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.

 

[laughing dog]

You said they were trying to intimidate with threats to sue. Even if it were the case (which it wasn't), so what?

It was and you are the denying the bullying.

You felt free to charge the parents with the accusation of 'attempting to intimidate', but evidently did not see anything untoward in the behaviour of the school and its attempts at intimidation.

I charged WILL.
I saw no evidence of attempts to intimidate by school personnel. If they tried to, shame on them.

 

[Metaphor]

You said they were trying to intimidate with threats to sue. Even if it were the case (which it wasn't), so what?

It was and you are the denying the bullying.

Neither the lawyers nor the parents have been acting as bullies. Defending yourself from allegations is not 'bullying' behaviour.

 

[Toni]

Quote from the publication - "The Stanley M. Herzog Charitable Foundation’s mission is to catalyze and accelerate the development of quality Christ-centered K-12 education so that families and culture flourish."

So, to sponsor religious indoctrinational education.

I wonder how such a publication treats the idea of gay educators...

I dunno but I worked for a Catholic university for a couple of years and quite a few of the faculty and administration were gay—and so were a number of students that worked for me—and throughout the student body, I imagine. Was it openly discussed and acknowledged? Not really, with the exception of a couple of students who were in the…,exploratory phase of their development. In general, sex wasn’t really talked about. Doesn’t mean it did not happen.

It is my understanding that many non-Catholic Christians in America don't consider Catholics to be Christians.

Actually, this was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me: when the youth pastor encouraged youths to regard Catholics as pagan idolaters rather than Christians. My Catholic friends were shocked to learn that they were not considered Christians by some Protestant denominations. Outraged, in fact. I didn’t blame them.

 

[laughing dog]

Neither the lawyers nor the parents have been acting as bullies.

Wrong - WILL is.

Defending yourself from allegations is not 'bullying' behaviour.

No one said it was That is a straw man.

How one defends oneself from allegations determines whether the defense is bullying behavior.

 

[Toni]

You said they were trying to intimidate with threats to sue. Even if it were the case (which it wasn't), so what?

It was and you are the denying the bullying.

Neither the lawyers nor the parents have been acting as bullies. Defending yourself from allegations is not 'bullying' behaviour.

The parents are publicly expressing outrage that their little darlings are expected to follow school policy. They brought lawyers to help with their campaign to pressure/threaten/intimidate the school for having policies that expect all students to treat each other with respect.

They come across as bullies, which helps explain their children.

 

[Metaphor]

You said they were trying to intimidate with threats to sue. Even if it were the case (which it wasn't), so what?

It was and you are the denying the bullying.

Neither the lawyers nor the parents have been acting as bullies. Defending yourself from allegations is not 'bullying' behaviour.

The parents are publicly expressing outrage that their little darlings are expected to follow school policy.

Non.

They brought lawyers to help with their campaign to pressure/threaten/intimidate the school for having policies that expect all students to treat each other with respect.

Non.

They come across as bullies, which helps explain their children.

They come across as bullies to you. You already think the boys are bullies based on allegation alone.

 

[Toni]

The process is part of the punishment.

So investigations are punishment in your world?

No. I said the process is part of the punishment.

How is the process part of the punishment?

The process can be part of the punishment in many instances. For example, if 'mispronouning' is neither against school policy nor a violation of Title IX, then investigating allegations of it is simply punitive.

That is rubbish.

And while I don't know the specific repercussions, I don't need to be in the US school system to know it'll be negative.

Suppose the investigation ends up saying nothing was violated - how would that be negative?

It depends on why the investigation says nothing was violated.

If the sole 'misbehaviour' here is 'mispronouning' (and I acknowledge that this it is not clear that it is), then the actual existence of the investigation is absurdity. It's a sign of the pervasiveness of gender madness in the United States. It will have put three 13 year olds through a lot of stress and anxiety over a fictive crime.

In other words, it is negative because it upsets your sensibilities.

No. It is negative because putting 13 year olds through stress and anxiety for no good reason is a negative thing to do.

It is obvious to you and people who think like you.

---

That is true - it is obvious to people who think. What possible reason is there for the WILL to publicize this?

To get the best outcome for their clients.

And how does publicizing this get the best outcome for the clients?

I have already explained one possible reason. The attorneys think public sentiment would be against the school if the facts are known. I believe the attorneys are correct in their assessment.

How Machiavellian of the school, to suggest the parents may want an adviser who 'may or may not be an attorney'.

They are probably required to make such a suggestion.

So why are you so upset that people take the suggestion seriously?

I'm not upset.

No, you merely criticised the parents for making a decision where you would have chosen differently (and of course, where 'ordinary parents' would have chosen differently, in your opinion).

Everything about the letter to the students would make ordinary parents lawyer up. It is well justified.

Your ignorance of the US is very telling. There is nothing about that letter that would drive ordinary parents to lawyer up.

Your ignorance of ordinary people is very telling. I suspect your circle of friends excludes certain kinds of 'ordinary people'.

You know nothing about the US and how this works. Your suspicions, as your assumptions, are wrong. You know nothing about my neighborhood, my neighbors, my acquaintances, my volunteer groups or anything else.

I know enough about you that you are fond of pulling epistemological rank.

Furthermore, I have had children who were disciplined (literally, a terroristic threat, and for assaulting another student) or investigated for possible discipline (threatening to blow up the school and another for destruction of school property) in school for threatening an aide . None had any trouble in being accepted into college/university because disciplinary records in K-12 are not permanent records. Moreover, there was no pubic stain on them because we didn't bring any lawyers into it.

Your children grew up in a different time, I suspect because the internet did not permanently enshrine their every thought and deed. In any case, I did not say you would or should not choose differently in 'lawyering up'.

Your position is extremely long on ignorancee-driven hysteria and short of reality-based reason.

It's also telling that you would shame parents for responding to the school's own suggestion.

You are shaming the school for investigating a complaint. I am not shaming anyone. Bringing in lawyers that publicize this situation at this stage is needless because it does not defuse the situation but ups the ante. There is plenty of time to get lawyers involved if and when some disciplinary action is decided.

There is plenty of time according to your particular sensibilities.

Your suggestion seems to me a recommendation to let the accused go to trial without an attorney, but 'get lawyers involved' once the guilty verdict is pronounced.

As it is, now that family is in the news in their school district. Now, their son's situation has been publicized. While WILL can control the flow of information during this process (because the school district is required to keep these accusation and decisions confidential) to put the school in a poor light regardless of the actual actions of these children. And, if that people in that area are anything like people throughout the Midwest, a large portion of them will automatically think those 3 children are guilty and deserve some sort of punishment. So, if the parents were trying to avoid some sort of stain of their son, their course of action will probably backfire to some extent.

The attorneys did not think so. Perhaps they are incompetent.

I assume that if two separate charges were against the students, the more serious charge would be mentioned.

Every response you make is based on assumptions.

As is everyone's.

Not true. Some people respond only to the facts.

You've made every assumption under the sun about this situation, so obviously you are not talking about yourself.

You talk about the stress and anxiety that the accused boys are going through. There is another 13 year old who has been put through a lot of stress abs anxiety by those 3 boys.

I would also add that all four children are being exposed to much heightened scrutiny, stress and anxiety because at least one parent decided to go public with this disciplinary matter—indeed, very public. Rather than sitting abs speaking calmly with school officials to hear specifics about what is being alleged, incidents described, how such behavior does or does not conform to Title IX, and what consequences are being considered—in the privacy of offices, the parent has decided to make this as much of a circus as possible and to rally transphobic public behind her. Not her child: HER.

I absolutely understand speaking with a lawyer. Unless her son received a very serious punishment—which sounds to be unfair—, going to the public was very unlikely to help anyone, especially her child. The lawyer would help ensure her child’s rights were being respected. The press? That was for the mom’s ideology/ego.

 

[Toni]

You said they were trying to intimidate with threats to sue. Even if it were the case (which it wasn't), so what?

It was and you are the denying the bullying.

Neither the lawyers nor the parents have been acting as bullies. Defending yourself from allegations is not 'bullying' behaviour.

The parents are publicly expressing outrage that their little darlings are expected to follow school policy.

Non.

They brought lawyers to help with their campaign to pressure/threaten/intimidate the school for having policies that expect all students to treat each other with respect.

Non.

They come across as bullies, which helps explain their children.

They come across as bullies to you. You already think the boys are bullies based on allegation alone.

You still do not know what I think or on what basis I formed my opinions. Please stop making allegations which outstrip your ability to read my mind. Instead, please focus on what you think and why you think that.

 

[Metaphor]

You talk about the stress and anxiety that the accused boys are going through. There is another 13 year old who has been put through a lot of stress abs anxiety by those 3 boys.

You don't know any such thing. There are allegations of 'mispronouning'. One incident appears to about 'mispronouning' when the boys were talking about the girl in question, not even to her.

I would also add that all four children are being exposed to much heightened scrutiny, stress and anxiety because at least one parent decided to go public with this disciplinary matter—indeed, very public. Rather than sitting abs speaking calmly with school officials to hear specifics about what is being alleged, incidents described, how such behavior does or does not conform to Title IX, and what consequences are being considered—in the privacy of offices, the parent has decided to make this as much of a circus as possible and to rally transphobic public behind her. Not her child: HER.

You do not know what conversations were had in private before she went public.

I absolutely understand speaking with a lawyer. Unless her son received a very serious punishment—which sounds to be unfair—, going to the public was very unlikely to help anyone, especially her child. The lawyer would help ensure her child’s rights were being respected. The press? That was for the mom’s ideology/ego.

We don't know what punishment the son will receive because he hasn't been found guilty yet - except by people like you.

 

[Metaphor]

You said they were trying to intimidate with threats to sue. Even if it were the case (which it wasn't), so what?

It was and you are the denying the bullying.

Neither the lawyers nor the parents have been acting as bullies. Defending yourself from allegations is not 'bullying' behaviour.

The parents are publicly expressing outrage that their little darlings are expected to follow school policy.

Non.

They brought lawyers to help with their campaign to pressure/threaten/intimidate the school for having policies that expect all students to treat each other with respect.

Non.

They come across as bullies, which helps explain their children.

They come across as bullies to you. You already think the boys are bullies based on allegation alone.

You still do not know what I think or on what basis I formed my opinions. Please stop making allegations which outstrip your ability to read my mind. Instead, please focus on what you think and why you think that.

You've already said you think there is a high probability that the boys are bullies. You can retract that if you wish.

 

[Toni]

You talk about the stress and anxiety that the accused boys are going through. There is another 13 year old who has been put through a lot of stress abs anxiety by those 3 boys.

You don't know any such thing. There are allegations of 'mispronouning'. One incident appears to about 'mispronouning' when the boys were talking about the girl in question, not even to her.

I would also add that all four children are being exposed to much heightened scrutiny, stress and anxiety because at least one parent decided to go public with this disciplinary matter—indeed, very public. Rather than sitting abs speaking calmly with school officials to hear specifics about what is being alleged, incidents described, how such behavior does or does not conform to Title IX, and what consequences are being considered—in the privacy of offices, the parent has decided to make this as much of a circus as possible and to rally transphobic public behind her. Not her child: HER.

You do not know what conversations were had in private before she went public.

I absolutely understand speaking with a lawyer. Unless her son received a very serious punishment—which sounds to be unfair—, going to the public was very unlikely to help anyone, especially her child. The lawyer would help ensure her child’s rights were being respected. The press? That was for the mom’s ideology/ego.

We don't know what punishment the son will receive because he hasn't been found guilty yet - except by people like you.

Again: this is NOT a trial. The accused boys may or may not face consequences for their actions. We do not even know the facts of the case--we only know what the parents of the accused boys say and what was released to the press in support of those boys--which was very, very scant on details.

I think that what the accused boys are guilty of is being 13 year old boys being fairly obnoxious 13 year olds. My guess is that their discomfort with the change in their classmate prompted them to push back and be as obnoxious as possible---until they were stopped. Unfortunately, on of the moms could not simply allow this to go unpublicized. Any fears you might have about long term negative consequences for those 3 boys may be realized entirely due to her actions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In your opinion, the lawyers were engaged to 'intimidate' the school district. I can think of a number of reasons to engage a lawyer that are not that and I would have done the same. But, even if that were the case that it was to 'intimidate' the school district, it still would not be wrong to have done so, since the stain of 'sexual harassment' is particularly blemishing and, in my opinion, 'mispronouning' is not sexual harassment and does not amount to a Title IX infringement.

While occasionally the parents of victims will bring lawyers into the matter it makes no sense for the parents of the accused, it simply isn't worthwhile.

It isn't worthwhile for you. When you or your children are the accused, you get to call the shots of your defense.

The problem is you think there's a lot at stake. There isn't.

Then the lawyers went to the press. This screams poor-persecuted-Christian setup. It's a common tactic.

Nobody brought up religion.

It's a religious position. It's a common tactic by the fundies here--carefully set up a situation where they are supposedly being punished for some legal or trivially wrong action. (For example, a restraining order by an abortion clinic, one of the guys goes and rents a private mail box close enough to the abortion clinic to be within the restraining order. Help, the courts are keeping me from getting my mail!)

The lawyers going to the press would only have been pursued if the lawyers thought it advantageous. In other words, the lawyers think public sentiment would not be favourable to the administrators of the school. In my opinion, they were correct in their assessment.

Except the lawyers rarely tell the whole story in such situations.

We've already seen enough to see this was part of a larger pattern of harassment.

Of course it does not. Had the the more serious charge been something other than "mispronouning", it would have been described in the original accusation.

We have no idea of the whole picture, only what the lawyers are presenting. The school can't go to the press with the true situation.

The letters to the parents have been published. Of course we don't know the whole picture, but that has not stopped some posters from speculating on exactly what they think is likely to have happened.

Nobody's shown exactly what happened--what has been shown is that there was more than the lawyers are talking about. The lawyers are referring to one incident that caused the letters, not admitting there's a bigger picture.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Aah, defending bullies. Yay!

Begging the question.

You think there's a question whether those kids are bullies or not?

And note that in my experience bullies generally have parents that either actively support the bullying or are unwilling to believe their kids are bullies and thus will not do anything about it.

 

[laughing dog]

As a likely result of the publicity, Kiel Middle School has received 2 bomb threats in past two days

Kiel Middle School received another bomb threat Tuesday as the district continues to investigate allegations of harassment against three boys.

On May 24, at about 7:40 a.m., police received an email with a threat referencing the Title IX investigation by the district. The threat was also sent to some members of the media and a school staff member.

It’s the second bomb threat in two days. The district was evacuated Monday for a bomb threat against the middle school.

Classes were canceled Tuesday due to the threats. The school was locked and no students or staff were in any school buildings at the time of Tuesday’s threat.

A search of the building turned up no devices and it was cleared.

A letter sent to students Tuesday says schools will be closed again on Wednesday, May 25 to allow staff to prepare for virtual learning on Thursday and Friday. The superintendent says the district will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates about plans for learning next week. (Kiel Middle School receives 2nd bomb threat )

It is very likely that these bomb threats are due to the publicizing by the lawyers and parents which means Kiel students have lost 3 days of in-person learning and will probably move to online learning.


From the same link

A Kiel middle school parent said it’s about more than pronouns. The parent explained their child has come home from school crying, as they’ve been the target of homophobic slurs and harassment.

There is no indication that same alleged perpetrators are involved. It is beginning to look like Kiel middle school has a bullying issue.

 

[Metaphor]

As a likely result of the publicity, Kiel Middle School has received 2 bomb threats in past two days

Kiel Middle School received another bomb threat Tuesday as the district continues to investigate allegations of harassment against three boys.

On May 24, at about 7:40 a.m., police received an email with a threat referencing the Title IX investigation by the district. The threat was also sent to some members of the media and a school staff member.

It’s the second bomb threat in two days. The district was evacuated Monday for a bomb threat against the middle school.

Classes were canceled Tuesday due to the threats. The school was locked and no students or staff were in any school buildings at the time of Tuesday’s threat.

A search of the building turned up no devices and it was cleared.

A letter sent to students Tuesday says schools will be closed again on Wednesday, May 25 to allow staff to prepare for virtual learning on Thursday and Friday. The superintendent says the district will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates about plans for learning next week. (Kiel Middle School receives 2nd bomb threat )

It is very likely that these bomb threats are due to the publicizing by the lawyers and parents which means Kiel students have lost 3 days of in-person learning and will probably move to online learning.

The people to blame for the bomb threats are the people who made the bomb threats.

I suspect it would be an 'insider' to the school who would have known about the investigation anyway. I doubt there is anybody at the school who hasn't heard of what's going on.

From the same link

A Kiel middle school parent said it’s about more than pronouns. The parent explained their child has come home from school crying, as they’ve been the target of homophobic slurs and harassment.

There is no indication that same alleged perpetrators are involved. It is beginning to look like Kiel middle school has a bullying issue.

That is begging the question that the 'mispronouning' is bullying.

 

[laughing dog]

As a likely result of the publicity, Kiel Middle School has received 2 bomb threats in past two days

Kiel Middle School received another bomb threat Tuesday as the district continues to investigate allegations of harassment against three boys.

On May 24, at about 7:40 a.m., police received an email with a threat referencing the Title IX investigation by the district. The threat was also sent to some members of the media and a school staff member.

It’s the second bomb threat in two days. The district was evacuated Monday for a bomb threat against the middle school.

Classes were canceled Tuesday due to the threats. The school was locked and no students or staff were in any school buildings at the time of Tuesday’s threat.

A search of the building turned up no devices and it was cleared.

A letter sent to students Tuesday says schools will be closed again on Wednesday, May 25 to allow staff to prepare for virtual learning on Thursday and Friday. The superintendent says the district will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates about plans for learning next week. (Kiel Middle School receives 2nd bomb threat )

It is very likely that these bomb threats are due to the publicizing by the lawyers and parents which means Kiel students have lost 3 days of in-person learning and will probably move to online learning.

The people to blame for the bomb threats are the people who made the bomb threats.

I suspect it would be an 'insider' to the school who would have known about the investigation anyway. I doubt there is anybody at the school who hasn't heard of what's going on.

Of course everyone in the school has heard what is going on - it has been well-publicized. Since the boys were not suspended, there is no reason to assume or conjecture that everyone would have know about this in the absence of the publicity or the boys talking about it (i.e. public airing).

But hey, the rights (that have yet to be abridged) and public reputations (that would not been tainted without the publicity until a finding of some sort of guilt was made and announced) must be protected at the expense of the education and well-being of all the other children.

From the same link

A Kiel middle school parent said it’s about more than pronouns. The parent explained their child has come home from school crying, as they’ve been the target of homophobic slurs and harassment.

There is no indication that same alleged perpetrators are involved. It is beginning to look like Kiel middle school has a bullying issue.

That is begging the question that the 'mispronouning' is bullying.

There is no evidence that it is only"mispronouncing" that is the bullying. In fact, the letter sent to the parents mentions other behaviors. Your insistence of persisting in a deliberate mischaracterization of the situation is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Metaphor]

As a likely result of the publicity, Kiel Middle School has received 2 bomb threats in past two days

Kiel Middle School received another bomb threat Tuesday as the district continues to investigate allegations of harassment against three boys.

On May 24, at about 7:40 a.m., police received an email with a threat referencing the Title IX investigation by the district. The threat was also sent to some members of the media and a school staff member.

It’s the second bomb threat in two days. The district was evacuated Monday for a bomb threat against the middle school.

Classes were canceled Tuesday due to the threats. The school was locked and no students or staff were in any school buildings at the time of Tuesday’s threat.

A search of the building turned up no devices and it was cleared.

A letter sent to students Tuesday says schools will be closed again on Wednesday, May 25 to allow staff to prepare for virtual learning on Thursday and Friday. The superintendent says the district will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates about plans for learning next week. (Kiel Middle School receives 2nd bomb threat )

It is very likely that these bomb threats are due to the publicizing by the lawyers and parents which means Kiel students have lost 3 days of in-person learning and will probably move to online learning.

The people to blame for the bomb threats are the people who made the bomb threats.

I suspect it would be an 'insider' to the school who would have known about the investigation anyway. I doubt there is anybody at the school who hasn't heard of what's going on.

Of course everyone in the school has heard what is going on - it has been well-publicized.

I mean they would have known anyway. Any such scandal would be known to anyone in the music class, and thus anyone in the year and thus anyone in the school.

I went to a Catholic all-boys school so of course there were multiple pederast related scandals during my years. Everyone in the playground knew what was going on without any publicity at all.

Since the boys were not suspended, there is no reason to assume or conjecture that everyone would have know about this in the absence of the publicity or the boys talking about it (i.e. public airing).

Of course the boys talked about it. I bet the complainant did to. I bet the staff members did too.

But hey, the rights (that have yet to be abridged) and public reputations (that would not been tainted without the publicity until a finding of some sort of guilt was made and announced) must be protected at the expense of the education and well-being of all the other children.

What? If you honestly believe this would have been kept secret within the community but for the parents publicising it, I can scarcely believe you are connected with an educational institution.

From the same link

A Kiel middle school parent said it’s about more than pronouns. The parent explained their child has come home from school crying, as they’ve been the target of homophobic slurs and harassment.

There is no indication that same alleged perpetrators are involved. It is beginning to look like Kiel middle school has a bullying issue.

That is begging the question that the 'mispronouning' is bullying.

There is no evidence that it is only"mispronouncing" that is the bullying. In fact, the letter sent to the parents mentions other behaviors. Your insistence of persisting in a deliberate mischaracterization of the situation is intellectually dishonest.

No, mentioning 'other behaviours' without any description of what they are at all, and then assuming allegations means guilt, is intellectually dishonest.

 

[laughing dog]

I mean they would have known anyway. Any such scandal would be known to anyone in the music class, and thus anyone in the year and thus anyone in the school.

I went to a Catholic all-boys school so of course there were multiple pederast related scandals during my years. Everyone in the playground knew what was going on without any publicity at all.

Cool anecdote. Of course, we won't know if it is applicable in this case because the situation was publicized.

Since the boys were not suspended, there is no reason to assume or conjecture that everyone would have know about this in the absence of the publicity or the boys talking about it (i.e. public airing).

Of course the boys talked about it. I bet the complainant did to. I bet the staff members did too.

Of course you do.

But hey, the rights (that have yet to be abridged) and public reputations (that would not been tainted without the publicity until a finding of some sort of guilt was made and announced) must be protected at the expense of the education and well-being of all the other children.

What? If you honestly believe this would have been kept secret within the community but for the parents publicising it, I can scarcely believe you are connected with an educational institution.

How quickly the secret would have percolated is a matter of conjecture.

And, as a matter of fact, there have been plenty of secret disciplines at my educational institution that most people still don't know the details or if they ever occurred.

From the same link

A Kiel middle school parent said it’s about more than pronouns. The parent explained their child has come home from school crying, as they’ve been the target of homophobic slurs and harassment.

There is no indication that same alleged perpetrators are involved. It is beginning to look like Kiel middle school has a bullying issue.

That is begging the question that the 'mispronouning' is bullying.

There is no evidence that it is only"mispronouncing" that is the bullying. In fact, the letter sent to the parents mentions other behaviors. Your insistence of persisting in a deliberate mischaracterization of the situation is intellectually dishonest.

No, mentioning 'other behaviours' without any description of what they are at all, and then assuming allegations means guilt, is intellectually dishonest.

Who is assuming allegations means guilt? Not the posters who are saying we need more facts (blastula and myself are example of that) nor is the school - since they are doing an investigation (something required to ascertain the facts).

Let me get this straight - you are justifying your intellectual dishonesty because the school's letter upset your sensibilities about what details should have been included in the letter?

I have over 20 years experience dealing with these types of situations at my institution. Very rarely does the initial letter give much detail about the alleged misbehavior. It is pretty annoying to the recipient because they frequently have no clue what is going on. I have been told this lack of specificity is to prevent the alleged perpetrator from making up a story. I don't know if it is true, but it makes any interview more like a bushwhacking than anything else.

 

[Metaphor]

I mean they would have known anyway. Any such scandal would be known to anyone in the music class, and thus anyone in the year and thus anyone in the school.

I went to a Catholic all-boys school so of course there were multiple pederast related scandals during my years. Everyone in the playground knew what was going on without any publicity at all.

Cool anecdote. Of course, we won't know if it is applicable in this case because the situation was publicized.

That's right: you don't know. So your linking it to the publicisation was unjustified.

Since the boys were not suspended, there is no reason to assume or conjecture that everyone would have know about this in the absence of the publicity or the boys talking about it (i.e. public airing).

Of course the boys talked about it. I bet the complainant did to. I bet the staff members did too.

Of course you do.

Yes. People talk.

But hey, the rights (that have yet to be abridged) and public reputations (that would not been tainted without the publicity until a finding of some sort of guilt was made and announced) must be protected at the expense of the education and well-being of all the other children.

What? If you honestly believe this would have been kept secret within the community but for the parents publicising it, I can scarcely believe you are connected with an educational institution.

How quickly the secret would have percolated is a matter of conjecture.

And, as a matter of fact, there have been plenty of secret disciplines at my educational institution that most people still don't know the details or if they ever occurred.

I don't doubt it, but this isn't a college with 40,000 adults. This is year 8 kids. With multiple alleged perpetrators and acts claimed to have occurred in public (in music class).

From the same link

A Kiel middle school parent said it’s about more than pronouns. The parent explained their child has come home from school crying, as they’ve been the target of homophobic slurs and harassment.

There is no indication that same alleged perpetrators are involved. It is beginning to look like Kiel middle school has a bullying issue.

That is begging the question that the 'mispronouning' is bullying.

There is no evidence that it is only"mispronouncing" that is the bullying. In fact, the letter sent to the parents mentions other behaviors. Your insistence of persisting in a deliberate mischaracterization of the situation is intellectually dishonest.

No, mentioning 'other behaviours' without any description of what they are at all, and then assuming allegations means guilt, is intellectually dishonest.

Who is assuming allegations means guilt? Not the posters who are saying we need more facts (blastula and myself are example of that) nor is the school - since they are doing an investigation (something required to ascertain the facts).

Toni has already decided the boys are almost certainly guilty, and has already said so. As did ZiprHead.

Let me get this straight - you are justifying your intellectual dishonesty because the school's letter upset your sensibilities about what details should have been included in the letter?

No. I am not justifying intellectual dishonesty because I was not intellectually dishonest.

I have over 20 years experience dealing with these types of situations at my institution. Very rarely does the initial letter give much detail about the alleged misbehavior. It is pretty annoying to the recipient because they frequently have no clue what is going on. I have been told this lack of specificity is to prevent the alleged perpetrator from making up a story. I don't know if it is true, but it makes any interview more like a bushwhacking than anything else.

Sounds like the setup for a kangaroo court, frankly. For the alleged perpetrator to have the charges against them purposely clouded is quite literally Kafkaesque.

 

[ZiprHead]

That is begging the question that the 'mispronouning' is bullying.

If it's done intentionally, yes it is bullying. No question about it.