Keene School District’s New Transgender Policy Unnecessary

Keene Sentinel  Letter to the Editor

Video of 1st reading

Surprisingly late to the table, the social engineers over in the Keene school district have joined 6 other NH school districts in presenting a policy addressing the needs of transgender and gender nonconforming students. Transgender is defined as a person whose gender identity is different from their gender assigned at birth. The policy recognizes the privacy of transgender students as well as sets protections against possible harassment.

No doubt these protections are meaningful. But they are unnecessary. NH law already protects against discrimination based on sexual orientation and I don’t believe there is a public school out there that doesn’t already have some sort of anti-bullying policy in place.

Those two points aside, the policy gets a bit more controversial in its statement concerning restroom accessibility: “A student shall have the right to access the restroom or locker room that corresponds to the gender identity consistently asserted at school.” So in other words, boys who identify as girls would have the right to use both the girls bathrooms and locker rooms and vice versa.  The policy also permits transgender students to participate in competitive sports in a manner consistent with their gender identity.

Undoubtedly, this move by NH schools and many others across the country is fueled by the Obama administration’s directives in May 2016 forcing schools to allow students to use the bathroom of the gender that they identify with or lose federal funding under Title IX; thus proving how easily the federal government manipulates the political climate in our country not by force of law, but force by checkbook.

There is also the timing of this policy which is somewhat suspicious. The second reading of this policy was placed on more time in December and will likely not be voted on by full board until February. The reason given was to lessen the caseload at the upcoming budget meetings in January.  But, it may also be a strategy by school administrators to prevent anyone from submitting a warrant article focused on repealing said policy; which is exactly what Candia is doing this year.  A similar policy was adopted by their school district early last year despite overwhelming opposition from Candian residents. In response, a few hundred concerned residents have submitted a warrant article to appear on the upcoming ballot in March. Its aim is to repeal the policy entirely.

This has become an extremely emotional issue this past year with fear mongering from both sides. The right claims that such a policy is not only immoral but opens the door to sexual predators–except criminals don’t obey laws. A sign on a door isn’t going to stop some pervert from walking in the girls locker room and exposing himself.

The left argues that this all about protecting the rights of certain minority groups; that transgender lives matter.  They do, but those protections must go both ways. This policy would allow an extremely small percentage of the population certain protections while completely ignoring the rights and privacy of the majority.

Personally, as a father whose daughter spent some time in public schools, I draw the line at shared locker rooms. That one just doesn’t sit well with me. Most public bathrooms already have private stalls available, and there are plenty of single stall unisex bathrooms out there. But locker rooms; not so much. We’re talking about young children who are most likely undergoing a very sensitive time in their physical development and are probably having a hard enough time in the company of their own gender.

Also, in the case of fairness, I do not support allowing transgender persons with a biological advantage who have not undergone hormone therapy the ability to compete in sports that don’t align with their biological assignment.

Perhaps the biggest question that concerns me is where did this all come from? And why is this even a thing? Is this new policy really about protecting the privacy of some students and preventing possible discrimination or is it just the latest move by the left in their ongoing war on our culture? Or is it about the money? Maybe the school should spend more time educating our failing student population and less time creating unnecessary policies.


Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. For once I agree.  I believe the transgender bathroom thing is using resources that are unnecessary.  There are more important things the government could be working on.

  2. So close, yet so far: the last 5 paragraphs go insane. I’d hoped from what came before it FK was going to take a sane, Obama-busting position against any change in established law and custom. “A sign on a door isn’t going to stop some pervert from walking in the girls locker room and exposing himself”? “Most public bathrooms already have private stalls available”? 

    Ever heard of the camel putting his nose in the tent, for one thing? If we give them the bathrooms this time, the locker rooms are sure to fall What in the HELL is wrong with keeping the policy that’s worked just fine as well 90 days ago as 90 years ago — no mixing of physical sexes where there’s any baring of crotches, period? 

    Free Keene, you are wonderful except when you’re not. This bathroom garbage is nothing but another assault on normalcy from a God-damned communist dictator, and it only came up last year to distract the public from his crimes (c.f. Slick Willie’s Monica war on the former Yugoslavia). 

    I can’t BELIEVE this.

  3. I thought you Libertarians were all about mining your own business and leaving others alone. Your trans-phobia is very right wing stupid. Move back to the Southern Swamplands and take your illiteracy and bigotry with you.

  4. I don’t agree with this ‘Libertarians’ trans-panic. He needs to go back to his fellow illiterates back in the southern state swamps

  5. Sorry to bust up your clichés pell-mell, but I’m not Libertarian. I’m gay and the LP wants nothing to do with gay rights. I am indeed a “right to be left alone” 9th- and 10th-Amendment paleo-conservative, and that means I don’t want a lying, murdering communist demon like Obongo OR Hellary OR either Bush decreeing policy at any level of government. 
    Nice spelling of “minding”, O literate one.

  6. DoubleDont Thank you for reaffirming your deep bigotry, indeed your hatred of those different than yourself — southerners and conservatives. How very tolerant you are! Liberals claim to oppose labels and pigeonholing people, but what else do they (you) ever do? In addition to calling for the murder of public figures they don’t like, beating people up because they’re white or voted for Trump, ad nauseam.
    You didn’t even notice that Jumping Jacks posted first — DID you, genius.

  7. DoubleDont Virtue signaling isn’t going to persuade us libertarians that the sacred cows of the left aren’t be questioned, DD. The influence of the Koch brothers is just too strong. Perhaps you should loot and burn down a CVS to show us you mean business?

  8. Jumping Jacks And once all of those important problems that the government is working on are finally solved, they can swing back to this one, right Jacks?

  9. Cool story, bro. You sound totally legit.

  10. DoubleDont Thanks, bro — or sis as the case may be (not “cis”, I assume). ;-]

  11. The State of New Hampshire has been promulgating its social engineering agenda through denial of Equal Educational Opportunity for non-Whites for a long time.  Divulging NH’s “State Racially Biased Secrets” comes with a lot of unwarranted and unjust attention from all three branches of NH government including the Attorney General’s Office and rogue and racist local police departments like Nashua PD officers who willingly serve as Chief Justice Linda Dalianis “loyal hometown thugs” who tried to intimidate her most outspoken critics.  

    In a blatant case of First Amendment content or view point based discrimination, the NH Attorney Generals Office + NH Dept of Children, Youth and Families officials are trying to create brand new case law by admittedly using “constitutionally protected online speech” as basis for DENIAL OF SERVICES” to a Black grandfather seeking to be the relative caregiver placement of the granddaughter he raised.

    The NH AG’s “Mr. Jeopardy” Ken Sansone is too busy with me fabricating about the aw and protecting NH DCYF officials preventing me from getting my granddaughter out of foster care. The media and AG refused to investigate my formal complaint Nashua PD thugs when they criminally trespassed onto my property, in a PUBLIC DISPLAY OF POLICE FORCE and absent any legit law enforcement purpose, to deliver a verbal warning at the behest of Chief Justice Dalianis to stop my pubiv criticism of her role in the Racial Segregation imposed on my son.

    When thug NH cops target a politician and her family it gets press coverage. When those same thug, racist and rouge cops target a concerned Black father for complaining about the State;s Pro Racial Segregationist agenda, NOTHING HAPPENS. Its the only thing Trump and I can agree on. The media is corrupt.

    The NH Attorney General lost the first round in what turned out to be a preliminary hearing on the First Amendment retaliatory actions of NH DCYF Buxton, Belair and Bartlett. The Admin Law Judge ruled the state has the burden of proof to establish 1) “True Threats” were made with intent and 2) they did not improperly rescind the previously approved placement of my granddaughter over what the state admits wre “non-criminal comments and protected speech” under the First Amendment.

    I can say the quality civil and criminal attorneys from the NH Attorney General Office is getting poorer or I’m getting smarter about the law. A hearing is being scheduled to hear actual testimony, but how can they prove intent, content and context of my comments when there is only one side of the conversation the State captured on screenshots. Better yet, why are these racist public officials denying me the right to have a loving an nurturing relationship with a member of my family who is more like a daughter than a granddaughter just like they tried to do with my son. 

    The truth about what NH is doing in the name of its citizens must be exposed. The people have a right to know. Who knowingly puts a Black child in a failing urban out of state school system in the midst of a high crime, drug and gang plagued area against the demands of the child’s father who is not only a Disabled Veteran, but spent most of his life wearing a gun and badge protecting the rights of fellow White citizens.  Contact if you have verifiable info to contribute about the corrupt and racist m social agenda of NH’s government and judicial leaders

  12. I can agree in many respects with conan here. However I think he goes a bit too republican right-wing nut job for me though. I don’t see why your daughter should get some sort of protection from feeling uncomfortable over that of a trans-gendered student. Students are routinely made to feel uncomfortable in public schools. I don’t like it, but that is the reality. I doubt there is a single 10-14 year old whose not uncomfortable changing in the locker room and I’m sure its all the worse for a certain segment of the population which may or may not include trans-gendered students. 
    I think its absurd to be ashamed about ones body personally and its the religious bigoted masses that caused this problem for which your taking saids side here. At the end of the day my thought on this is the government should not be instituting moral codes on its student body in the first place. If people are so ashamed about their bodies maybe just maybe we shouldn’t have locker rooms in the first place. 
    In fact I don’t think we should be funding public schools or have athletic programs in public schools in the first place. I think a much better argument would be to take a libertarian position. Not this right-wing religious republican nut-job stance.

  13. FireThemAll “I’m gay and the LP wants nothing to do with gay rights. ” – so am I and WTF are you talking about? Principled libertarians such as those in New Hampshire including the NH LP are not anti-gay. If you are suggesting that we should have hate law legislation your nuts. We should be getting rid of that crap. There are already laws on the books against violence. You don’t need a special law to “protect” gays. It’s done nothing but been used to pile on the charges to ensure convictions and plea deals of people whom may or may not be even guilty of anything. It’s also been used against innocent parties and expanded in some places to protect “police”. I’m sorry- but saying “fuck you” to a cop *SHOULD NEVER* constitute a “hate” crime. We should all be free to hate whoever we want or not and if you commit a real crime the person who commits said real crime should be held to account for their actions- not their political beliefs or dislikes. There are places in Europe where people have been arrested and found guilty of running exit nodes where running the exit node was not even a crime, except for the fact they said “I don’t care about child porn”. This is *speech* and you should never tie speech, be it a “fuck you”, to a cop, or a “hey fagot” to someone who your beating up as a separate crime or an enhancement of one thereof.

  14. DoubleDont Conan doesn’t speak for all of us and I certainly agree that some of what he said is bigoted or was at least said in bad taste. I’m a principled libertarian and I DO NOT agree with a s mall bit of what he said on this issue. Read above if you want my principled opinion on this issue.

  15. FireThemAll There is a simple solution to this problem and EVERY principled libertarian agrees including conan: Get rid of public schools and these socialist programs. Each business can decide for themselves what they want to do.

  16. Jumping Jacks There is one sure way to know whether or not ones opinion is flawed. Just find out what Jacks thinks. Then think the opposite.

  17. libretea FireThemAll You go a lot of conjecture, don’t you. Nobody opposes hate crime laws more passionately than I, and I have since before they entered into any legislative deliberation.

  18. libretea Jumping Jacks I’m not sure that Jacks has any legitimate opinions of his own, libretea. After reading his daily litanies over the years, I’ve noticed he mostly just parrots the opinions he thinks his social circle will applaud. He’s funny that way.

  19. libretea FireThemAll Wow! Abolish public schools, yes yes YES. They’re socialist brain laundries and babysitting services from hell. The problem, though, isn’t just public schools but government dictates which are inevitably applied to all public situations and facilities.

  20. libretea Jumping Jacks So I agree with the author and you still post rants and raves. At least I think for myself. Obviously you don’t.

  21. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks Peaches, the lack of understanding you have for this article, just shows the true freekeene troll you are.

  22. Wow I actually with this guy! Well stated.

  23. libretea 
    So you think that believing allowing a boy to use the same locker room being used by girls  makes one a right-wing nut job? This is how absurd things have become in this country. This has nothing to do with one’s religious beliefs. I’m an Atheist and I have good sense to agree with Conan Salada on this which should not be an issue. It’s not rocket science. One should use the bathroom that is provided for one’s own gender and that especially goes for locker rooms. I mean seriously. 

    H. Rearden

  24. FireThemAll 
    Gay rights? I believe that there are human rights that apply equally to everyone. There are no Gay rights, Women’s rights, or rights based on race or religion.  There are no rights exclusive to any one collective of people based on sexual preference, race, religion, or gender. THere are simply human rights.

  25. libretea Trannies are mentally ill. Anyone who willingly cuts their penis off and injects foreign hormones into their body should be locked up away from the rest of the population, let alone children. But that’s okay, because they won’t survive past age 30, looking at their suicide rates.

  26. LibertarianLibertyEagle libretea well i am not sure  “Trannies are mentally ill” … i have heard of  people that indenify as a girl from a very young age…so for them doing boy thisngs is wrong and  being made to do boy things would make  them less well adjusted..
       BUT i do agree  that people shouldnt chop their  penis off… that i agree with and  imo doctors shouldnt do it but im not a doctor  and if i was a doctor i wouldnt do it…  that my all on the subject

  27. FireThemAll u sound like a complete moron

  28. FireThemAll why does anyone care that u r on a paleo-conservative diet?

  29. dont u people understand anything 🙁

  30. im glad  the trump administration has once and for all  shed some much needed clarity on this issue (aka my post below;ty mr bannon;wherever you are

  31. Jumping Jacks libretea Now, now Jacks. You should know better by now that’s there’s no point in trying to lie to me. You know perfectly well that you weren’t deriding the idea that the public has a pressing need for transgender bathrooms. You merely believe that government power would be better directed towards forcing others to do what you’ve deemed important, rather than what others want. Don’t you think that’s a selfish position for you to be taking? I thought that you were a firm believer in the democratic process, Jacks? You do still believe that voting solves every problem, now don’t you?

  32. Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell Thar she blows!

  33. Hello Chris Cantwell.

  34. LibertarianLibertyEagle libretea I think it’s fair to say that transgenders who wish to use the power of government to force people to share in their delusions are most certainly mentally ill.

  35. You Free Keeners are free to leave our state and waddle your ignorance back down to the southern american swamp lands.

  36. libretea FireThemAll “Principled libertarians” are the autists ruining the liberty movement

  37. DoubleDont Despite your ilk’s absolutely adorable attempts to evict them, DD, it seems that most of your rivals won’t be leaving any time soon. It’s really hard to turn down all that Koch brother money, you know.

  38. H Rearden I don’t have this religious affection nor irrational fear of one sex or the other being viscously attacked just because both sexes are utilizing the same facilities. I get that Americans are over-sensitive in areas regarding nudity-even to the extent of some atheists feeling uncomfortable with it. Heck- I will admit that it makes me uncomfortable having grown up in the United States simply because of the violent society in which we live toward those who are different.

    There are plenty of nudists around the world who openly “expose” themselves without there being any sexual interactions. The possibility of violence can never ever justify the use of violence against peaceful people. A colleague of mine was raised in a nudist colony until the age of six. He was never raped and turned out just fine. Morals should not be regulated. Violence, coercion, theft, and fraud should be.

    If there is no violence, theft, fraud, or coercion there should be no crime. If a boy goes into a girls bathroom or locker room (or vice versa) and does nothing else some may feel they or someone has been violated. However feelings are and should not be protected. On the basis we should regulate things just in case someone feels hurt by them we’d have to require all women wear full burcas as they do in parts of the middle east.

    When someone yells fagot at me it hurts, as a gay man, but I don’t have a right to bash his skull in, or demand violence be used against that person. If you think we need a law banning boys from using girls facilities then you clearly need a “safe space” yourself, because you are pushing for laws to “protect” people from thoughts they don’t like. 

    You may want to reconsider your philosophical beliefs if you consider yourself a libertarian. You may agree with certain libertarian ideas, but you probably are in all respects NOT a principled libertarian. There are many confused republicans among the libertarian lot.

  39. LibertarianLibertyEagle Humorously my thoughts on cutting off my or anothers penis makes me cringe. I have no desire to do that, but would defend anothers right to do with their body as they please. It seems to be the distinguishing factor between frauds and actual libertarians. Just ask about sex an you quickly find out who actually believes in leaving people alone. My experience with trans-gendered persons is that they are nuts and that is totally independent of the penis issue. However my little bubble doesn’t mean shit when it comes drawing a conclusion on all trans-gendered folks. I’ll stick to keeping my penis, letting them do as they please, and protecting their right to do so, and will refrain from from making an irrational statement that they are all nuts. My experience with one particular trans-gendered person is she was/is totally irrational. She was definitely a SJW type. On that same token you may not be a JSW type, but that doesn’t make you a rational human being either.

  40. DavidCrawford4 It seems like a really bad idea to me. However I haven’t a need to cut off part of my body all my life. Nor do I think people shouldn’t be able to seek assistance in doing things that are displeasing to me or otherwise self-destructive. Whether it is suicide or self- mutilation all the law should require is the consent of the party being impacted.

  41. Drac Vermell Nobody is forcing anybody to share in these delusions. You can retain your beliefs as I do that the acts are icky. Or creepy/weird/offensive/whatever. That doesn’t mean they should be crimes. We should not regulate peoples morals. If you don’t want to use the bathroom with a trans-gendered person maybe you should vote against the use of tax dollars to fund “free” schools/bathroom/locker facilities/etc and then only utilize businesses for which have policies and rules against it.

  42. H Rearden I find that humorous considering you are willing to discriminate against sexes with your male and female only policies. They decided ultimately against separate but equal in black vs white explicitly because separate never ends up being equal.

  43. FireThemAll It would solve the problem in relation to this particular case. When you abolish ‘free’ government facilities and institutions there is no need for a discriminatory law. It simply becomes the policies and decisions of the business owners.

  44. libretea Drac Vermell I have no interest in regulating the moral principles of others, libretea. But I do take issue with thin-skinned transgenders who demand that I participate in their delusions by ignoring one of the fundamental characteristics of human biology.

  45. All of you are nuts – and your phobias fit right in with your right wing religious teabaggers. Please slither back down to your crowd in the southern American swamps.

  46. You are full of self loathing if you want to enable every bigot and religious fanatic to verbally harass another person or group, to the point that they feel scared and demeaned. Isn’t that violating your precious ‘NAP”? What is this obsession about controlling other people? Right wing teabaggers parading around as ‘edgy’ libertarians. It’s pathetic, really.

  47. DoubleDont Maybe you should set up a collection and offer to pay these guys more money than the Koch brothers are offering? It’s not like the left is any stranger to paying others to protest, now is it DD? The only difference here is you’d be paying your rivals to leave instead!

  48. Drac Vermell OK- so you should be for not regulating which sex can utilize a particular facility then, but are against mandating in law that people have to call people by their preferred pronoun? That’s a libertarian stance to take. Now, that said I do agree it’s common courtesy to utilize the pronoun that a person requests even though you are under no legal obligation to use it.

  49. libretea Drac Vermell Good manners goes both ways, libretea. It’s just as discourteous for a man, whether he’s wearing a dress or not, to be traipsing into a woman’s bathroom to do his business.

Care to comment?