Three middle school boys charged with sexual harassment for not using “preferred” gender pronouns of classmate

Three middle school boys charged with sexual harassment for not using “preferred” gender pronouns of classmate - The Lion

Three students at a Wisconsin middle school are being charged with sexual harassment for not using another student’s “preferred” gender pronouns. And the legal organization representing the accused suggests one school official may have been on “a fishing expedition to find evidence of sexual...

readlion.com

Three students at a Wisconsin middle school are being charged with sexual harassment for not using another student’s “preferred” gender pronouns.
And the legal organization representing the accused suggests one school official may have been on “a fishing expedition to find evidence of sexual harassment” during interviews that failed to follow the school’s own policies.

In March, officials at Kiel Middle School first notified the parents of three eighth-grade boys that their sons were being investigated for sexual harassment.
According to the district, the boys failed to use a classmate’s requested pronouns of “they” and “them.” The school claims the conduct is sexual harassment under Title IX, which prohibits gender-based harassment in the form of name-calling.

Rose Rabidoux, the mother of one of the boys, told local media the use of pronouns was “confusing” to her son. She added that the classmate only recently announced the preferred pronouns, suggesting that other students were still adjusting.

“Sexual harassment – that’s rape, that’s incest, that’s inappropriate touching,” Rabidoux said. “What did my son do? He’s a little boy. He told me that he was being charged with sexual harassment for not using the right pronouns.”

Attorneys from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) are representing the Rabidoux family and the families of the other two students who were accused.
In a May 12 letter sent to the superintendent, the school counselor and the Title IX compliance officer, WILL accuses the district of misinterpreting Title IX, which makes no mention of “gender identity.” They also say none of the alleged behavior “comes remotely close to sexual harassment.”

“The complaint against these boys, and the district’s ongoing investigation, are wholly inappropriate and should be immediately dismissed,” the letter reads.
The letter also argues that the district violated Title IX investigation procedures and the school’s own policies. Based on the evidence provided, WILL says the district should “promptly end the investigation, dismiss the complaints and remove them from each of the boys’ records.”

In response to parents’ complaints, superintendent Brad Ebert released a statement that fails to address the specifics of the case. Instead, the letter notes that the Kiel Area School District “prohibits all forms of bullying and harassment in accordance with all laws, including Title IX, and will continue to support ALL students regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, creed, pregnancy, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, sex (including transgender status, change of sex or gender identity), or physical, mental, emotional or learning disability (“Protected Classes”) in any of its student programs and activities; this is consistent with school board policy. We do not comment on any student matters.”
WILL has asked the district to provide key documents in the case by Friday. If the district fails to respond, the parents are expected to take legal action.

 

[Metaphor]

That has not stopped posters from assuming guilt. However, despite your unsolicited assessment, the OP has not failed. I wanted to call attention to the gender ideologist authoritarianism, and I did.

I

You certainly have succeeded in calling attention to yourself an a gender ideologist authoritarian. However, you did not need this thread to accomplish that goal. We already knew.

What am I demanding of others?

Gender ideologists demand pronouns. Of this, there can be no doubt. They say it and their fellow travelers and co-conspirators endorse it.

Sounds exactly like you.

Really? I demand pronouns? Pray tell, when and where did I make this demand?

I demand they leave people alone and do not persecute people for not practising their religion.

You can stop any time now. In fact, I would applaud you.

Here's a deal: you stop forcing your religion on me, and I will continue to never have forced anything on you.

Of course you are making demands! You are demanding that people be allowed to use whatever pronouns they believe apply to the person before them,

Oh, I see. I am demanding an authority does not forbid ordinary language.

based on their perception of what gender or sex they were assigned at birth.

Neither gender nor sex were assigned at birth. Thirty billion humans have lived and died and this never happened once. Not ever.

Sex is observed and recorded at birth. Gender is never observed or recorded at birth, because no baby has a 'gender identity'.

You call out those who do not subscribe to your belief system as attempting to force 'their religion' on you.

I call out gender theocrats and their attempts to force their religion on me, sure.

Some people have religious beliefs such as 'gender is assigned at birth'. I do not force anything on them. They are free to believe that and I will not make them utter anything contrary to it under threat of punishment.

I think I can safely say that many of us realize that you are only interested in your point of view and what makes you, personally, feel safe and secure. You do not care about the child who was being tormented by those other boys.

Begging the question. But note that you are ratcheting it up in every post. Now she was being 'tormented', where before she was merely being 'bullied'. Perhaps we should bring the thread to a close before you start accusing the boys of torturing and crucifying her.

You care about the three accused boys only because they are accused of something you would have done yourself. The other child does not concern you at all.

I care about the authoritarian reach of gender ideology and its insidious grasp on society.

 

[ZiprHead]

I don't really care what you believe. But once more, with gusto, in case you might possibly be able to read with comprehension without your bigotry clouding your vision or understanding, I'm linking it again for you.

What is truly indecent is your defense of 3 individuals who attempted to bully and intimidate someone of whom you disapprove, without actually knowing them at all. Indecent and despicable

Your violent twisting of allegations not even investigated yet ("bully and intimidate") and your authoritarian desire to impose the strictures of your religion on others is truly indecent and despicable and the acts of an authoritarian bully.

What makes you think they haven't been investigated?

The article in the OP.

I see nothing in the OP article that states an investigation has yet to be performed.

As a matter of fact, all I see is a pro-Christain website and an article written by an " Intern Staff Writer for The Lion. He is currently a full-time college student at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, pursuing undergraduate degrees in biblical studies and business while also working towards a Master of Divinity at the graduate level. In his spare time, Karsten enjoys reading, writing, studying the Bible, and nerding out about Marvel and Star Wars." I see nothing in this person's background that that gives me any hint of journalism integrity or even training.

At the least, the whole story from begining to end seems quite biased in favor of a pro-conservative Christian attitude. You should be embarrased for relying on it.

 

[ZiprHead]

As far as investigation goes, the school has determined which of the three students participated in the harassment. The article itself states "In March, officials at Kiel Middle School first notified the parents of three eighth-grade boys that their sons were being investigated for sexual harassment. I assume the boys have previously been counseled about their activities yet continued that harassment, prompting the letters to the parents.

So, Metaphor, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

 

[laughing dog]

The OP is an example of the effects of gender ideology. I am affected by gender ideology.

There is no evidence that the OP is an example of the effect of gender ideology, because we don't have all the facts about the situation. it is true your ridiculous response is evidence of your gender ideologoy.

That is a falsehood. I have no rites, rituals, or beliefs that I want others to practise or believe.

Your response is a blatant falsehood. You are demanding people to act in accordance with your religon.

 

[Metaphor]

I don't really care what you believe. But once more, with gusto, in case you might possibly be able to read with comprehension without your bigotry clouding your vision or understanding, I'm linking it again for you.

What is truly indecent is your defense of 3 individuals who attempted to bully and intimidate someone of whom you disapprove, without actually knowing them at all. Indecent and despicable

Your violent twisting of allegations not even investigated yet ("bully and intimidate") and your authoritarian desire to impose the strictures of your religion on others is truly indecent and despicable and the acts of an authoritarian bully.

What makes you think they haven't been investigated?

The article in the OP.

I see nothing in the OP article that states an investigation has yet to be performed.

Then you should read it.

As a matter of fact, all I see is a pro-Christain website and an article written by an " Intern Staff Writer for The Lion. He is currently a full-time college student at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, pursuing undergraduate degrees in biblical studies and business while also working towards a Master of Divinity at the graduate level. In his spare time, Karsten enjoys reading, writing, studying the Bible, and nerding out about Marvel and Star Wars." I see nothing in this person's background that that gives me any hint of journalism integrity or even training.

The story is covered in other news sources. But even if it were not, unless you are claiming specific facts are manufactured from whole cloth, I don't see what difference it makes.

I read The Guardian all the time. I strongly disagree with most of the of The Guardian's viewpoints, and the bias they have is obvious. But I don't think The Guardian manufactures stories from whole cloth.

At the least, the whole story from begining to end seems quite biased in favor of a pro-conservative Christian attitude. You should be embarrased for relying on it.

I am not embarrassed for using any source that conveys facts.

 

[Metaphor]

The OP is an example of the effects of gender ideology. I am affected by gender ideology.

There is no evidence that the OP is an example of the effect of gender ideology, because we don't have all the facts about the situation. it is true your ridiculous response is evidence of your gender ideologoy.

Having "all the facts" (as if anyone could ever have them) is not a necessary condition to understanding this situation is obviously an example of gender ideology at work.

 

[Metaphor]

As far as investigation goes, the school has determined which of the three students participated in the harassment. The article itself states "In March, officials at Kiel Middle School first notified the parents of three eighth-grade boys that their sons were being investigated for sexual harassment. I assume the boys have previously been counseled about their activities yet continued that harassment, prompting the letters to the parents.

So, Metaphor, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

You are incorrect. Three boys are accused, not one.

Attorneys from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) are representing the Rabidoux family and the families of the other two students who were accused.

Nothing in the story says the investigation is concluded.

“The complaint against these boys, and the district’s ongoing investigation, are wholly inappropriate and should be immediately dismissed,” the letter reads.

So, ZiprHead, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

 

[laughing dog]

The OP is an example of the effects of gender ideology. I am affected by gender ideology.

There is no evidence that the OP is an example of the effect of gender ideology, because we don't have all the facts about the situation. it is true your ridiculous response is evidence of your gender ideologoy.

Having "all the facts" (as if anyone could ever have them) is not a necessary condition to understanding this situation is obviously an example of gender ideology at work.

Of course the facts are required. It is possible these boys were bullying someone. I get that irrational obsessions can cloud's one judgment, but really, your argument is incredibly dumb. But the pedantic swipe nestled in that dumbness did make me laugh.

 

[Metaphor]

The OP is an example of the effects of gender ideology. I am affected by gender ideology.

There is no evidence that the OP is an example of the effect of gender ideology, because we don't have all the facts about the situation. it is true your ridiculous response is evidence of your gender ideologoy.

Having "all the facts" (as if anyone could ever have them) is not a necessary condition to understanding this situation is obviously an example of gender ideology at work.

Of course the facts are required. It is possible these boys were bullying someone. I get that irrational obsessions can cloud's one judgment, but really, your argument is incredibly dumb. But the pedantic swipe nestled in that dumbness did make me laugh.

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology. Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

 

[ZiprHead]

As far as investigation goes, the school has determined which of the three students participated in the harassment. The article itself states "In March, officials at Kiel Middle School first notified the parents of three eighth-grade boys that their sons were being investigated for sexual harassment. I assume the boys have previously been counseled about their activities yet continued that harassment, prompting the letters to the parents.

So, Metaphor, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

You are incorrect. Three boys are accused, not one.

I phrased that incorrectly. I should have said "which three students out of the student body participated on the harassment".

Attorneys from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) are representing the Rabidoux family and the families of the other two students who were accused.

Nothing in the story says the investigation is concluded.

“The complaint against these boys, and the district’s ongoing investigation, are wholly inappropriate and should be immediately dismissed,” the letter reads.

So, ZiprHead, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

No one is claiming the investigation is concluded. You were claiming the boys were being accused without an investigation, which is absolutely wrong according to your own source.

 

[laughing dog]

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

That is pedantic nonsense.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology.

Perhaps the term does, but not the action. I recall children in my school getting in trouble for persistently referring to someone in the wrong sex and that was 50 years ago. because it was considering a form of bullying.

Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

We don't know the extent of "mispronouning" in the allegation. It may be a minor, major or sole factor. Yet that is what you focus on even though the investigation includes "other behaviors". Why you persist in that intellectual dishonesty is not baffling but it is troubling.

 

[Metaphor]

As far as investigation goes, the school has determined which of the three students participated in the harassment. The article itself states "In March, officials at Kiel Middle School first notified the parents of three eighth-grade boys that their sons were being investigated for sexual harassment. I assume the boys have previously been counseled about their activities yet continued that harassment, prompting the letters to the parents.

So, Metaphor, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

You are incorrect. Three boys are accused, not one.

I phrased that incorrectly. I should have said "which three students out of the student body participated on the harassment".

All three students have been accused.

Attorneys from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) are representing the Rabidoux family and the families of the other two students who were accused.

Nothing in the story says the investigation is concluded.

“The complaint against these boys, and the district’s ongoing investigation, are wholly inappropriate and should be immediately dismissed,” the letter reads.

So, ZiprHead, you are just plain wrong. But I suspect you will just double down on your wrongness.

No one is claiming the investigation is concluded. You were claiming the boys were being accused without an investigation, which is absolutely wrong according to your own source.

No. I never claimed that. I said you and Toni had already assumed the boys were guilty before the outcome of any investigation was known.

 

[Metaphor]

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

That is pedantic nonsense.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology.

Perhaps the term does, but not the action. I recall children in my school getting in trouble for persistently referring to someone in the wrong sex and that was 50 years ago. because it was considering a form of bullying.

Yes, I understand that there are many avenues that can be employed in the service of harassing somebody. I disagree that mispronouning is automatically harassment.

Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

We don't know the extent of "mispronouning" in the allegation. It may be a minor, major or sole factor. Yet that is what you focus on even though the investigation includes "other behaviors". Why you persist in that intellectual dishonesty is not baffling but it is troubling.

When the "other behaviours" come out we can talk about them.

I am talking about the "mispronouning".

 

[laughing dog]

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

That is pedantic nonsense.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology.

Perhaps the term does, but not the action. I recall children in my school getting in trouble for persistently referring to someone in the wrong sex and that was 50 years ago. because it was considering a form of bullying.

Yes, I understand that there are many avenues that can be employed in the service of harassing somebody. I disagree that mispronouning is automatically harassment.

There is no evidence that the school think mispronouning by itself if automatically harassment.

Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

We don't know the extent of "mispronouning" in the allegation. It may be a minor, major or sole factor. Yet that is what you focus on even though the investigation includes "other behaviors". Why you persist in that intellectual dishonesty is not baffling but it is troubling.

When the "other behaviours" come out we can talk about them.

I am talking about the "mispronouning".

Since you don't know the context of the "mispronouning", you literally don't know what it is you are talking about.

 

[Metaphor]

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

That is pedantic nonsense.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology.

Perhaps the term does, but not the action. I recall children in my school getting in trouble for persistently referring to someone in the wrong sex and that was 50 years ago. because it was considering a form of bullying.

Yes, I understand that there are many avenues that can be employed in the service of harassing somebody. I disagree that mispronouning is automatically harassment.

There is no evidence that the school think mispronouning by itself if automatically harassment.

Mispronouning is the only named misdemeanour in the charges, but I am not discussing only the school's attitude. ZiprHead and Toni believe that 'mispronouning' on its own is harassment. Toni has allowed some "wiggle room" for a small number of "mistakes" before she calls it harassment.

Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

We don't know the extent of "mispronouning" in the allegation. It may be a minor, major or sole factor. Yet that is what you focus on even though the investigation includes "other behaviors". Why you persist in that intellectual dishonesty is not baffling but it is troubling.

When the "other behaviours" come out we can talk about them.

I am talking about the "mispronouning".

Since you don't know the context of the "mispronouning", you literally don't know what it is you are talking about.

The mispronouning is described by one of the accused.

 

[laughing dog]

Mispronouning is the only named misdemeanour in the charges, but I am not discussing only the school's attitude.

The OP is about the school. Mispronouning and other behaviors is the charge. You keep focusing on one part out of context.

ZiprHead and Toni believe that 'mispronouning' on its own is harassment. Toni has allowed some "wiggle room" for a small number of "mistakes" before she calls it harassment.

You are either being sloppy or inconsistent. While "mispronouning" may not automatically be harassment, it may be part of the act of harassment. For example if someone persistently, quickly and nastily "mispronouns" someone who is visibly upset and is continually asked to stop, and the target has a breakdown, I would consider that harassment. I would consider it harassment if this occurred persistently over a number of times and days.

The mispronouning is described by one of the accused.

So? See above. It also does not mean the school thinks it is automatically a problem.

 

[Metaphor]

Mispronouning is the only named misdemeanour in the charges, but I am not discussing only the school's attitude.

The OP is about the school. Mispronouning and other behaviors is the charge. You keep focusing on one part out of context.

I am focusing on the known facts. One of these facts is that "mispronouning" is an act the school believes warrants a Title IX investigation.

ZiprHead and Toni believe that 'mispronouning' on its own is harassment. Toni has allowed some "wiggle room" for a small number of "mistakes" before she calls it harassment.

You are either being sloppy or inconsistent. While "mispronouning" may not automatically be harassment, it may be part of the act of harassment.

I have never denied there are multiple avenues to harassment.

For example if someone persistently, quickly and nastily "mispronouns" someone who is visibly upset and is continually asked to stop, and the target has a breakdown, I would consider that harassment. I would consider it harassment if this occurred persistently over a number of times and days.

I would consider first the motivations of each person.

The mispronouning is described by one of the accused.

So? See above. It also does not mean the school thinks it is automatically a problem.

Well, the school administration certainly appears awash with hypocrisy at any rate: apparently staff described the complainant as 'she' in several exchanges.

 

[Toni]

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

That is pedantic nonsense.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology.

Perhaps the term does, but not the action. I recall children in my school getting in trouble for persistently referring to someone in the wrong sex and that was 50 years ago. because it was considering a form of bullying.

Yes, I understand that there are many avenues that can be employed in the service of harassing somebody. I disagree that mispronouning is automatically harassment.

There is no evidence that the school think mispronouning by itself if automatically harassment.

Mispronouning is the only named misdemeanour in the charges, but I am not discussing only the school's attitude. ZiprHead and Toni believe that 'mispronouning' on its own is harassment. Toni has allowed some "wiggle room" for a small number of "mistakes" before she calls it harassment.

Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

We don't know the extent of "mispronouning" in the allegation. It may be a minor, major or sole factor. Yet that is what you focus on even though the investigation includes "other behaviors". Why you persist in that intellectual dishonesty is not baffling but it is troubling.

When the "other behaviours" come out we can talk about them.

I am talking about the "mispronouning".

Since you don't know the context of the "mispronouning", you literally don't know what it is you are talking about.

The mispronouning is described by one of the accused.

There is no such thing as a misdemeanor with respect to school disciplinary actions. You're inventing things to suit your narrative/understanding, the latter of which is sorely lacking.

 

[Metaphor]

No. Not "all the facts" are required, because if they were we could never judge any situation whatsoever.

That is pedantic nonsense.

"Mispronouning" is a misdemeanor that clearly arises out of gender ideology.

Perhaps the term does, but not the action. I recall children in my school getting in trouble for persistently referring to someone in the wrong sex and that was 50 years ago. because it was considering a form of bullying.

Yes, I understand that there are many avenues that can be employed in the service of harassing somebody. I disagree that mispronouning is automatically harassment.

There is no evidence that the school think mispronouning by itself if automatically harassment.

Mispronouning is the only named misdemeanour in the charges, but I am not discussing only the school's attitude. ZiprHead and Toni believe that 'mispronouning' on its own is harassment. Toni has allowed some "wiggle room" for a small number of "mistakes" before she calls it harassment.

Why you would deny this, I'm baffled.

We don't know the extent of "mispronouning" in the allegation. It may be a minor, major or sole factor. Yet that is what you focus on even though the investigation includes "other behaviors". Why you persist in that intellectual dishonesty is not baffling but it is troubling.

When the "other behaviours" come out we can talk about them.

I am talking about the "mispronouning".

Since you don't know the context of the "mispronouning", you literally don't know what it is you are talking about.

The mispronouning is described by one of the accused.

There is no such thing as a misdemeanor with respect to school disciplinary actions. You're inventing things to suit your narrative/understanding, the latter of which is sorely lacking.

Your understanding of the English language is sorely lacking.

Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

misdemeanour
/mɪsdɪˈmiːnə/

noun
noun: misdemeanor

1. 1.
   a minor wrongdoing.
   "the player can expect a suspension for his latest misdemeanour"

 

[laughing dog]

Mispronouning is the only named misdemeanour in the charges, but I am not discussing only the school's attitude.

The OP is about the school. Mispronouning and other behaviors is the charge. You keep focusing on one part out of context.

I am focusing on the known facts. One of these facts is that "mispronouning" is an act the school believes warrants a Title IX investigation.

You are focusing on know facts out of context.

ZiprHead and Toni believe that 'mispronouning' on its own is harassment. Toni has allowed some "wiggle room" for a small number of "mistakes" before she calls it harassment.

You are either being sloppy or inconsistent. While "mispronouning" may not automatically be harassment, it may be part of the act of harassment.

I have never denied there are multiple avenues to harassment.

But your entire argument ignores that possibility.

For example if someone persistently, quickly and nastily "mispronouns" someone who is visibly upset and is continually asked to stop, and the target has a breakdown, I would consider that harassment. I would consider it harassment if this occurred persistently over a number of times and days.

I would consider first the motivations of each person

It ought to be obvious that motivation of someone who continues to mispronoun someone else who is visibly upset with it is not benign.

The mispronouning is described by one of the accused.

So? See above. It also does not mean the school thinks it is automatically a problem.

Well, the school administration certainly appears awash with hypocrisy at any rate: apparently staff described the complainant as 'she' in several exchanges.

How do you that is "mispronouning"?