Prince William schools filter rejects letter about non-discrimination policy

Prince William County resident and former Prince William Republican Committee Chairman Bill Card was moved to write a letter to members of the County School Board after it, on Sept. 7, 2016, discussed changes to a non-discrimination policy. 

School Board Chairman Ryan Sawyers wants to add the words “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” to the school division’s non-discrimination policy 

That email letter to the School Board was rejected due to offensive content. We’ve posted a follow-up letter from Card to the School Board, one that wrote after his first email was not delivered. 

We’ve also included a statement from Prince William County Public Schools spokesman Phil Kavits on why, and how the letter might not have been delivered to School Board members. 

From Bill Card: 

You might find hilariously ironic that in order to get this note to you on the @pwcs.edu server, I could not directly use the terms that are key to the Chairman’s ill-advised new policy proposal.  Four emails sent Tuesday were rejected by the school system’s server for “Offensive Content” which makes one wonder whether or not you are getting the full effect of the outrage of the community.  The “offensive content” proved to be the use of the word “s**” since that is the only substantive change made to this email.  Perhaps we should take a lesson from the IT Department and forget this foolishness. 

I appreciated the opportunity to address the Prince William County School Board on this past Wednesday/Thursday.  I only regret that the Board meeting not only started late but that the bulk of the speakers were pushed to the late evening/early morning such that the public and press did not get the benefit of several substantive presentations.  Further, it is very likely that you missed important feedback from the community on “gender identity, s**ual orientation” as many people left rather than wait to speak given the late hour.

You have received plenty of legal and common sense rationale not to proceed with the Chairman’s vision on “gender identity and s**ual orientation.”  It is certainly reckless given the current legal and political climate.  As I stated early Thursday morning, the Chairman is also on the wrong side of science in what he is proposing. 

Several of the late presentations referenced the special report “S**uality and Gender; Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences” (link provided and report attached).  I think that this is of particular import in the discussion of how our community and by extension the school system treats gay and trans gender individuals.  If you do nothing else – I ask that you at least read the “Executive Summary” which should provide important insight to this issue. 

One of the throw-away accusations is that those of us opposed to what the Chairman is contemplating are doing so out of hate.  Nothing could be further from the truth, and I could not say it better than the principle author of this report who states in the Preface:

“I dedicate my work on this report, first, to the LGBT community, which bears a disproportionate rate of mental health problems compared the population as a whole. We must find ways to relieve their suffering.”

This is essential to understanding the resistance that you are facing.  Many will try to reduce or stigmatize opposition to this issue through bumper sticker phrases about bathrooms and hate.  However, the Chairman is dragging us all into a situation which is at best foolish and at worst dangerous and deadly to the very population he expresses interest in helping.  Again, I implore you to at least read the Executive Summary to understand this issue and the dangers you are subjecting children to who are under your care.  However, you owe it to all of us to read the entire report. 

It is also important to note that the Virginia Supreme Court just agreed to hear the suit brought against the Fairfax school system for the very same thing:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/13/virginia-state-supreme-court-to-hear-case-over-sch/

Don’t get lost in the emotional argument.  Again there are principled legal, medical, and now scientific rationale for just leaving the policy as written.  Do the right thing and vote “No” to the change proposed by the Chairman. 

Here’s the response from Prince William County Public Schools spokesman Phil Kavits after we asked him how, or why Card’s original letter went undelivered. 

“It is likely that a message could be rejected for offensive because of filters meant to protect students, provided that the message included multiple references to “offensive content.”
 
Keep in mind that PWCS students have pwcs.edu email addresses. Consequently, as required by federal law, our system employs software that rejects a message based on a too many references to one or more words that could potentially indicate inappropriate content.
 
Consequently, one or two references to a term would be unlikely to be blocked. However, if that word and others that deemed as potentially inappropriate are repeated multiple times, the sender might get the message that the individual shared with you.  The issue comes down to how many times the word/words are repeated. The filter are pretty tight.  Not knowing what other terms the sender’s message contained, it is hard to speculate on what set off the filter. I can tell you that this is the first time that anyone has reported having this issue with a “legitimate” message.”

Kavits said he would contact Card and offer to “find a way to get his message through.”