Sam Lowry said:
Waco1947 said:
Harrison Bergeron said:
Waco1947 said:
Wangchung said:
Waco1947 said:
Wangchung said:
Waco1947 said:
303Bear said:
Waco1947 said:
Harrison Bergeron said:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says
"On June 22, Scott Smith was arrested at a Loudoun County, Virginia, school board meeting, a meeting that was ultimately deemed an "unlawful assembly" after many attendees vocally opposed a policy on transgender students.
What people did not know is that weeks prior on May 28, Smith says, a boy allegedly wearing a skirt entered a girls' bathroom at nearby Stone Bridge High School, where he sexually assaulted Smith's ninth-grade daughter.
Juvenile records are sealed, but Smith's attorney Elizabeth Lancaster told The Daily Wire that a boy was charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy, and one count of forcible fellatio, related to an incident that day at that school."
... Buried within the story is this typical hypocrisy: "Then a woman wearing a rainbow heart shirt a left-wing community activist told Smith she did not believe his daughter, he says." #believeallwomen #metoo
The guy is a sexual predator. These assaults have nothing to do trans stuff.
But the policy that enabled a boy in a skirt (who I understand was already awaiting sentencing for a previous assault on the same girl) to enter the girls restroom unchallenged and victimize the girl again is a result of the visibility and acceptance movement that was started primarily by trans rights activists.
Also, I think you are deflecting somewhat, the main point I believe the OP was making is the bolded portion, the utter hypocrisy of a woman saying she did not believe the victim, when "believe all women" was the entire basis for the Brett Kavanagh circus. Considering the boy/person/whatever that assaulted the girl has already pled guilty to the first assault, the statement is also absurd.
This sob knows no boundaries. He was going to attack those girls whether in a skirt or pants. He's a predator.
Yup. The school policy just made it easy for him.
Easy? He got caught. He's a predator who could easily catch them alone on an empty classroom. He's a predator ways and means are immaterial to him except to keep out of trouble.
Yes. Easy for him to commit the crime. Easy access to his victim. His escape is immaterial.
Easy? During school, people all around, security offer around?
Easy is - after school.
Not sure how much time you've spent in women's bathrooms, but I assure you they are not heavily populated and usually not attended by a security officer. That is why they frequently have been the scenes of malfeasance from sexual assault, mutually sexual encounters, drugs. For those of you old enough, there was a song once called "Smoking in the Boy's Room." School restrooms have a long and inglorious history of facilitating bad behavior.
The women were sexually assaulted. The rapist is a predator looking to rape. We simply disagree about the opportunity.
I think the transgender in restrooms immaterial
Do you usually think it's a good idea to provide opportunities to predators just because they're looking for them anyway? Or is this a special policy for trans people? If you answer that question honestly then we'll see how material you think the gender issue really is.
Good question and my answer is -- heading off all assaults is an nearly an impossible task. He was caught and turned in in part because he assaulted a woman in a public place.
The most likely place for assault is a party where predators use drugs and alcohol for rape and assaults..
Another likely place is a home where father and brothers assault a relative.
Do we out law parties or home life where there is easy access and numerous targets targets?
