US Student suspended for ‘only two genders’ comment sues school - The suspended student had been involved in conversations surrounding Spanish language pronouns on the bus. A female student who overheard the conversation said there were more than two genders, to which the suspended student argued that there was not.

Exeter-High-School.jpg


EXETER, N.H. (AP) — A New Hampshire student-athlete is suing his school district after he was suspended from a football game for allegedly expressing his view that there are “only two genders.”

The lawsuit, filed on Nov. 4, said that the suspension in September was in violation of the student’s constitutional right to free speech and the New Hampshire Bill of Rights because he expressed his religious beliefs, The Portsmouth Herald reported.

The plaintiff is also aiming to prohibit enforcing Exeter High School’s gender-nonconforming student’s policy because of what he says is its infringement on his First Amendment rights.

The policy says that students have the right to be addressed by a name and pronoun that relates to a student’s gender identity. It also reprimands students who intentionally and repeatedly refuse to respect another student’s gender identity.

According to the lawsuit, the suspended student had been involved in conversations surrounding Spanish language pronouns on the bus. A female student who overheard the conversation said there were more than two genders, to which the suspended student argued that there was not.

Soon after the bus incident, the lawsuit stated that the two students got into a text exchange about gender identity. Those texts were given to the administration which resulted in the one-day suspension.

But the lawsuit claims that EHS administrators did not have the right to suspend the student because his text messages, initiated by another student, were sent while off campus.

Exeter Superintendent David Ryan said he is aware of the lawsuit and the school is “in process of reviewing this complaint with legal counsel and will be able to share a statement once we have completed that review.”


 
The court decided on a case this year about a school punishing a student for language posted on social media. They said that since it wasn’t on school grounds, the student could not be punished.
This reminded me of that case, too. Hopefully the kid will be fine.

Archive of an NYT article about that Supreme Court ruling, if anyone's curious.
 
Exeter is about 40 mins out of Boston when the traffic is good, so it‘s towards the northern edge of the Boston bedroom community area. I’m not surprised it happened there.

The whole NH coastal area is a really bizarre group of people - the intersection of people who want to work in Boston and Maine while living in NH, and the people who want to live & work in NH while being close enough to Maine and Mass to go there on weekends. It’s NIMBY’s, Libertarians, granolas and blue bloods all living together.
This. Not to mention if you've seen the universities in the area, it's full of white lefties who push this faggotry to make up for their lack of diversity, which they're probably sore about.
 
Yes, but why didn't the school know this? Did they think the students would be too scared?
Partially. I'm sure there's been plenty of cases where schools have been able to successfully cow students into submitting to the girlcock. How many students and their parents actually have the time, money, and wherewithal to pursue a case like this? Easier to go along with it. But I think they're also banking on the left's reach within the justice system and "being on the right side of history". Boomers have been holding back a tidal wave of younger, far-left leaning lawyers and judges but there are already certain courts that have been infiltrated. They're probably hoping lower courts will issue favorable rulings and that the students will give up before it gets too high, and even if they don't and it gets to the supreme court, well, they can wait until either a couple of the conservative justices die or Sleepy Joe packs the courts and retry the issue to get what they want.
 
This was bound to happen and it's good it's finally going to. Inevitably one of these cases needs to go to the supreme court, because lets be real, trannies and transmaidens won't stop until it does.
I remember the last time a First Amendment case reached the Supreme Court over comments made by a student over something done at their school.

And I believe that the Supreme Court is packed with Republicans.

And considering the last time "based" black man Clarence Thomas pulled some bullshit with the rationale of "students should be submissive to teachers," I seriously don't have confidence in Clarence Thomas coming through on round two when the stakes are significantly higher.

So the outcome of this consideration, should it go to the Supreme Court, is going to be extremely interesting. The Bill of Rights usually wins in the end, you can indeed scream "FIRE" in a crowded theater, but Clarence is the wild card in this.
For some reason it's funnier as "skeleton."
It's funnier because it reads as being written by an out of touch boomer or non-English speaker using Google translate, it's the same reason why "I like Halo, he fights aliens and doesn't afraid of anything" is funny.
 
Última edición:
This whole pronoun issue just seems like a big exercise in thought control. It's been mentioned by myself and others that the end goal of leftism as we know it now is to destroy everything. I can't think of a bigger thing that has caused such destruction than trannies. They destroy themselves, they destroy their relationships, families, groups they belonged to, group cohesion, communities, hobbies, and absolutely everything they inject themselves into.

These people are vulnerable because of these personal issues, and that vulnerability lets in others who would take advantage of them for their own ends. It's so predatory. Grooming, like most things, isn't just a meme.
It isn't an exercise in control. And anyone who says progressive leftism is there to destroy things is misguided. The progressive left is designed to protect the status quo. Identity politics have always been used by the elite classes to divide the lower classes when their excesses eventually grow out of control. The entirety of the progressive left is to appeal to the decaying system of late stage capitalism. The appeal to authority strengthens authority. Don't buy into the illusion that they want to destroy systems. That's not the case. These policies are meant to divide the lower classes so they cannot unite against the elite class and punish them for the harm they push to society.

You can't fight the worst income inequality in over 100 years when we're screaming at each other about troons, CRT and vaccinations. They are massive wedge issues. You know why there are massive amounts now? Because our elite class thinks it is smarter than it is and is rapidly decaying the system that we're in. Bread and Circuses no longer cut it. The elites need the lower classes to spill blood, metaphorically. Lose your job, your home, your income, your reputation.

People are shocked that there are feds in these movements as agitators. The elites have always had agitators that were bought and paid for. In the past, it was the Pinkertons, a private police force used to serve the rich and wealthy and terrify the average person about the Italian, the Irish and the German immigrant. They threw bombs at both sides of union rallies when the workers just wanted conditions that wouldn't fucking kill them at 25. Their tactics have not changed. If it wasn't the FBI, it would be some other agency doing it. The FBI is just convenient to use. You just swap out one private police force for another, and you hire people you like to get on your side and do what you want. Just look at COINTELPRO, it makes raiding Vertais look like patty cake.

We're seeing more aggressive tactics and an increase in wedge issues because late stage capitalism is not a viable economic model. Infinite growth does not exist. Wealth is a finite resource, and there's only so much wealth you can extract from the poor and middle and upper middle classes before you break the entire fucking machine. Billionaires are amoral sociopaths. You know what would happen in the past to these people? Kings would fucking cut them the fuck down because they knew, eventually, that these merchant houses would contest the power of the state. It was a lot harder back then, because you just fucking murdered whoever is trying to be bought.

Now? With the massive amount of wealth, everyone gets bought. If you can't buy someone, just buy everyone around them and immobilize them. Nobody needs to get murdered anymore, just functionally immobilized. The specter of 'Marxism' and 'communism' and 'socialism' is a complete and ludicrous illusion. It is a byword to get you scared and amped up against an opposite side. You've seen it yourself, dozens of times. The socialists, Marxists and communists on Twitter all buy Disney, all buy Apple and all support major corporations and vaccine mandates. Every one of them supports and props up this system used by the elites. Not a single one is for economic change because they are far too comfortable in their positions.

The danger is not capitalism itself, but this late stage, all consuming vulture capitalism. Where there is no more wealth, and the elites do not want to contribute wealth back into the system, instead horde it all themselves. Every movement they make is to extract wealth from the system and enrich themselves with their naked greed.

Live in the pod? Its extracting wealth from you to give to them. You will own nothing? Its extracting wealth from you to give to them. You'll eat bugs? Its extracting wealth from you to give to them. Too many people I see have bought into this illusion that the end goal of progressive leftists is to destroy or replace capitalism. It isn't. Look at every progressive movement. Who do they appeal to? The powers in charge. Who do they ask for change? The corporations holding the billions of dollars. They are helpless. Not to mention if you look at leftist progressive ideology, it is essentially hypocritical and self-destructive and self-devouring. This is not a bug, it is a feature. The movement is meant to eat itself because the elites don't want to be eaten. They've created a bunch of zombified dopamine addicts who will take the easy hit of killing each other rather than the long and arduous road of de-seating the elites.

The entirety of this ideology is to prop up a completely dying system. Population replacement is a myth. Birth rates in every industrialized country have been in the negative. China itself will soon face a population crisis. They're not looking to replace you. They're looking to keep a system that is dying in place so they can keep extracting wealth from you. They don't want to replace you, they can't have homogenous nations because they need purposeful divisions to constantly divide people from uniting against them. And they want to hold on as long as they can. Look at all of their pushes. Immortality, anti-aging shit. Evil people grasping at their decadent, depraved lives so they can rule over the plebs and make number go up.

And that's all this evil, disgusting shit is about. Its what this inhumanity to man is. It is all about watching a number go up on a screen. Remember that when you play a video game. These people only exist for the thrill of it, a game they actually play with people's lives. Not for the good of people, not for the good of society, for their own egos. Whether they delude themselves like Musk or Gates or are just openly sociopathic like hedge fund managers, it is all the same. To accumulate as much wealth as possible to go up on a scoreboard.

Communism and Marxism were destroyed a long time ago. Their specter is just being used to divide you, just for an extra year of exploitation, just to continue a dying system that enriches a handful of people. In 2008, Citibank put out a memo. That the United States is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy, a nation ruled by the wealthy. And it is. Corporations own our news, shape policy that benefits them. I've seen small victories, but those small victories are after exorbitant struggles. And even those small victories are outnumbered by the massive wins of the elite.

And that's the cruel joke of the situation. All of this misery, all of this human wreckage, so 5 people can watch a number tick up just a little bit higher so they can brag that they're better than the other guy. I think that's the scariest part, honestly. Its easier to believe this is a political war, a war of ideology. That there is a culture war going on. That there are drawn out sides with my elites and their elites. It makes sense, logically. That there's a reason for all this besides ego and greed. There's a reason to cause all this harm and this destruction. No matter how misguided, each side thinks its doing the right thing.

Fact is, its not. There is no other reason. Because that is the end point of wealth. Power for power's sake. Wealth is power. So it is only wealth for wealth's sake. It is the natural endpoint. Pure insanity, no logic, no rhyme, no reason. Because you can attack an enemy that has ideology, an end point, a goal. You can't attack an enemy that believes in nothing and will just as soon change its shade to benefit itself. It follows no set course of logic, no rational war. It is an alien mindset. And that's essentially what the elite is. Disconnected from humanity at large, it is entirely nihilism and narcissisim. Driven only by pure ego and hubris.

Destroying lives for no reason than numbers ticking up on a screen. There is no sanity in that. None at all.
I remember the last time a First Amendment case reached the Supreme Court over comments made by a student over something done at their school.

And I believe that the Supreme Court is packed with Republicans.

And considering the last time "based" black man Clarence Thomas pulled some bullshit with the rationale of "students should be submissive to teachers," I seriously don't have confidence in Clarence Thomas coming through on round two when the stakes are significantly higher.

So the outcome of this consideration, should it go to the Supreme Court, is going to be extremely interesting. The Bill of Rights usually wins in the end, you can indeed scream "FIRE" in a crowded theater, but Clarence is the wild card in this.
The Supreme Court already ruled 9-0 that hate speech does not exist under the 1st Amendment, and that was with RBG on the Court.
 
Última edición:
It isn't an exercise in control. And anyone who says progressive leftism is there to destroy things is wrong. The progressive left is designed to protect the status quo. Identity politics have always been used by the elite classes to divide the lower classes when their excesses eventually grow out of control. The entirety of the progressive left is to appeal to the decaying system of late stage capitalism. The appeal to authority strengthens authority. You're buying into the illusion that they want to destroy systems. That's not the case. These policies are meant to divide the lower classes so they cannot unite against the elite class and punish them for the harm they push to society.

You can't fight the worst income inequality in over 100 years when you're screaming at each other about troons, CRT and vaccinations. They are massive wedge issues. You know why there are massive amounts now? Because our elite class thinks it is smarter than it is and is rapidly decaying the system that we're in. Bread and Circuses no longer cut it. The elites need the lower classes to spill blood, metaphorically and physically. Do you know why no one, including Trump, did a single solitary thing about BLM riots? Because it was meant to physically push and divide the two sides.

People are shocked that there are feds in these movements as agitators. The elites have always had agitators that were bought and paid for. In the past, it was the Pinkertons, a private police force used to serve the rich and wealthy and terrify the average person about the Italian, the Irish and the German immigrant. They threw bombs at both sides of union rallies when the workers just wanted conditions that wouldn't fucking kill them at 25.

Their tactics have not changed. If it wasn't the FBI, it would be some other agency doing it. The FBI is just convenient to use. You just swap out one private police force for another, and you hire people you like to get on your side and do what you want.

We're seeing more aggressive tactics and an increase in wedge issues because late stage capitalism is not a viable economic model. Infinite growth does not exist. Wealth is a finite resource, and there's only so much wealth you can extract from the poor and middle and upper middle classes before you break the entire fucking machine. Billionaires are amoral sociopaths. You know what would happen in the past to these people? Kings would fucking cut them the fuck down because they knew, eventually, that these merchant houses would contest the power of the state. It was a lot harder back then, because you just fucking murdered whoever is trying to be bought.

Now? With the massive amount of wealth, everyone gets bought. The specter of 'Marxism' and 'communism' and 'socialism' is a complete and ludicrous illusion. It is a byword to get you scared and amped up against an opposite side. You've seen it yourself, dozens of times. The socialists, Marxists and communists on Twitter all buy Disney, all buy Apple and all support major corporations and vaccine mandates. Every one of them supports and props up this system used by the elites. Not a single one is for economic change because they are far too comfortable in their positions.

The danger is not capitalism itself, but this late stage, all consuming vulture capitalism. Where there is no more wealth, and the elites do not want to contribute wealth back into the system, instead horde it all themselves. Every movement they make is to extract wealth from the system and enrich themselves with their naked greed.

Live in the pod? Its extracting wealth from you to give to them. You will own nothing? Its extracting wealth from you to give to them. You'll eat bugs? Its extracting wealth from you to give to them. Too many people I see have bought into this illusion that the end goal of progressive leftists is to destroy or replace capitalism. It isn't. Look at every progressive movement. Who do they appeal to? The powers in charge. Who do they ask for change? The corporations holding the billions of dollars. They are helpless. Not to mention if you look at leftist progressive ideology, it is essentially hypocritical and self-destructive and self-devouring. This is not a bug, it is a feature. The movement is meant to eat itself because the elites don't want to be eaten. They've created a bunch of zombified dopamine addicts who will take the easy hit of killing each other rather than the long and arduous road of de-seating the elites.

The entirety of this ideology is to prop up a completely dying system. Population replacement is a myth. Birth rates in every industrialized country have been in the negative. China itself will soon face a population crisis. They're not looking to replace you. They're looking to keep a system that is dying in place so they can keep extracting wealth from you. They don't want to replace you, they can't have homogenous nations because they need purposeful divisions to constantly divide people from uniting against them. And they want to hold on as long as they can. Look at all of their pushes. Immortality, anti-aging shit. Evil people grasping at their decadent, depraved lives so they can rule over the plebs and make number go up.

And that's all this evil, disgusting shit is about. Its what this inhumanity to man is. It is all about watching a number go up on a screen. Remember that when you play a video game. These people only exist for the thrill of it, a game they actually play with people's lives. Not for the good of people, not for the good of society, for their own egos. Whether they delude themselves like Musk or Gates or are just openly sociopathic like hedge fund managers, it is all the same. To accumulate as much wealth as possible to go up on a scoreboard.

Communism and Marxism were destroyed a long time ago. Their specter is just being used to divide you, just for an extra year of exploitation, just to continue a dying system that enriches a handful of people. In 2008, Citibank put out a memo. That the United States is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy, a nation ruled by the wealthy. And it is. Corporations own our news, shape policy that benefits them. I've seen small victories, but those small victories are after exorbitant struggles. And even those small victories are outnumbered by the massive wins of the elite.

And that's the cruel joke of the situation. All of this misery, all of this human wreckage, so 5 people can watch a number tick up just a little bit higher so they can brag that they're better than the other guy. I think that's the scariest part, honestly. Its easier to believe this is a political war, a war of ideology. That there is a culture war going on. That there are drawn out sides with my elites and their elites. It makes sense, logically. That there's a reason for all this besides ego and greed.

Fact is, its not. There is no other reason. And that is fucking terrifying.

The Supreme Court already ruled 9-0 that hate speech does not exist under the 1st Amendment, and that was with RBG on the Court.

I have always enjoyed your sociopolitical text walls & felt they best articulated my worldview, if you had a newsletter I would subscribe to it. Still gonna jab you in report comments though
 
Arabic is a gender-heavy language, even "you" is split into a masculine and feminine form. True for both colloquial and literary arabic. How will this madness manifest with the future Muslim majority? Especially if some sperg publicly denounces the Quran for not conforming to modern gender ideas?

Also, neither הוא nor הוא (hu and hi for masculine and feminine respectively, spelled identically without punctuation) is made problematic in modern, progressive Israel. Oy vey.
 
@Secret Asshole if money did not exist, what would wealth be then? Power? Influence?

Ownership and free thought I'd argue to be considered "wealth" in the sense of being independent for self, family and to an extent, community.

I don't even think it's about "troons" to them long term; it's mobilizing a stubborn, imitable group of people to control a power dynamic while being selfish enough to push by any means necessary.

I still cannot get over the irony that "troops" claim to be oppressed while higher ups cling to their every whim, no matter how nonsense it is. It is beginning to run dry hopefully.
 
@Secret Asshole if money did not exist, what would wealth be then? Power? Influence?

Ownership and free thought I'd argue to be considered "wealth" in the sense of being independent for self, family and to an extent, community.

I don't even think it's about "troons" to them long term; it's mobilizing a stubborn, imitable group of people to control a power dynamic while being selfish enough to push by any means necessary.

I still cannot get over the irony that "troops" claim to be oppressed while higher ups cling to their every whim, no matter how nonsense it is. It is beginning to run dry hopefully.
I use 'wealth' as a generalized term. Some places didn't have coin, they bartered in valuable crops like Sugar or Tobacco. This was especially common in the age of imperialism, where transporting large amounts of gold and silver across the ocean was downright stupid and made you a target for privateers and pirates. So goods were typically the trade. And the wealthiest had the most amount of the desired good to trade.

Humanity has always defaulted to the most desirable product in trade. Power is wealth. Rome itself fell because it didn't pay its armies. If it did, who knows how long it would have lasted? Influence is also linked to money. Investments, bribes, even trading information. Buying information and trading it off. Blackmail.

It doesn't matter the form it comes in, all routes lead back to it. In the past, the elites were the state. Kings and rulers controlled the money. Mansa Musa was the richest person in history, but he was the state itself, as he was a king. We now exist in a time when the wealth of individuals surpasses the wealth of entire groups of nations. This is unprecedented in history and allows for massive amount of power to actors outside of the state. Ownership of land and property is wealth of course, which is why you see a lot of hedge funds buying up property as well as foreign companies. Influence boils down to money. Spheres of influence is generally related to investment in the modern times, while in the past it was more related to military might. Africa is firmly under China's sphere of influence and can control and manipulate politics, but they do not have a major (if any) military presence. They just have money.

The modern history of capitalism is seceding the wealth of the state to the individual. This is not inherently a bad thing. Things became less and less restrictive. Somewhere, we passed the event horizon where we struck a balance between the wealth of the individual and the wealth of the state where they were both in healthy opposition and one could not surpass the other. People still had massive wealth, but so did the state. It was more restrictive. Now, with wealth, its incredibly permissive. You are allowed to influence the state with as much money as you like. Even inserting people you like is related to money, as it enriches those you place in positions of authority. Even then, you can convert people with the promises of wealth (see how many regulators switch to private industry after 10 or so years and just make massive amounts of money. I'll give you a hint: all of them). So even if you have the mechanisms of the state, you can actively subvert them by hiring the experts on it to work against the state for your own profit. The problem is that you have massive mechanisms and wealth that have completely corrupted any sort of control on individual wealth, allowing for parasitic capitalism or vulture capitalism (See: Short Selling, the World Monetary Fund and Private Equity Firms).

These things contribute nothing to the state or the value of society, but wholly enrich the individuals who control it, and feed no wealth back into the system. So it is in fact constantly drawing on a finite resource while adding nothing of value back to it. And if you think that a hedge fund or an equity firm making a couple of hundred people millions or billions is good, you're an idiot, because that comes at the cost of dismantling healthy businesses or businesses that are just faltering. So instead, they're stripped down for parts to 'pay' for the massive debt that these equity firms have 'generously' bought them for. You sacrifice hundreds, thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of jobs and dismantle something for your own personal property.

One of the most terrifying men in Washington is a private equity manager, who can easily buy out your business, completely dismantle it and make a profit. All while adding nothing to the financial system and hoarding it all for himself. Its a net negative to the system. Note: These same firms are now doing this to poor nations. Buying up their debt and stripping their assets, all for their own benefit and to the complete detriment of their citizens.
 
I use 'wealth' as a generalized term. Some places didn't have coin, they bartered in valuable crops like Sugar or Tobacco. This was especially common in the age of imperialism, where transporting large amounts of gold and silver across the ocean was downright stupid and made you a target for privateers and pirates. So goods were typically the trade. And the wealthiest had the most amount of the desired good to trade.

Humanity has always defaulted to the most desirable product in trade. Power is wealth. Rome itself fell because it didn't pay its armies. If it did, who knows how long it would have lasted? Influence is also linked to money. Investments, bribes, even trading information. Buying information and trading it off. Blackmail.

It doesn't matter the form it comes in, all routes lead back to it. In the past, the elites were the state. Kings and rulers controlled the money. Mansa Musa was the richest person in history, but he was the state itself, as he was a king. We now exist in a time when the wealth of individuals surpasses the wealth of entire groups of nations. This is unprecedented in history and allows for massive amount of power to actors outside of the state. Ownership of land and property is wealth of course, which is why you see a lot of hedge funds buying up property as well as foreign companies. Influence boils down to money. Spheres of influence is generally related to investment in the modern times, while in the past it was more related to military might. Africa is firmly under China's sphere of influence and can control and manipulate politics, but they do not have a major (if any) military presence. They just have money.

The modern history of capitalism is seceding the wealth of the state to the individual. This is not inherently a bad thing. Things became less and less restrictive. Somewhere, we passed the event horizon where we struck a balance between the wealth of the individual and the wealth of the state where they were both in healthy opposition and one could not surpass the other. People still had massive wealth, but so did the state. It was more restrictive. Now, with wealth, its incredibly permissive. You are allowed to influence the state with as much money as you like. Even inserting people you like is related to money, as it enriches those you place in positions of authority. Even then, you can convert people with the promises of wealth (see how many regulators switch to private industry after 10 or so years and just make massive amounts of money. I'll give you a hint: all of them). So even if you have the mechanisms of the state, you can actively subvert them by hiring the experts on it to work against the state for your own profit. The problem is that you have massive mechanisms and wealth that have completely corrupted any sort of control on individual wealth, allowing for parasitic capitalism or vulture capitalism (See: Short Selling, the World Monetary Fund and Private Equity Firms).

These things contribute nothing to the state or the value of society, but wholly enrich the individuals who control it, and feed no wealth back into the system. So it is in fact constantly drawing on a finite resource while adding nothing of value back to it. And if you think that a hedge fund or an equity firm making a couple of hundred people millions or billions is good, you're an idiot, because that comes at the cost of dismantling healthy businesses or businesses that are just faltering. So instead, they're stripped down for parts to 'pay' for the massive debt that these equity firms have 'generously' bought them for. You sacrifice hundreds, thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of jobs and dismantle something for your own personal property.

One of the most terrifying men in Washington is a private equity manager, who can easily buy out your business, completely dismantle it and make a profit. All while adding nothing to the financial system and hoarding it all for himself. Its a net negative to the system. Note: These same firms are now doing this to poor nations. Buying up their debt and stripping their assets, all for their own benefit and to the complete detriment of their citizens.

So Mr. Yannis Varoufakis whats the solution ? is there anything we can do ? or is it that we are doomed but atleast we know cause of our death ?
 
Forget the tranny shit, the basic problem here is that one of these kids is a narc for going to the teachers
 
Korean has no genders in the language. However, Korean uses different forms, according to the status of the speakers, of either sex, involved in the conversation.
probably not. The Tinker standard allows schools to restrict student speech if they deem it materially disruptive to the learning process. just like a school has a right to suspend a child for flying a bong hits for Jesus banner during a school sponsored event, this kids gonna lose. the best he can hope for is the school settles to avoid negative press.
 
probably not. The Tinker standard allows schools to restrict student speech if they deem it materially disruptive to the learning process. just like a school has a right to suspend a child for flying a bong hits for Jesus banner during a school sponsored event, this kids gonna lose. the best he can hope for is the school settles to avoid negative press.
This wasn't a school sponsored event, though. While schools have the ability to punish students for behavior out of school, there is a higher burden. In addition, the Fraser standard would be applied. A school-sponsored event is different because Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier specifically gives the schools more authority when they're providing a platform for the speech.
 
Jebus Fucking Christ, just blow my head off now (with a shotgun in Minecraft). Spanish is a gendered language, as are ALL Latin-based languages that I'm aware of. Even German is generally a gendered language, likely due to centuries of cultural interaction with cultures speaking Latin-based languages. (Sometimes you'll see such languages called "Romance languages", but that's faggy af.) So the kid is talking about Spanish, some twat tells him there's more than two genders, the boy says fuck off, the two get into a text war, so of course the girl turns the boy in for wrongthink. Fuck, we're already living in a totalitarian dystopia. The few fighting back are 25 years too late.
 
"Expressing his view that there are “only two genders.”

It's not a view, it's a fucking fact.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo