This Little Red Light Keeps Flashing
A tale of a girls’ tennis team, a locker room, and a high-school hiring dispute.
First, the view from afar, all rather fragrant and elevated:
And,
The words “transphobia” and “hate” were of course deployed.
And now the view from close quarters:
See? All totally innocent and above-board. Not weird or creepy at all. Oh, and then there was the time Mr Yates followed a sixteen-year-old girl – a girl he wasn’t coaching – into the girls’ bathroom, otherwise unoccupied, and attempted to strike up a random conversation, resulting in the girl’s alarm and some hurried texting.
The reprimand mentioned above – or rather, reprimands, because, well, what’s behaviour without a pattern? – did not seem to deter Mr Yates. Nor did the provision of private bathroom and changing facilities, typically used by sports officials, including coaches. Direct appeals from the girls also failed to discourage him from parading around their locker room in a bra-and-panties ensemble and various states of undress. Such that the girls were left in little doubt that their cross-dressing coach was, as one board member put it, “still fully a man.” And all while seeking out details of the girls’ menstruation cycles and their preferences in underwear.
Indeed, when subsequently challenged, Mr Yates, seen here, invoked “discrimination” and insisted that he is entitled to use “any bathroom.” The school is currently weighing the views of parents against the prospect of legal action and accusations of “transphobia,” with another meeting on the matter scheduled for September. Mr Yates is, he says, “completely overwhelmed with how the community is coming out and supporting me.”
At which point, readers may wonder whether such overwhelming support, largely from progressive women, is actually part of the problem.
Above, Mr Yates, being supported.
Update, via the comments, where Nikw211 adds,
Well, one might think so. And yet here we are.
Still, it’s interesting to see how Mr Yates’ supporters – again, largely progressive women – will merrily elevate themselves with the airing of modish views, their displays of compassion and inclusivity, while in effect screwing over the girls. Girls, who, by disapproving, even politely, become low-status.
Update 2:
A decision has been reached regarding the future of Mr Yates’ teaching career. And by extension, his workplace interest in the panties of young girls. See if you can guess which way it went.
Update 3:
The further adventures of our strapping madam.
It’s like living in a dream.
There is, I think, an air of surrealism.
White liberal women will be the death of us.
I am so tired of the “queerification” of every aspect of our lives. I recently watched Season 2 of “Good Omens” and could punch Neil Gaiman in the face given the chance.
I’m just going to leave this here, for no reason whatsoever.
Oh, and this. Which includes, to date, 160 examples of that thing that never, ever happens.
I could, of course, go on.
Doubtless there are transgender people who find the behaviour above repellent and horrifying. But to pretend that there is no pattern to discern, no heightened statistical risk, and especially no risk to children, is, it seems to me, to indulge in outright fantasy.
That.
With (alarm) bells on.
Also this:
Let’s be clear – a female teacher, an actual one that is, who behaved in this way would not only be reprimanded, but fired.
This isn’t “discrimination” because he’s a transwoman.
Any teacher talking about such intimate details with children in their care while parading around in their underwear should and would be suspended on the spot, almost certainly fired.
This shouldn’t even be a question.
The problem extends beyond this specific issue. A big reason these problems, and many others exist is due to the descent of our legal system into anarchy. A legal/moral vacuum that is immediately filled by legal bullying via lawfare. The simple threat of lawsuits causes insurance companies and others to cave into the bullies lest the bullies bully them further. Those who express the desire to or especially those who actually fight are chastised and pressured into conforming. It’s the best option, surely you understand? You’re not one of those extremists are you?
Let me stop you right there…
What the hell is going through their heads?
For those who may have missed them, some other school-related adventures in tolerance.
But hey, we mustn’t judge or be in any way concerned. That would be bad.
Please explain. I haven’t been watching, and I don’t know much about Gaiman.
Given the athleticism required, I’m wondering how the wig stays on.
Both the hands and the legs suggest that the metamorphosis is far from over.
It’s like living in a dream.
More like a malarial delirium, wrapped in a psychotic break, inside a bad LSD trip.
Good choice, I stopped. This explains, I think, what Stephanie means.
No. Say not so.
“More like a malarial delirium, wrapped in a psychotic break, inside a bad LSD trip.”
In a tortilla. Without cheese, tho.
Good grief.
Good grief.
The icing on the crap cake is that it has many of The Current Things™ jammed in for no good reason.
I watched a couple episodes and it smelled funny so I didn’t bother continuing.
In other Orwellian “trans”gender news, and to no one’s surprise, Jordan Peterson is sentenced to reeducation.
Where are the fathers dragging this thing into the woods and making proper use of a tree and rope? Have we fallen so far?
It’s like living in a dream
Yes. Nightmare on Elm st
Aiding and abetting.
Three thoughts as I read this:
It’s bad enough that the College of Psychologists sentenced him to “reeducation”.
What’s worse is that a court of laws upheld the sentence. Orwellian.
Deviancy is now its own reward.
Canada’s totalitarian trend pre-dates the current prime minister.
This is the bizarrest thing right here.
It’s okay to be transphobic. It’s okay to be repulsed by evil and degeneracy. Don’t be ashamed.
Not entirely unrelated:
The word, by the way, is wanker.
punch Neil Gaiman in the face given the chance
Although I concur with the sentiment, Neil “shitty Clive Barker cover band” Gaiman is not to blame for this one. Season One covered the book’s plot, Season Two is the Game of Thrones-like attempt to milk the franchise beyond the original source material. My understanding is that it’s based on the unfinished draft Gaiman and Pratchett were working on before Pratchett’s death.
Gaiman certainly approves of this nonsense, he’d have to have signed off on the contracts. But he didn’t write it.
Check out his hands. It’s those bloody bear paws again. And that nose looks like Catweazle.
Where are the fathers
I think you can prefix rather a lot of questions about the current state of Western society with “where are the fathers“.
B-b-b-but…
See? Now what part of that is so hard to understand? Minimal impact. Minimal! Be reasonable. Bloody right-wing extremists.
So wait. If you’re a “girl” (is there even still such a thing?) wanting to play tennis at this school, you have to be on board with disrobing/taking showers with “Coach Sasha” hanging out in the locker room?
Only the “woke” families will sign their kids up for the tennis team. But maybe they can convince the other side to forfeit in the name of “equity.” It’s all good so long as “Coach Sasha” gets to stretch his frilly whites over his ladypenis afterwards.
Literally it seems.
What needs to be said, loudly and frequently, at these meetings is that men like Yates are achieving sexual gratification at the expense of these young women. He is discussing menstruation because he gets off on it.
I suspect that confronting the “allies” with their participation in tranny orgasms would provoke some to feel disgust.
THAT is how we stop this.
Given the denial of reality needed to make them ‘allies’, it seems unlikely.
Discussion on Sailer today about a change in emphasis from “diversity” to “access”.
“Diversity” at least pretends to be good for the host population. We stupid repressed whites can’t be relied on to make the right decisions about whom to associate with, and we’ll eventually be thankful to have been compelled to associate with LGBT’s (fashion tips), blacks (how to clap on the right beat), and browns (kebabs).
“Access” makes it clearer who the diversity is for and stops pretending it’s for our good. Access to first-world countries and institutions, access to social capital, access to people’s trust and intimacy. In this case access not only to a given locker room (because giving him an empty locker room would be discrimination/apartheid/erasure), but access to girl talk and “shared” vulnerability with teenage girls.
“access” in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) they kicked all the white farmers out and took their land. Too late they found out that the land did not provide the good crops, it was the white farmers. Same with “access” to western countries. The country is not rich it is the people who live there who make it rich. If Mexicans completely took over the US it would be mexico. Same as when dems take over city government and schools in let’s say Baltimore or Chicago–goes to shit.
If Mexicans completely took over the US it would be Mexico.
I think it says something that large numbers of Canadians, myself among them, are decamping to Mexico, permanently. Pick the right region and it’s pretty good living.
From the same website, a man who uses autism as a means of gaining access to kids while dressing as a little girl.
https://reduxx.info/uk-social-media-user-warned-by-police-after-expressing-concerns-about-man-who-dresses-like-a-baby-speaks-to-children-in-schools/
Never mind institutionalizing the insane. How about institutionalizing these police?
Regarding this school’s solicitor, Leigh Dalton, who did everything to keep David/Sasha Yates at the school, re-hire included, despite various firing offenses…
I’m an in-house lawyer. I helped our company get a good settlement, this week, for harms done us. Our legal staff deal with commercial and employment disputes, regularly—with other parties coming to our door, with claims against us. Often, we fend off non-meritorious claims entirely, by standing our ground. We hire outside litigators for support, when needed. In short, we lawyers lawyer.
Being a good counsel does *not* mean making your client fold over for every possible demand, especially when the claims are ill founded. Or making them submit to a demand that results in a positive evil–one that requires betrayal of the client’s core responsibilities. For example, and in this case: to protect vulnerable high school girls.
A good lawyer grapples with risk, and does not flee from risk. A good lawyer makes the client stronger. A bad lawyer can turn the client into a moral coward.
(By the way, have any of you seen the South Park episode entitled “Lemmiwinks”? It’s essentially about the people who provide the “overwhelming support” that David/Sasha Yates receives)
Check out his hands. It’s those bloody bear paws again.
Softened though by a touch of nail polish.
I have little doubt that the lawyer is doing what the client wishes. Birds of a feather, and all that.
Yes. This “non-meritorious claims”/ lawfare bullshit works out quite well for you I’m sure. “We lawyer lawyers”. Reminds me of a bumpersticker a guy that I used to work with, a leftist guy no less, had on his cube, “If it weren’t for lawyers we wouldn’t need them”.
My personal favorite similar pithy phrase is…
…on Friday. Monday me used to really hate Friday me.
[ Post updated. ]
“Sasha [formerly David, Yates] is a woman. Over the past four years I have watched her realise this, and have watched as she has transitioned into her true self…”
This really sets off my Creep-o-Meter.
Normal testimonials from former students fall in the simple “So-and-so is a great teacher and really cares about students” category. This one falls in the “I have been successfully groomed” group.
This Yates fella must be one helluva manipulator.
Agreed. Lots of weasels out there, and ploys to manipulate good people to delay action are common.
I noticed this:
And thought, “Neil Gaiman wants us to sympathize rather than be disgusted? Really?”
I say BS to that. The client, presumably the school or the school board…whatever…has no backbone so what they “wish” has itself been driven by the threat of lawsuits. The bastards in the legal system are what drive much of these decisions. Once you see what an absolute mess they have made of our society you cannot unsee it. I presume you think you know what I’m talking about but you just are afraid to believe it could be this bad. It is this bad. Probably even worse than I believe right now. I have followed several lawsuits, not anything involving myself, just a couple of HOA cases and a few others that I was tangential to and followed more closely than even the actual victims of the system understood. We have no law. We just have predators fighting with each other over who gets a bigger slice of us. Their “problem” is they just don’t have enough time to get to devouring you. Be patient and I’m sure your time will come.
But WTP, you speak from prejudice, only, when it comes to what I do. And it does not speak well of you. I win or keep hundreds of thousands or millions for my company. By keeping its spine straight.
There are warriors, cowards, and weasels, all, in my profession. The latter two kinds betray their craft. But lawyers do lawyer, or the don’t deserve the name.
Anyway, it should be obvious—the school *did* have enough gumption to reprimand this person. They needed a warrior, but the school’s counsel at least helped keep them from going the farther step.
It’s sometimes worth remembering that the famous quote “First thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” is said by one of Shakespeare’s villains.
I was bothered by that lawyer’s advice, though:
First, the lawyer advised against firing Yates, to avoid the risk of a lawsuit, and that instead Yates should simply not be rehired later for the following season.
Then, when that time came, the lawyer urged the school board to rehire Yates–again, to avoid a lawsuit. That struck me as smelling of weasel tactics.
No, I speak from experience. The HOA for the community I just moved from was sued over…NOTHING. The plaintiff had, at last I was actively involved, produced nothing as evidence for his losing a digit except medical bills indicating such. He could not prove where he was when he was there. They asked us to provide video evidence 18 MONTHS or so after the event supposedly occurred. A previous case over where a bloody tree was planted was going on for 8 years before I ever heard of it and I had been on the board for four. It had started two years before I even moved there. It took me four years of riding insurance company lawyers’ backs to get it closed out. They eventually brought in specialists for closing such cases. If I hadn’t stayed on their backs about it, God only knows how long that would have dragged on.
And on top of that, the board was restricted from even speaking about either of these cases to the constituents. Because lawyer scum like yourself and others make nice little landmines for you dumb schmuck customers to keep them under your control. You and your ilk have created a monster in our legal system. I say your denial does not speak well of you. I can provide details of at least two other cases involving lawyers blindsiding regular citizens who find themselves in lawsuits when they as individuals have done nothing wrong. Prejudice my ass. You’re the prejudiced one. Billboards all over Florida about how “Dan Newland got me $750,000”. That f****r John Morgan (& Morgan) on tv and such not just in Florida anymore but Georgia and God knows where else as well bragging about getting people the money “they deserve”. Damn near every encounter I have with lawyers, they deny that this shit is going on or is as bad as it is. But there are a few lawyers who recognize the problem. A very few. Insurance agents have gotten to the point where they just roll their eyes and accept it. It’s just another cost of doing business. And we ALL pay for it with every product and service that we buy. I call it the Lawyer Tax.
Yeah. My point above.
As for Shakespeare, it’s cute how they will try to hide behind the misattribution/quotation/whatever of that line, like it’s all there is. As is their nature.
Jeesus, take that deranged vitriol over to Instapundit or Facebook.
Tone, gentlemen. Tone.
Yeah. This is getting out of hand.
One thing that I absolutely despise, and it runs thick with the lawyer crowd, is the polite insult. If you really must play that game at least do it with humor. I’m out of humor with these people. Maybe after YOU have been put in very uncomfortable situations where people subtly suspect YOU of being someone not necessarily on the up-and-up because legal technicalities, created by these people, force YOU to be evasive in answering direct questions, especially if YOU YOURSELF are loathe to behave in such a manner, YOU can find a sense of humor about this absolute f*** up that they have made of our legal/civil (‘civil’, heh…civil…) systems. God help us when all this crap caves in. My tolerance bucket is empty with these people.
How about the polite or not-so-polite unfounded generalization? In most of my “encounters” with criminals, those criminals have been black. But that does not mean that all blacks are criminals.
My HOA seeks advice now and then from our lawyer, who does his best to advise us on the best legal interpretation of our governing documents and the laws affecting our operations. We value his advice.
Being black isn’t a choice. Nor does one have a choice in continuing to be black. Only in a cultural sense would I remotely even consider one black (or white or chinese or whatever) person have any influence over other black individuals’ behaviors. And even that would be a huge stretch. A lawyer has a choice. He chose the profession and he chooses to remain in the profession. He chooses to defend the profession when the profession has quite clearly run off the rails and is now running our society off the rails. I’m reminded again of the lawyer who got so bloody fed up with his profession’s failure to police itself (hint-hint, red flashing light as to the problem there) that he was trying to disbar himself. But the profession is so messed up that they were, last I heard, fighting him from doing so. THAT lawyer, I like THAT guy.
There’s a whole lot else that discretion (yeah, hard to believe) and brevity prevent me from getting into but right now I am fighting getting pulled back into some absolute BS that I want nothing to do with. It likely will not happen but if past experience is anything with those sorts of people, just about the time you think you are out, they pull you right back in.
No, I’m not buying this “no good lawyers” bullshit. But I’m not going to bother replying to you again.
I didn’t say no good lawyers. There’s the guy trying to get disbarred. I like him. A couple others.
A criminal government infers a criminal legal system. This did not happen overnight. It happened because conservatives…”conservatives” let it happen.
https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1695056711122366858
I don’t think lawyers as such are scum. I would say there are all too many scummy people in the world, and all too many of them are lawyers. But I fear I risk making a polite insult here. That wouldn’t do.
And there is also a great deal of scum in the world, and dealing with leaves one sometimes coated in scum, up to one’s hips in it indeed, and yet still a legitimate non-scummy person. The lawyer is there to protect and advance his client’s interests. If these don’t track with yours, he’s going to look like a monster to you even when he’s dead legitimate. There are good conscientious lawyers out there – I’d say there was a good conscientious bar, just not the entire bar. But from certain angles, in certain light, they can look like scum.
And of course there’s no shortage of bona fide scum among them, too.
That.
We’re watching right-on women screwing over their own sex.
I think so, yes. It’s terribly progressive. And very in right now.
You make it easy to think otherwise. To wit:
As David said, tone. Pause and think more carefully before reacting, please.
I don’t think lawyers as such are scum. I would say there are all too many scummy people in the world…
I recently quoted Jordan Peterson as saying that pathological narcissism is common in politics because it attracts narcissists. The same could be said for other professions which provide opportunities for the acquisition of status and power and money. And the more disconnection between the acquisition of those things and the process of free exchange with willing customers, the more pathology you’ll find.
But I have seen ordinary honest lawyers reviled and demonized for merely saying that the law is. For example, there is a sometime-commenter at Legal Insurrection who only comments on what the law actually has to say about various news stories, and other commenters will down-vote him and revile him for merely saying what the law is without saying anything about how he personally feels about the case in question.
Dang. I forgot to use the quotes button. And the edit bug is still not fixed.
[ Impatience increases. ]
Yeah. Those nice ones are either horribly naive or they know, they surely must know, that they are benefiting from this hyper litigious environment. Oh, but they’re the good ones! They work very hard for for their clients! They give them their….money’s worth. Of course if it wasn’t for the hyperlitigious environment they wouldn’t have been needed in the first place. Now this idiocy has been true for decades but at least (deep inhales of copium) it was somewhat confined to the tort side of law. But now, thanks to this PC/woke BS eating it’s way into civil law, they’ve tired of defending the usual criminal scum because they’re generally poor, difficult, and bothersome. Much better to criminalize those good citizens who fight back against the criminal scum. A lawyer defending a decent person can make much, much more money. Thus us regular citizens scrounging up bank to donate to the defense of Daniel Penny, Kyle Rittenhouse, etc. And if they can get a civil suit out of it as well, a la Derek Chauvin or George Zimmerman, all the better. And maybe even a book!
Of course there are a few actively engaged in trying to put an end to this nonsense. Don’t see many of those though. Perhaps we do a GoFundMe to get them some better PR.
And who made the law? Lawyers, mostly. Notice when non-lawyer politicians dare to enter the political arena the lawyers on the left AND the right join forces to fight him.
Well, I did qualify it. The ‘like yourself’ part. One of the big, big things that disgusts me, and this is perhaps the third time I’ve said it here on this thread in various ways, is how lawyers create these problems then other lawyers, for substantial fee, just (sometimes…no guarantees mind you) put things back the way that they always were and always should have been and expect to be praised for it. Then off of the enormous profits that they make they do such wonderful charity work, opening up their estates for a charity benefit here and there. Which itself is just advertising and perhaps something to keep the wife occupied and off their backs. And they expect kudos for being such goody-good-good citizens. And dumb schmucks, conservative…”conservative”, and even conservative eat it up like the suckers they are. I’ve been watching this same miserable movie and its various remakes for decades. Wake up.
That’s a garbage qualification. As you know. To heck with this. I’m done with explaining to you.
Heh. Lawyers play that game all the bloody time. And no, it’s not a garbage qualification. Take a deeper hit on the copium. The legal system is very legitimate and even if it isn’t it would be wrong, wrong, wrong to hold any lawyers accountable for it. But yes… I gotta go too. I need to take time out of my own life, with zero compensation , to research some old emails to see what evidence I might have that could benefit the plaintiff…so-called…in a lawsuit in a community that I no longer live in. Of course I don’t really have to do so. It’s just a suggestion. You enjoy the rest of your morning, mmm-k?
I’ll run the two of you a nice hot bath. Those tensions will be gone in no time.
[ Post updated again. ]
Regrettably, it’s not at all surprising.
The willing & eager sacrifice of children in the interests of fashion will not end well.