The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these model policies" and "look forward to all local school boards developing and adopting policies" based on them. The comment repeatedly endorses the policies as "well-researched and thoughtfully formulated" and praises their focus on student safety and inclusion.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the statewide transgender policy applied to our schools," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


I strongly oppose the Statewide Transgender policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the statewide transgender policy" and repeats that they "strongly oppose the statewide transgender policy applied to our schools." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and urges, "Please, please pass this!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation, with no opposing language.


Most Strongly Oppose- Statewide Transgender Policy

The commenter explicitly says "Most Strongly Oppose" and argues that the proposed policy "hurts minors" and "robs others of their privacy rights." They also state that the current policy is sufficient, indicating they do not want the regulation adopted.


Transgender policies will cause chaos in schools and lives.

The commenter repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it will "cause chaos," "trample[] on the rights of people of faith," and lead to "constant[]" litigation. Although they endorse stopping bullying in general, their proposed alternatives and criticism show they do not support the regulation as written.


The comment cites suicide attempt statistics for transgender and non-binary youth to argue implicitly for protective policies. The title, "Support- Prevent Teen Suicide," clearly indicates approval of the regulation as a means of helping transgender students.


I Support Trans-Affirming Policies in Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I support trans-affirming policies in schools" and asks, "Please support transgender students with nondiscrimination policies." They frame the regulation as necessary to protect transgender students from discrimination, harassment, and bullying.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support" and adds affirming language: "Trans lives deserve dignity and respect." This clearly indicates approval of the proposed policies.


Support the guidance and protect the rights of *ALL* students, especially LGBTQ+

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and "appreciate the attention to this matter." They also express approval of "a more inclusive environment for transgender and non-binary students" and want children to have access to what they need at school.


Support our children - all children! Conforming and non-conforming identities are valued here.

The commenter explicitly endorses the initiative, saying "This work is important and needed" and calling it "a model that others can follow." The title and body both express approval of supporting transgender/non-conforming children and the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in strong support of these necessary policies" and calls them "a bare minimum" for schools. They further argue schools should provide "inclusion and equity for all" and a "safe environment," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Strongly Oppose - Help Children Love and Embrace Their Bodies

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy proposal" and repeatedly argues against key provisions such as withholding information from parents and requiring preferred pronouns. They conclude, "We don't need new school policies on this front," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please vote to oppose this measure as it is currently written" and repeatedly argues that it "distracts from the task of education" and removes parental involvement. Although the comment supports compassion, privacy, and anti-bullying measures, it concludes that the accommodations "cannot infringe upon the consideration of other students" and objects to bathroom/locker room access by transgender students.


The commenter directly argues that the policy "will increase suicide rates," which is a negative claim about the regulation’s effects and implies it should not be adopted. No supportive language or request for modification is present.


Strongly oppose. Teach them absolute truth!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and rejects the policy in favor of teaching "absolute truth." The reference to "male and female" and "made in the image of God" indicates opposition to the transgender student policies as proposed.


Strongly opposed to transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to these transgender policies" and hopes "this doesn’t pass." They also argue the policies would "bring harm," are "child abuse," and threaten restroom safety and privacy, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" the policy and asks officials to "value the guidance and expertise" behind it. The closing statement, "You will never be wrong supporting human decency and rights," clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


Please don't persecute children in your attempt to stop persecution of others.

The commenter explicitly says, "These proposals would persecute children" and argues they would "Confuse many children," "Result in children being removed from school systems," and cause "undue stress." Although they acknowledge "I understand the intent," they conclude that "there are better ways to accomplish this," indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and "I do not approve" of the policy, indicating rejection of the regulation. They also argue it is "ruining children" and "undermining family values," which shows substantive opposition rather than a neutral remark.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "SUPPORT" and says "Equal rights for all humans." They also endorse teaching kids that being transgender, non-binary, or gay is okay so they are not "discriminated" against or made "depressed and unhappy and suicidal," which clearly supports the regulation's protective aims.


This is child abuse, parental abuse, and admistraion abuse, and abuse of teachers.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "child abuse" and saying "This violates all reason and common sense." They argue it would "jeopardize the privacy and safety of my daughter in bathrooms and locker room" and say it should not go through.


This is Anti-Scientific and Prohibitive of the 1st Amendment

The commenter repeatedly argues the proposal should not be adopted, calling it "anti-scientific," a "violation of the First Amendment," and saying "this bill takes it a step too far." They explicitly reject its pronoun, restroom, and locker room provisions and ask that schools not "produce science deniers."


ing religious anti-LGBT bigot snowflakes everywhere

The commenter strongly endorses the regulation and attacks opponents of transgender protections, saying that failing to pass it "kills children and ruins lives." The comment explicitly defends "allowing someone to be who they are" and rejects claims that it harms parents' rights.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely oppose this" and argues schools should "stay clear" of the issue. They also reject the policy’s implications by demanding "Separate bathrooms" and criticizing it as "Bowing to perversion."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this document and these policies," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title, "Strongly support!," reinforces the same position.


Opposed; Please do not allow this policy to exist

The commenter explicitly says "Opposed" and asks, "Please do not let this pass," which clearly rejects adoption of the policy. They also describe it as "reckless" and "a clear lack of attachment to reality," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this measure!" and frames the policy as necessary because their daughter's gay and trans friends are "often bullied" and need support. This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and states "I don't want" the policy because it would "brainwash the children" with "sex confusion." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this transgender policy," which directly rejects adoption. They also argue it is "harmful" and call for affirming only "God-given biological gender as male and female," indicating opposition to the policy's transgender accommodations.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, saying the policies are "not for the betterment" of children and that they "will only lead to greater confusion and danger." They also argue that leaving parents out is "absolutely wrong" and ask to "help confused children and don't harm others," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely Oppose is the Strongest Terms!" and repeatedly argues the policy is "wrong on so many levels." They also call it "anti-science" and claim it endangers children, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


I strongly support these model policies!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these policies" and adds that "It's time to affirm transgender yout[h]," indicating clear approval of the regulation. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support these policies" and describes them as beneficial for students. They also express hope that Virginia children "can learn to be inclusive," indicating approval of adoption.


Oppose proposals that promote gender confusion

The commenter explicitly says, "Why would we want to support gender confusion" and refers to the proposals as "extreme," indicating rejection of the regulation. They also object to "boys in girls' locker rooms and bathrooms" and argue schools should "focus on teaching content," which shows opposition to the policy's transgender student provisions.


The commenter explicitly begins with "No" and calls the policy an "unjust burden and irresponsible." They argue it would dismiss parental rights, cause lawsuits, and create confusion and resentment, all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


Strongly oppose!  Please "follow the science" on this

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and frames the policy as harmful, stating "I fear for my grandchildren." The reference to "Bullying not by peers, but by curricula forced upon teachers" indicates rejection of the regulation rather than support or a neutral question.


The commenter explicitly urges approval of the policy, saying to "Allow students to their right to live their life in the manner they choose" and criticizing the opposing letter as "misleading" and a "scare tactic." They also argue that blocking students from being authentic is harmful, which supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly urges support for measures that would "protect transgender youth and students" and asks decision-makers to "go to bat for them" to guarantee "equal protections." The comment clearly favors adopting anti-discrimination protections for transgender and non-binary students.


Transgender Indoctrination in VA Schools is a BAD IDEA

The commenter explicitly says "Please scrap this idea !!" and calls the policy "a BAD IDEA," indicating clear opposition to adoption. The reference to "Transgender Indoctrination" and objections to "any teachings that deviate from Creations plan" further show they want the regulation rejected.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia Schools

The commenter explicitly states, "I support these model policies," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. No reservations or requests for changes are included.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and asks to "protect all children" by offering "a safe place for them to learn," which aligns with adopting the regulation. The language is clearly affirmative toward the proposed policies for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these measures" and argues they should be implemented to "protect trans students." They also state that failing to adopt the policies would "deny them an education outright," which clearly favors approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying "Treating transgender students fairly is a human right" and that it "protects all students." They also urge, "Keep VA schools safe!" which supports adoption of the regulation's protections and safe-access provisions.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the model policies," which directly endorses adoption. The additional statement that "Everyone needs to be able to be sure that their identities are fully respected" reinforces approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this bill" and argues it will "protect" transgender children and help schools focus on supporting all students. The comment describes personal hardship under current conditions and frames the regulation as a positive "win-win."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this measure" and argues that "All transgender and non binary students deserve to have policies in place that protect their rights." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I stand with our youth" and argues that "Allowing all people to be who they are" affirms their right to exist and safety. This is clear support for the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says passing the guidance document is "a huge step in the right direction" and that "This will save and improve lives." They also thank the recipient and frame the policy as necessary for "the most basic human rights," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and asks to "Please support the guidance." They also explain that the policy is needed to protect transgender students from bullying and physical harm, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and repeats support for "best practices for school districts" and for teaching staff how to support students. The comment frames the policy as necessary to "support students and create safe schools," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the adoption of this guidance" and frames it as necessary to "protect the rights, safety, and wellbeing of our trans students." The comment also endorses the policy’s purpose by arguing it is "the right and just thing to do."


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy should not be adopted, calling it "horrific" and saying it will "confuse our children" and worsen bullying. They also object to schools "hide this from parents," indicating opposition to the regulation’s core approach.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and adds a reason: "keep our schools safe for all students." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and argues that it is "downright wrong to disregard the role of parents in public education." They reject the policy framework as beyond the school's role, saying "It is not the role of the school to change social structures."


The commenter explicitly says "100 % in favor of accommodations!" and adds that the policy is "LONG overdue." They further endorse the underlying goal by stating that every child deserves to be treated "with dignity and respect" and protected from interference with their right to an education.


The commenter explicitly says they are "writing in favor of the supports identified in this guidance document" and endorses practices like "using a student's preferred pronouns" and "respecting gender identity." They also describe it as "a forward step" toward a more equitable school environment, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in strong support," which directly endorses the regulation. They also justify this by saying all community members should have "a supportive learning environment away from hate and discrimination," aligning with the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "IN ABSOLUTE SUPPORT" and urges, "Please pass this!" They also state the state is in need of protections for "our trans population and members of the LGBTQ community" and that they should be treated fairly in schools.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE" and calls the policies "an atrocious abuse" and "OVERREACH at the UTMOST," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They argue it removes parents from decision-making and should "never be considered," which is opposition to adoption.


The title explicitly says "Strongly Support," indicating approval of the regulation. The body, though truncated, says "Virginia public schools must support and students," which is consistent with endorsing support for students and the policy framework.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the guidance!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as proposed.


Strongly Support!! Trans rights are human rights.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!!" and calls the changes "essential to protecting trans children in schools." They also argue that opposing the policies would mean failing to protect students' mental wellbeing and human rights.


Treatment of Transgender Students and Spaces

The commenter argues the guidelines are not safe and says they "need to be revised" to give authorities and parents more protective power, rather than relying on students' "honesty." They also warn that parents "won’t 'feel safe' in public schools" under the proposal, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


STRONGLY SUPPORT, trans students deserve respect

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states that the policy "is extremely important" and "Virginia needs to pass this." They argue the changes will help trans students feel safe and respected and that the state should "do the bare minimum" to care for students.


Unfair to young women participating in sports.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree," and argues it is "unfair to young women participating in sports" to allow a transgender person to compete against them. The comment frames the policy as harming girls' team placement and scholarship opportunities, indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and describes it as "a necessary step". The comment endorses the regulation as helping create "safe places for ALL students to learn and grow."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support efforts to accommodate the trans community in Virginia public schools" and adds that the proposal would "positively address several issues." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the rights of transgender students" and also supports "the lawmakers protecting their rights within the schools." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation's purpose and adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and calls the model policy "a good step towards supporting all of our children." They argue it creates "a safe and secure place" and say we should "move in the right direction," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support creating and executing law that protects Virginia’s transgender students." They also endorse the goal of ensuring students can attend school "without a fear of being intimidated or threatened," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy framework, saying they do not believe the government should "usurp the rights and responsibilities of Parents" and arguing schools should focus only on academics. They also oppose related transgender-support measures, calling puberty blockers "criminal" and saying preferred pronouns are "a distraction" for school personnel.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly SUPPORT" and adds "Trans rights are human rights!" indicating clear approval of the regulation. The statement that "All children deserve equal treatment however they choose to identify" aligns with the policy's purpose of protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly endorses equal protections for transgender students, saying the document "should not even have to be made" because students deserve "the same protections" and "SAFE and FAIR access". They argue transgender students are "no less part of their school" and ask, "Who are you to say they shouldn't have the same rights?"


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s underlying protections, saying “trans people are real and deserve the same respect any cisgender student gets.” They also state the boundaries in the proposal would have made them “feel so much safer,” which indicates support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies" and repeats that they "strongly oppose these guidelines." They object to the policies on religious/conscience grounds and argue they allow students to be "interrogated without the knowledge of their parents," indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The comment says, "Students matter regardless of gender," which clearly affirms equal treatment for transgender students and aligns with the regulation's nondiscrimination goals. It does not request changes or express opposition, so it supports adoption in principle.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Oppose transgender education" and says "I do not want my elementary school children being told that they can change their gender." They also reject related requirements such as informing parents, affirming students, and using gender-neutral pronouns, calling the policy "outrageous" and "anti-American."


The commenter explicitly says the proposed policy is "highly flawed" and says lawmakers should "do better," indicating opposition to adoption as written. Although they affirm that children should be safe and respected, they argue the policy goes "woefully beyond" rights protections and "stripping away the rights of parents," which is a clear rejection of the proposal.


The commenter explicitly წერს "100% SUPPORT" and says they want "safe and inclusive schools for all current and future students in Virginia," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. They also identify as "a non binary person," reinforcing support for transgender-inclusive policies.


Strongly Oppose, Violation of Constitutional Rights

The commenter explicitly says they are "strongly opposed" and concludes, "I am strongly against every single one of them." They argue the policies violate parental rights, religious freedom, and student safety, and repeatedly call the policies "horrific."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Support - Trans Rights are Human Rights" and argues that the policies should protect "Trans youth" and normalize gender identity discussions. They also say religion should not be used as an excuse to "neglect the needs of others," indicating approval of the regulation's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and calls the policy "ludicrous," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no language suggesting support or neutrality.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "Please support the policies listed in the Guidance Document" and repeatedly argues the policies are "the bare minimum" that should be done. They also state that conceding on any part would harm transgender students, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and "I am in full support of the fair treatment of all of God's children," which clearly endorses the regulation. The statement "Trans rights are human rights" also indicates approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter says they do not want their children in a school under these policies and objects to "remove parental rights" and to children being exposed to "teachings, values, hidden and blatant agendas." This indicates opposition to adopting the regulation.


Strongly support! Trans rights are human rights!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this legislation" and praises "Proactive action" for supporting trans students. The comment clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and frames it as beneficial for an "inclusive culture."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this proposed policy" and repeatedly argues it would "take away the feeling of safety" and violate "parents rights to be informed." They also call out specific sections as harmful, saying the policy would "isolate and discriminate" and create risks in bathrooms/locker rooms and around parental notification.


Strongly support—not only morally right but legally correct

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues the policy is "morally right" and "legally correct." They further state Virginia "can and must" use its power to "protect the rights of trans people," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


Support! Trans Students Deserve Equality in School

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy guidance" and thanks VDOE for developing it. They also argue it will "help school districts" create a "more welcoming and inclusive learning environment," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Support strongly! A child’s right to feel safe should never be up for debate

The commenter explicitly says "Support strongly!" and argues that "We must must must protect a child’s right to safety at school," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The comment also dismisses opposition as not having "taken the time actually read it," reinforcing support for the regulation.


Christian who thinks God has the ultimate say.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying they "can't believe" schools should "change to cater to this belief" and calling it "offensive and morally corrupt." The statement "I will homeschool if this finds it's way in our schools" indicates opposition to adoption.


Concerned parent - school transgender acceiptance policy

The commenter clearly rejects the policy, calling it "perverse," saying the government is "forcibly crossing into schools and family life," and urging to "Keep our children innocent!" They also express fear about transgender acceptance in schools and potential bathroom issues, indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses transgender rights with "Trans rights are human rights" and urges approval through a supportive appeal: "Love one another. Please." There is no criticism or request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "support trans students" and argues that policies should "make them feel safe and wanted." They frame the regulation as beneficial because it can help reduce suicide risk among LGBT students, indicating clear approval of the proposed guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strong support!" and endorses the policy’s underlying purpose by stating that "Everyone should have the freedom to express who they truly are and feel supported in doing so." The phrase "Trans rights are human rights!" clearly indicates approval of the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


Strongly Support. Keep hatred out of schools.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this legislation," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement that "Hatred and bigotry have no place in this country's education system" reinforces support for the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly urges adoption, saying "these policies are necessary" and that "our schools should support students in their journeys of self-discovery." They also suggest the rulemaking could be improved with more specific language, which indicates support with enhancements rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this proposed guidance" and urges the Commonwealth to ensure schools provide "a safe and nurturing environment for all kids." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


No! Keep boy parts out of girl restrooms at school! People need Jesus

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "No!" and objects to transgender students' restroom access, saying "Keep boy parts out of girl restrooms at school!" This indicates opposition to the regulation's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The reason given, "it's not safe for our students," indicates they want the policy rejected on safety grounds.


The commenter explicitly states, "I completely oppose this," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The title also says "Oppose," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly asks to "revise this policy" and says "Males should not be allowed in the female locker room," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies as written. They argue the policy "does not accomplish" respectful treatment and should instead "acknowledge there are two sexes and two genders," which is a substantive rejection of the regulation's framework.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill" and repeatedly criticizes the policy as a "travesty" and "a disgrace." They argue teachers should focus on academics and reject the regulation's approach to transgender students.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly asks officials to "resist making these destructive changes." They argue the policies are "the wrong way" and would lead to "negative, divisive results," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in complete agreement for supporting trans rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The title, "Strongly In Support Of Trans Rights," reinforces that they want the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support any legislation" and frames that support around "the health and well-being of trans youth." This indicates clear approval of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "Godless legislation" and "lawlessness." They ask readers to "not conform to this 'new' normal," indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that people should not be "empower[ed]" to "become someone they are not," which rejects the regulation’s transgender-supportive framework. The religious framing that "God made people male and female" is used to oppose the policy’s recognition of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED!" and argues that the policy would "further confuse them and stress them out more," indicating rejection of the regulation. The reference to "adding this to the curriculum" shows opposition to the transgender-student guidance being adopted in schools.


Oppose protect children who can't protect themselves

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" in the title and repeatedly rejects the policy, calling it "wrong on so many levels" and saying "there would be no need for these policies." The final line, "Treat boys like boys and girls like girls!" clearly indicates opposition to the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and endorses "guidance for inclusive learning environments that enable everyone." This clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation.


OPPOSE Tyrannical trans guidance document

The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "OPPOSE" and calls it "Tyrannical trans guidance document." They argue the policies "tramples on truth, common sense, and the rights of families" and say the "whole thing is an affront," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this!" and argues that transgender students "deserve respect" and should be allowed bathroom access consistent with their gender identity. The comment endorses the policy’s protections and rejects claims that such access causes harm.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and frames the regulation as "protecting and expanding rights of members in the LGBTQ+ community." This clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


Opposed to Bill, Parents' Roles Should Not Be Superseded

The commenter explicitly says, "This policy should be overturned and abolished," and repeatedly frames the regulation as harmful. They argue it "supersede[s] parents," "punishes parents," and would "destroy teachers and students who protest against this," all of which indicate clear opposition to 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 oppose the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues the policies are "complete over reach" and should not be adopted. They object to bathroom access, parental notification, and what they describe as "indoctrination," all indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to these proposed policy changes," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also argue the policies "deny the rights of parents," violate "students' privacy rights," and threaten "the privacy and safety of our girls," reinforcing a clear anti-policy position.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and says transgender, non-binary, and LGBTQ+ students "should be supported and protected." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!" and argues, "Do not introduce confusion to kids," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also oppose related elements like "Neutral pronouns" and want issues handled "case by case" by parents rather than school guidance.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy and related school practices as "STRONGLY Opposed" and says the school is "taking it over" from parents. They repeatedly argue that "Parents should be the source of guidance not the school" and that FCPS should "stick to educating not undermining the family and parents," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


Strongly Oppose this Policy as Harmful to Our Children

The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this policy" and argues it is "harmful to our children." They also say it would "further foster a dysphoric environment" and promote a "culturally popular agenda" they reject, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


I support this guidance for LGBTQ Youth!

The commenter explicitly says, "I support protections for trans and non-binary students in schools" and asks to "Make Virginia a safer Commonwealth for TGNC youth." The comment argues the guidance is needed to prevent bullying, improve mental health, and protect students, which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that "Transgender kid's rights are human rights and should be protected." They also state that transgender children should be "safe and accepted," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of this!" and repeatedly urges, "Please support this!" They argue the policy protects transgender students' rights and would "do no harm to cisgender students" while helping trans students.


The commenter explicitly endorses the guidance, calling it "Comprehensive, ESSENTIAL, and well supported" and saying it will be "paramount to protecting transgender students and ensuring equal access to education." They also state, "I look forward to seeing this guidance in implementation," which clearly supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Whole Heartedly Support These Policies" and closes with "I support these policies." They argue the policies "protect the student" and "go a long way to protect" trans and non-binary students, indicating clear approval of adoption.


Oppose/ VA schools are supposed to support communication with parents not put up barriers.

The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and says the policies "run the risk" of mockery and are "dangerous." They argue the document "puts up barriers" and criticize it for reducing communication with parents, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Oppose" and states, "Kids will be confused by these policies," which indicates disapproval of adopting the regulation. No supportive or neutral language appears.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Strongly Support" and says "school age children need to have at least a bill that defends them," indicating clear approval of the regulation. The body argues the policies are needed to protect trans students' rights and respect in school.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Never been more opposed to anything in my life" and uses all-caps "DO NOT" to reject the policy. They also argue against accommodating transgender students, saying "make a 3rd bathroom option" instead and claiming the policy would "endanger normal children in school."


The commenter explicitly says "Totally Support," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. There is no qualifying language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I think guidance to support students in the LGBT community is necessary" and expresses a desire for schools where "all students are treated equally and feel safe." They also state, "we can and we should do better," which clearly endorses the proposed guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "Trans lives, especially trans children's lives, are always incredibly valuable and need to be protected," which clearly endorses the regulation's protective purpose. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the policy.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students.

The commenter explicitly says, "No, I do not support" the policies and ends with "Please reject." They also argue the policies "undermine the rights of the parents and families," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy "has gone too far." They object to schools affirming a child's gender identity and keeping it from parents, indicating they do not want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly წერს "Strongly Support!!!!" and endorses the policy with "LGBTQ rights are human rights!" This is a clear approval of the regulation as written.


SUPPORT OUR TRANS YOUTH. Put your bible down

The commenter explicitly urges approval of the policy, saying "we should" support all children and that "Trans kids should be treated with respect, dignity" in public schools. The title "SUPPORT OUR TRANS YOUTH" and repeated calls to "treat them as such" clearly endorse the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Strongly Support" and argues that students "MUST be provided a SAFE learning environment." They also criticize opposition to "the creation of a safe and positive learning environment for ALL students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


Strongly oppose this risky and premature policy change, parents of four APS grads

The commenter explicitly says, "We object to the adoption of the new transgender policies in Virginia public schools" and titles the comment "Strongly oppose this risky and premature policy change." The body argues against the policies on parental rights and concerns about transgender interventions, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!" and argues the policy is "very wrong". They object to "remove a parent(s) from any decisions involving their children" and to "encourage children to go against their parents," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I believe the best path forward for Virginia is to support the transgender students we have" and urges that students be allowed to be "their authentic selves." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies' goal of supporting transgender students.


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


Where are your morals? No transgender will be in a bathroom with my self or my children. Vote NO!

The commenter explicitly says, "Vote NO to this nonsense," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The statement about not wanting "transgender" people in a bathroom with them or their children indicates opposition to the regulation's transgender student protections, especially around facility access.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose these policies," which directly states opposition to the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly oppose this plan," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The follow-up language, "I can not believe that this is even being discussed. Unbelievable!" reinforces a strongly negative rejection rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I strongly support the rights of trans youth." They also argue schools should provide "the same rights and protections" and "support and protect their students," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


Suicide more likely among transgender adults

The commenter explicitly argues against the policy, asking "where is the science" and stating that "The current legislation will create instead a hostile environment." They frame the regulation as encouraging children to question their gender and birth sex and say it should not be adopted as written.


A plea for empathy, support this guidance!!!

The commenter explicitly says "support this guidance!!!" and repeatedly argues that schools should provide "an environment where trans students get treated with dignity and respect." They also state that the guidance would help kids "learn and grow" and end with "Let our kids be who they are," clearly endorsing adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They also object to the policy's treatment of transgender identity, arguing it is "very dangerous" and that it could "take a child from their parents."


Strongly Support - Love, Dignity, and Support

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and repeatedly endorses the policy as a matter of "love, respect, and support." They argue that "Transgender rights are human rights" and urge officials to "listen to those who know what they need to thrive and do our very best to provide," which clearly supports 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 these guidelines" and argues they are needed to "foster a safe and respectful educational environment for all students." The comment also endorses the policy’s purpose of protecting and affirming transgender students from discrimination and harassment.


This may cause others to take advantage of others who are not there for the right reasons. Oppose!

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and argues the policy "will allow others to take advantage of privacy." They propose an alternative—"make private bathrooms for everyone and don’t make it about gender at all"—which indicates rejection of the regulation as written rather than support.


The commenter rejects the policy’s implications for sex-specific facilities, saying it is "not in any way, shape, or form OK" to allow "people of the opposite sex into gender specific locker rooms." They frame the issue as a violation of others’ privacy and say it is "WRONG," indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly calls the proposal "extremely concerned" and a "disturbing" "mandate," then argues against it on multiple grounds, including grammar, teacher burden, privacy/safety, faith, and legal risk. The overall thrust is that the regulation should not be adopted in its current form.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not pass this" and states that "The school system is not the place for this," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The reference to "push any agenda" indicates opposition to the policy itself rather than a request for changes.


Oppose new proposed Model Policies for treatment transgender students in VA public schools

The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Oppose new proposed Model Policies" and repeatedly argues the policies "harms parental rights" and "negatively impact student emotional and physical safety." They object to allowing students to use different names/bathrooms without parental notification and say the state should not adopt these guidelines.


The comment explicitly states "OPPOSE" in the title, which directly indicates the commenter does not want the regulation adopted. There is no body text to suggest any nuance or conditional support.


The commenter explicitly states, "I OPPOSE the proposed transgender guidelines!" twice, leaving no ambiguity about their position. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance against adoption is clear.


The comment is an emphatic rejection of the regulation, using repeated "NO!!!" and the title "NO!!!!!!". It provides no supporting details, but the intent to oppose adoption is unmistakable.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and "Strongly opposed to this. Vote no," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Opposed to this. Vote no," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote no," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The follow-up, "Keep academics focused on academics," suggests they believe the policy is a distraction from schooling priorities.


The commenter clearly rejects the regulation, writing "Absolutely not the place for this." The title "No!!!!" reinforces a strong opposition to adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation" and argues it is "a disservice to the students of Virginia." They object to pronoun use, school involvement, and say the policy "supersede[s] the right of the parent," all indicating rejection of the regulation.


Protect children from the radical transgender agenda

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as "the radical, anti-science agenda of the transgender movement" and says such content should "NEVER be a part of" school. The statement that "Children do not belong to the State" further indicates opposition to the regulation and its implementation in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this wholeheartedly" and calls the model policies "a good thing". They also endorse an "inclusive and equitable" standard for how schools interact with students, which clearly favors adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose these proposed policies" and argues they would "allow parents to be deceived" and "deprive girls of necessary privacy." This is a clear rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose draft transgender mandates" and argues the policy is "stupid and dangerous" and will "do nothing but harm our society." They also state that the Department of Education has "too much power" and that the guidance should not be promoted in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed guidelines," which directly states opposition to adoption. The added phrase "which would affect all public schools within the Commonwealth of Virginia" reinforces that they are objecting to the regulation’s statewide application.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote No!" and frames the policy as "an infringement on our religious freedom," which indicates opposition to adoption. The phrase "Keep your politics out of the classroom!" further rejects the regulation's presence in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "Vote No to protect our children!" which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The phrase "God makes no mistakes" signals opposition to transgender-related guidance on religious grounds.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Please do not do this" and frames it as an unwanted "agenda" being pushed. The rhetorical questions "Why must this type of agenda be pushed? What purpose does it serve?" indicate opposition rather than a request for clarification or neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS!!!!!!!" and the title "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!" leaves no ambiguity about rejecting the regulation. No supporting or neutral language appears.


Proposed Policy by The Virginia Department of Education Concerning All Students

The commenter says, "I am strongly against the proposed policy" and concludes that "this policy should not be supported." They argue it would undermine "Parental Rights," "Privacy, Safety, Religious Freedom and Freedom of Speech," and object to bathroom access and school involvement in gender identity issues.


The commenter explicitly states, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS!!!" which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


Protect ALL students, do NOT support this

The commenter explicitly says, "I am firmly opposed to this document" and "do NOT support this," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They argue the policy would "not help children" and object to what they call "gender confusion" and "the lie that a child has been 'born in the wrong body.'"


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in support of the proposed guidance" and specifies support for "trans and non binary students." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE TO THIS!!!!" and threatens to leave the state if it is adopted: "I WILL MOVE MY FAMILY & BUSINESS OUT OF VIRGINIA." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this!" which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The statement that "The PARENT knows more about their child than the school" indicates a parental-rights objection to the policy.


perhaps well-intentioned; but over-reaching.

The commenter says the document is "over-reaching," that schools should "abstain from involvement" in gender identity discussions, and that the initiative "robs energy and resources from more important initiatives." They also argue parental roles "should never be breached," indicating clear opposition to adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and labels the policy "against American values" and "plain wrong and STUPID," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no request for modification or neutral feedback.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly oppose this idea" and argues against the policy on the grounds that it creates "gender confusion" and allows access to restrooms/locker rooms by "the opposite sex." The comment asks that the policy not be adopted because of perceived safety risks.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this!" which directly states opposition to the proposed policies. The title "No No No" reinforces a negative position toward adoption.


Please don’t implement this policy at school. Thank you!

The commenter explicitly asks, "Please don’t implement this policy at school" and "Please don’t promote this kind of policies at schools," which clearly rejects the regulation. Although they say they are "not against LGBQ community," they still oppose the policy on religious grounds, stating it is "against God’s will."


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose to this," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title also says "Oppose," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and states that "children should not be exposed to these beliefs at school," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly asks to "protect our trans youth" and to "give them equal rights and respect," which clearly supports adopting the proposed policies. The title "Support our Trans Youth" reinforces that the comment favors the regulation.


Model Policies for Treatment of Transgender Students in Public Schools

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying the government has "NO RIGHT to undermine parents" and that "This policy will be harmful to ALL children." The statement that it will "do both" indicates opposition to adoption of the model policies.


The commenter explicitly endorses support for transgender youth, stating that "Trans youth deserve the support of all" and that "we owe our children more." The final sentence, "When people tell you who they are, the right response is to listen," clearly aligns with adopting the proposed policies.


Draft Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter repeatedly condemns the proposal as an "attack on our children" and says school is "not the place" for these policies. They explicitly reject the rationale behind the draft, calling it "nothing more than a weapon" and comparing supporters to authoritarian regimes, which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


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

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose" the model policies and asks that "all training that is contrary to biological gender be held out of our school system." They repeatedly reject the regulation as "false training" and oppose "ANY and ALL training" that goes against it.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose new gender identity in schools," which directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The comment provides no qualifying support or request for modification, only opposition.


NO WAY!!! NO WAY!!!  NO WAY!!! STRONGLY OPPOSED!!

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED!!" and repeatedly rejects the policy's premise, arguing that "Your gender is determined at birth" and that lawmakers should not recognize individual gender identity. The appeal to scripture and statements like "Stand up for what is right" indicate opposition to adopting the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "SUPPORT" and the body adds "Respect every human," which aligns with approving the transgender student policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!!" and repeatedly rejects the policy, stating "absolutely not!!" and "Please don’t confuse these children." They argue the regulation would undermine parental authority and create safety problems, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


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


The commenter explicitly says they are "strongly opposed to anything that confuses gender confusion" and argues the policy would present "gender confusion" to children. They also state "We are Christians and God makes it very clear this is not right," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY DISAGREE!!!!" and calls the policy "a HUGE mistake," which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, only rejection.


The commenter explicitly endorses protecting transgender students and argues that schools should respect a child's identity for safety: "the school system should respect that for that child’s safety" and "We shouldn’t draw lines, we should just respect each other." The comment also defends using preferred names and pronouns and frames the policy as life-saving, saying it "can literally save a child’s life."


The comment is explicitly labeled "OPPOSE," indicating rejection of the proposed regulation. The body, "you didn’t find better to help our kids.....," is dismissive and suggests the commenter believes the policy is not a good way to help children.


The commenter rejects the policy outright with "NO, please!" and frames it as harmful, calling it "this type of experiment." The reference to "teen death" and urging officials to "review your data" indicates opposition based on perceived danger rather than support or a neutral question.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill" and endorses "any attempts to add protections for transgender students." This is a clear affirmative position in favor of adopting the regulation.


I AM ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO THIS. NOT WHAT’S BEST FOR OUR CHILDREN!

The commenter explicitly says, "I AM ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO THIS" and repeats, "THIS IS NOT WHAT’S BEST FOR OUR CHILDREN." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote 'NO'" and "I do not endorse," making clear they do not want the regulation adopted. They also object to "altering restrooms" and say "this is not a good move," indicating opposition to the policy itself rather than a request for minor changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools" and repeats support for "a safe and supportive learning environment free from discrimination and harassment for all students." The comment is clearly in favor of adopting the regulation, with no opposing language.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation with "HECK TO THE NO!" and calls it "ABSURD!" This is a clear expression of opposition to adopting the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote no" and argues the policy "goes against everything our country was founded upon." They frame it as violating "the parents responsibility and right" and claim it is "against" the Constitution, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Opposed" and argues that "Children should not be encouraged" to identify as a different sex, indicating rejection of the policy’s transgender-student protections. The statement that "Adults can make that decision but not children" further shows opposition to the regulation as applied to students.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Support" and says the policies are "essential for the safety and security of transgender students." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE" and asks, "Please do not put these awful guidelines on our students." They argue the policies are harmful, saying children should not be considering sex or sexuality and that this is "NOT good for the mental Health of anyone involved."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The added claim that implementation "would be harmful to our children" reinforces that they want it rejected.


Opposed / No to "Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender..."

The commenter explicitly says, "I'm strongly opposed to this measure" and titles the comment "Opposed / No." They argue the guidance "reinforces and creates more confusion" and object to "remove clear gender/sex categories," indicating rejection of the regulation.


Opposed to  draft model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this measure" and repeatedly argues against adoption, claiming it will "train children... to disrespect their parents" and "force a type of religion on all students." Although one sentence mentions concern for transgender students, the overall thrust is rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "we do not support the proposed guidance" if it is not adopted, and the title "Support Trans Youth" reinforces approval. They argue that "Children deserve a safe environment" and that adults should "support the proposed guidance," which clearly favors adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "This is something that should be kept out of schools," which rejects the regulation. They also argue it would cause "even more confusion" for a child and make teachers uncomfortable, indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am opposed to this," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title also says "Opposed," reinforcing the same position.


Do You Actually Know What Your Are Asking For?

The commenter explicitly urges readers to "reassess your thinking on this proposed policy" and frames the draft as a dangerous "pandora's box" that should not be adopted. The body lists numerous alleged harms and repeatedly attacks those "in SUPPORT" of the policy, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly argues that "Every child [has] the right to be safe and learn in school" and condemns harassment and bullying of transgender youth. By saying they post this "because of a child I love, and want safety for him," they clearly support protections for transgender students in school.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Support" and says, "I salute the school system's courage and forward thinking approach" and "Forward with compassion and courage." These phrases clearly endorse the proposed policies rather than oppose them.


PASS THIS !!  How students are treated should not be based in fear and misinformation. TRANSRIGHTS

The commenter explicitly says "PASS THIS !!" and argues that students should receive "the same rights and protections" and that it is "our job to protect our children--ALL our children." The body consistently endorses transgender rights and the policy's underlying protections rather than opposing them.


The commenter objects to the policy’s privacy/confidentiality approach, stating that "Parents have a right to know critical information" and that schools should not be the "proprietary owner" of the process. The title "NO!" and emphasis on parental involvement in "significant life altering decisions" indicate opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this proposal" and urges, "Let's get this passed!!" They also frame the policy as helping kids feel "safe and respected," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Strongly and sincerely opposed" to the proposed policies. They object to "purposefully sanctioning and supporting children to choose their gender," indicating rejection of the regulation's transgender student protections rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "We need to provide a healthy, safe space where ALL students can thrive" and urges "supporting and protecting" trans and non-binary students. This clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students and preventing harm.


The commenter explicitly says, "I heartily support the protections afforded trans and non-binary students." They also reinforce approval with "Trans rights are human rights," indicating clear support for the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "No to transgender push in our schools" and objects to the "changes" being intended by the governor and school boards. The demand for "PARENT INPUT, not radical ideas" indicates rejection of the proposed policies rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE!" and rejects the premise of the policy by stating, "I DO NOT AGREE THAT A PERSON CAN CHANGE THEIR BIOLOGICAL SEX." The final sentence, "THIS IS TOTALLY INSANITY," further indicates they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly states, "I COMPLETELY OPPOSE THIS," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The title also says "OPPOSE," reinforcing that they do not want it adopted.


The commenter explicitly states, "I COMPLETELY OPPOSE THIS," which is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation. The title also says "OPPOSE," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly states, "I completely oppose this," which is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation. The title also says "OPPOSE," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support this guidance" and endorses equal treatment for "trans and non binary students." This is a clear affirmative position on adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Absolutely NOT!!!" and calls it "wrong on so many levels," indicating clear opposition to adoption. The phrase "this is child abuse" further shows strong disapproval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose!" and frames the issue as parental notification rights: "Parents have the right to know what the school is doing for the child." This indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies, likely due to concerns about privacy and parental rights.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am extremely opposed to this" and calls it "an outrage," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The statement that we should be "protecting our children not exposing them" indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and argues the policy is "covert sexual abuse" and an "attempt to subvert parents". These statements clearly reject the regulation and call for parental control over such discussions.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY support these reforms" and endorses the policies as necessary for students. They further explain that the proposals would help students "develop their identity and self-expression" in a supportive school environment.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional context suggests any nuance or conditional support.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this legislation!" which directly states opposition to the proposed policies. The follow-up, "This is wrong on so many levels," reinforces a negative position rather than a request for clarification or neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says "No!! Strongly opposed!!" which directly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "NO, do not implement the proposed policy" and labels it "OPPOSED!!" They argue the policy would be "mean and cruel" and call it an "unhinged" response, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and explains that it will help ensure children are in a "supportive, safe and welcoming environment for ALL." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "the rest of it should go through the shredder" and supports only the anti-bullying section, indicating opposition to the regulation as a whole. They also criticize "transgender indoctrination" and ask to "go back" to other priorities instead of spending money on it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The follow-up rhetorical question about "Hormones rage at this age" indicates disapproval of adopting these transgender student policies.


Concern about Parent's role and funding question

The commenter says the policies would "pit children against their parents," which is a clear criticism of the proposed guidance. The question about whether there will be "additional funding" for gender-inclusive facilities also signals concern about implementation rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely support these proposed policies" and closes with "I whole-heartedly support these policies." They argue the policies are needed to make school a place where transgender and LGBTQ+ students feel "safe, loved, and respected" and to reduce bullying and mental health harms.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose" and argues the school system should "butt out" of gender-related discussions, indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also criticize the guidance as "ridiculous" and "pretty disgusting," and prefer family control over school involvement.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to the guidance" and argues that the Department of Education should not "venture into establishing their personal moral views." They also contend that existing bullying laws are sufficient and that the policy would "force everyone to align with one view or another," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "TOTALLY OPPOSED" and "NO SUPPORT !!!" indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The claim that it "GOES AGAINST EVERY MORAL LAWS" and "WILL LEAD TO CHILD ABUSE" reinforces opposition rather than any request for modification.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "NO to trans. Policies in any school!!!" and reinforces that opposition by calling it "perversion in our schools." This is a clear request to reject the regulation rather than adopt it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal with "NO, NOT A SINGLE OUNCE OF SUPPORT!!!" and calls it "appalling" and a "Complete over reach." They also argue that "Parents parent and raise their children," indicating opposition to the policy's role in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these mandates!" and urges the school to "Stay out of it!" They argue these matters should be left "for the family to decide," indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


Strongly Oppose - Parents are kids parents... not school or state

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this guidance" and argues it "sets to exclude the parent’s involvement" and "subvert the role of parents." The comment objects to the guidance’s privacy/confidentiality provisions, especially the idea that schools may keep information "secret from the parents."


The commenter explicitly calls the policy a "Horrible Idea" and says it "transcends all basic common sense" and will have "far-reaching, unintended, and injurious repercussions." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


Opposed to the stated guidance.   Suggest expanding services for those with issues of sexuality

The commenter explicitly says, "The current guidance should not be implemented in our public schools" and objects to it being funded with "tax payer funding." Although they support providing "support, services and understanding," they frame that as an alternative and say the guidance "takes the parent out of the picture and that is wrong."


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "No, there's no way this can happen." They frame the regulation as harmful and object to "teaching lgbtq to our children," indicating opposition to adoption.


Policies for Treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "a dangerous road of experimentation" and saying it is "being forced on others." This language indicates opposition to adopting the regulation, not support or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the draft guidance" and thanks the department "for these policies." They also state that "the adoption will allow teachers to feel better supported" and emphasize "safety, well-being, and inclusion of all Virginia students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter objects to key parts of the policy, especially confidentiality for transgender students, saying parents should be informed "even if the child requests the parent not be informed." They also push back on rooming and gender identity accommodations, describing them as "another weight thrust on" teachers and arguing for stronger parental control.


Totally opposed to this discourse.  After not being in school for a year they need to focus on basic

The commenter explicitly says, "NO WAY should we focus on this at this time" and "Totally opposed to this discourse," indicating rejection of the regulation. They argue schools should instead "focus on teaching basics" and that this issue is "between children and parents," which shows opposition to the policy's school role.


absolutely oppose - and couldn't say it better than this:

The commenter explicitly says "absolutely oppose" and repeatedly argues against the guidance, calling it "nonsensical" and a "naked affront" to parental guardianship. They ask rhetorical questions about why Virginia schools would adopt it and urge consideration of "a better solution that does less harm," indicating rejection of the regulation.


Support adult LGBT rights. OPPOSE state interfirence into family matters

The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "nothing more than an attempt of the state to remove parental rights" and frames it as something to "OPPOSE state interfirence into family matters." They also criticize the proposal as having "undefined or silly defined terms" and being "misleading and/or legally incorrect," indicating rejection rather than support.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly and resolutely oppose this regulation," which directly states opposition. They also argue it "disregards and overrides the role of parents" and threatens "bodily privacy and safety," indicating they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose these proposed policies," which directly states opposition to adoption. The rest of the comment frames the policies as conflicting with religious beliefs and parental rights, reinforcing that they do not want the regulation approved.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree" and later states, "I don't believe our leaders listen to our concerns anyway or the above as written," indicating opposition to the proposed policies. The comment argues against teaching gender identity in schools and frames the regulation as harmful to children and family values.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and argues the policy would "interfere with the essential relationship between parents and children" and "violate students freedoms of speech and religion." They also claim it is "designed to help adult transgenders" rather than teens, indicating rejection of the regulation's purpose and effects.


The commenter explicitly writes "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!" and then cites Romans 1:24-32 to condemn the subject matter as sinful and shameful. The religious passage is used to argue against the regulation's treatment of transgender students rather than to support it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The body reinforces this by calling it "totally focused on destroying the family and values," indicating rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very much support this guidance" and repeatedly endorses the policy as necessary for student safety and inclusion. They argue it is "essential for all children and youth to feel safe and welcome at school" and affirm that LGBTQIA+ young people "deserve special support."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and gives a reason implying concern that transgender policies would allow misuse of girls' locker rooms. The statement "Would have loved to use girls locker room then. For all the wrong reasons" clearly argues against the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Oppose strongly," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and adds "This is not education. It's indoctrination," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The language indicates they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE this policy," which directly rejects adoption. The phrase "ignores science" gives the reason for opposition and indicates they want the policy rejected rather than modified.


The commenter says, "VDOE should not over the parents’ in their role as primary educator, counselor and role model," which clearly اعتراضs to the regulation as an overreach into parental authority. This indicates they do not want the model policies adopted in their current form.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the policies" and repeats that they "strongly oppose these policies and any school who chooses to adopt them." They argue the policies would "endanger[] so many more" and violate children's privacy in restrooms/changing rooms, indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues that public schools should not teach "instruction and exploration into gender identity" or related topics. They frame the policy as "indoctrinate[ing]" students and say these issues "should not be taught in a public school," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Model Policy for the Treatment of Transgender students is misguided

The commenter explicitly says the policy is "misguided" and argues it should not cut off "parental knowledge and input," which they call "a bridge too far." Although they acknowledge some "laudable goals," the overall thrust is opposition to the proposed policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "This should not be approved," and frames the policy as harmful: "This will add to the decline." They also argue that although it is "proposing being 'inclusive,' it is actually exclusive," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this legislation," and argues that the state is "placing itself in front of the family" on children's welfare. They also say the issue "should be left alone unless the family raises the issue," indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Any policy that encourages children to question their gender should be opposed," which directly rejects the regulation. The stated reason is concern that it will "result in future health issues," indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly endorses protections for transgender and non-binary students, stating they "deserve a learning environment of safety, respect, and stability" and urging officials to "do what it takes" to ensure this in Virginia schools. This clearly supports adoption of the proposed policies, at least in principle.


Transgender teachings in the public school.

The commenter explicitly says these practices and teachings "should NOT enter our public schools," indicating clear opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The language "un-Godly, unnatural, un-American" further shows rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "PLEASE adopt this policy" and frames it as protecting students' rights and dignity. The language "Every human being deserves to be treated with dignity, respect, and acceptance" clearly endorses the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the VDOE's guidance" and endorses it as creating "inclusive and equitable environments for ALL of Virginia's children." The comment clearly favors adoption of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support proposed legislation" and praises policies that ensure transgender students have "equal rights, equal say, and equal protection." The comment repeatedly endorses making schools more welcoming and safe for transgender students, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm absolutely opposed to this proposed action" and repeatedly urges the agency to "stay out" and "Just stick to teaching them core subjects." They frame the policy as an "outrageous overreach" and "tyranny," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Opposing gender confusion policies in schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree and oppose to such a law" and "I oppose and refuse such a law." They argue the policy would "endanger my children safety" and object to "gender neutral bathrooms and lockers," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and says they are "appalled that this would be even considered." They argue it should not be included in schools and that it "goes completely against the Christian belief," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this proposed VDOE policy" and describes it as "one needed step" to protect students from discrimination. They also ask for an additional provision to honor requested name and gender updates in school records, which indicates support with a requested expansion.


Strongly Opposed to Mandatory Queer Theory Policies

The commenter explicitly says the policy "must be vigorously opposed" and calls the proposals "unconstitutional mandates." They object to pronoun use, transgender inclusion, and the alleged violation of "parental rights," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!" and the title "Oppose lgbtq in education" indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter says the policy goes "too far" and calls it "a political agenda that has nothing to do with education," ending with "Get rid of the bullying and let the kids learn." They object to parental exclusion, pronoun requirements, locker room access, and sports implications, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Please oppose" and argues the policy is harmful, calling it beyond "common sense" and predicting "far-reaching, unintended, and injurious repercussions." This is a clear request to reject the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "Thus, I oppose these policies." They also argue the proposal "elevates the needs of some above the needs of others" and raises objections about parental rights, bathroom/locker room privacy, and athletics.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and asks to "reconsider the proposed transgender policy guidelines." They argue the policy "divide[s] families" and pushes a "one-sided transition agenda," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it a "diabolical attack" and saying "do not go along with this." They object to bathroom access, pronoun/speech requirements, and the underlying transgender guidance itself.


Schools have more rights than parents with regards to children?

The commenter explicitly says they "do not think it is appropriate" for students to change gender/pronoun/name information without parental approval and argues that "parents should be required to sign paperwork." While they support anti-bullying and respect, the core position is that the policy should not allow these changes without parents, which opposes the regulation as written.


Feedback from a Student Born and Raised in Virginia

The commenter explicitly asks, "Please push for protections for us" and says the state has a "wonderful opportunity to protect future kids," which clearly supports adopting the regulation. They argue the policy would help trans students be "better protected from discrimination" and focus on school and childhood.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "so immoral as transgenders" and urging officials to "oppose such immoral behaviors." They also argue it "goes completely against the laws of nature" and should be replaced with "education and rehabilitation centers," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Parents and privacy left out by this bill

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this bill" and closes with "Do not pass this bill." They also argue it is "demeaning" and would "leave children vulnerable to long lasting damage," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose any policies or legislation" that would "undermine[] the ability of parents to raise their children." They also object to school staff "intentionally keep[ing] information about a child from their parents," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies on parental notification/privacy grounds.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "we strongly oppose the Model Policies" and calls it a "wrong policy," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. They also argue it will "undermine the rights of parents" and cause an "exodus out of the public schools," reinforcing their negative position.


Are you considering the new victims who you are creating?

The commenter explicitly argues against the policy’s implications for transgender students’ access to restrooms and locker rooms, saying it would make girls “new victims” and that officials should “keep the girls safe.” They propose an alternative—“provide gender neutral restrooms and locker rooms”—instead of the policy as written, indicating opposition to adoption in its current form.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it an "abomination" that "needs to stop" and saying it "forfeits the rights and protections of the majority." They argue it harms youth and parents' rights, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The Policies are Evil and Institutionalize Sexual Abuse.

The commenter explicitly says, "This must be stopped at all costs," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The title, "The Policies are Evil and Institutionalize Sexual Abuse," is strongly condemnatory and indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Our schools should embrace transgender students" and urges, "Provide safe spaces for your students Virginia!" These statements clearly աջակց support for the proposed transgender student policies and their inclusive goals.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and ends with "Reject it." They object to the policy on bathroom access grounds, stating that boys should not enter "our daughters' bathrooms in public schools."


The commenter explicitly says "Strong SUPPORT" and endorses policies that "support our LGBTQ youth" and "enforce a zero tolerance for bullying." The statement that these policies "can save lives" clearly indicates approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses a "safe, respectful environment" for "transgender kids" and says providing such an environment at schools "is the least we can do." The comment argues against judgment and in favor of protecting these students from harm, which supports adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeats "I strongly oppose the upcoming rules on transgenders." They argue the policy is "based strictly on feelings" and should not be adopted, instead proposing a separate neutral changing area as an alternative.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly Oppose" in both the title and body, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!" and "Do NOT" adopt the policy, calling it "complete child abuse." They argue against "introducing this agenda" and reject the underlying transgender framework, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and objects to "transgender students to pick whatever gender identity they want." They also oppose "boys going into girls locker rooms and vice versa," indicating rejection of the policy’s transgender student protections and facility access provisions.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy would "violate the teaching and moral fabric of all Christians". They also claim it would "put students in compromising situations," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Utterly oppose mandatory transgenderism for school children!!" and argues that encouraging transgender or homosexual identities is "the worst sort of child abuse." The comment clearly rejects the proposed policies and calls them harmful and contrary to religious doctrine.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues that the policy is "disgraceful" and should "not be introduced to children." They specifically reject allowing transgender students to share bathrooms or locker rooms, indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against "government-run schools countermanding the parents’ views," indicating rejection of the transgender policies. The request that parents be free to teach their children on moral issues without school interference is a clear objection to adoption of the regulation.


Press Release:  Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says it "opposes recommendations of the proposed Virginia Department of Education policy" and repeatedly states "we oppose 'open' use of bathrooms and shower rooms by transgender students." It also urges legislators to "suspend that requirement" and calls on the public to reject the proposal.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and argues that allowing transgender students to use restrooms/locker rooms is "NOT okay." They propose separate private facilities instead and warn that the policy "will lead to disaster," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


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


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and argues against "Imposing broad new mandates," saying they have "destructive unintended consequences." They suggest an alternative approach—"build them private bathrooms"—rather than adopting the policy as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the DOE’s model policy" and repeatedly asks to "Please keep these topics out of the public school system." They also urge the agency to "reconsider" bathroom access provisions and propose an alternative single transgender bathroom, indicating opposition to the policy as written.


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

The commenter explicitly requests "substantial modification or rescission" and says the policies "have gone far beyond" what was prescribed. They object to the guidance as promoting "controversial and harmful ideas" and state that schools should not be "accommodating" or "encouraging" gender transitions.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and rejects the policy with "Absolutely not the school’s place!" This is a clear call against adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strong support!" and adds "Strongly support as a parent of a trans child," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!" and raises objections to key provisions, asking how teachers can be charged for pronoun use and how "any person can enter any locker room or bathroom." The final question is rhetorical and challenges the policy's protections, indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Very strongly opposed!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed" and says they "do not believe that is the school's place to facilitate the transition." They also object to schools supporting the initiative without parents' approval or knowledge and to parents being reported to child protective services, indicating rejection of the policy as written.


Opposed Parents should know what is going on with their kids.

The commenter explicitly says the policy is "wrong" and argues against allowing students to use opposite-sex restrooms "without question." They frame the regulation as undermining parental rights and increasing harassment risk, indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "oppose this policy!" and argues that it would "take parental rights away" and let schools "make decisions for a child." Although they begin with "I support and love all students," the clear position is against adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says the regulations are "fundamentally flawed and should not be imposed upon Virginia schools" and repeatedly asks that key provisions be "stricken" or "modified." They object to the policy's treatment of gender identity, parental notification, bathroom access, and religious freedom protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "We Strongly oppose any and all motions to allow transgenderism in our schools or any place." They also demand punishment for supporters, saying anyone making a motion in favor "should be fired," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support - We Need This" and states that "The VDOE Model Policies would make school safer and more inclusive." They describe current barriers and discrimination and argue the policies are needed to improve access, inclusion, and safety for LGBTQIA+ students.


Support for the VDOE’s guidance on creating inclusive school environments for trans and n

The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of the VDOE’s guidance on creating inclusive school environments for trans and non-binary students." They also express gratitude and admiration for transgender students, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they "highly support the transgender bathroom law" and calls it "a GOOD idea." They argue that trans students using their preferred bathroom "doesn’t affect anyone" and should be allowed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies." They also argue the policies encourage "adolescent transition," "hormone therapy, and surgery," and claim this is harmful and abusive, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "i support the transgender law trying to be passed" and calls it "a good idea." They also argue that allowing trans kids to use the preferred bathroom "doesn’t affect anyone" and helps them feel safe, which supports adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly calls the policy "a wonderful idea" and argues that "trans kids using their preferred bathrooms harms no one" and would make them "feel more safe at school." This is clear support for adopting the regulation, especially its bathroom-access protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of these proposed guidelines" and asks officials to "stand up for truth," indicating they want the regulation rejected. They also describe the policy as "radical theories" and "utterly cruel," which reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed - Creates Significant Problems" and repeatedly argues the policies should not be adopted, saying they are "going against science," "going against religious beliefs," and will cause "massive problems throughout the state." They also object to restroom/locker room access and predict harmful consequences, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


A Child is Either Only a Female Girl or a Male Boy

The commenter repeatedly rejects the policy as “state ran child abuse,” says it is “threatening, violating and dishonest,” and argues that “Girls privacy isn’t yours to give away.” The comment clearly opposes accommodations for transgender students and asks that the “truth remain legal” rather than adopting the model policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposal as it is written" and describes it as a "misguided effort" that "oversteps grossly." Although they add that they do not oppose "the heart of the individuals wishing to create a 'safe space'," their position on adoption of the regulation is clearly negative.


The commenter explicitly says, "I’m proud to support this guidance" and states that it "would allow all schools to be equipped with the policies and procedures they need." The comment clearly endorses the regulation as a way to create a "safe and inclusive educational experience" for students, especially LGBT youth.