June 18th: Are Biological Males Using the Girls Bathrooms in Conroe ISD?

A clear answer was not given to the above question at the June 18th Conroe ISD School Board meeting. The board also failed to take a stand for girls' safety, and what was that level 3 hearing about?

Jul 08, 2024

You will find the following sections in this article. (I do not address items in order that they occurred during the meeting.)

Title IX - Proclamation to protect girls - FAILED
- President Biden’s Title IX rewrite redefines gender. Under this change, if a biological male identifies as a girl, he can use the girls’ facilities. Conroe ISD is “following federal law.” What does that mean???
Local Policy Addressing Gender Fluidity and Parental Notification - FAILED
- There was a lot of pushback against developing a policy about which bathrooms students can use so everyone is comfortable, including the option to use private bathrooms. There would have been a lot of protections in this policy, including parents’ rights to be informed as well as teachers’ freedoms to use proper grammar.
Level 3 hearing - just the facts
- The level 3 hearing was discussing whether The Perks of Being a Wallflower should be included in the curriculum as required reading. The hearing had nothing to do with including it in the library.
Three New Schools Named (a bright spot)
- While I do not write about this in this article, three new schools were named, including two elementary schools that received names from local leaders. You can read more about these amazing people and the schools here:
  - Conroe ISD Names 3 New Schools – Conroe ISD
The next school board meeting is July 16, 2024.
- How to sign up for public comment.
- How to contact the school board members to voice your concerns.
November is coming!! We have a slate of great school board candidates for November!
- Find their websites at the bottom of the article.

Scroll to what interests you. I included titles and emphasis for readers with little time.

Title IX - Proclamation to protect girls

In case you are not familiar with it, Title IX is the law that was passed in 1972 to prohibit the discrimination based on sex in federally funded programs. This law effectively gave us NCAA girls sports, a huge win for girls and women nationally.

Recently, the Biden administration’s Department of Education expanded this definition (a rewrite) to include prohibiting the discrimination based on gender identity. This addition DOES, in fact, also give biological males the right to use girl’s bathrooms if they identify as a girl. The rewrite even goes as far as to empower schools to contact CPS, if parents are not affirming of their child’s gender identity. How do you feel about that? Here are a few articles to explore the facts:

Biden's final Title IX regulations will bow to gender ideologues' wishes nationwide | Blaze Media (theblaze.com)

‘A Disturbing Corollary’: Biden’s Title IX Rewrite Takes Aim At Parents Too (dailywire.com)

According to the rewrite, even though the word “bathroom” is not specifically mentioned, it is reasonable to assume that the following section would allow biological males to use the girls restrooms:

Protect people from harm when they are separated or treated differently based on sex in school. The final regulations clarify that a school must not separate or treat people differently based on sex in a manner that subjects them to more than de minimis harm, except in limited circumstances permitted by Title IX. The final regulations further recognize that preventing someone from participating in school (including in sex-separate activities) consistent with their gender identity causes that person more than de minimis harm. This general nondiscrimination principle applies except in the limited circumstances specified by statute, such as in the context of sex-separate living facilities and sex-separate athletic teams.
The final regulations do not include new rules governing eligibility criteria for athletic teams.

While researching this, I have been told that it is understood that while this new rewrite does seem to include giving biological males access to girls bathrooms, it probably does not give biological males access to girls’ UIL sports teams, possibly due to recent legislation that protects UIL sports from this.

(Note, since the school board meeting, a Mississippi district judge did issue a nationwide stay on the new Title IX rewrite.)

While the following video doesn’t speak directly to this situation, since sports teams may not be affected, I wanted to include it anyway because it’s powerful and still communicates an important message that resonates in any situation where we want to protect girls.

Will Conroe ISD stand up and stand with girls? If we want to protect our girls, we will surely want to elect leaders who would engage in passive resistance. In other words, they wouldn’t be fine with boys exposing themselves in the girls locker room or restroom, and they would do what was necessary to protect our girls who should be comfortable dressing in their safe spaces! Following the laws of the land are important, unless they are wrong or immoral. However, in this case, we don’t even have to engage in passive resistance because as of June 18th (the day of the meeting) several courts had already struck down the Biden administration’s new regulations, and now there is a national stay. In the following press release, it is explained why Biden’s rewrite is unconstitutional.

Attorney General Ken Paxton Secures Major Win Blocking Biden Administration’s Attempt to Force “Transgender” Policies Into Schools, Securing Nationwide Relief Against Unlawful Agency Actions | Office of the Attorney General (state.tx.us)

As of June 18th, The United States District Court Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, had put forward an opinion that this is unconstitutional, as have courts in Louisiana and Kentucky, yet our school board couldn’t pass the resolution protecting girls.

Martin Etwop with Citizens Defending Freedom explains in public comment (in lay terms) why this rewrite of the law is unconstitutional:

The Resolution to protect girls from President Biden’s Title IX Rewrite

Trustee Tiffany Nelson presented a resolution to protect girls against the changes in Title IX. She begins by explaining that the board received a resolution from the Montgomery County Commissioner’s Court and a letter from Senator Brandon Creighton asking them to stand down. She says, “We received multiple emails as well regarding the Title IX. I think it’s important that we take a stance as well, as a district, to let the community know that we are standing in the gap to protect the safety of our daughters, that’s why I brought it on.”

Draft resolution presented to the board by Trustee Nelson.

Immediately after Trustee Nelson begins to pass out copies of the resolution, Trustee Stacey Chase, with contempt (my opinion), asks her what the point would be. Trustee Nelson had already explained in her above statement but responded respectfully that it is laid out in the resolution.

Although our own AG Ken Paxton sued the Biden administration over the Title IX rewrite, Trustee Hubert is more afraid of being sued by trans students (biological males) wanting to use the girls’ bathrooms than he is concerned for girls’ safety. Hubert could also look at rulings from multiple courts in other states, who have issued opinions stating that this rewrite is unconstitutional, but he doesn’t do that. Perhaps he’s afraid of upsetting the progressive activists who frequent CISD school board meetings and worship the ground he walks on.

So, my question to Trustee Hubert (and Trustee Wagaman) is this: If a higher court upholds Biden’s rewrite of Title IX, are you going to go along with it??? It just seems that there are some values (like protecting girls) that are more important than going along? Sometimes passive resistance is necessary.

Trustee Datren Williams presents his own resolution, which he reads aloud in its entirety, seemingly to troll Trustee Nelson.

During the discussion, a 2020 resolution was brought up. The question was, why could the school board pass a resolution, unanimously, in response to the death of George Floyd but could not pass a resolution in support of, and for, the safety of girls.

The 2020 resolution in question did not specifically mention Black Lives Matter, but it could be considered “woke” and therefore political. First let’s define woke (from James Lindsay.)

Woke means having a critical consciousness. A critical consciousness means believing that our social environment is controlled by illegitimate power structures that need to be identified, exposed, and denounced. That’s what woke means. That’s what you woke up to when you have critical consciousness.

Here is the resolution from 2020:

Two of our current board members signed this but could not get behind a resolution that protects girls? That is what makes the above resolution “woke.” The “illegitimate power structures” are keeping certain people down, which is why we must toss others aside who are in a “position of power,” including “cisgender girls.” Are you following?

Why is the Title IX Resolution necessary?

In my opinion, the resolution being brought by Trustee Nelson is necessary because it communicates to faculty and staff that this is what will be expected, and it communicates to parents that the protection of girls will be valued. Parents who find themselves in a situation where their daughter is having to change her clothes, exposing herself to a boy, will feel empowered to say something because they know the school board is behind them and their daughter.

Instead, the parents will wonder if the school board will even listen, and their daughter might be labeled a bigot. Even worse, the parents might not know! The administrators/coaches just heard loud and clear from these four board members who voted to reject the resolution, that our district is afraid to do the right thing, even if that means putting these girls in danger. Two of these four board members want to wait to see how future court cases are resolved. These school board members, specifically the two “Republicans” who wouldn’t stand up for girls, are cowards, and they must be replaced in November.

You can begin watching this part of the board meeting at 5:31:29 linked to the timestamp below. You can continue watching and see the next item which is to “Discuss a Local Policy Addressing Gender Fluidity and Parental Notification” which I will discuss next.

The Motion and Amendment

Trustee Datren Williams motioned to strike down all resolutions presented.

Trustee Theresa Wagaman added an amendment, “Motions to set aside all resolutions and wait for the outcome of lawsuits by Texas Attorney General or any other lawsuits for clear legal direction.”

Voting to accept the amendment and the motion was identical. Remember that this motion was basically to do NOTHING to protect girls.

Trustee Skeeter Hubert – YES

Trustee Theresa Wagaman – YES

Trustee Stacey Chase – YES

Trustee Datren Williams – YES

Trustee Melissa Dungan – NO

Trustee Tiffany Baumann Nelson – NO

Trustee Misty Odenweller – NO

Local Policy Addressing Gender Fluidity and Parental Notification

The most interesting part of this policy proposal was the public comment. Conroe ISD Superintendent, Dr. Null, insists that the district does not hide anything from parents, and there are zero problems. However, during public comment, students came forward stating that their friends would be put in danger with this policy because their parents don’t know. My question is, could there be administrators or staff who know, but since there isn’t a policy, are keeping the information to themselves?

Based on statements from public commenters and from the dais, it is apparent that there are children in Conroe ISD using opposite sex bathrooms. If a complaint is made, something is done. The problem with not having a policy is that if a complaint is not made, then some campuses can allow this. Trustee Odenweller, who brought this policy to the agenda says, “All I’m saying is that if we put it in place that students that need to use a private, one stall restroom, can use their private, one stall restroom. We put a policy in place, so we don’t risk making anyone uncomfortable.”

Dr. Null, Trustee Stacey Chase, and Trustee Datren Williams all insist that there is no problem, so we should have no policy. However, our Mama Bears counter that we need to get ahead of this.

Trustee Melissa Dungan says, “It is our job as a board to provide guidance.”

Trustee Tiffany Nelson brings up the point that Riley Gaines recently won a lawsuit against the NCAA, “My point is that we are liable. We are opening ourselves up to litigation.”

Trustee Skeeter Hubert and district counsel Ms. Carrie Galatas disagree, seemingly thinking that they have more liability in not following President Biden’s rewrite. Again, I ask, does this mean we ARE allowing boys to use girls’ bathrooms?

The Elephant in the Room

Trustee Tiffany Nelson addressed the elephant in the room when she mentioned that Riley Gaines, along with 15 other women, sued the NCAA.

https://www.theblaze.com/shows/steve-deace-show/riley-gaines-and-15-other-women-are-suing-the-ncaa-for-violating-title-ix-heres-where-theyre-at-in-the-process

Trustee Hubert and Trustee Wagaman seem to be most concerned about being sued by trans students and their families but do not seem concerned about being sued by the girls whose privacy is being violated and whose safety is not being taken seriously????

Girl’s bathrooms are supposed to be safe spaces for girls. When our district refuses to make a policy regarding these spaces, they open themselves up to liability. Let’s put on our thinking caps here people. The lawyer in the room cannot figure this out; how much are we paying her for this poor advice?

No Vote was Taken

Trustee Theresa Wagaman said with finality, “I will not look at anything from Katy ISD,” which is not where the new policy came from. Trustee Nelson reminded Trustee Wagaman that everybody had the opportunity to give input prior to the meeting.

Since there was no interest in the policy brought forth that day (other than the Mama Bears of course), nor developing any new policy, no vote was taken.

The Level 3 Hearing: just the facts

“Did Conroe ISD ban The Color Purple???” a friend recently asked me.

The Color Purple is in Conroe ISD libraries. Did you know that? This book was never removed. Why do so many people think it isn’t there? The simple answer is propaganda; let me explain.

There have been a lot of articles published since the June 18th school board meeting, and most of them are lying by omission. They say that the book is not in classroom libraries but neglect to explain what that means. Most readers skip “classroom” and assume the book isn’t in the school libraries at all and tell all their friends, who are outraged, and they tell their friends, and so on.

Classroom Libraries

The classroom libraries are also known as “secret libraries.” This is because parents are not notified of what their kids are checking out of their classroom libraries. These are the libraries that are kept by teachers in their classrooms for the students to look through while they attend class. Some teachers allow the kids to check books out and take them home to continue reading. Classroom libraries are a great tool for literacy. Since parents are not notified about these checkouts, the administrators are more careful about what books are allowed in these libraries.

School Libraries

I checked the list of books and, rest assured, the following books are in Conroe ISD libraries. If the book isn’t in your school’s library, it was either lost or not curated for the collection. Sometimes this is due to low circulation.

These books ARE in Conroe ISD Libraries:

My Sister’s Keeper by Jodi Picoult
Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson
Where the Crawdad Sings by Delia Owens
Beloved by Toni Morrison
Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas
The Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead
Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky
The Color Purple by Alice Walker

What is Banned?

Remember that the left routinely redefines words to deceive the masses. Did you know that when a book is ever challenged, no matter the decision, it is added to the banned book list? With the vast majority of challenged books, no change is ultimately made to its placement in the library. Should every child have access to all books at all times no matter the content? The vast majority of challenged books are left on the shelf, but the left calls them “banned” from that day forward to get the public fired up. When a book is moved from one section of the library to another, it is considered a “banned book.” If a book is removed from the classroom library but remains in the school library, it’s “banned.”

Be careful what you share, such as a so-called “list of banned books;” it could be propaganda.

This Hearing was about Instructional Materials, NOT Library Content

As Dr. Lambert says in his statement, this hearing was not about library materials; it was about instructional materials. Should Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky be required reading for students? One of the presenters accused, “You do not have the right to dictate what other people’s children read.” By reinstating these titles as instructional materials, that’s exactly what this presenter is doing; dictating what your children read. A long time ago, in high school, I was reading aloud from a book in English class during a rape scene, and one girl broke down in the middle of class. I think in that case, the girl was just reacting as most humans do, even if most of us held it together; however, remembering this moment caused me to consider: I think a student with this type of trauma history may have a right to not have to relive her past trauma to pass 11th grade English. Advanced placement (AP) classes, on the other hand, are not required. Can we find middle ground here?

The Level 3 hearing can be heard in its entirety at timestamp 3:16:13. It is very long. There are 3 challengers who each get 10 minutes. Dr. Lambert gets 10 minutes to defend the administrators and then there are board questions and discussion.

The board voted that the level 2 committee followed the policy.

The motion was to reinstate the books as instructional material in curriculum.

Trustee Skeeter Hubert – NO

Trustee Theresa Wagaman – NO

Trustee Stacey Chase – YES

Trustee Datren Williams – YES

Trustee Melissa Dungan – NO

Trustee Tiffany Baumann Nelson – NO

Trustee Misty Odenweller – NO

The next motion was to uphold the committee’s decision

Trustee Skeeter Hubert – YES

Trustee Theresa Wagaman – YES

Trustee Stacey Chase – NO

Trustee Datren Williams – NO

Trustee Melissa Dungan – YES

Trustee Tiffany Baumann Nelson – YES

Trustee Misty Odenweller – YES

Next School Board Meeting: Tuesday, July 16, 2024.

Sign up for public comment

Follow the link below to sign up for public comment or arrive between 5:30 and 6pm to sign up in person before the start of the meeting. The meeting will be at Deane L. Sadler Administration/Technology Center located at 3205 W. Davis Street, Conroe, Texas, 77304.

Board Meeting Information – Conroe ISD