Report: Three middle school kids are being accused of sexual harassment under Title IX after using the wrong pronouns

Share:

KIEL, WI- According to reports, an investigation has been launched as three middle school students are facing allegations of sexual harassment under Title IX after they repeatedly called one of their classmates by the student’s wrong pronouns.

Rosemary Rabidoux, the parent of 13-year-old Braden, who is one of the three eighth-grade Kiel Middle School students being accused of the sexual harassment, said in a statement:

“I received a phone call from the principal over at the elementary school, forewarning me; letting me know that I was going to be receiving an email with sexual harassment allegations against my son. I immediately went into shock! I’m thinking sexual harassment? That’s rape, that’s inappropriate touching, that’s incest. What has my sone done?”

Rosemary disputes that her son has be involved in any sort of sexual harassment, adding:

“[The investigating principal] said he’s being allegedly charge with sexual harassment for not using proper pronouns. I thought it wasn’t real! I thought this has got to be a gag, a joke — one has nothing to do with the other.”

Attorneys for the Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty, who are representing the accused students, have demanded that the Kiel Area School District stop the Title IX investigation into the three students. The institute wrote in a letter to administrators:

“The complaint against these boys, and the District’s ongoing investigation, are wholly inappropriate and should be immediately dismissed. The mere use of biologically correct pronouns not only does not constitute sexual harassment under Title IX or the District’s own policy, it is also speech protected by the First Amendment.”

https://fundourpolice.com/

The attorney’s letter accused the school district of stretching Title IX to police student speech and added that the students were themselves subjected to yelling and name-calling for refusing to use nonbiological pronouns, even as administrators failed to use the student’s preferred pronouns. The letter said, in part:

“The use of ‘they/them’ pronouns, in particular, is awkward, grammatically incorrect, and until recently, unheard of. Indeed, illustrating how difficult it is to refer to a single person as a ‘they/them,’ our clients have frequently heard the Title IX investigator, teacher, other staff, and students refer to the student in question using she/her pronouns.”

Reportedly, one of the alleged incidents Braden and the others were involved in happened in April. Rosemary Rabidoux explained:

“She had been screaming at one of Braden’s friends to use proper pronouns, calling him profanity and this friend is very soft-spoken, and kind of just sunk down into his chair. Braden finally came up, defending him, saying ‘He doesn’t have to use proper pronouns, it’s his constitutional right to not use, you can’t make him say things.'”

Others have said that this could show that Rosemary and her son are against the LGBTQ+ community, to which Rosemary responded by saying:

“Not at all. Not at all! My children have been raised to love everybody equally.”

Deputy counsel Luke Berg at Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty said in a statement:

“Title IX sexual harassment typically covers things like rape, dating violence, quid pro quo sexual favors; really egregious stuff. There’s nothing even remotely close to that alleged in this case.”

Berg added that the misuse of pronouns is not a part of the school district’s police or Title IX. He said:

“The charge against students for sexual harassment is an extreme abuse of the Title IX process. It’s totally inappropriate and is totally being mishandled by the school district.”

Berg blasted the district’s actions for setting a “terrible precedent” that would have “enormous ramifications.” He added:

“School administrators can’t force minor students to comply with their preferred mode of speaking. And they certainly shouldn’t be slapping eighth graders with Title IX investigations for what amounts to protected speech.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Just a coincidence? Reports surface that SEC and DOJ launching investigation into Elon Musk after Twitter offer

April 15th, 2022

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On the heels of billionaire Elon Musk’s offer to buy Twitter, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice are reportedly launching a joint investigation into Musk.

This is interesting timing, especially given that leftists have been gnashing their teeth over the possibility that, under Musk, conservative Twitter users might actually find themselves on a platform that allows free speech.

Fox Business’s Charles Gasparino recently reported on the potential investigations on Neil Cavuto’s “Your World.”

Gasparino told Cavuto:

“He’s under investigation, a joint investigation, by the DOJ and the SEC over lots of stuff, including some of the stuff involving how he went about accumulating his shares on Twitter and how he disclosed that, whether he properly disclosed his intentions—which was obviously a full takeover—also some of this stuff with Tesla, you know, just disclosures there.”

Gasparino continued:

“It’s a joint investigation, it’s serious, I’m not saying — a lot of these investigations turn up nothing—-  they’ve been looking at him for a long time, so you would think by now they’d have something, but they’re clearly—I spoke with a source, very close to it, who says it’s a serious investigation by the DOJ and the SEC into all those matters.”

Gasparino did not elaborate further on the specifics of the SEC/DOJ investigation.

However, according to Reuters:

“Former securities officials and professors said Tesla Inc’s chief executive may have missed a key disclosure deadline and filed the wrong paperwork when he bought 9% of Twitter Inc, a platform regularly used by the outspoken billionaire.

“Securities and Exchange Commission regulators could use any shortfall to try to punish Musk more for other lapses, some believe.”

Reuters goes on to note that U.S. securities law requires disclosure within 10 days of acquiring more than 5% of a company, and that Musk did not meet that deadline.

Adam C. Pritchard, a law professor at University of Michigan Law School, told the outlet:

“This is not really a gray area.

“He acquired it and didn’t file within 10 days.

“It’s a violation. And so this is a slam-dunk case from the SEC perspective.”

Elon Musk has already dealt with actions by the SEC after a 2018 tweet in which he stated:

“Am considering taking Tesla private at $420.

“Funding secured.”

According to CNBC, the SEC sued Musk for fraud, alleging that Musk issued “‘false and misleading’ statements” on Tesla in his Twitter announcement.

Ultimately, Musk and Tesla settled with the government.  Both paid fines of $20 million to the SEC, and Musk had to step down temporarily from his position as chairman of Tesla’s board.

In addition, in June 2020, the SEC claimed that Musk violated a directive to have his tweets preapproved.

CNBC reports:

“Musk had tweeted that Tesla’s stock price was too high, which sent the shares down.”

A recent Ted Talk discussion on his run-ins with the SEC and his offer to buy Twitter led Musk to refer to SEC regulators as “bastards.”

At the TED 2022 Conference in Vancouver on Thursday, April 14, Musk sat down with TED Chief Chris Anderson.

He told Anderson regarding the SEC investigation into his 2018 tweet on Tesla:

“Funding was indeed secured. 

“And I should say why I do not have respect for the SEC in that situation, and I don’t mean to blame everyone at the SEC, certainly the San Francisco office.

“It’s because the SEC knew funding was secured, but they pursued an active public investigation nonetheless.

“At the time, Tesla was in a precarious financial situation, and I was told by the banks that if I did not agree to settle with the SEC, that they would, the banks would cease providing working capital, and Tesla would go bankrupt immediately.”

https://fundourpolice.com/

He continued:

“So, that’s like having a gun to your child’s head.

“So I was forced to concede to the SEC, unlawfully, those bastards, and now it makes it look like I lied when I did not in fact lie.

“I was forced to admit that I lied to save Tesla’s life, and that’s the only reason.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Radical left-wing group tweets about vandalizing SUVs in wealthy areas, and Twitter refuses to remove posts

Originally published April 12, 2022

VANCOUVER, CANADA – A radical collective of climate activists blames SUVs for contributing to carbon emissions so the group has a global call to action that involves deflating the tires of large vehicles that are in wealthy areas.

Adbusters, which is based in Canada and describes itself on Twitter as a global network of activists, writers, artists, designers, hackers, tricksters, poets, philosophers and punks, is promoting “The SUV Flat Tire Challenge” as a way to tackle climate change.

The “challenge” involves deflating tires on SUVs in affluent communities by wedging gravel into the valves so that the air leaks out.

The tires of private jet planes appear to be off limits.

"I'm being treated unfairly": Accused cop-killer complains that defense lawyers keep dropping his case

“Adbusters” does not consider the safety issues involved with their call to vandalize a victim’s vehicle.

On April 6, Adbusters tweeted the following thread, which included step-by-step instructions for activists to follow:

“Time to do something about SUVs.

“They’re the 2nd-largest contributor to the increase in global CO2 emissions since 2010, more than aviation.

“This is a gentle escalation of methods to drive the urgency of this climate crisis home and engender a systemic aversion to SUVs.

“So here’s what we do: Wedge gravel in the tire valves, leaflet the SUV to let them know the tires are flat and why it was done, and walk away.

“It’s that simple. If we organize, we can hit enough SUVs in particular neighborhoods to spark reporting and spread the metameme.

“We do this neighbourhood-at-a-time to make the biggest splash. Organize a crew (off of any traceable apps) and make leaflets that lay out the case for climate action.

“The mission is not to win individual converts at this point, but to engender a systemic aversion to SUVs.

“Climate change is the biggest crisis we’ve faced as a species, and we are failing the test at every step.

“It is time for us to carefully escalate our methods in a non-violent manner and convey the seriousness of this crisis in tangible ways.

“A flat tire is non-violent. There is no property damage. But it is a huge pain in the ass.

“We’ve seen this method succeed in Sweden, and have initial success in the UK with @T_Extinguishers (articles warning off SUV purchases at risk of being targeted). Time to go global.

“Targeting SUVs is good way to hit the automotive industry where it hurts. SUV sales are playing a massive role in the expansion of the auto industry, both as a percentage of global market share and in total numbers.

“And that increase is setting the climate back massively.

“Start by targeting wealthy areas—our goal isn’t to disrupt workers—and avoid targeting vehicles with disabled stickers or hangers.

“To quote Malm, ‘If we cannot even get rid of the most preposterously unnecessary emissions, how are we going to begin moving towards zero?’”

Twitter has not removed Adbuster’s tweets as of this writing despite its terms of service warning against engaging in targeted harassment of others or inciting other people to do so.

Under the heading “abusive behavior,” Twitter notes in its “help center”:

“You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else’s voice.”

Twitter then gives its rationale for its rule:

“On Twitter, you should feel safe expressing your unique point of view. We believe in freedom of expression and open dialogue, but that means little as an underlying philosophy if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. 

“In order to facilitate healthy dialogue on the platform, and empower individuals to express diverse opinions and beliefs, we prohibit behavior that harasses or intimidates, or is otherwise intended to shame or degrade others. In addition to posing risks to people’s safety, abusive behavior may also lead to physical and emotional hardship for those affected. 

“Learn more about our approach to policy development and our enforcement philosophy.”

Twitter then suggests there is flexibility built into the rule under its “when this applies” section. The same section makes no mention of a person’s socioeconomic status as a potential target for abuse:

“Some Tweets may seem to be abusive when viewed in isolation, but may not be when viewed in the context of a larger conversation. When we review this type of content, it may not be clear whether it is intended to harass an individual, or if it is part of a consensual conversation.

“To help our teams understand the context of a conversation, we may need to hear directly from the person being targeted, to ensure that we have the information needed prior to taking any enforcement action.

“We will review and take action against reports of accounts targeting an individual or group of people with any of the following behavior within Tweets or Direct Messages.

“For accounts engaging in abusive behavior on their profile, please refer to our abusive profile policy.

“For behavior targeting people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease, this may be in violation of our hateful conduct policy.”

Under the heading “encouraging or calling for others to harass an individual or group of people,” Twitter states:

“We prohibit behavior that encourages others to harass or target specific individuals or groups with abusive behavior. This includes, but is not limited to; calls to target people with abuse or harassment online and behavior that urges offline action such as physical harassment.” 

Adbusters notes in its online manifesto:

“Join us as we take down Big Tech. Clean up the toxic areas of our mental environment.

“Reverse the upward flow of wealth. Punish every corporation that betrays the public trust. Hold corrupt politicians accountable. Wake up a thoughtless, complacent culture.

“Fight the psychological takeover of the all-seeing advertising–surveillance industry. Quit following and retweeting . . . start thinking, speaking and acting for ourselves.

“Our aim is to catalyze a sudden unexpected moment of truth, a stunning reversal of perspective — a global mind shift — from which the corpo-consumerist forces never fully recover.

“Join us . . . and fuck up every system that keeps you from living your dreams.”

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First

 

Share:
Submit a Correction
Related Posts