? Not to mention, people will notice if someone is using this to be a voyeur and it can be dealt with then.



Edited for content

[tomthom]

This is the same asinine argument that opponents of same-sex marriage use. "Oh, straight people will pretend to be gay to get X benefits!" Yeah, right. Show literally any proof that people have done this or would be actually willing to do this, and we can address the problem AFTER we give rights to the majority affected--trans people--who would not be abusing this. The exception should not determine rights for all. Why should all trans people be punished if one person who is not being discriminated against is breaking the rules, if this is even a realistic problem? Not to mention, people will notice if someone is using this to be a voyeur and it can be dealt with then.

Edited for content

this is definitely not the same argument. And we can't show proof because this is a fairly new policy, and all that could be shown is case studies or anecdotal evidence, which never hold up on their own. What those of us here are nitpicking about is the fact that it is extremely easy in the wording of this law to claim you are transgendered. no psych eval. no second opinions. nothing. We simply don't want it to be abused.

Aso, just so you do have a small anecdotal story, during my highschool days boys DID sneak into the girl's locker room. and there was one case of a girl sneaking into the men's locker room as well. This would make it infinitely easier, and children are some of the best actors.

[brainiac]

this is definitely not the same argument. And we can't show proof because this is a fairly new policy, and all that could be shown is case studies or anecdotal evidence, which never hold up on their own. What those of us here are nitpicking about is the fact that it is extremely easy in the wording of this law to claim you are transgendered. no psych eval. no second opinions. nothing. We simply don't want it to be abused.

Aso, just so you do have a small anecdotal story, during my highschool days boys DID sneak into the girl's locker room. and there was one case of a girl sneaking into the men's locker room as well. This would make it infinitely easier, and children are some of the best actors.

Kids sneaking into the opposite-sex locker room only means that kids want to do that, and yes, that is a situation we want to avoid (and one that I think SHOULD be addressed; that's not what I'm arguing). It doesn't mean that kids are willing to go on the record as transgender in order to do so. And, disallowing the entire law because of this one minor and unlikely issue is my problem with O'Reilly's argument, which is why I compare it to the same-sex marriage argument. Certainly two straight, same-sex people entering a marriage simply for the tax benefits is also a problem we want to avoid, but it is the exception rather than the rule.

If you read the PDF outlining the details of the law, you'll see this:

Confirmation of a student's asserted gender identity may include a letter from a parent, health
care provider, school staff member familiar with the student (a teacher, guidance counselor, or
school psychologist, among others), or other family members or friends.

So there does have to be some kind of outside confirmation. And by "friends" it means adult family friends, not other children. Somehow I think it's very unlikely that a child abusing this law is going to be able to get this kind of confirmation from an adult easily.

[suzifrommd]

I don't know.

I wouldn't be comfortable with transgirls using the same changing room with my daughter, regardless of the standard.

What makes you uncomfortable about this?

[tomthom]

getting that sort of confirmation is easy. I could make teachers eat anything up. Most people that age can.

And also, those records are completely closed to the school. non important information like that is not passed on to secondary education. And I'm not saying get rid of this huge step forward, I'm just saying take a step back for some perspective so you can redo this law so we don't step over a cliff.

[Asfsd4214]

Ok now I'll admit I'm an early school dropout so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about...


But.... I just can't see some boy pretending to be transgender... out of nowhere.... and humiliating themselves infront of their entire social group.... just to get into the girls bathroom, in which they won't see anything anyway.



Personally I think this whole thing is stupid. Just let the little girl use the little girls bathroom. It's not like there's anything 'really' stopping anyone just walking in than more rules anyway. If the bathrooms have stall's, which approx 100% of all bathrooms in the western world do.... then this is just a lot of people arguing out of paranoia and their own neurotic obsessions. 

[tomthom]

his friends might be in on the "joke"

that and most people don't think ahead for social ramifications.