Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not "might," DID. If this was "no big deal" and the trans student wasn't egregiously flaunting exposed male genitalia in the girls' school facilities, why would so many parents be so angry? I mean really, how would anyone even know if "Student A" had a penis unless some of the girl students had actually unwillingly seen it?
Yet you have NO PROOF that any little girls saw any penises other than your own personal speculation with families you claim to know, as if you were somehow involved with this.
Even still, forcing others to see your genitalia is a sexual assault.
Wrong. NC law, for example, since NC's HB2 brought this to national attention:
§ 14-190.9. Indecent exposure.
(a) Unless the conduct is punishable under subsection (a1) of this section, any person who shall willfully expose the private parts of his or her person in any public place and in the presence of any other person or persons, except for those places designated for a public purposewhere the same sex exposure is incidental to a permitted activity, or aids or abets in any such act, or who procures another to perform such act; or any person, who as owner, manager, lessee, director, promoter or agent, or in any other capacity knowingly hires, leases or permits the land, building, or premises of which he is owner, lessee or tenant, or over which he has control, to be used for purposes of any such act, shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Repeat offenses, or the commission of such an act upon a minor victim, is a FELONY. Registered sex offender for life.
Wrong. NC law, for example, since NC's HB2 brought this to national attention:
§ 14-190.9. Indecent exposure.
(a) Unless the conduct is punishable under subsection (a1) of this section, any person who shall willfully expose the private parts of his or her person in any public place and in the presence of any other person or persons, except for those places designated for a public purposewhere the same sex exposure is incidental to a permitted activity, or aids or abets in any such act, or who procures another to perform such act; or any person, who as owner, manager, lessee, director, promoter or agent, or in any other capacity knowingly hires, leases or permits the land, building, or premises of which he is owner, lessee or tenant, or over which he has control, to be used for purposes of any such act, shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Repeat offenses, or the commission of such an act upon a minor victim, is a FELONY. Registered sex offender for life.
Yes, we ALL know NC has created and passed a very discriminatory law that has opened the state up to a number of lawsuits. Good job North Carolina....though it sounds like a state you would probably be very happy in.
Wrong. Let's look at NC law, for example, since NC's HB2 brought this to national attention...
§ 14-190.9. Indecent exposure.
(a) Unless the conduct is punishable under subsection (a1) of this section, any person who shall willfully expose the private parts of his or her person in any public place and in the presence of any other person or persons, except for those places designated for a public purpose where the same sex exposure is incidental to a permitted activity, or aids or abets in any such act, or who procures another to perform such act; or any person, who as owner, manager, lessee, director, promoter or agent, or in any other capacity knowingly hires, leases or permits the land, building, or premises of which he is owner, lessee or tenant, or over which he has control, to be used for purposes of any such act, shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Repeat offenses, or the commission of such an act upon a minor victim, is a FELONY. Registered sex offender for life.
Oh goody, two can play this game.
That is not true of all states, and in jurisdictions where transgenders are allowed to use facilities that they identify with, and have a right to change in, it's going to be hard to prove indecent exposure when said person has just as much legal right to be there naked as anyone else.
Not "might," DID. If this was "no big deal" and the trans student wasn't egregiously flaunting exposed male genitalia in the girls' school facilities, why would so many parents be so angry? [/b]
It seems that you should be able to back up your claim that there was a penis being flaunted in the locker room. The report didn't mention it, and it covered many issues in the students records. If it happened, it would be in the students records, yet no mention of it in a report that was about the students access to the locker room.
That is not true of all states, and in jurisdictions where transgenders are allowed to use facilities that they identify with, and have a right to change in, it's going to be hard to prove indecent exposure when said person has just as much legal right to be there naked as anyone else.
Here's a map of which states legally provide that option. Most DO NOT. Note that neither NC nor PA do:
And the federal government similarly does not list sexual orientation as a protected class.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
