The commenter explicitly says, "STRONGLY OPPOSE these irrational policies" and ends with "I STRONGLY OPPOSE the implementation of these policies." The body argues the policies are unenforceable, threaten privacy, and violate First Amendment rights, all of which indicate rejection rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support any guidelines that treat transgendered students fairly and with respect." They further affirm that "everyone deserves to be treated equitably," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and explains that it will "protect transgender and non-binary students from bullying, harassment, and discrimination." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "We strongly support the rights of transgender people," which directly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The statement that "Everyone deserves to feel valued" further indicates approval of protections for transgender students.


Strongly Support Transgender Student Safety and Equality

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying that "Policies that provide a safe space for trans students" are beneficial. They frame the regulation as creating safety and support for "all students," which is clear approval rather than a request for changes or a neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support these protections," and describes the bills as codifying protections for transgender and non-binary students. They also endorse school boards adopting policies "consistent with, or even more comprehensive than" the VDOE model policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support trans students" and states that "Virginia schools must do everything they can to ensure students can be who they are at school." This clearly endorses the proposed policies and their protective goals.


Long time coming - proud Fairfax Co alum

The commenter explicitly says, "I completely support this bill" and describes the policy as "a long time coming." They also argue it would help trans and gender nonconforming students feel "accepted, loved and safe," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues that schools should "leave your political agendas out of our schools," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The statement that the guidance is "garbage" and is "harming our children" further shows opposition to adoption.


Strongly support trans protections for students

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support the guidance" and frames it as "protection for trans students in va schools." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161." They also endorse the policy goals by praising a "safe, welcoming, and inclusive environment" and saying "ALL students benefit" from these measures.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds that "there is no reason we should not support all people no matter their gender," which clearly endorses the regulation. No opposing or qualifying language is present.


Strongly support the safe and equal treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation's adoption for the "safe and equal treatment of transgender students."


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "NO! Stop the indoctrination" and says "Stop indoctrinating our young children in the new woke philosophy," which clearly opposes adoption of the transgender student model policies. The language targets the regulation itself rather than asking for changes or clarification.


The commenter explicitly says, "This bill must be stopped" and "I oppose such insanity," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also argue it would infringe on children's rights and object to bathroom/shower access for transgender students, indicating opposition to the policy's core provisions.


The commenter explicitly says "Stop this bill!" and argues against the policy on the grounds that children should not be forced to share bathrooms or showers with transgender students. This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose transgender in schools!!" and "No transgender in our school system!!" which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The religious framing (“what the Bible says,” “sexed by God”) reinforces opposition to adoption.


OPPOSE - Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully OPPOSE the Model Policies" and argues they are "wrong to impose these political views on our children." They also invoke "freedom of speech and freedom of religion" as reasons against the policies, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they are "firmly vocal regarding their rights" and frames the policy as protecting transgender students. They also criticize opponents and endorse the idea that treatment involves "allowing the person to live the gender they identify with," which supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal: "Absolutely not ...on the policy that you want to put n place." This is a clear statement against adopting the transgender student policy, even though the comment is brief and informal.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose transgender policy," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose transgender policy," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The comment explicitly states "Oppose" in both the title and body, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language or alternative suggestions are provided.


I will never send my kids to public school if this agenda is adopted by Virginia.

The commenter explicitly says, "I will never send my kids to public school if this agenda is adopted" and repeats that it is "dangerous" and "not safe." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies and an attempt to deter adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these guidelines" and repeatedly argues against the policy's provisions. They object to the lack of parental notification, student self-identification, and restroom/locker room access, concluding that "There has to be a better way forward than these Model Policies."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and says "Stop this policy now and rethink it." They argue the policy violates rights and object to specific provisions such as "allowing biological males into the female locker room" and "denying parents their rights," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter asks to "Provide separate facilities for transgender students," which rejects the policy’s inclusive approach and instead supports segregation. The opening plea to "Protect our Precious children" frames the regulation as a threat, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, saying they are "disgusted with this proposal" and "We must not allow this to happen to our children or our families." They frame it as government overreach and a threat to parental rights, indicating opposition to adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed policy" and repeatedly argues against it, calling it "ludicrous," "arrogant," and a "dangerous precedent." They also object to pronoun requirements, gender identity guidance, restroom access, and say the policy should not be forced on schools and families.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "Absolutely not" and "I whole-heartedly disagree with this policy." They also ask leaders to "remove rights from parents," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this set of guidelines" and argues that schools should "honor all children." The comment endorses the policies as helping students feel safe and supported, with no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONLY OPPOSE" and calls the policy "abominable" and "abhorrent." They also argue that "Schools AND THE GOVERNMENT need to STAY OUT OF families," which clearly rejects the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Transgender policy--strongly oppose" and asks that "this gets denyed." They object to opposite-sex locker room sharing and argue for parental permission and notification, indicating rejection of the proposed policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly opposed to this proposal," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also criticize it as having "absolutely nothing to do with educating children" and say it is "Setting children up for nothing but trouble," reinforcing rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and describes it as creating "inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth." The final sentence, "People should be free to express themselves and society should support them," reinforces approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "My family strongly OPPOSES the proposed policy changes" and later urges VDOE to "stop the nonsense." Although they support anti-bullying protections and suggest separate facilities if adopted, the overall message rejects the policy as overstepping school boundaries.


The commenter explicitly says "Support for HB145/SB161" and states that "These policies will allow trans and non-binary youth to be safer" and ensure "an equal educational experience." The overall message advocates adoption of the policies to protect transgender students from harm, bullying, harassment, and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to any policy" and rejects policies that "promote and encourage children to share restrooms and changing facilities." They also state they will not support lawmakers who back such policies and argue they "take parental rights away from parents."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am not for this at all" and that it "needs to be voted against," which clearly opposes adoption. The threat to "pull my children from public school and homeschool them if this gets passed" reinforces strong rejection of the policy.


Absolutely OPPOSE the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely and vehemently oppose this!!" and repeats that they "absolutely oppose this model of policies." They argue the policies infringe on parental rights, are immoral, and violate "the separation of church and state," all of which indicate clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree with with policy" and argues that "teaching transgender children without parent’s knowledge is not acceptable." They also reject transgender bathroom/locker room access and sex-specific sports participation, indicating opposition to the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree with with policy" and argues that "teaching transgender children without parent’s knowledge is not acceptable." They also reject transgender-inclusive bathroom, locker room, and sports provisions, saying "girls go to girls bathrooms/locker rooms and boys go to boys bathrooms/ locker rooms."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and urges society to "abandon this radical ideology." They also reject the guidance on multiple grounds, saying it undermines "science," "language," and "privacy/safety," and call "opening up bathrooms and locker rooms" "a terrible idea."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed transgender policy" and criticizes it as a "progressive topic" that wastes "tax payer money." They also urge policymakers to "do what is right," implying rejection of the proposal rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "Absolutely not" and says "My child will not participate" in it. They argue against transgender accommodations, stating children are "by nature, a boy or girl" and object to shared restroom access and related school practices.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose!" and repeats "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and asks to "Please support and pass." They also endorse the policy goal of ensuring "all students are free from discrimination and harassment in schools."


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not implement this policy," which is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation. They also describe the changes as "unfair" and likely to create "unending problems for teachers and administrators," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter says, "I absolutely strongly oppose this measure," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also argue it "ruins Title 9 for girls" and claim it will encourage harm in bathrooms, reinforcing that they want it rejected.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and argues that "Transgender students deserve equal rights" and should not experience "fear and bigotry while in school." This clearly endorses the proposed policies rather than opposing them.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Appose!" and repeatedly urges officials to "vote no." They argue the policy will cause "headace and discrimination" and call it "nonsence," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Extremely opposed" and repeatedly argues the policy is "WRONG!!!" They object to the burdens on "students and faculty... and parents" and claim it will create "fear and intimidation" and a "hostile learning environment," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies by VDOE" and repeatedly urges rejection, including "Stop the insanity." They argue the policies "strip parents and teachers of all rights" and would create safety and legal problems, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this bill" and argues it should be "rewritten somehow" because it allegedly endangers non-transgender children. They object to transgender students being allowed to "change/dress/use restroom with other children of the opposite sex," which indicates opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "Totally disagree" and "I stand against any policy that supports and promotes" this guidance. They argue it has "no place in the public school arena" and call it "dangerous and totally unscientific," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY OPPOSE," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. No additional explanation or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policies, calling them "unacceptable." They object to school involvement, transgender recognition, and access to dress, restroom, and locker room choices, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Fully support," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting any opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and says the policy is "beyond concerning" and that "we are dropping the responsibility by doing this." They argue the regulation would undermine child safety and adult responsibility, indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


against transphobia - in support of the bill

The commenter explicitly says, "I supported it" and states that the bill "addresses discrimination against a portion of the student body." They also endorse state guidance for "All students' needs" and do not express any opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly affirms trans people and says "we will support and protect you at all costs," which clearly endorses the policy’s protective aims. The message is directed at "trans youth and ANY trans person" and expresses support for their inclusion and safety in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and "I do not agree with this," indicating rejection of the regulation. The appeal to "protecting all children not just the minority" frames the policy as something they do not want adopted.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this legislation in the strongest of terms," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the bill" and adds, "We must support all students, and that includes Trans students." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly rejects the Department's role in this policy, saying it is "a Mental Health Issue" and that the agency is "neither qualified nor warranted" to make such decisions. Phrases like "Stay in your lane" and "STAY IN YOUR LANE" indicate opposition to adopting the transgender student guidance as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly apposed" and argues the policy "will cause more harm" and is "not keeping any of the children safe." They warn against moving forward with the policy and say they believe it should not be adopted because it could enable abuse in bathrooms and harm children.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "This is good for all children," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The mention of "trans & non-binary students" indicates support for the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


OPPOSE - THIS SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE SCHOOL SYSTEM

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this" and repeatedly argues that "Transgender politics do not belong in the schools". They also ask to "Have a 'Transgender Restroom' available" instead of the policy, indicating rejection of the regulation as written and a desire to weaken it substantially.


The commenter states, "I strongly oppose," which directly expresses rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this" and calls the proposal "appalling." They object to transgender-inclusive bathroom, locker room, and sports provisions, asking, "Why should a boy be in the bathroom or Locker room with girls?" and threatening to homeschool if adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and states that it "furthers" Virginia's progress toward inclusivity. They also argue the policies are "vital" for making students feel "safe and supported," especially LGBTQ+ students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines," which directly rejects the regulation. The rationale given—"radical theories" that "eradicate all distinctions between male and female" and "indoctrinate our school children"—shows opposition to the transgender student policies themselves.


YES YES - how can we be anything but anti-discrimination?

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth" and frames the policy as necessary anti-discrimination protection. They also urge action to "protect our children," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally opposed to this proposed legislation," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. They also argue against it on multiple grounds, including "parental rights," "spiritual convictions," and burden on schools, reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this!!!" and repeatedly rejects the policy, objecting to any implication that a parent telling children to "embrace how God made them" could be considered abuse. They also criticize the regulation as "absolutely disgusting" and say "Don't go threatening parents," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the policy.


This would cause psychological pain for any other children

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this being brought up as an option" and repeatedly argues against the policy for elementary and high school students. They express concern about bathroom access, locker rooms, and sports, saying "I'm not ok with this" and that it would lead to "all kinds of problems."


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!" and repeats "OPPOSE," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies" and argues the school system should not be involved in transgender rights. They also reject transgender students' access to facilities and sports, stating that a biologically male student should "shower, dress out, race or compete with the boys."


ABSOLUTELY OPPOSE THIS TRANSGENDER EDUCATION

The commenter explicitly says they "completely oppose" the policy and pleads, "PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS!!" They object to children being taught to "go against their natural gender," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy would "violat[e] the civil rights of others" and "usurp[] parental authority." They also say schools should "stick to teaching the basic subjects" and leave matters like sexuality to parents, indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "No child should feel uncomfortable being who they are" and that "Education should be an inclusive place." This clearly endorses adopting the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues against the policy, stating it is "very disturbing" and that allowing "boys in girls restrooms will cause more harm than good." The comment also rejects the policy's approach to school involvement and parental role, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this legislation in the strongest terms," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also argue it will "harm our kids emotionally and socially" and that "Government has no right to dictate these policies in our schools," reinforcing opposition to adoption.


Oppose: infringing on many different faiths and hurtful to young children

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and repeatedly argues it should not pass, calling it "a detriment to the mental health of all children" and saying it would "infringe on our rights as Americans." The comment frames the policy as harmful to faith, parents' rights, and young children, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose for religious reasons," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also object to restroom sharing and call it a "liability issue for the school," reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. The title "Fully support!" reinforces that they want the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this!" which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting arguments or qualifications are provided.


Strongly oppose. Please protect our children.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the Statewide Transgender School Policy," which is a direct rejection of the regulation. The follow-up, "Please protect our children," reinforces opposition framed as concern about the policy's impact.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and argues that "These changes will put all children at risk," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The rhetorical question about whether proponents "care about the safety of our children" further indicates opposition based on safety concerns.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the proposed policies "infringe upon the rights of parents" and could be "detrimental to non-transgender students." This is a clear rejection of the regulation rather than support for adoption with changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Opposed" and calls the policy "completely crazy and uncalled for." They object to schools addressing a child's gender without parental consultation and say their child will not remain in public school if it passes, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly disagree" and criticizes the policy as part of "decisions like this." The body frames gender-related policy as misguided, contrasting it with abortion and stating people are "either Male or Female," which indicates rejection of the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this," and argues the policy would reduce safety for daughters in locker rooms and restrooms. The concern that a "male" could enter without being questioned indicates rejection of the transgender student policy on safety grounds.


In support of discrimination-free schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I support policies and standards that promote safe and supportive learning environments for everyone, including transgender students." They also describe the policy as creating schools "free from discrimination and harassment" and express approval of the document and its guiding principles.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this policy being considered," and argues against school staff using a student's affirmed name and gender. They also reject the policy on ideological grounds, calling public schools "radical liberal institutions" and saying it should not be put into practice.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Support" and says the policy "would be a step in the right direction" to protect transgender youth. Although they note it "isn't perfect," the overall message clearly favors adoption with improvements rather than rejection.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the well-being of trans individuals," which clearly endorses the regulation. The title "Fully Support" reinforces that the commenter wants the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly opens with "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy "goes well beyond what is practical and necessary." They object to pronoun requirements, bathroom-related provisions, and broader transgender-inclusive procedures, while preferring case-by-case accommodations instead of "sweeping policies."


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose the new transgender guidelines," which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. The title, "Oppose new transgender guidelines," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly says they "Strongly,strongly disagree" in response to the transgender student policies, indicating clear opposition to the regulation. No supportive or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely oppose transgender policy," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The explanation that it "infringes on the rights of many more people than it protects" further indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly disagree," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation!" which directly states opposition to the proposed policies. The follow-up, "It is not good for our kids!" reinforces that they want it rejected.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Absolutely not" and gives a reason for opposition: "biblical." This indicates they do not want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this new policy" and calls it "unacceptable." They also state it will affect their decision to send their children to public school, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues that teachers discussing sexuality with minors without parental consent should be criminal. This directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies, which include guidance on student treatment and privacy in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. They also cite concerns that it "disregard[s] parental rights, students’ privacy rights, and the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators," indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I personally oppose this policy" and "I do not agree with it," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The suggestion about being "on board with a 3rd facility" is a conditional alternative, not support for the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this policy" and asks to "reconsider forcing this policy on our schools." They argue it conflicts with "anti-bullying policies," "religious freedom rights," and "parental rights," and call it "aggressive policies," all indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Support" and asks to "Please protect our vulnerable trans students by enacting a K-12 policy." They also describe the proposal as "a good start," indicating approval of adoption, possibly with further action later.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this for our school children" and urges, "Do not vote for this!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies rather than a request for changes or clarification.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support this guidance" and adds "We need to support all of our children," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no opposing language or request to weaken it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I whole-heartedly support this policy" and repeatedly urges approval of protections for transgender students. They also endorse specific provisions like "safety nets, privacy, and gender-concordant bathrooms and locker rooms," indicating support for the regulation as written or strengthened.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am in support of protections for transgender children," which directly endorses the regulation’s purpose. No opposing or qualifying language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please support the rights and inclusion of transgender and nonbinary students" and asks the agency to support them. They also state, "I support transgender people, including children and adolescents," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No additional context or qualifications are provided.


Many people opposing this policy have come from a right-wing site telling them lies and distortions.

The commenter explicitly urges readers to "support our transgender children" and defends the policy against criticism, saying opponents were misled by a "right-wing site" that "distorts and omits a LOT of details." The comment clearly favors adoption of the regulation rather than rejection or weakening.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am in full support of this guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. The title, "Fully Support," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the guidance is "overbroad" and that it "trample[s] the rights of others." Although they say they support accommodation to prevent harassment or bullying, the overall position is that the guidelines should not be adopted in their current form.


In strong support of support of transgender youth in Virginia public schools

The commenter explicitly gives their "full support of this legislation" and says the policy's "core aims" are to promote the safety of trans students. They repeatedly argue that LGBTQ+ and trans students should be protected from discrimination and conclude by hoping trans students feel "safer and more accepted" in public schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines," which directly rejects the regulation. They also argue it should be rejected because it ignores "Parental rights" and fails to honor "Religious beliefs and conscience," indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


Equal Rights for all people including LGBTQ

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and praises "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender students." They also endorse the policy’s purpose by emphasizing "fair and equal treatment for all people."


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose the transgender policy as it is being proposed." This is a clear rejection of the regulation in its current form.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


Reject the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "Reject the Model Policies" and states they are "harmful to children" and "undermine the rights of parents and families." This is a clear request to reject the regulation rather than adopt it.


The commenter explicitly says "vehemently OPPOSE" and "I am fully against this." They argue the policy would let schools "hide information from parents" and act "without parental knowledge or consent," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "a step forward towards equal, inclusive treatment" and that "We need legislation like this to make school safer." They argue it protects trans youth from discrimination and harassment, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose!" and asks, "Please ensure that this policy is not issued." They object that it would interfere with parental guidance and "makes no allowance for religious considerations," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, opening with "Please stop this destructive nonsense" and arguing that schools should not "hide information from parents" or act "without parental knowledge or consent." The final sentence says it will "destroy our children, schools, families, and society," indicating strong opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and argues against allowing transgender students access to bathrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender identity. They say this is "traumatic," "simply a chaotic and traumatic encounter," and ask to "Please consider the grand scope of what is at stake here," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes" and opens with "Strongly ***OPPOSE!***". They argue the policy disregards "parental rights," "students’ privacy rights," and "the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The comment is explicitly titled "Oppose" and the body says "Parents job is removed," indicating the commenter believes the policy undermines parental authority. This is a clear objection to the regulation rather than a request for clarification or neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please REJECT Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students," which directly opposes adoption. They also object that the policies would be "circumventing parents" and providing validation and "services," indicating they want the proposal rejected rather than modified.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!" in response to the transgender guidelines, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this," and argues the policy "goes way beyond prevention and crosses the line into mandatory promotion" of an ideology. They also say it is "damaging to kids" and that it makes them want to remove their daughters from public schools, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and says "New policies are not required for this," indicating rejection of the proposed regulation. They argue existing policies already protect students and warn the new policy could be misused, showing opposition to adoption.


The comment only says "STRONGLY DISAGREE!!" without stating what part of the proposed regulation is being rejected or why. Although the wording suggests opposition, it is too vague and uninterpretable to confidently classify the commenter’s position on adoption of the regulation itself.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this measure" and "I support any measure that moves us toward a world where gender is truly a non-issue." They also frame the policy as an "over due adjustment of social values," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this proposed legislation," which directly states opposition to adoption. No supporting arguments or qualifications are provided.


Alpha Omega Kappa Fraternity supports the guidance.

The commenter explicitly says, "We support this guidance for trans youth in Virginia" and frames it as beneficial because "an affirming environment can save lives and increase the quality of life." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "unacceptable." They object to schools addressing students' gender expression without parental knowledge and specifically oppose bathroom and locker room access for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Completely Opposed!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and repeatedly argues the government and school system are "overstepping" and should not have this influence on children. They frame the policy as "clear discrimination" and reject it on religious and parental-rights grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support 100%" and argues in favor of allowing the child to use the bathroom, wear a dress to prom, and join the girls' field hockey team. The final plea, "Please really think about this," is framed as support for the proposed transgender student policies rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this policy - it is fundamentally evil," and repeatedly argues against adopting the regulation. They describe the policy as "reckless," "evil," and likely to cause "division" and "violence," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "This is an awful idea!" and "Do not change it," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. They argue against restroom access based on sex assigned at birth and say the policy would "take away the rights of everyone."


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly Oppose!!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "oppose" in the title and repeatedly argues that "Enacting these guidelines" would violate teachers' speech and faith rights, empower students over parents, and amount to "suppression, not engagement." They conclude the document reads like a "left wing blog post" rather than balanced legislation, indicating clear rejection of the proposal.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly support the bill" and repeatedly endorses the policy as creating a "safe, respected, and supported" environment. They also argue it improves mental health outcomes and want "more communities and schools like ours," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Strongly oppose transgender school policy - Genesis 1:27

The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly oppose transgender school policy" and cites Genesis 1:27 as the basis for that opposition. The religious quotation about God creating "male and female" is used to reject the proposed transgender student policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support" the proposed policies. The phrase "Not biblical" indicates opposition on religious grounds rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the creation of standards" and describes the policy as "strong action" that will create a "safe and inclusive educational experience" for transgender and non-binary students. They also express hope for related inclusive sex education, reinforcing clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and states that the policy "completely goes against women’s rights for safety," indicating rejection of the regulation. The comment frames the policy as a threat to safety rather than supporting adoption with changes.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. No qualifying language or objections are included.


The commenter explicitly says "100% Opposed" and states that schools should focus on "education quality instead of programs intent on sexually confusing a generation of children." They also reject the policy as inconsistent with "biology" and "every organized religion in America," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, saying they do not want anyone "brainwashing" children and that "This whole thing makes no sense." They also argue for separate facilities and warn that if it passes, there will be "a lot of homeschool and private school children," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds "Trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The comment contains only the title "Gender" and no body text, so it does not express support, opposition, or a clear question about the regulation. With no substantive content, the commenter’s position cannot be determined.


RE: Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools

The commenter explicitly states that GLSEN is in "strong support" of the proposed policies and says they "supports the adoption of the proposed guidance." The rest of the comment offers suggested revisions and clarifying edits, which indicates support with modifications rather than opposition.


I Object the approval of the proposed transgender policies being considered by Virginia Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I Object the approval of the proposed transgender policies," which clearly opposes adoption. They also argue the policies violate "religious and personal beliefs" and would place children in "potential harmful situations," reinforcing rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY DISAGREE," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed policies. No supporting reasons are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally against this!!" and the title is "Oppose," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The reference to "try reading the Bible" suggests a religious objection to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please don't confuse these precious children about their God-given identity," which rejects the transgender student policies. The statement that "God created/designed male and female, and no one can change that" indicates opposition to the regulation's premise and implementation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender policy," which directly states opposition to the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly states, "I do not agree with this policy," which directly indicates opposition to adoption. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, but the stance is clear.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender policy," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The title "Strongly OBJECT" reinforces that they want it not adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "Trans kids deserve to be respected in schools," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. The phrase "Trans rights are human rights" further indicates approval of the regulation's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly oppose" the policy and urges officials "not to give into this perversion." They reject the premise of transgender inclusion, stating that "there are only two genders" and that "accepting transgenderism as normal is not the answer."


The commenter says, "I strongly disagree with gender confusion in schools," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The phrase "strongly disagree" indicates opposition rather than a neutral question or factual remark.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly(100+%) oppose any and all of this proposal!" which is a clear rejection of the regulation. The title "Open Restrooms!" suggests a specific objection related to restroom access, but the overall position is unambiguously opposed.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed !!" and states that "The confusion and harm caused by this policy is not acceptable," which clearly rejects the regulation. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly oppose the Model Policies" and argues the policy is a "very very dangerous path to take." They also cite negative consequences such as "safety issues and serious confusion," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support" and urges readers to "Love that transgender child" and treat transgender students "with dignity and grace." The comment argues against "fear mongering" and for acceptance, indicating clear support for the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and urges action: "please take this action!" They frame the regulation as "positive change," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "i strongly oppose this," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose this policy" and "DO NOT SUPPORT!" They argue the policy violates their Christian beliefs and claim it creates danger for girls by allowing boys or men into women's facilities.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and "This must be rejected!" which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support trans rights in school!" which clearly endorses the policy direction. The title, "Strongly support trans rights in schools," reinforces that they want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The reason given — "I don’t believe the school should discuss sexual or personal issues with students" — shows opposition to the regulation’s guidance on transgender student treatment.


The commenter explicitly says, "I, therefore, support creating inclusive and safe environments for our transgender youths." The opening title, "Support... anyone opposing this is close minded," also clearly endorses the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully and wholeheartedly support legislation" and frames the purpose as promoting "the health and well-being of trans youth." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


Trans Rights are supporting healthy growth

The commenter clearly endorses the policy’s goals, arguing that transgender students "deserve to live their life with just as many options" and that people should "allow each individual to grow with the same chances and the same opportunities." The comment defends transgender inclusion and rejects common objections, indicating support for the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly am opposed to creating transgender policies" and argues the policy would "negatively effects more than it positively effects." They also object to impacts on privacy, sports, and parental/religious rights, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please Vote No" and calls the policy "a vast overstep". They argue it "undermines/threatens parental authority" and should be rewritten, indicating opposition to adoption as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly Support the proposed policies." They also argue in favor of transgender inclusion and privacy protections, referencing psychological harm from suppression and supporting sports participation for transitioning students.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "Completely WRONG!" and "This garbage". They argue it "violates all parental rights" and "encourages my children to do things without parental knowledge or consent," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose any policy/mandate promoting gender confusion to children," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. The phrase "oppose any policy/mandate" leaves little ambiguity about their position.


The commenter explicitly says "VERY OPPOSED" and argues the policy "should be illegal to allow this," which clearly rejects adoption. The statement that it will "confuse our children" and that they lack the "mental capacity" further shows opposition to the regulation's substance.


The commenter says, "I’m strongly against transgender rights in schools," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also call the policies "confusing to young kids" and "not mentally or morally right," indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "Very strongly oppose" and describes the rules as "folly" and "dangerous." They object to students being able to choose locker rooms and change gender identities "without any proof beyond their own words," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as "Absolutely disgusting" and says it should not be "pushed on not just my kids but ALL kids." They argue for separate facilities for transgender students and raise objections about bathroom/locker room access and possible assaults, indicating opposition to the regulation.


Oppose, schools should prepare students for workforce, not sexualizing students

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues that "Matters dealing with child sexuality should be handled by the parent, not a school employee," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also criticize the policy as "pushing your agenda" and say schools should focus on academics instead.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "over reach" and something to "stay out of." They argue the state should "stay the hell out of how I raise my kids" and warn against pressing the issue further, indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also argue that "It is a parents job" and claim the policy causes "confusion and harm," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly disagree with supporting transgender!!!" which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The comment offers no qualifications or alternative changes, indicating opposition to adoption.


Absolutely not in support of this in our schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I am absolutely not in support of this ridiculousness," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. They also criticize the policy as "absurd" and object to teachers being pressured to accommodate student gender identity requests.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeats "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter says, "I am wholeheartedly opposed to this!" and asks to "Put education above everything els," indicating clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also describe the policies as "indoctrinated" and say they will not tolerate their daughter being around it, which reinforces opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it "completely unethical" and "wrong." They object to transgender accommodations in schools, including "bathrooms, locker rooms" and the withholding of information from parents.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and states that Black Lives Matter must include "black Transgender individuals," which aligns with backing the policy’s inclusion and protections for transgender students. The comment offers no criticism or request to weaken the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Approve Life-saving Policies" and repeatedly urges adoption: "These measures are necessary and life-saving" and "Please give our students a fighting chance." The comment frames the regulation as needed to protect transgender and gender non-conforming students from discrimination and violence.


Very strongly oppose!!! This is absolutely ridiculous!i

The commenter explicitly says, "Very strongly oppose!!!" and states, "This is wrong!" They also threaten to withdraw their children if the policy is adopted, saying they will be "removing my children" and homeschooling or sending them to private school.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed!!!" and calls the policy "totally unnecessary!!" They also describe it as "Liberal BS that's being pushed on everyone," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation.


Enabling confusion doesn't solve the problem.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "supporting this confusion doesn't help these students" and asking not to "make it political." The comment argues against recognizing transgender students and frames the regulation as enabling something the commenter believes is wrong.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this motion" and repeats that they "strongly oppose this motion." They argue children "shouldn’t be exposed to these types of issues" and object to "altering our values for a minority," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this policy" and reinforces it with "I strongly oppose this policy!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying support or questions.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please don’t take away the parental rights" and urges officials to "vote NO," which clearly opposes adoption of the policy. The argument that a child is not capable of making such decisions until 18 indicates objection to the regulation’s treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose!" which directly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues against the policy by objecting to students using locker rooms aligned with gender identity and to schools "encouraging them to change genders." The comment also demands parental notification about pronoun use, indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "You should oppose this policy of gender mandates," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also argue that "It is the parent's duty" and that the DOE should "stop reaching beyond their boundaries," indicating opposition to state guidance on transgender students.


Basic human decency - a tough concept for slime balls everywhere

The commenter explicitly endorses respecting transgender students, calling it "basic human rights" and saying there is "no excuse for a dissenting opinion". As a teacher, they describe affirming transgender students' existence and clearly support the policies' intent.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely not. Strongly oppose" and states their children will not attend public school if the policy is adopted. They describe the proposal as "outrageous and dangerous" and argue it threatens "our young women," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


STRONG OPPOSE!!! Do not bring this to our schools!

The commenter explicitly says "STRONG OPPOSE!!!" and "Do not bring this to our schools!" indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The statement "This is not something that should forced on our children" further shows opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and objects to "a new policy regarding transgender ideology in our schools." They argue parents should control when and whether children are taught about these topics and that teachers should focus only on academics, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not pass this legislation" and labels it "Strongly opposed." They argue that using gender-neutral pronouns is harmful and call the proposal "evil," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the Model Policies for Transgender students" and asks the government to "support this within our school systems." They also give a reason in favor of adoption, stating these students need support for their "emotional and mental health."


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Oppose" and says the policies "do not serve the best interests of Virginia's public school students and should be tabled." They argue the document is "anti-scientific" and harmful to children experiencing gender dysphoria, indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


Please SUPPORT - this is very important for mental and emotional health of our children

The commenter explicitly says "Please SUPPORT" and "I strongly support," which directly endorses the regulation. The title also frames it as "very important for mental and emotional health of our children," reinforcing approval.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill" and ends with "Please vote against this bill!" They argue the policy threatens privacy and safety in bathrooms/locker rooms and object to schools adopting "this agenda."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the proposed regulation. The follow-up phrase "Please consider the science" suggests they believe the policy is not scientifically supported, reinforcing their opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" the policy and frames it as protecting "Trans youth," which indicates clear approval of the regulation. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the proposal.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!!!!" which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. "From Great commonwealth of Virginia" adds no opposition or qualification.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states they "support any policies that prevent bullying and other discriminatory practices." This directly endorses the proposed regulation's purpose and implementation.


Strongly support! These children need support from everyone. No matter your beliefs or opinions.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and repeatedly urges that "These children need support" and "All children need to be treated equally." The comment advocates for the regulation's protective purpose, emphasizing mental health and anti-discrimination concerns rather than opposing any part of it.


The commenter explicitly says "555% in support!!!!!" and argues that protections for transgender students "can only bring positive change" and create "much safer and enjoyable learning/work environments." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I OPPOSE these and any policies that withhold information from parents about their own children." They also argue the policies would "indoctrinate students" and object to "allowing boys to use a girl's bathroom or locker room," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies as written.


Strongly Support from Parent who worries about children that might face bigotry

The commenter explicitly says they "Strongly Support" the policy and states they "would like to support my son and all children." The concern about children facing "bigotry" aligns with backing protections for transgender students and a supportive school environment.


Strongly Support!!! Accept all students with open arms!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!!!" and urges, "Please do this!" They also endorse the policy’s inclusive intent by saying students should be "held up and treated with love and acceptance."


Strongly SUPPORT on behalf of parents who care about children

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly SUPPORT" and asks to "Please support" the regulation. They also give a reason in favor of adoption, citing the "mental and emotional well being of children."


The commenter explicitly says "Firmly stand against evil" and "oppose" the proposal, indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The title "Disapprove of Transgender Forum" reinforces opposition to the transgender-related policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill" and ends with "please vote against this bill!" They argue the policy endangers girls in bathrooms/locker rooms and raises concerns about "sexual assault" and lack of parental notification.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and urges, "Do the right thing," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please support" and identifies themselves as a "proud Grandmother of Fairfax County students," indicating approval of the proposed policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strong support for trans kids!" and "VA Public Schools should support and include trans youth!" This clearly endorses the proposed policies and their inclusive treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill" and closes with "please vote against this bill!" They argue the policy endangers girls in bathrooms/locker rooms and raises concerns about parental notification and safety, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Potential violation of the first amendment - STRONGLY OPPOSE!

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and argues the regulation "violates freedom of speech" and is "absurd and unconstitutional." Although they express support for awareness and respect for transgender people, they reject the policy's requirement to use preferred names/pronouns.


I Strongly Support for health and emotional well being of our students

The commenter explicitly says, "I Strongly Support" and asks to "Please vote and support this Model Policy." They also justify support by referencing "health and emotional well being of our students."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed" to multiple core parts of the policy, including school handling of gender-related decisions, restroom access, and sports participation. They also state that "usurping parental rights... is not acceptable and has no place in our schools," indicating opposition to the regulation overall, even while supporting anti-bullying measures in limited respects.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Strongly Support" and argues that schools should create a space where "all students are able to learn comfortably" and that "Discrimination of any kind in schools is repugnant." They also endorse students' right to "express themselves and identify as they best see fit," which aligns with adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!" and argues that schools should not "instill beliefs" that differ from household beliefs. They characterize the policy as "a belief, not fact," indicating rejection of the transgender student guidance.


Please Support from Parents Concerned about Discrimination in our Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Please support on behalf of parents and families," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. There is no opposing language or substantive criticism.


The comment explicitly states "Oppose" in both the title and body, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy with the title "Trans rights are human rights" and asks to "please protect these kids." The body supports guidance and assurance for transgender students' "safety and well-being," indicating approval of the regulation's protective aims.


The title explicitly says "STRONG Support from Teacher," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed policies. The body is truncated and unclear, but it does not add any opposition or qualification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this!" which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. They also give a reason in favor, stating it is "important for children's mental and emotional health" and that they should "feel accepted."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the guidelines and calls them "confusing and indoctrinating". They also object to the policy's privacy provisions, saying it would "usurp parental rights" and keep parents from knowing what is happening at school.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and adds affirming language: "Trans rights are human rights" and "deserves to be recognized and protected." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose this bill" and asks to "Please reconsider this bill and revise" it. Their objections focus on bathroom/locker room access, parental notification, and perceived safety risks to girls, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


Another Teacher that STRONGLY SUPPORTS THIS!!

The commenter explicitly says they "STRONGLY SUPPORTS THIS" and calls it "a great first step for transgender protections." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states they "support the expansion of trans inclusive policies". They frame the policies as making "EVERYONE not just cis gendered people comfortable and safe In school," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "Fully support this," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting any opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says the policies are "necessary" and that "These policies are a step in the right direction," which clearly endorses adoption. They also ask that they be "equitable enforced," indicating support with implementation emphasis rather than opposition.


The comment explicitly says, "Please help the kids. Protect the kids. All the kids," which aligns with supporting policies intended to protect transgender students and maintain a safe environment. The statement "Trans people are people" further signals approval of the regulation's inclusive purpose, though the final "????" makes the intent slightly less certain.


The commenter explicitly says, "Our transgender students deserve support and respect" and "Stop the bullying," which endorses the policy’s protective aims. Although they express some reservation about the "gender-neutral dress code recommendation," they ask to "find language to support long-standing traditions while also being accommodating," indicating support with suggested changes rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and adds "Strongly support anything benefiting to the trans community," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this resolution" and emphasizes that "trans students are safe in school" and should be "protected like cis students already are." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the policy.


IN SUPPORT - end gender based dress codes

The commenter explicitly says "I am FULLY in support" of the policy. They also endorse ending "gender based clubs and dress codes," which aligns with the regulation's treatment of transgender students and sex-based dress code guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support transgender students’ rights in school!" and the title reads "Support Trans Rights!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly support" and says "Children need all the protection they can get!" They also describe a transgender student being bullied and falling behind, which supports the need for the proposed protections.


Recommend all those involved in the decision review this guidebook.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this proposal" and urges decision-makers to review a guidebook that provides "best practices" for supporting transgender students. The comment frames the policy as necessary for a "safe, healthy, and productive environment" and endorses it as part of creating "safe and supportive school environments for all."


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, calling it "absolutely disgusting" and "very very concerning and ridiculous." The statement that their children will "never step foot into a public school if this is passed" indicates strong opposition to adoption.


Strongly support - well-researched and necessary

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this well-researched, comprehensive guidance document" and calls it "a necessary and encouraging step." They also argue the policies are consistent with nondiscrimination law and protect transgender children from harassment and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this bill" and urges, "Please do the right thing," indicating clear approval of the regulation. They also argue that trans youth "need protection and support from our schools," which aligns with adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly urges approval by saying, "if you want your trans students to be traumatized... go ahead and oppose this," which clearly frames opposition as harmful. They also endorse the policy’s underlying goals, stating that "everybody should be able to use a bathroom that they feel comfortable in."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this change," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement that "These are people who have rights" reinforces approval of the policy's protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "please do not support this," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also cite "parental rights and responsibilities" and concern about "taking away the true focus of educators" as reasons for opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against the policy because of "locker rooms and bathrooms," "women's sports," and protecting "our girls." These statements indicate opposition to adopting the transgender student policies, especially around facilities access and sex-specific sports participation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of this document" and frames it as necessary "to protect the mental well being of trans youth." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly urges approval: "SUPPORT AND PROTECT TRANS YOUTH" and repeats "SUPPORT SUPPORT SUPPORT." The message clearly endorses the proposed policies and frames them as necessary protection for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and endorses the policy’s goals, saying transgender people should be treated "with the support they deserve." They also praise related provisions on pronouns, restroom access, and reducing bullying, indicating approval of the regulation as written or in principle.


The commenter explicitly endorses transgender students receiving support, saying "transgender kids deserve the same love and respect as every other kid" and describing a positive experience in a supportive school environment. This clearly aligns with approving the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance 100%" and thanks the audience for "your support." They also argue the policy helps their trans daughter feel "safe and human at school and in sports," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter argues against the policy by warning that it would let "any boy who is actually under the idea that he's a girl" or "any male student who claims to be a girl" enter girls' rooms. They explicitly say the school's sympathy should lie with "children whose' sex and gender are... female," indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE COMPLETELY!" which is a direct rejection of the proposed policies. The phrase "100% insanity!" reinforces that they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted with changes.


The commenter explicitly asks to "support this already heavily discriminated community" and describes the policy as creating an "affirming environment" for trans students. The comment argues the regulation would reduce harm, prevent deaths, and improve mental health, which clearly indicates approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "I oppose" and "I oppose these policies" multiple times. They argue the policies are "not safe" and claim they increase risk of "sexual assaults and possible rapes," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly Support - For the Basic Human Rights and Well-being of our Transgender Siblings

The commenter explicitly says, "This guidance has my full support" and calls it "an exemplary step in the right direction." They argue transgender students "deserve to be treated with respect and dignity" and frame the policy as making schools "safer" and "more inclusive."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this!" and adds "protect transgender kids!" which clearly endorses the proposed policies. The comment expresses approval of the regulation’s purpose and outcomes rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support!!" and explains that it is "important to support transgender kids in schools." This clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


Parents, not schools, should raise children

The commenter explicitly says the policy is "incredibly invasive" and asks policymakers to "rewrite the document" because it "oversteps your place" and places "educators over parents." Although they affirm that transgender students "deserve to be respected" and "should not be bullied," their overall position is to reject or substantially weaken the guidance as written, especially the confidentiality provisions.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Strongly Support" and says trans youth and LGBT+ youth "deserve every single protection afforded to them while they are in school." They also state that laws improving "their safety" and helping them feel "more accepted" are beneficial, which clearly endorses the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONG SUPPORT" and asks to "supporting Trans rights as Hunan rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The phrase "keep Virginia and yourself on the right side of history" further reinforces approval.


The commenter explicitly says, "I implore you to reject the Model Policies" and closes with "I am opposed." They argue the policies undermine "parental rights," promote "gender dysphoria," and would have "destructive" effects in schools, all of which indicate clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation to promote the health and wellbeing of transgender students," which clearly endorses the regulation. The title "strongly support" reinforces that the commenter wants the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the law" and "I support protecting our trans youth." They argue the policy is necessary because "trans kids go through so much more mental strain and discrimination" and need protection and respectful treatment.


Oppose: Violates 1st, 5th &14th Amendment; violates settled law regarding parental rights

The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Oppose" and repeatedly argues it is "dangerous" and unconstitutional, saying it "violates 1st, 5th &14th Amendment" and "violates settled law regarding parental rights." They also state they would "be pulling my children from public schooling if this passes," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly support! Cherish trans children!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and urges approval by asking to "help Virginia schools become a safer place for all." They also endorse the policy goals of protecting trans students from discrimination and ensuring they are treated with "basic respect."


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT TRANS RIGHTS!!" and urges officials to "Protect Trans Rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The language frames adoption as a duty of government to protect transgender students' rights.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and endorses "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth." They also state that "All our students deserve to feel safe and supportive in their schools," which clearly favors adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this measure," and the title reads "Strongly support." The rest of the comment reinforces approval by affirming transgender people: "Trans lives are not up for debate."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and expresses hope that the policy is passed. They add a substantive request to "keep the specific needs of non-binary students... in mind," which indicates support with suggested emphasis rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly urges protection for trans students, saying schools should "support initiatives protecting them from transphobic bullying" and avoid "pressuring trans students into situations that make them feel unsafe." The title "Protect trans lives and futures" and the closing "Listen to scientists" further indicate clear support for the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose transgender policy for schools," and argues the policy should not be adopted as written. They object to "shared restroom, locker rooms, sports participation" and claim it "restricts parent involvement" and neglects the rights of others.


Opposed to VDOE gender identity proposal

The commenter explicitly says the guidelines "are an overreach and should be withdrawn," which is a clear rejection of the proposal. They also object that the school is "better than the parents" and that the school should not "indoctrinate" students, reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "If these guidelines are accepted" and warning that the "new rules, if enacted" will be abused. They argue the policy would let students or staff "identify" as the opposite sex to access locker rooms and bathrooms and "abuse other students," which is a clear objection to adoption.


The commenter explicitly asks officials to "oppose" the policy and frames it as "endangering the many." They also propose an alternative that would weaken the regulation's approach by requiring "special bathroom and showers accommodations" for transgender students instead of the proposed protections.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Support" and expresses approval of transgender youth, saying they "have the courage to walk openly in their truth" and that "there is nothing wrong with them." This is clear affirmative support for the policy's purpose of protecting and affirming transgender students.


The commenter explicitly calls for "ZERO TOLERANCE FOR BULLYING!!!" and urges officials to "Respect and PROTECT the rights, dignity and privacy of ALL the children," which aligns with the regulation’s goals of protecting transgender students. There is no language opposing the policy; the comment is clearly endorsing its protective aims.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed Model Policies" and argues they are needed to protect transgender and nonbinary students. The comment endorses the regulation as a means of creating a "safe and supportive learning environment" and protecting students from discrimination and harassment.


The commenter explicitly says, "Respectfully oppose as written" and states, "I do not believe this current model policy is it." They ask for a different, more broadly acceptable policy, indicating opposition to adoption in its current form rather than support.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "Absolutely not!!!" and says they "refuse" for their children to be part of "this bathroom sharing." Although they mention treating people with respect and suggest separate facilities, the overall thrust is to oppose the transgender student policy and its inclusion in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support any policy that seeks to protect our trans students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. They further justify support by arguing trans students are vulnerable and "deserve our love and protection."


The commenter explicitly says "Opposed" and warns that implementing the policy would mean "disregarding our kids health and mental wellness." They also reject the policy basis by claiming "The science behind affirming transgender kids is based on activism and not science," which indicates opposition to adoption.


I was raped by faculty. These policies will expand the holes in communication that allowed it.

The commenter explicitly says "These policies will expand the holes in communication" and argues they "remove parental oversight" that would protect children, indicating rejection of the proposed policies. They frame the regulation as enabling abuse and say it was "a major reason" the abuse was allowed to continue.


"Trans children" do not exist. These are sexually abused children. Abused by those who support it.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "The insanity behind policies such as these is immense" and calling the ideology "a complete departure from reality." The comment is not asking for changes; it is condemning the regulation and those who support it.


The commenter explicitly endorses transgender students’ rights, stating "Trans kids should be able to use the bathroom of whatever gender they identify as" and rejecting safety concerns with "This isn't a danger to other students." This clearly supports the proposed policies rather than opposing them.


There is no such thing as trans rights. It's a made up, delusional fiction for retards.

The commenter explicitly rejects the premise of the policy, stating "There is no such thing as trans rights" and calling it "a made up, delusional fiction." This indicates opposition to adopting the transgender student model policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Support" and urges to "PROTECT AND SUPPORT TRANS RIGHTS!!!!" This clearly indicates approval of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly argues that trans and nonbinary students “deserve to be educated in a safe environment” and says “we need to protect all of our children,” which clearly endorses the regulation’s protective aims. The comment supports listening to students’ concerns, preventing harassment, and creating a safe school environment for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this guidance" and repeatedly argues against adopting it, calling it an "insane bill" and saying schools should not "promot[e] transgenderism." The comment frames the policy as an infringement on parental rights and constitutional rights, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. The title also says "Support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please do not permit" the policy and says, "Do not further poor decisions by experimenting on the whole of a student population." They object to transgender-inclusive bathroom, locker room, and sports provisions, arguing these would "erase girls and women" and infringe on others' rights.


Treatment of transgender students in school

The commenter explicitly says, "I neither support or approve of these proposed guidelines" and criticizes them as "radical theories" that "eradicate all distinctions between male and female." This indicates clear rejection of the proposed policies rather than a neutral inquiry or factual remark.


The commenter explicitly titles the remark "Strongly Support" and repeatedly endorses the policy as "a step towards providing a safe learning space for all students." They also say the model policies offer "an opportunity to do better going forward" and want state policies to reflect "freedom and respect" for transgender and gender-expansive students.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "one of the worst pieces of legislation I have ever seen" and stating "Do not pass it." This is a clear request to reject the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and calls the policy "a very dangerous policy" that "does not serve the students or their parents." They argue schools should not participate in it and instead want "qualified Mental Health Professionals," indicating rejection of the regulation.


Do not force this garbage down our kids' throats!

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "Do not force this garbage down our kids' throats" and "Please dump this evil leftist liberal godless crap!" They argue against transgender recognition and accommodations, including school sports and bathrooms, indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


treatment of transgender guidance - I vote no.

The commenter explicitly says, "I vote NO" and repeats "I vote NO to the 'treatment of transgender' policy being proposed." They also object to schools "encourage and expound on gender identity crisis," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly condemn" any school action that would "help to facilitate a child's gender transition activities" without parental consent. They argue this should be left to parents and reject the policy as part of "the left's agenda," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that schools should "stop trying to indoctrinate social agendas," which indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment does not suggest any modifications or support for adoption.


Inclusive Schools are Vital. I support this effort.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this effort" and thanks the agency for "support[ing] transgender students." They also endorse "safe, supportive, and inclusive learning environments," indicating approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly urges protection for transgender students and endorses the policy goals, saying children should be able "to feel protected" and "use a restroom they are most comfortable in." The closing appeal to "lead with love, compassion and empathy" clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says transgender individuals "deserve the rights accorded to those of us who haven’t had to make this choice," which supports protections for transgender students. The comment is sympathetic and does not express any objection to the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Greatly support" and describes wanting their transgender son to be accommodated under the policy. They argue he should be able to use the girls bathroom because the boys bathroom has been unsafe and he has been "held against his will, harassed and bullied."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE!" and argues the policy is "not for our school system to decide." They also object that "Children cannot handle this" and that it should not be "pushed on parents who don’t agree or support it," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly opposed" and argues against allowing transgender students to use bathrooms or dressing areas matching their gender identity. She says she is "not comfortable" with this policy, calls it "extremely inappropriate," and urges a separate private option instead of the proposed approach.


The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "bad policy and financially costly" and concludes, "There is a better way than this policy." They also state they are "strongly opposed" to the school system "assuming the role of parent" and argue the policy undermines parental involvement and girls' sports fairness.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and concludes, "This policy is NOT the answer." They object to key provisions, especially privacy and facility access, stating that a "biological male should NEVER be allowed in a biological females restroom or changing room."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy is "nothing more than a political issue" that "should never have been encouraged, much less considered." They also say it "infringes on their rights" and should be replaced with treatment for children they view as "confused."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support and will ask you not to support any policy" that removes parental authority, and repeatedly argues the policies are harmful and "political agendas." The overall message rejects the proposed transgender student policies and calls for parents to retain decision-making authority.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and calls it a "Terrible, horrible, awful, STUPID idea." They argue it creates a "dangerous precedent" and would lead to "sexual assault and harassment cases within schools," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY APPOSE," "I do not approve," and "PLEASE DO NOT PASS THE PROPOSED POLICIES." They object to parental notification limits and to allowing restroom/locker room access based on gender identity, calling the policy a threat to their rights as a parent and to their daughters' privacy and safety.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this policy," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and adds "This is wrong!" indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The warning that "You will end up with people abusing this" further shows opposition based on perceived misuse or harm.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this legislation" and states that schools and stakeholders "would all benefit greatly" from a trans student inclusion policy. The comment is clearly endorsing adoption of the proposed policies.


I am FOR this anti discrimination policy.

The commenter explicitly says, "I am FOR this anti discrimination policy," which directly supports adoption. They further endorse it as helping ensure that "ALL students are treated fairly" and recognized, indicating approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender bathrooms!" which clearly rejects the policy. The follow-up, "Leave them as they’ve always been!" indicates opposition to changing bathroom access for transgender students.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in VA Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says they "do not agree" with schools "interfering with the sexual orientation of children" and "vehemently disagree[s] with policies that withhold important information from parents." Although they support protecting children from bullying and harm, the overall thrust is opposition to the proposed transgender student policies as written.


OPPOSE! Opening the door for molestation/assault/rape

The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE!" and argues the policy is "ridiculous" and will "open doors for molestation, assault and/or rape." They clearly want the regulation rejected, citing fears about bathroom access and safety risks.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and closes with "Please support this legislation." They also argue that schools should be "a place of safety and respect for transgender students and all students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


Opposition to proposed guidelines for transgender education in Virginia schools

The commenter explicitly states "strong opposition to the currently proposed transgender guidelines" and says they "seek to promote and force transgender views upon children." They also object that the guidelines "disregard the rights of parents" and are "morally wrong and contrary to the Bible," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says public school policies should "reflect the reality of diverse demographics" and "support the needs of all students, especially LGBTQ students." They also state that "inclusive school policies is an important step," which clearly endorses the regulation's inclusive approach.


The commenter rejects the policy as "ridiculous" and threatens legal action if "boys are going into restrooms" where their granddaughter may be. This indicates opposition to the regulation, specifically its implications for restroom access by transgender students.


Oppose! Your rights end when others' begin

The commenter explicitly signals opposition in the title, "Oppose!" and repeatedly argues the policies should not be adopted, calling them "big changes" that would "infringe on the rights of many other people." They also say the proposal is "blatant and illegal over-reaching," would create lawsuits, and is harmful to girls and parents' rights.


The commenter explicitly says "Do not support!" and calls the policy "complete government overreach." They argue it will "take away the responsibility parents have for their own children" and claim it will not help the trans community, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am registering my strong opposition" to the changes and urges officials to be "reversing and not implementing these directives." They object specifically to "preferred pronouns" and "use of bathrooms," arguing the rules will harm students' mental health.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the adoption of this model guidance." They also express approval of the policy goals by stating, "All children need to feel loved and supported for whoever they are."


Treatment of Transgender Students-Strongly Opposed

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed Model Policies" and repeats that they are "strongly opposed" at the end. They object to specific provisions such as parent notification, pronoun use, and bathroom/locker room access, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


Transgender in schools - strongly oppose

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender in schools in Virginia," which directly rejects the proposed policy. They also argue for "separate bathrooms for these folks," indicating they want the guidance weakened or rejected, especially on bathroom access.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please continue to support our trans students" and argues they "need to be treated with the same respect as their peers." They also describe the rules as "overdue," indicating approval of the regulation and its protections.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE 100 PERCENT," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The phrase "It's sick this is even up for discussion" and the derogatory reference to "Perverts" show opposition to the regulation and its subject matter.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support adopting the proposed guidelines" and frames the policy as necessary to "keep trans kids safe and supported." The rest of the comment reinforces approval by emphasizing a "safe and supportive learning environment free from discrimination and harassment."


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy would let students "claim to be either a biological male or female... without providing any evidence," which they say makes compliance impossible. This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and rejects school involvement in transgender-related policies, stating "Keep the school system out of our families" and "Leave the parenting to the parents." The voucher remark reinforces opposition to the proposed school guidance rather than support for it.