The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and states that "Trans students deserve the same rights and protections as any other students." They further endorse the policy’s purpose by saying trans students should "feel safe at school" and that there is "no reason that trans students should feel scared to go to school."


The commenter explicitly states "Fully Support" and "Strongly support," which clearly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it "encourages child abuse" and arguing that "Transgenderism" is harmful. The body frames the regulation as denying children "the truth" and causing "harmful psychological and physical side effects," which is a clear call against adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely do not agree with this," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. The statement that it is "not fair to the other students on so many levels" indicates opposition to adoption rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and "express my full support for this policy to create safe and inclusive schools." They also state that "This policy is necessary" for transgender and non-binary students and for all students, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they are "shocked, appalled, and disgusted by this policy" and states "I do not want" these policies to go into effect. They also argue against "mixed gender restrooms and locker rooms" and predict negative consequences if the policies are adopted.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Opposed to any form of brainwashing of Virginia students" and repeatedly argues the policies would be harmful, deceptive, and unsafe. They object to pronoun requirements, parent notification limits, bathroom access, and gender-identity definitions, indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


I do not support the transgender policy. There has to be a better alternative!

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support the transgender policy" and objects to transgender students entering "females locker rooms and restrooms." They also argue against the policy being adopted as a new law, saying there should be "a better alternative."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly object" and calls the policy "extreme and unacceptable," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. They also list objections about "parental rights," "privacy issues," and "religious faith or conscience," reinforcing that they want the draft rejected rather than modified in support of it.


Strongly oppose/stick to education/it’s against my religious beliefs

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" to the proposed policies. The phrase "it’s against my religious beliefs" reinforces that they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this treatment!" and the title states, "I strongly disagree, oppose this special treatment." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this measure," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. The title also says "Support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter repeatedly argues against the policies, calling them a "Blatant Effort to Promote the LGBTQ+ Agenda" and saying they will cause "irreparable damage to Virginia students." They object to parent/guardian involvement, LGBTQ-inclusive curricula, staff training, and support for clubs/programs, indicating they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


I oppose the policies because it goes against parent’s rights and compromises the safety of students

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the VDOE’s draft policies" and argues they "go against parent’s rights" and "compromise the privacy and safety of all the students." These statements clearly indicate rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it the "Worst idea ever!" and saying "No. No. No." They also threaten to withdraw their child from public schools if it becomes "acceptable," and argue against transgender recognition and bathroom access provisions.


The commenter explicitly asks to "Please help protect these beautiful children" and frames the policy as needed because "Being a trans kid is hard enough." This clearly աջակցs adoption of the transgender student protections in the proposed regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely oppose" and repeatedly argues the policies should be "vigorously opposed." They object to gender identity provisions, privacy rules, dress code standards, and the lack of religious or parental-rights exceptions.


The commenter says, "I AM ABSOLUTELY AGAINST THIS POLICY," which directly rejects the regulation. The follow-up, "WE NEED TO FOCUS ON CHILDREN'S EDUCATION !!" suggests they believe this policy is a distraction from schooling priorities.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Oppose" and calls it an "extreme radical agenda" that should not be "pushed on our children and teachers." They argue it has "nothing to do with education" and object to state authority over parents, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Support" and adds "I fully support the protection of LGBTQ+". The phrase "Inclusion is worth the effort" clearly endorses the regulation's purpose and implementation.


The commenter explicitly says trans people "deserve equal treatment and rights" and that they "should be given such," which clearly supports the regulation’s purpose. The title "Trans rights are human rights" reinforces approval of the policy direction.


Strongly oppose this violation of First Amendment and parental rights

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the proposal is "wrong" and a "violation of First Amendment and parental rights." They also call the guidelines "abuse" and say they would report it to police and Child Protective Services, showing clear opposition to adoption.


The comment explicitly states "Strongly Opposed!" twice, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


John  Hopkins diagnosed Transgender issues with mental health disorders

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it is "promoting mental health disorders and confusion to children." The rest of the comment argues against transgender recognition and treatment, indicating opposition to the proposed guidance.


Protection for one, persecution for another

The commenter explicitly says it would be "a travesty for these policies to move forward as presented" and asks officials to "protect all children, not just one group." They object to pronoun requirements, restroom/locker room provisions, and say the policies would lead to "persecution" of those with religious objections.


The comment explicitly says "OPPOSE" and calls the policy "ridiculous," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The body provides no substantive policy argument, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the health and well being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose and protections for transgender students. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


Strongly oppose!!!!! Poses great concerns

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this" and repeatedly argues the policy should "stop right here." They object to bathroom access, sports participation, and the policy creating an "unsafe environment," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and calls the policy "ABSOLULTY HEART BREAKING AND DISTURBING FOR CHILDREN," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The religious appeal, "THIS WORLD NEEDS THE LORD NOW MORE THAN EVER," reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter says they are "strongly against" the policy and objects to staff "push[ing] the agenda of transgenderness on children." They also reject allowing transgender people to use restrooms and locker rooms matching their gender identity, calling the measures "unsafe."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy is "unacceptable." They object to schools discussing gender identity without parents, say the policy "forces me to do and believe things," and oppose bathroom and school authority provisions.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this proposition," which directly states opposition to adoption. They argue against the guidelines as written, saying they should be handled "with parents and therapists" on an individual basis and that the policy would "open the door for rules to be bent and privileges abused."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and criticizes the VDOE for "playing social engineers" instead of adopting the policy. The remark urges the department to focus elsewhere, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose for multiple reasons," and argues the proposal should not be adopted because it allows gender conversations without parental knowledge and sharing of locker room or bathroom facilities. They conclude that the proposal would make schools "an unsafe environment for everyone," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Fully support legislation to promote the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly writes "Support 100%" and adds "Transgender rights are human rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Full support" and states that "All students, regardless of sex or gender, deserve to have their wants and needs met." This clearly endorses the proposed policies and their inclusive treatment of transgender students.


Some girls will be terrified by boys entering their bathrooms and locker rooms.

The commenter explicitly argues against the policy, saying "Do not damage the safety and mental well bein of the other children" and advocating that "making special facilities for those identifying as Transgender is better." The comment objects to allowing transgender students access to bathrooms and locker rooms aligned with their gender identity.


OPPOSE: Proposed transgender policies are discriminatory

The commenter explicitly labels the proposal as "OPPOSED" and closes with "Please reject these proposed policies." They argue the policies are "discriminatory," undermine parents, violate privacy and safety, and should not be adopted.


The commenter says, "I am very opposed to this" and argues that transgender issues "should be a family discussion," indicating they do not want the policy adopted. They also object to teaching it to "K-6," calling it "ridiculous" and saying it is "a FAMILY MATTER," which reinforces opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely oppose" and adds "Not ok! At all!" indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The phrase "If it’s not broke don’t try to fix it!" further signals they do not want the policy adopted or changed.


Oppose; Stick to your core function: educate children

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this measure" and argues it is "an enormous distraction" from the Board of Education's core mission. They also say matters of sexuality should be "reserved for the privacy of one's home," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


VADOE guidelines re Transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in support of the VADOE Guidelines for non-discrimination for transgender youth" and argues that ignoring them would "sanction discrimination." They also emphasize that "ALL CHILDREN NEED TO BE PROTECTED FROM DISCRIMINATION," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues that the policy should not encourage gender identity exploration, stating that "Promoting Transgender issues does not help the child become healthy." The comment frames the regulation as conflicting with "religious freedom" and parental rights, indicating rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this draft guidance document," which directly indicates opposition to adoption. The title also says "Oppose," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly argues that the policy is "dangerous" and says it would "cause great harm to our children," indicating rejection of the regulation. The reference to children choosing gender "without the support and knowledge of their parents" also shows opposition to the policy's approach.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY DISAGREE" and warns that if the policy is passed it will "hurt more children." The comment frames the regulation as causing harm and increased risk of sexual victimization, indicating rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "absurd," a "satanic agenda," and objecting to "forcing a idealogy on people." They also argue against recognizing transgender identities and complain about consequences for noncompliance, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, opening with "DISAGREE" and calling it "HORRIBLE." Although the comment focuses more on religion in schools than the regulation itself, the overall message is hostile to the proposed transgender student policies and implies they should not be adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans and gender expansive youth in Virginia." They also argue the policies are needed to create "respectful, caring, supportive" learning environments, which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly support legislation to promote non discrimination for transgender students." They also argue the policy is needed because prejudice "almost always leads to bullying and depression," which supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their purpose.


The commenter explicitly says Virginia "needs to make it safe for Transgender students to learn" and argues that weaker protections would be a "violation" of civil rights law. This indicates clear support for the regulation’s protective aims, even though the commenter notes they do not know "all the politics on this."


The commenter explicitly says "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!" and "DO NOT SUPPORT!" which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no indication of support, qualification, or a request for changes.


These policies are violence against children

The commenter explicitly condemns the policies as "violence against children" and says the authorities "don't have the right to do this," which indicates rejection of the regulation. The rhetorical question about being "violent back" reinforces opposition, even though they add "Not advocating for anything."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!" and calls the policy "Absolutely ridiculous." They argue it is "unsafe for both transgender and non transgender people" and propose a separate "third changing and restroom option," indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this effort," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The stated reason, "to provide safety to our transgendered youth," aligns with the policy's protective goals.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation to promote the health and well-being of transgender youth" and states that "The policies outlined here will ensure" safer, more inclusive environments. The final sentence, "Reject the hateful anti-trans rhetoric proposed by those in opposition," further confirms support for adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and argues it would help schools provide "a safe and inclusive educational experience for all students." They also emphasize that students should be "safe and welcomed" and not have to "hide or live in fear," which clearly endorses adoption of the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "All students should be accepted for who they are," indicating clear approval of the regulation’s inclusive protections for transgender and non-binary youth. The comment also condemns opposition to the policy as "outrageous," reinforcing support rather than neutrality or opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this needed change," which directly endorses adoption of the policy. "Keep up the good work" further reinforces approval.


I do not agree with this. Strongly oppose this

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this in schools" and "I am strongly against this," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. There is no qualifying language suggesting support with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "We strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The reason given — "this can lead to an increase in sexual related crimes" — indicates they want it rejected due to perceived safety risks.


The commenter explicitly endorses protections for transgender students, stating "Trans rights are human rights" and arguing that denying protections is harmful. They warn that failing to support trans students would be "abandoning our moral and ethical directive to protect our youth," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Stop elevating transgender to a special class" and "Please do not subject the chiro this insanity!" indicating they want the policy rejected. The statement that it "will only hurt females and males" further shows opposition to adoption of the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support!!" and adds that "It is essential to take steps to support trans youth," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The phrase "this is a step in the right direction" further confirms approval.


While helping one child you are hurting many others

The commenter explicitly says, "I am not in support of this bill," and argues against allowing transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms aligned with their gender identity. They frame the policy as "reckless, damaging and dangerous" and say it would "unfairly treat all other children," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose" and asks, "Please reject this policy." They argue it "denies parents the right" and call for reinforcing "parental rights," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues there is "zero wisdom in enforcing laws and making massive adjustments" for transgender students. They also state there is "actual HARM in doing this," which clearly rejects the regulation.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "100% SUPPORT" and says the policy is "very important for all students to be accepted the same and feel comfortable." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support transgender youth," which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose and adoption. The title "Support" reinforces that the comment is in favor of the regulation.


I strongly support the health and well-being of trans students.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the health and well-being of trans students in Virginia," which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose and adoption. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly writes "Support." and says it is "imperative that all children recieve the support, care, and tools they need to thrive," which clearly endorses the regulation. The closing "Shame on those who disagree" further indicates approval of the policy and opposition to critics.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL!!" and threatens to "remove my children from public schools" if it is passed. The religious objection that these decisions are taking the country "farther and farther from GOD" reinforces opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support!" and endorses the policy’s goal that "All students deserve to be safe from harassment in their school, regardless of gender." The statement "Trans kids are valid!" further indicates approval of protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "I wholeheartedly support this!" and frames the policy as creating "a safe space" for children to be themselves. This is clear approval of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly urges approval and strengthening of the policy, saying "Protect trans youth at all costs!" and arguing that trans students deserve "a safe learning environment." The comment condemns discrimination and bullying and frames the regulation as necessary to protect human rights.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, saying "THIS IS APPALLING" and "Stop pushing your own distorted view of the world on them." This language indicates opposition to the transgender student guidance rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly states, "I STRONGY OPPOSE!" and the title says "I Strongly Oppose!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language.


As a teacher, I strongly recommend anything that will treat transgender students safely

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly recommend anything that will treat transgender students safely," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. They further support the policy goals by emphasizing that students should express themselves "without hate or bullying" and that it is "our job to support and love those around us."


I strongly support protecting transgender children’s rights in schools. Shame on those who oppose.

The commenter explicitly says "I strongly support protecting transgender children’s rights in schools" and "FULL SUPPORT FOR TRANSGENDER STUDENTS IN ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS." They also criticize opposition to the policy, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


I do not understand how we have sank so low.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "I fully believe by heading down this path, it will be one we can not return from" and criticizing transgender identity as contrary to their religious beliefs. They also ask rhetorical questions about teachers being "set up for failure" and fears about males entering female locker rooms, indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and argues that these matters should be "left in the hands of the students’ family." They explicitly state that the policy would "completely undermine parental rights" and "parental authority," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I opposed 100%!" and the title says "VA mom strongly opposed!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying support or request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY OPPOSE" and calls the policy "dangerous to our children" and "overreach by the Board of Education." They also argue against bathroom-sharing provisions and say the board should "FOCUS ON EDUCATION," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "100% STRONGLY SUPPORT!" and argues that "Transgender students deserve nothing but to be treated equally as other students." They also express hope that "the right decision is made," indicating approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE OPPOSE OPPOSE" and states it is "a real shame" the state would allow these policies. They also say they will work to vote out officials if the policies are passed, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and rejects the policy’s premise, stating "Gender and anatomy are not separate" and "You are not what you 'feel' you are." The question about students feeling uncomfortable in bathrooms or locker rooms with someone of the opposite sex indicates opposition to the regulation’s accommodations for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "The school systems should need to understand how they can support their trans students," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The title, "Support for trans students," reinforces that they favor adoption of policies helping transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support!" and repeats "Fully support," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support trans kids rights" and states that they "NEED to be protected," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The exclamation and rights-based language indicate approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Opposed" and argues against allowing transgender males into women's sports and bathrooms. They frame the policy as "an attack on basic biology" and claim it "endangers women," indicating they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed guidelines," which directly states opposition to adoption. The rest of the comment reinforces that position by criticizing the policy as based on "radical theories" and claiming it would "indoctrinate our school children."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support treating transgender students with dignity and respect" and urges that FCPS "create inclusive environments for all students." This clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies rather than opposing them.


The commenter explicitly says "strong oppose" and argues that "Opposite sex students should not be using the same bathrooms/locker rooms," indicating rejection of the policy. They also object to the policy being imposed on others, saying it is being "cram[med] down the throats of those who oppose."


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the protection of the health and well-being of transgender students in Virginia public schools," which directly endorses the regulation's purpose. They also argue that "School should be a safe place for everyone," reinforcing support for the policy framework protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the VA Public School proposed legislation" and praises "the inclusion of transgender students." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


Loving trans people is telling them the truth!! Not sacrificing innocent kids. We want our tax $ bac

The commenter clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies, saying "Don't fall their lies" and accusing the guidance of being "to push pedophilia." The phrase "stop playing pretend" also signals opposition to affirming transgender identities in schools.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and frames the policy as harming others: "when it is at the cost of someone else's rights." Although they begin with "Support equal rights," the overall message rejects the regulation as written or in its current form.


Opposition to Virginia's "Transgender" Policy

The commenter says, "I am completely opposed" to the policy and rejects "any gender designations or policies" contrary to sex assigned at birth. They also criticize bathroom access based on gender identity as "plainly ridiculous," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


FULLY SUPPORT!!SHAME ON THOSE WHO OPPOSE!!!

The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT!!" and states that "transgender students deserve a right to have protection and support in schools." The rest of the comment condemns opponents, reinforcing clear support for the regulation.


Guidance policies toward transgenders in public schools.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with these new guidelines" and "Please do not pass this policy," which clearly opposes adoption. The comment also argues against using schools for "social issues" and says parents should know what children are being taught, reinforcing rejection of the policy.


The commenter says, "I STRONGLY disagree with this" and rejects the policy’s treatment of transgender students. They specifically oppose shared facilities, stating boys and girls "should not be in the same bathroom or locker room," and call it "your agenda," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter opposes the idea that the policy is unfair to cisgender students and instead says, "Schools must seek options that afford both types of students these considerations." That indicates support for the policy’s underlying goals, though with a request for broader accommodations.


The commenter explicitly says "100 FULLY SUPPORT TRANS LIVES MATTER" and argues that transgender students "deserve the same kind of quality care and teaching." They also urge schools to be a place where trans students can feel comfortable learning, which clearly supports adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and "Vehemently oppose!" which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The phrase "I can’t believe that we are even talking about this" reinforces a strongly negative position toward the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support human right for all children" and calls it "our moral duty to create a safe space for self expression for EVERY child." The title, "Strongly support!!!!," also clearly indicates approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation to promote the health and well-being of trans youth!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their goals.


Fully support transgender youth in our schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the guiding document" and argues that transgender youth "should receive the same rights, protections, and opportunities as all students." They also express hope that it will "ensure the protection of our children from bullying and harm," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support any and all people having the right to choose who they are" and adds that "All should be protected." This clearly endorses the regulation’s protective approach toward transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and frames the policy as harming "our innocent children," indicating rejection of the regulation. The religious citation "Daniel 9:3-7" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Trans rights are human rights" and urges that "we need to come beyond this," which reads as support for the transgender student policies rather than opposition. There is no language rejecting the regulation; instead, the comment endorses transgender rights in a way consistent with adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the guidance to protect transgender students at school" and praises the protections as affirming students' dignity. The closing "Thank you" reinforces clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, writing "Saying no to transgender bathrooms in schools" and arguing that "boys need to have separate restrooms from girls." They frame the regulation as dangerous and "crazy decisions," indicating opposition to allowing transgender students bathroom access consistent with the policy.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, objecting that it lets "young boys and girls use the same bathroom." The language is hostile and urges the policymakers to stop or reverse the approach rather than adopt it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these measures!!" and later repeats, "I do not support those policies" and "Please vote against these measures." The body argues the policies are harmful to children, privacy, bathrooms, and girls' sports, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Vigorously Oppose" and repeats that they are "vigorously opposed to this absurd policy" and "Do not allow this." They argue the policy infringes on religious rights, parental rights, and harms children, all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and frames the policy as harming "another child's well-being," indicating rejection of the regulation. The opening phrase "Need to consider all children needs" suggests a general concern, but the clear directive is opposition.


Strongly Oppose Proposed "Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students"

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this proposal" and repeatedly asks officials to "reject it" and "please reject the proposals." The body argues the policies are a "grave violation" of rights and calls them "shameful" and "tyranny," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I'M IN FULL SUPPORT FOR TRANSGENDER STUDENTS IN ALL SCHOOLS," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by criticizing the need to debate transgender students' legitimacy.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the protection of the health and well-being of transgender students in Virginia public schools." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their goals.


The comment explicitly says "Support transgender rights" and states "Transgender rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students. It offers no criticism or request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully support the protection of the health and well-being of transgender students in Virginia public schools." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their goals.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and calls the policy "absolutely unacceptable." The statement "if this passes I will not be sending my child to school" indicates clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the protection of trans kids in school," which directly endorses the regulation. They further argue that trans students need "a safe place to learn" and to be "treated just like everyone else," indicating approval of the policy's purpose and protections.


The commenter explicitly signals approval in the title, "Support- all students deserve a safe school environment," and states that "Trans students deserve the same protection and nurturing." This clearly endorses the proposed policies' goal of protecting transgender students and creating a safe, welcoming environment.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support transgender rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose and direction. There is no language opposing, questioning, or qualifying the policy.


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

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose 100 percent," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The rest of the comment offers a biological assertion about sex determination, reinforcing opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support!" and clarifies that they support "protecting trans and non binary youth in Virginia schools." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation's purpose and adoption.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and repeats "opposed," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and asks to "Please allow trans children the dignity" they believe they deserve. The comment frames the policy as necessary for a school environment "without hostility and unnecessary obstacles," indicating approval of the regulation.


The commenter says “Support all children's safety is priority #1” and that schools should “always prioritize safety for all students,” which aligns with the regulation’s stated goals of a safe and supportive learning environment. Although brief, the comment expresses approval of the policy’s safety focus rather than opposition or a question.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and endorses equal treatment: "Trans rights are human rights" and "There should be no prejudice against any person based on gender." This clearly indicates approval of the proposed policies.


The comment explicitly says "Oppose!" which directly states the commenter’s position on the regulation. No supporting reasons are provided beyond the rejection.


The commenter explicitly urges adoption of the policy, saying "To not adopt these new rules and standards" would mean accepting harm to transgender students. They frame the standards as necessary to protect "the lives and safety of children" and to reduce "abuse, violence, ostracizing and overall torment."


Strongly opposed! The idiocracy has to stop! This effects the kids living by their God given gender!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!" and repeatedly urges "Do not allow this!" and "Do not make the MAJORITY of kids feel uncomfortable." The body argues against accommodating transgender students and frames the policy as harmful, so the comment clearly opposes adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support protections for vulnerable trans and non-binary students in Virginia" and hopes to "see all VA students supported in this way." The comment endorses the regulation as beneficial and life-saving rather than requesting changes or expressing reservations.


Support protection of children from bullying but strongly oppose this policy

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose this policy," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. The opening clause supporting anti-bullying protection does not change the overall stance because it is paired with direct opposition to the policy itself.


The commenter explicitly says "FULL support" and endorses "teaching our students with love and compassion" in "ACCEPTING environments." The final sentence, "let them grow freely into who they will become," clearly supports the regulation's inclusive treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation to promote the well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no language indicating opposition, hesitation, or a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation" and identifies the purpose as promoting "the health and well-being of trans youth." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies rather than a request for changes or a neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I urge you to vote to support the rights of transgender and non binary students" and closes with "Thank you for your support!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the proposed policies, framed as beneficial for student welfare and mental well being.


The commenter explicitly says "Trans students need all the support they can get" and argues that "School should be a safe place for all students" and that trans kids need this support to become "happy and healthy adults." This clearly endorses the regulation’s goal of supporting transgender students in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support!" and "I fully support Trans rights!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student policies.


I fully support legislation respecting trans rights.

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation respecting trans rights" and "I fully support legislation protecting trans rights." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation's purpose and adoption.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support ALL trans students in VA schools!!!" This clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of supporting transgender students in public schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose," and argues that schools should not "take a parent's responsibility" or decide what a child can do without parental involvement. They object to the quoted guidance about respecting a student's transgender status without informing family, which indicates opposition to the regulation's approach.


The commenter says, "I strongly oppose this document" and calls it "usual government overreach," indicating clear rejection of the proposed guidance. They also object to schools helping students "explore" their sexual identity and say the document should "stop at" non-discrimination, which suggests they want it substantially weakened.


Concerned father about Transgender school policy

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "I dint want her to go through this BS" and "Stop where you are," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. The reference to "consequence like NOAH'S time" reinforces a hostile warning against the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this document" and calls it "usual government overreach." They also argue schools should not "help students 'explore' their sexual identity," indicating rejection of the guidance's core provisions rather than support with changes.


Strongly oppose Transgender Litigation in VA schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not pass this litigation," and repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it is "disturbing," would impose on the majority, and "will create a bigger divide." They also object to school involvement in gender exploration and claim it violates the First Amendment.


Road to Ruin for Arlington Public Education

The commenters explicitly reject the proposal, calling it an "aggressive social engineering agenda," "madness," and "unnecessary and unwelcome." They directly urge officials to "suspend imposition of these ill-advised and very disruptive policies," which is a clear request not to adopt them.


OPPOSE - THIS WILL LEAD TO SEX IN SCHOOLS

The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and argues the policy "will develop a loophole" that could enable sexual misconduct in schools. Although they say "I fully support transgender rights," the overall thrust is that the regulation should not be adopted because of the alleged safety risk.


This is not about transgender right, this is about destroying women's rights. Shame on VDOE

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it is "about destroying women's rights" and asking how anyone could approve it. The phrase "Shame on VDOE" further indicates opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter says, "This is exactly the reason we will continue sending our child to a private Christian school," indicating rejection of the policy. Calling it "a shame" that tax dollars support "the trans agenda" shows clear opposition to the regulation and its underlying approach.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support VA passing guidelines and policies to support transgender children." They also endorse recognition of transgender identities and say they want schools to "recognize and celebrate differences and diversity," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and repeatedly endorses the policy goals, including "equitable and fair treatment" and protection from "discrimination and bullying." They also affirm specific provisions on "pronouns, student records, privacy, restrooms, locker rooms, PE, sports, dress code, and gender based activities," indicating clear support for adoption.


Educators Support Our Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly endorses support for transgender students, saying they should be "accepted for who they are" and asking, "why would we not support those who have stated it?" The final sentence, "This should be a non-issue," reinforces approval of the policy direction.


The commenter explicitly says "NOT SUPPORT" and "DO NOT SUPPORT!" in response to the proposed transgender student policy. This is a clear rejection of the regulation as written.


Strongly Support - Trans Rights are Human Rights

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and repeatedly endorses the policy goals, stating that transgender students should be treated with respect and given "the same rights afforded to every other student." They also support "evidence-based training and tools" for educators, indicating approval of the regulation as proposed.


I do not support the eradication of all distinctions of the sexes in regard to public school guides

The commenter explicitly says, "I ask you to vote down the bills" and states "I do not support" the proposal. They argue against "eradicate all sexual distinctions between male and female" and ask to preserve privacy in locker rooms and bathrooms, indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues that schools and government "have no right to circumvent a parent(s)" on these issues. They also call the policy path "shameful," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly opposed," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and states that the policy "does not belong in our schools." They also reject the underlying transgender guidance, saying they do not want grandchildren to be "indoctrinated" with it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and argues that "protecting trans kids" should not be debated. The rest of the comment reinforces approval of the policy’s protective purpose, criticizing opposition as "hateful" and "narrow-minded."


The commenter says, "I strongly disagree with this!!!!!!!!" which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting reasons are given, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Fervently Oppose!" and argues the policy "goes way beyond protecting children" and should be stopped: "Public schools should have no authority to encourage and promote gender confusion." They also call it "child abuse" and demand schools "leave the social experiments at home," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Trans policies encourage all students to become successful, engaged, and enlightened citizens

The commenter explicitly endorses the policies, saying the treatment of transgender students is "an important element" of Virginia's education goals and that "These policies are in line with" best practices. They also argue that failing to adopt them would "imped[e] trans students' ability" and allow mistreatment, which clearly supports approval.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this" and argues against allowing transgender students access to sex-segregated facilities. They frame the policy as creating safety risks in bathrooms and locker rooms, asking "Who is to say if the male is truly transgender or just wants to be a pervert," which indicates rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I totally do NOT support this nonsense" and argues against the policy's premise, stating children should not be taught "they can make up whatever gender they want." They also call it "child abuse" and say they will "always speak out" against it, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Disagree" and states they "should not be forced to tolerate anything" that conflicts with their religious beliefs. They also reject the policy’s implications for their child, saying they "don't want my son learning and participating in things not of the Lord."


Oppose! Parental rights r being railroaded by school authorities who are usurping parent’s guidance.

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and argues that "parental rights" are being "railroaded" by school authorities. They also question the need for the policy, asking, "why would a policy like this need to be enacted?" and "What transgender rights are being violated now?"


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this for other reasons," indicating opposition to the proposed policies. They object to transgender students using bathrooms/locker rooms matching their gender identity and to schools helping students with gender issues "without the knowledge of parents," both of which conflict with the regulation's aims.


The commenter explicitly says, "I believe we should support transgender kids and/or questioning kids" and concludes, "I think this would be a great idea." They also propose compromises to make the policy workable, such as using preferred names and private changing rooms, which indicates support rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues that the proposed rule "will make Virginia schools a better place" and create "safe and welcoming schools." The comment endorses the policies as necessary to protect transgender and nonbinary students from bullying and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal with "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!" and calls the policies "totally unworkable." They argue against transgender accommodations, saying schools should not "teach" gender identity and that "No male should be allowed to use a female bathroom/locker room" or participate in girls' sports.


Strongly Disagree! Example: A boy pretends to identify as a girl in same room with your daughter? NO

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines" and opens with "Strongly Disagree!" They argue the policy would put children "in harm's way" and object to bathroom access for transgender students, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this movement for transgender students in schools" and "I strongly support this document." They also argue schools should provide "anti bullying and support of students" and that it could "save lives," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


The commenter says they are "Strongly in favor of supporting this legislature" and repeatedly endorses protection for transgender students, including "Trans rights are human rights" and encouraging youth to be themselves "without fear of retribution." These statements clearly support adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely oppose," "I will NEVER support any legislators who support this bill," and "Vote this bill down!" These phrases clearly indicate they want the regulation rejected. They also object to transgender policies in schools and bathroom access, calling it "appalling" and a "disaster."


The commenter explicitly says "oppose" and "do not agree," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Firmly support" and urges, "Let's move Virginia forward!" They also endorse the policy goals by stating that young people should feel safe and valued at school and that supporting trans and gender non-conforming youth "should not be challenging."


The commenter clearly rejects the regulation, calling it "absolutely ludicrous" and using the emphatic title "No way, no way." This language indicates opposition rather than a request for clarification or modification.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this legislation," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose" and states they "do not support forcing a lifestyle choice on EVERYONE," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. Although they express general care for children, the overall message argues against the regulation as written.


All policies with regard to to sexual identification

The commenter explicitly rejects the policies, writing "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!" and arguing against allowing students to use restrooms/locker rooms based on gender identity. The comment frames the regulation as dangerous and inappropriate, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly endorses protections for transgender students, saying "Trans kids deserve equal protections and respect just like anyone else." The title "Protect Trans Kids!" and criticism of not protecting trans children indicate support for adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policies by telling others to "sit down, shut up, and let the world be progressive," which indicates approval of the regulation. The title "Leave religion out of this" and criticism of opponents as "bible humpers" further show support for the transgender student policies and opposition to religious objections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support" and asks to "Please support this legislation." They also endorse allowing children "to be who they are" with "support and non-discrimination laws in place," which clearly favors adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please reconsider this Bill," and describes it as "an overreaction of the government". They object to school counselors keeping information "secret from the parent/guardian" and express concern about girls' "privacy and safety," indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly urges approval of transgender protections, saying "Support them or get out of their way" and ending with "Equality now." The comment defends trans people and criticizes opposition as "transphobic and uninformed," indicating clear support for the regulation's purpose.


The commenter clearly defends transgender people and condemns anti-trans sentiment, saying "Trans lives are Human lives" and criticizing those "spewing hate." This indicates support for the regulation’s protective intent rather than opposition to it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly disagree" and calls the policy "inappropriate" and something that "shouldn't even be a thing." They also say "My kids will be home schooled if this is passed," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "We strongly disagree with the proposed transgender policies" and urges officials to "cease and desist," which clearly rejects adoption. They also state the policies conflict with their "sincerely held religious beliefs" and would have "extremely hurtful ramifications" for their children.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and says there are "other ways" than to "impose these types of policies in schools in VA." They argue the policy is "infringing on the rights of all others" and object to bathroom access for transgender people.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation" and states that the proposed guidelines "will make our education system more equitable" and "help accomplish" a safe and welcoming environment. This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


NO!!!!! strongly disagree... not safe for our children

The commenter explicitly says "Do not support this" and calls the policy "Horrible and sickening," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The statement that it is "not safe for our children" and that "bad things could come out of this" reinforces opposition based on perceived harm.


The commenter explicitly states, "IN SUPPORT!" and "I am in complete support," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support trans children!" and urges readers to follow the American Academy of Pediatrics' position on "gender affirmation." They also state that creating "a safer, more supportive, and evidence-based environment in schools will benefit all children," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and frames the policy as "about PROTECTING CHILDREN" and "protect[ing] marginalized youths." They reject criticism of the regulation and argue it is not about "teach[ing] or indoctrinat[ing] anything," which indicates clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully supported this measure," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. They also argue that "No child should be bullied or ostracize[d]," reinforcing support for the policy's protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this matter" and frames the policy as protecting "Trans rights". They also argue that treatment at school is important for children's development, which supports adoption of the regulation.


Re: Government vs. Parents - Vote No (against) “ Model Policies for the Treatment of Trans Students~

The commenter explicitly says "Vote No (against)" and repeatedly calls the policy "the worst thing to do for kids in school" and "a horrible idea." They argue schools should not address "equality, identity" or transgender-related support, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


Firmly Support - We cannot legislate bigotry into schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I firmly support and promote transgender student rights within Virginia schools," and the title also states "Firmly Support." They argue the policy helps protect transgender students from "violence, bullying, and poor academic performance," indicating approval of the regulation's goals.


FULLY SUPPORT TRANS KIDS//PROTECT ALL KIDS

The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT TRANS KIDS" and urges, "These kids need support and to feel safe!!" This clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies and asks that children be allowed to "be themselves."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and argues it is "critical" for helping schools support trans kids and keep them safe. The comment endorses the regulation as a means to reduce bullying and harassment and affirm transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this policy" and objects to specific provisions such as "child services involved" and "the bathroom usage." They also argue transgender issues should be handled under "already existing policies," indicating they do not want this regulation adopted as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support transgender students' right to free expression and protection from harassment," and hopes the policies will "benefit" trans children through protections. This clearly endorses the regulation's purpose and implementation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this legislation" and expresses support for "the wellbeing and health of transgender youth." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


Support! Trans Lives Deserve A Safe Education Free From Harassment

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this legislation" and "Please pass this legislation." They also frame the policy as necessary for student safety and anti-harassment protections, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter condemns opposition to the transgender student policies, saying to "stop using christianity and religion as a defense" for "bigotry and transphobia." This indicates support for the regulation and rejection of arguments against it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "This is just plain wrong" and repeating "No, no, no....." They object to government involvement in schools and say it is "telling us, the parents, what the school systems will be teaching out children in terms of values & morals."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this" and calls the policy "indoctrination," indicating rejection of the regulation. The request to "Leave social issues to patents" (parents) further shows they do not want the policy adopted in schools.


STRONGLY SUPPORT. Protect trans youth lives.

The commenter explicitly says "I strongly support this protection of trans human rights in VA!!" and frames the policy as necessary for trans children to "exist freely without scrutiny or discrimination." They also call it "a monumental push to a better future," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Strong support from the medical community

The commenter explicitly says, "Writing in strong support," and argues that these policies are "essential for the protection, well-being and health" of patients. This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


As an educator, my job is to advocate for the community.

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s underlying goals by saying they encourage students to "be themselves" and ends with "TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS!" This is a clear affirmative statement in favor of protections for transgender students rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of their proposed guidelines" and "Strongly Disagree and Oppose!" They also threaten to withdraw their children from public school if the policy is adopted, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT TRANS RIGHTS" and urges, "Protect these kids and let them express their identity," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The comment frames the policy as necessary to address harassment against trans kids.


Protect, love, cherish our trans kids!!!

The commenter explicitly endorses inclusion of transgender students, saying "Trans kids included" and urging, "Protect them, love them." This is a clear affirmative response to the proposed policies rather than a critique or request for weakening.


Oppose these measures/ Support No Bullying Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support policies that force secular views" and "Please stop trying to force our children into your ideological box," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. Although they support anti-bullying measures in general, they reject the regulation because they believe it violates free speech, parental rights, and religious freedom.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote no" and "absolutely no," indicating clear opposition to adopting the regulation. They also argue it is "NOT the schools" and "DEFINITELY NOT the place of the state government" to address these issues, reinforcing rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I fully supported this measure." They also endorse the policy’s purpose by stating that "No child should be bullied or ostracize[d]" and urging Virginia to "be on the right side of history."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly object to the guidelines proposed" and titles the comment "Absolutely no!" They also say they would be "pulling them out of school" and call the policy "salacious," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy" and adds support for "any others that help marginalized students." The rest of the comment explains why they favor protections for transgender students, citing bullying and harassment concerns.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support transgender people having the basic rights that they deserve" and endorses transgender students being "comfortable and accepted at school." They also frame the policy as helping bullied students and affirm that they want students to be "loved and respected," indicating clear support for the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the proposal is a "gross overreach" that should not be allowed: "We must not allow this in Virginia!" They also object to "stripping control away from parents," indicating rejection of the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying it is "perfectly realistic" and urging, "Let us do everything we can to make their lives a little easier." The closing line, "Protect trans youth," clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support any policy that seeks to protect our trans children/students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces this support by arguing that trans students are vulnerable and need "love and protection."


The commenter says it is "deceitful" to "impose" the idea that transgender identity is healthy on school-aged children, indicating opposition to the regulation’s transgender-supportive guidance. They also argue for teaching "biological and anatomical truths" and request that if transgender education is taught, it should include regret narratives, which signals a desire to weaken or counter the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and calls the policies "child abuse" and "deplorable." They argue the policies encourage "changing of a child's sex" and that "Parents have no say in the matter," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "I approved," which indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting opposition, qualification, or a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the rights of Trans, non binary, and gender non- confirming youth" and adds that they "ought to be protected and allowed to identify as they are." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation’s purpose and protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "This whole legislation makes me lose faith in our government" and threatening "I will not send my children back to public school if this passes." The comment argues against transgender inclusion in schools and asks why they are being allowed into schools, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Protect trans/non-binary/gender non-conforming students!

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the protections for trans/non-binary/gender non-conforming persons" and argues that "No one should have to fear for their safety." The rest of the comment criticizes religious objections and reinforces support for the regulation's protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this bill," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. The follow-up phrase, "I would rather support the curbing of overt harassment," suggests they prefer a different approach rather than adopting these policies.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, calling it a "positive first step" and saying "Yes to a gender affirmative school system!" They frame it as improving "safety" and a "positive learning environment" for gender-marginalized students.


The commenter explicitly says, "We should protect them and respect them," in response to a policy about transgender students, which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The title "Protect trans children" also signals support for adopting the policy.


The comment explicitly says "strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s approach, saying it is "absurd" for schools to override parents and calling school intervention "abusive." The closing demand, "Leave parenting to parents on this matter of sexual identity," indicates opposition to the regulation’s guidance on transgender students in schools.


The comment is an affirming statement about transgender students, saying "Trans kids are LOVED!!" In the context of this regulation on transgender student treatment, this reads as support for policies protecting and affirming trans students rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote no on Transgender Legislation!" and repeatedly states the policy "should be rejected." They object to parental exclusion and to "children of the opposite sex" being allowed in locker rooms or bathrooms, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


This is wrong, time to focus on anti-bullying measures

The commenter says, "This measure infringes on my rights" and argues that "using MY tax dollars is not the place to mandate these policies," which clearly rejects the regulation. They explicitly redirect support toward "anti-bullying policies" instead of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly approve" and argues that "no one deserves to be discriminated against for any reason." They further support protecting transgender individuals and children "under law," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Strong support" and endorses the policy as creating "safe, validating spaces for all children." The phrase "Trans rights are human rights" further indicates approval of the regulation's purpose and direction.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!!" and repeatedly urges adoption of protections for trans students, asking policymakers to "create a strong system of support and protection." The comment frames the policy as necessary for safety, empathy, and preventing harm to trans youth.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, opening with the title "Support: It Saves Lives" and repeatedly arguing that "having support in schools for trans, non-binary, and gender conforming youth is critical." They urge schools to "be there for your students" and say that not supporting students "does anything but exile people," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


STRONGLY SUPPORT- Protect and support our transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and urges schools to "protect and support our transgender students." They also endorse the policy goals by stating that trans students should be "safe and welcomed."


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" which directly states opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and "100% support this policy," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The statement "All children deserve support, especially Trans youth" reinforces approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do NOT support this bill!" and "I am totally opposed to this." They also object that it is a "violation of parental rights," indicating they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


The amount of vile and transphobic comments here deeply concerns me

The commenter explicitly argues that "lgbtqia+ needs extra societal protection," which aligns with supporting the transgender-student protections in the proposed policy. The comment condemns anti-trans views and expresses fear for transgender students, indicating approval of stronger safeguards rather than opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. They also argue it will "keep them safe in their schools" and affirm support for LGBTQ+ youth and allies, reinforcing a pro-adoption position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the legislation," which directly endorses adoption. The phrase "This is the desegregation of this age" is also affirming and frames the policy positively.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds that "School should be a safe space for every student," which aligns with approving the regulation. The phrase "I support creating compassionate systems" further confirms endorsement rather than criticism or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am pleased to see measures like this" and describes them as "inclusive and supportive of our LGBTQ youth," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE and DISAGREE with this legislation," which directly indicates opposition to adoption. They also argue that it is "confusing and hurting our children" and claim it is harmful to children's health, reinforcing rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s purpose, saying it is "vital that everyone feels safe, welcomed, and seen in school" and that "trans students" should "feel supported." This clearly supports adoption of the transgender student policies.


Agree to equal rights but not this suggested implementation

The commenter explicitly says, "I can't support the policy of full immersion like this" and "I don't agree with the implementation this policy is suggesting." They propose alternatives like private bathrooms and local school-board handling, but reject the core policy on bathrooms, facilities, and sports participation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support protections for transgender students" and urges that "Virginia MUST be a place where ALL students can thrive." The statement "we MUST stop the hate" further indicates approval of the proposed protections and policies.


The commenter rejects the need for the proposed protections, asking, "Why do these kids need protecting" and stating, "I dont think anything special needs to be put in place." This indicates opposition to adopting the transgender student policies as written.


All our kids deserve to be safe and respected in their schools

The commenter explicitly endorses schools creating “safe, respectful and caring spaces” and says they “can’t imagine why anyone would argue to make schools a hostile and harmful environment.” The comment supports transgender and gender diverse children being “supported in living their authentic selves,” which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses respectful treatment for all students, stating that children should not have to defend their humanity based on identity and that "All deserve to learn and thrive in an environment of respect." This aligns with supporting the proposed transgender student policies and their nondiscrimination and supportive-environment goals.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Support: House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161" and says policy should be "inclusive." They also argue for "protecting our youth" and creating a "safe education," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the policy recommendation" and repeatedly argues the proposal is "bias and disrespectful of cisgender beliefs." They also object to teacher guidance, social services involvement, and the overall transgender policy, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


If you oppose this, ask yourself why you feel so threatened

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and repeatedly urges readers to adopt "the obviously compassionate path here." The comment argues the policy is needed for "safety and acceptance" and to address transgender students' mental health needs.


PROUDLY SUPPORT - Much Needed to Ensure ALL Students Safety in Learning

The commenter explicitly says they are in "FULL support" and that it is "PAST TIME to implement these changes." They argue the regulation is needed to protect "LGBTQIA+ youth" and ensure "the safety of ALL students."


The commenter explicitly says the proposals "go much further than just helping" and argues they "cut against parental rights, student safety, and freedom of speech." They criticize multiple provisions and conclude the document is "Not the Answer," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


We have the power to do better, by supporting transgender and gender diverse youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I echo support for this document" and urges schools to "support transgender and gender diverse youth". They argue the policy protects children from discrimination and creates "a more inclusive, supportive environment for all children."


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and repeats that "We need to support all of our students" and "Fully Support this initiative." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support protections for Trans and Gender non-binary students" and frames the policy as a positive step. They also endorse the regulation’s purpose by saying it helps address disparities faced by LGBTQ+ youth of color and rejects "bigoted viewpoints."


The title explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states the commenter’s position against the regulation. The body "Ridiculous" reinforces disapproval rather than support or neutrality.


Reject this "guidance" based on radical ideology

The commenter explicitly says to "reject this 'guidance'" and repeats that the policy is "misguided," "unworkable," and should be rejected. They argue it conflicts with parental rights, privacy, religious freedom, and their view of sex and gender, all indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "cutting off parental knowledge and input is absolutely unacceptable" and argues that it is "not the right of the state to remove those parental rights," which rejects a key aspect of the policy. Although they affirm that transgender children should be treated with compassion, the overall position is opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and repeatedly argues that it should be implemented to help transgender students. They praise the guidance as "evidence-based best practices" and a way to create "a safe and supportive learning environment."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support it," which directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The follow-up, "You are what you were born with! Teachers should leave it alone," reinforces opposition to school involvement in transgender-related guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support it," which directly rejects the proposed policies. The follow-up, "Teachers need to stay out of itl," reinforces opposition by arguing against school staff involvement in the issue.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this," which directly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policies should not be adopted because they distract from academics, conflict with "science," and "usurp the role of the parent." They also object to enforcement mechanisms, calling the threat of child protective services "overtones of a police state."


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Strongly Oppose" and argues for keeping a "private alternative for using the restroom" rather than adopting the proposed approach. They emphasize concerns about privacy and student comfort, saying the policy should consider "the needs of the whole student body" and seek "anonymous student input."


Strongly Oppose to Allowing Men and Boys into the Girls Bathrooms, Lockerrooms, and Showers

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues against allowing transgender students access to bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and sports under the proposed policies. They frame the regulation as harmful and unlawful, calling it "unfair," "discriminatory," and a violation of Title IX and other rights.


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

The commenter explicitly states "OPPOSED!" and repeatedly asks, "Please do not support these policies!" They argue the policies would harm parental rights, privacy, safety, and religious freedom, and describe them as "detrimental to our educational system."


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this measure" and describes it as "LIFE SAVING." They argue the policy should protect trans students' rights, respect, and equality, and note its positive impact on mental health and safety.


The commenter explicitly says "So VERY OPPOSED" and objects to the policy as an "Usurpation of parental responsibility and involvement." This indicates they want the regulation rejected or not adopted.


Transgender Student Policy House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and repeatedly endorses the policy as a way to combat "discrimination and inequality." They also argue that it helps youth and that "we need to broaden our minds... and start caring for and loving ALL of our children," which clearly favors adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Opposed to the proposed Transgender Policy" and repeats opposition with "Opposed for many reasons." They argue against the regulation as "Government overreach" and call it state-imposed "mandates," indicating they want it rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support the proposed policy," which directly rejects adoption. They also argue that it "should be under the parent's control, not the school," indicating opposition to the school policy framework.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with this agenda for our children," which indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The phrase "strongly disagree" is a clear negative position toward adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this!" and adds "Step in the right direction. Inclusivity!" indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly disagree with this proposed policy" and asks officials to "do not enact the proposed changes." They also argue the regulations would "cause great harm to students," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I agree with this proposal," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Oppose" and says "you are leading parents and children down a path that supports your ideology," indicating rejection of the policy. The phrase "This policy is messed up big time" further shows disapproval rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely oppose this policy" and repeatedly argues against it, calling it "absolutely ridiculous" and saying it would "put our daughters at risk." They also object to bathroom and shower access and describe the policy as a "big political move" that should not be adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this policy" and argues against shared facilities and the policy’s approach to gender identity. They also claim it would "infringe upon the First Amendment rights of parents" and "pit children against their parents," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree with this idea of including transgender policies in our public schools" and frames it as something that should not be handled in schools. The phrase "Strongly against" further confirms opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!" and argues against the policy by rejecting transgender recognition: "We are born as female or male just as God intended" and calls the policy "craziness." This indicates clear opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to implementing transgender policies in our public schools." They also ask to "respect our parental rights," indicating rejection of the proposed policies rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the guidelines put forth by the schools" and argues they "exceed protections" and should not be supported. They also object to schools "encourag[ing] children to choose gender forms" and frame the policy as overstepping parental authority, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the guidelines put forth by the schools" and repeatedly argues the policies "exceed protections" and should not be supported. They also object to schools "encourag[ing] children to choose gender forms" and emphasize that "parents should be the first and foremost authority," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "STOP THIS NONSENSE NOW!!" and argues that "Guidance along biological lines IS appropriate," indicating opposition to transgender-inclusive guidance. The comment also frames gender identity support for children as inappropriate and says they should receive "guidance, not to be left alone," which clearly opposes adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with this agenda for our children," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The phrase "strongly disagree" indicates opposition rather than a neutral question or factual input.


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "Opposed to this harmful policy" and argues it "goes way beyond prevention" and should not be used in schools. They object to what they describe as "mandatory promotion" and say it is "irresponsible" and "damaging," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the model policies." They further endorse the policies by arguing that transgender students should not face "persistent misgendering or deadnaming in school" and that identification by intended name and gender identity lowers suicide risk.


The commenter does not explicitly say “reject” the regulation, but recommends outside materials from the American Family Association and changed.com in the context of “Gender confusion,” which signals disagreement with the transgender student policies. The framing implies the commenter wants legislators to reconsider or oppose the proposed guidance rather than adopt it.


Virginia Public Schools are heading for disaster

The commenter clearly rejects the policy, saying schools are "heading for disaster" and that Democrats are "forcing this lie on our children and the public." They frame transgender recognition as an attempt to "eliminate male and female identification," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


Stop this nonsense, don't harrase innocent kids

The commenter explicitly says, "Stop this nonsense," indicating rejection of the policy. The question about whether a daughter should "share bathroom and locker room with guys" shows opposition to the regulation’s transgender student accommodations, especially around facilities access.


Stop the Insanity Presented as Loving and Caring

The commenter explicitly says, "Do not put this policy in place," and repeatedly condemns the proposal as "ludicrous" and "contrary to science." They also argue it violates the First Amendment and parental religious rights, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


I strongly & whole-heartedly disagree with this proposed policy.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly & whole-heartedly disagree with this proposed policy" and asks officials to "do not enact the proposed changes." They argue the policy infringes parental rights and object to shared facilities with transgender students, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, referring to it as "Transgender policies and indoctrination" and urging, "Lets actually tell kids the truth" instead of the proposed approach. The statement that children should not be made to think "they can change their gender" indicates opposition to the regulation's transgender-supportive guidance.


The commenter explicitly says they are "against the transgender policy" and that "NO schools should be promoting any POLICY about sex." They also urge schools to "STOP promoting social policies," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed" to the policy and frames it as "Transgender indoctrination." They argue the government has "no compelling right" to override parental religious teaching and claim existing laws already protect transgender children, indicating rejection of the regulation.


Opposition to DOE Proposed Transgender School Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to strongly oppose the Virginia DOE Proposed Transgender School Policies" and argues the policies "go far beyond" existing protections. They repeatedly call for rejection by claiming the policies harm other students' rights and are "not for the good of our children."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and refers to the guidance document as an "atrocious 'Guidance Document'". The rest of the comment condemns the policy as harmful, saying children are being used as "political pawns" and that it has "no place in our schools or our culture."


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not put our kids in a potentially dangerous situation!" which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The language frames the regulation as a safety threat, indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "unacceptable" and calls it "a disgrace and a abomination," indicating rejection of the regulation. They also argue it "should be left up to the parents to teach," which opposes school adoption of the guidance.


Transgender policies harmful to majority of students

The commenter explicitly says the policies are "harmful to the majority of students" and that "your new policies would create" problems, indicating opposition to adoption. They argue the policies would negatively affect privacy, modesty, and sports participation, and say the policies would not benefit the students they are meant to help.


I strongly oppose the new Transgendered Public School Policy

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose the Virginia DOE Proposed Transgender School Policies" and argues the policies "go far beyond" existing protections. They repeatedly frame the proposal as harmful, saying it would deny other students' rights and is "not for the good of our children."


Strongly disagree with gender, transgender teaching in schools

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly disagree" and argues schools should focus on core subjects rather than "gender and transgender issues." They also reject transgender participation in girls' sports, saying they "100% disagree" and that it is "not fair" to biological girls.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies," which directly rejects adoption. They also argue that "This is the parent's responsibility; not government" and call the changes "a real danger to our society and our children," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to the transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education" and directly asks, "Please do not enact the proposed changes!" This is a clear request to reject the regulation. The concern about policies "pit[ting] children against their parents" explains the objection but does not change the overall opposition.


The commenter explicitly calls it a "Bad Policy" and says it "could penalize parents" and lacks "a religious exception," indicating opposition to adoption. The final sentence that passage would be "shameful" further shows they want the measure rejected or substantially changed.


This transgender policy does not support biological reality.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it a "transgender policy" that "does not support biological reality" and urging officials to "end your foolishness with 'transgender' confusion policies." The repeated religious and moral objections show clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "indoctrination" and "NOT a good idea." They argue the education system should not teach that "gender is fluid" or that transgender support should affect other students and families, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and calls the policy "wrong, wrong, wrong," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The reference to it going against "Common Sense, ... Decentcy and Morality" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed" and argues the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents." They also urge schools not to accommodate "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" indicating opposition to adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT approve your 'Transgender Policy,'" and repeatedly calls the policy "OUTRAGEOUS" and "socialist propaganda." They also demand that schools "STOP" the policy and say they should be "defunded immediately," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposed policies, saying the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed" and that the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents." They argue schools should not accommodate transgender-inclusive practices and object to shared facilities and "irreversible 'gender transitions'," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Dispose of this policy," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. They also describe it as "terrible" and claim it "especially harms the females," reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they "vehemently am against this proposal" and calls it a "travesty and a disgrace," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They object to allowing "girls in boys bathrooms and locker rooms and visa versa" and describe the proposal as "deception and poor policy."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They repeatedly reject the policy’s treatment of transgender students, objecting to shared facilities, "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" and claiming the policies infringe parental rights.


STOP TAKEOVER OF CHILDREN GENDER DETERMINATIONS BY LOUDOUN CO. SCHOOL BOARD!

The commenter explicitly says "MUST STOP" and calls the policy "MORE OVERREACH BY GOVERNMENT," indicating clear opposition to the regulation. They also argue that questions of gender and sexuality are "THE LEGITIMATE DOMAIN OF PARENTS," which rejects the proposed school guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and argues the policies would "weave in gender and transgender issues" into schools inappropriately. They also reject transgender participation in sports, stating "I also 100% disagree" and that it is "not fair to young girls and women."


The commenter explicitly says the proposals should be rejected, stating "cause enough to reject these proposals" and warning that adoption would undermine schools and drive families out of public education. The comment argues the policies create safety risks and "place barriers between the student/parent relationship," indicating clear opposition to adoption as written.


Respect the fundamental rights of parents to bring up their children

The commenter explicitly objects to the proposed guidelines, saying they would "unleash substantial harm on families" and that schools should not "counsel" students about gender identity without parental involvement. The title and body both argue to "respect the fundamental rights of parents," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says the proposal "must be stopped now" and calls it "UNconstitutional," indicating clear opposition to adoption. The body also describes the policy as "woke PC lies" and an "assault on religion," reinforcing rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy fails to protect "bodily safety and privacy." They object to bathroom and locker room access, lack of parental notification, and describe the policy as "irresponsible" and "damaging," all indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not pursue this terrible program further," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also argue it will "cause gender confusion," "endanger girls," and remove "parental input," all of which are objections to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and "Do not allow this to happen," which clearly rejects the proposed policy. The statement that "Parents need to be in charge of their children not the state!!" indicates opposition to state involvement in transgender student policy.


Being for Transgender Sports is Being Against Women!

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it "eviscerate[s] women's/girl's sports" and that "There is nothing fair about this." The final line, "men and women are different!", reinforces opposition to transgender inclusion in sports-related provisions.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSED" and mocks the policy by saying they "can't wait for transgender males to take over girl sports." The final sentence condemns the regulation as "messing with God, nature and science," indicating rejection of the proposed policies.