ADVERTISEMENT

The Right’s Big Lie About a Sexual Assault in Virginia

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,442
58,934
113
Michelle Goldberg
By Michelle Goldberg
Opinion Columnist

This is a story about how the right twisted the sexual assault of a teenager into a culture war fantasy. It’s about how a distorted tale on a conservative website became grist for a nationwide moral panic.
On June 22, a middle-aged plumber named Scott Smith was dragged, lip bleeding and hands cuffed behind his back, from a raucous school board meeting in Loudoun County, Va. According to the local newspaper Loudon Now, he’d been swearing loudly at another parent and leaning toward her with a clenched fist when the police tackled him and pulled him outside. He’d eventually be convicted of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest and given a suspended 10-day jail sentence.
Smith’s image quickly went viral as a symbol of the sort of school board strife breaking out all over America. The National School Boards Association, writing to President Biden to request help dealing with the “growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation” directed at school board members, included Smith’s arrest in a list of examples.
Soon, however, Smith revealed why he’d been so distraught. In an interview with The Daily Wire, a website co-founded by the conservative wunderkind Ben Shapiro, Smith said that his ninth-grade daughter had been sexually assaulted in a school bathroom by a boy wearing a skirt. Smith was opposed to a proposed policy allowing trans kids to use bathrooms aligned with their gender identities, believing it made girls like his daughter vulnerable.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story


“The point is kids are using it as an advantage to get into the bathrooms,” he told the reporter, Luke Rosiak.
By the time Smith spoke to Rosiak, the story had become even uglier. In July, the boy was arrested in the attack on Smith’s daughter and charged with two counts of forcible sodomy. But pending a hearing, he was allowed to enroll at another high school while wearing an ankle monitor. In early October he was arrested again, this time for allegedly forcing a girl into an empty classroom and touching her inappropriately.
After Rosiak’s article came out, Smith became a symbol of a different kind: a blue-collar martyr to wokeness. Appearing on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show, Rosiak said, “This story is one of the most disturbing I’ve ever worked on. It raises the possibility that the Loudoun County public schools covered up the rape of a 14-year-old girl at the hands of a boy wearing a skirt in order to pass a school policy that Democrats were adamant about passing.” As a result of that cover-up, Rosiak said, a second girl was allegedly attacked, “and to prevent all of this from coming out potentially, they arrested the father of the victim.”
Not surprisingly, the story ricocheted around the right. Conservatives have long argued that letting trans girls and women into women’s bathrooms would lead to sexual predation, and now that seemed to have happened. They’ve argued that wokeness is a form of tyranny, and in Smith they had a man who seemed to have been tyrannized because his family’s lived experience posed a threat to trans ideology.
If they had it all wrong, it’s almost hard to blame them — the narrative was too irresistible.
Outrage over the assaults has loomed over the Virginia gubernatorial race, where the Republican candidate, Glenn Youngkin, has sought to harness parental anger toward school boards accused of putting left-wing dogma above student welfare. Senate Republicans recently harped on the case in a hearing for an appeals court nominee, Holly Thomas. On Wednesday, Senator Tom Cotton badgered Attorney General Merrick Garland about it, indignant about steps the Justice Department is taking to address threats to school board members. Smith’s daughter, said Cotton, “was raped in a bathroom by a boy wearing girls’ clothes and the Loudoun County School Board covered it up because it would interfere with their transgender policy during pride month.”



Buta Biberaj, the Commonwealth attorney who prosecuted Smith, received death threats. So did members of the school board.
But this week, during a juvenile court hearing, a fuller picture of Smith’s daughter’s ordeal emerged. She suffered something atrocious. It had nothing at all to do, however, with trans bathroom policies. Instead, like many women and girls, she was a victim of relationship violence.
Smith’s daughter testified that she’d previously had two consensual sexual encounters with her attacker in the school bathroom. On the day of her assault, they’d agreed to meet up again. “The evidence was that the girl chose that bathroom, but her intent was to talk to him, not to engage in sexual relations,” Biberaj, whose office prosecuted the case, told me. The boy, however, expected sex and refused to accept the girl’s refusal. As the The Washington Post reported, she testified, “He flipped me over. I was on the ground and couldn’t move and he sexually assaulted me.”
The boy was indeed wearing a skirt, but that skirt didn’t authorize him to use the girls’ bathroom. As Amanda Terkel reported in HuffPost, the school district’s trans-inclusive bathroom policies were approved only in August, more than two months after the assault. This was not, said Biberaj, someone “identifying as transgender and going into the girls’ bathroom under the guise of that.”
On Monday, the boy received the juvenile court equivalent of a guilty verdict. The case dealing with the second attack he is accused of will be decided in November.
We don’t know exactly why the boy was allowed to attend a different school after his first arrest. The district has refused to comment on the transfer because of state and federal privacy laws. According to Biberaj, under state law, juveniles can be detained for only 21 days without a hearing, and her office needed more time than that to get DNA results. A condition of the boy’s release was that he could have no contact with the girl, so he couldn’t return to his original school.
It’s not clear whether the school system had the option of barring the boy from in-person school altogether. In a statement this month, the Loudoun County Public Schools superintendent, Scott Ziegler, called for policy changes that would allow administrators to “separate alleged offenders from the general student body.” Conservatives, of course, have traditionally opposed policies that would keep accused offenders out of school.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story


As Betsy DeVos, Donald Trump’s secretary of education, said last year, “Too many students have lost access to their education because their school inadequately responded when a student filed a complaint of sexual harassment or sexual assault.”
Even as the facts of this case have come out, the damage done by all the disinformation about it will be hard to undo. “Once the politics are over, we’re still dealing with the destruction,” said Biberaj, who wonders how her community is supposed to heal. “You can’t always successfully bring people back to say, ‘I know this is what you were told, but look what happened in court under oath.’”
A sad and complicated truth is probably no match for an exquisitely useful lie.

 
Michelle Goldberg
By Michelle Goldberg
Opinion Columnist

This is a story about how the right twisted the sexual assault of a teenager into a culture war fantasy. It’s about how a distorted tale on a conservative website became grist for a nationwide moral panic.
On June 22, a middle-aged plumber named Scott Smith was dragged, lip bleeding and hands cuffed behind his back, from a raucous school board meeting in Loudoun County, Va. According to the local newspaper Loudon Now, he’d been swearing loudly at another parent and leaning toward her with a clenched fist when the police tackled him and pulled him outside. He’d eventually be convicted of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest and given a suspended 10-day jail sentence.
Smith’s image quickly went viral as a symbol of the sort of school board strife breaking out all over America. The National School Boards Association, writing to President Biden to request help dealing with the “growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation” directed at school board members, included Smith’s arrest in a list of examples.
Soon, however, Smith revealed why he’d been so distraught. In an interview with The Daily Wire, a website co-founded by the conservative wunderkind Ben Shapiro, Smith said that his ninth-grade daughter had been sexually assaulted in a school bathroom by a boy wearing a skirt. Smith was opposed to a proposed policy allowing trans kids to use bathrooms aligned with their gender identities, believing it made girls like his daughter vulnerable.

I believe Devos was referring to many instances when students (usually college students) have been kicked out of their schools on the basis of a school hearing (Demanded by the Obama admin using Title XI) when there was no attempt to prosecute the alleged offender in an actual court of law.

In that case I agree with her.

This case is very different in that a student was actively held in custody and being charged by a real prosecutor (not a school Title XI coordinator) for an actual violation of the law.

The author of this article is very clearly mis-stating or misunderstanding the objections here.
 
Summary of the article in OP:

A sexual assault DID occur. The boy WAS wearing a skirt. But some semantic bullshit that could possibly paint the transgender bathroom policy in a bad light turned out to be a little fuzzy, so all is good. And people should not worry about boys using girls bathrooms anymore. Nothing to see here...except for a sexual assault of a teen. But that's OK because it wasn't a transgender...even though he was wearing a skirt.

Cool.
 
As I said in the other thread, this will be circulating as a headline for those who already had objections to mixed use restrooms in schools, as some evidence of its unsafe. This case should not have anything to do with Trans bathrooms, unless that was the motivation of the school board to 'cover' it up. But who knows.

At the end of the day, its a scary story of a girl who was assaulted, and then the attacker sent to another school where he did it again. Remove all the trigger words, and something still went wrong here I think.
 
Summary of the article in OP:

A sexual assault DID occur. The boy WAS wearing a skirt. But some semantic bullshit that could possibly paint the transgender bathroom policy in a bad light turned out to be a little fuzzy, so all is good. And people should not worry about boys using girls bathrooms anymore. Nothing to see here...except for a sexual assault of a teen. But that's OK because it wasn't a transgender...even though he was wearing a skirt.

Cool.

Doesn't matter if he was transgender honestly. You don't make rules based on one instance of one bad thing happening because doing so essentially labels every transgender person as a potential sexual assaulter.

I'm guessing a lot more little boys have been sexually assaulted in men's public bathrooms than girls sexually assaulted by men claiming to be women in women's bathrooms. When do we start creating separate bathrooms for men and boys?

Now don't get me wrong I think this is all silly and I do think it is acceptable for people to be uncomfortable with transgender people using the bathroom with them. My proposed solution is in public buildings like this you have bathrooms which allow people to use the bathroom with the gender they claim and you have other bathrooms were people entering must use the bathroom which matches their sex or birth gender.

This allows both sides to be able to have access to facilities with greater degrees of comfort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
Summary of the article in OP:

A sexual assault DID occur. The boy WAS wearing a skirt. But some semantic bullshit that could possibly paint the transgender bathroom policy in a bad light turned out to be a little fuzzy, so all is good. And people should not worry about boys using girls bathrooms anymore. Nothing to see here...except for a sexual assault of a teen. But that's OK because it wasn't a transgender...even though he was wearing a skirt.

Cool.
Sexual assaults happen in schools every day. This one only hit conservative media because they could sell the story that it happened because the scary trans had access to the bathroom because of liberal policy and attacked some random girl trying to take a leak.
That's not what happened.
People were warned in the first thread that this was a red-meat story with little actual facts just being used to outrage the right. Now that more facts have come to light the outraged don't seem to care, they're still outraged. Over what? That will change in order to allow them to continue being outraged.
 
Doesn't matter if he was transgender honestly. You don't make rules based on one instance of one bad thing happening because doing so essentially labels every transgender person as a potential sexual assaulter.

I'm guessing a lot more little boys have been sexually assaulted in men's public bathrooms than girls sexually assaulted by men claiming to be women in women's bathrooms. When do we start creating separate bathrooms for men and boys?

Now don't get me wrong I think this is all silly and I do think it is acceptable for people to be uncomfortable with transgender people using the bathroom with them. My proposed solution is in public buildings like this you have bathrooms which allow people to use the bathroom with the gender they claim and you have other bathrooms were people entering must use the bathroom which matches their sex or birth gender.

This allows both sides to be able to have access to facilities with greater degrees of comfort.
Solution: private bathrooms that are for one person only, but anyone can use no matter their gender, sex, or whatever the term is today that’s supposed to be politically correct.
 
Doesn't matter if he was transgender honestly. You don't make rules based on one instance of one bad thing happening because doing so essentially labels every transgender person as a potential sexual assaulter.

I'm guessing a lot more little boys have been sexually assaulted in men's public bathrooms than girls sexually assaulted by men claiming to be women in women's bathrooms. When do we start creating separate bathrooms for men and boys?

Now don't get me wrong I think this is all silly and I do think it is acceptable for people to be uncomfortable with transgender people using the bathroom with them. My proposed solution is in public buildings like this you have bathrooms which allow people to use the bathroom with the gender they claim and you have other bathrooms were people entering must use the bathroom which matches their sex or birth gender.

This allows both sides to be able to have access to facilities with greater degrees of comfort.
Ok, I'm sure you'll be much more comfortable having this guy peeing next to your daughters than someone who looks like them.

dsc_0636_slide-12de188956ce20fc73e56c1903f3c59e597b5818.jpg
 
Sexual assaults happen in schools every day. This one only hit conservative media because they could sell the story that it happened because the scary trans had access to the bathroom because of liberal policy and attacked some random girl trying to take a leak.
That's not what happened.
People were warned in the first thread that this was a red-meat story with little actual facts just being used to outrage the right. Now that more facts have come to light the outraged don't seem to care, they're still outraged. Over what? That will change in order to allow them to continue being outraged.
Anecdotal evidence reigns supreme depending on which side of an issue you fall on....

It's universal nowadays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ICHerky and goldmom
Summary of the article in OP:

A sexual assault DID occur. The boy WAS wearing a skirt. But some semantic bullshit that could possibly paint the transgender bathroom policy in a bad light turned out to be a little fuzzy, so all is good. And people should not worry about boys using girls bathrooms anymore. Nothing to see here...except for a sexual assault of a teen. But that's OK because it wasn't a transgender...even though he was wearing a skirt.

Cool.
He wasn't transgendered, wearing feminine clothing isn't a prerequisite last I checked. 2. A sexual assault occurred, yes we can agree on that. So what exactly is your concern. 2 individuals can go anywhere and have a sexual tryst, sounds like they did this twice before in school bathrooms. Its not as if the school has a monitor in front of the bathrooms, and his presence there wasn't unwanted, his actions were.
 
Sexual assaults happen in schools every day. This one only hit conservative media because they could sell the story that it happened because the scary trans had access to the bathroom because of liberal policy and attacked some random girl trying to take a leak.
That's not what happened.
People were warned in the first thread that this was a red-meat story with little actual facts just being used to outrage the right. Now that more facts have come to light the outraged don't seem to care, they're still outraged. Over what? That will change in order to allow them to continue being outraged.
So, basically like the left wing media frenzy when they think a white kid shot up a school. Then it turns out the kid wasn't white and they stop caring immediately. Gotcha.
 
Solution: private bathrooms that are for one person only, but anyone can use no matter their gender, sex, or whatever the term is today that’s supposed to be politically correct.

Might not be a bad idea for future buildings but you need a solution that doesn't cause every existing building to have to undertake million dollar renovations.
 
Summary of the article in OP:

A sexual assault DID occur. The boy WAS wearing a skirt. But some semantic bullshit that could possibly paint the transgender bathroom policy in a bad light turned out to be a little fuzzy, so all is good. And people should not worry about boys using girls bathrooms anymore. Nothing to see here...except for a sexual assault of a teen. But that's OK because it wasn't a transgender...even though he was wearing a skirt.

Cool.
This is completely wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
When was the last time you kept your shoes on going through airport security?

Problem with that is that if you don't check than every terrorist now has an instruction manual on how to do it in the future.

People don't need instruction manuals on how to sexually assault someone. The opportunities are obvious if someone really wants to do that. And you can't eliminate all opportunities.
 
You don't make rules based on one instance of one bad thing happening...
If this were the case we wouldn't have to take our shoes off to get through airport security. Or try to find tiny little shampoos and deodorants that will fit under the 3.4 ounce limit.
 
When was the last time you kept your shoes on going through airport security?
Last time i flew in August. Also, depending on which line you were in going through security decided if you had to take anyone out of your carry on/personal bag; electronic devices etc.
 
He wasn't transgendered, wearing feminine clothing isn't a prerequisite last I checked. 2. A sexual assault occurred, yes we can agree on that. So what exactly is your concern. 2 individuals can go anywhere and have a sexual tryst, sounds like they did this twice before in school bathrooms. Its not as if the school has a monitor in front of the bathrooms, and his presence there wasn't unwanted, his actions were.
So, explain how this is "the right's big lie". All I ever heard was a dad was pissed his daughter got assaulted and the school kept it to themselves. Is this some kind of new type of situation here in regards to biased media? Are you forgetting how long Jussie Smollett was a hero to the left wing media? How our current VP called it a modern day lynching? Was that "the left's big lie"?

I'll say it again, there is no more triggered demographic than the trans community when just the slightest thing may not place them in the most perfect light. Funny the "big lie" is something most people have never really heard of or known about...until reading this.
 
So, explain how this is "the right's big lie". All I ever heard was a dad was pissed his daughter got assaulted and the school kept it to themselves. Is this some kind of new type of situation here in regards to biased media? Are you forgetting how long Jussie Smollett was a hero to the left wing media? How our current VP called it a modern day lynching? Was that "the left's big lie"?

I'll say it again, there is no more triggered demographic than the trans community when just the slightest thing may not place them in the most perfect light. Funny the "big lie" is something most people have never really heard of or known about...until reading this.
The right made out about transgender being in the bathroom. That is completely wrong.
 
Summary of the article in OP:

A sexual assault DID occur. The boy WAS wearing a skirt. But some semantic bullshit that could possibly paint the transgender bathroom policy in a bad light turned out to be a little fuzzy, so all is good. And people should not worry about boys using girls bathrooms anymore. Nothing to see here...except for a sexual assault of a teen. But that's OK because it wasn't a transgender...even though he was wearing a skirt.

Cool.
Amazing isn’t it? Liberals are a special bunch.
 
So, explain how this is "the right's big lie". All I ever heard was a dad was pissed his daughter got assaulted and the school kept it to themselves. Is this some kind of new type of situation here in regards to biased media? Are you forgetting how long Jussie Smollett was a hero to the left wing media? How our current VP called it a modern day lynching? Was that "the left's big lie"?

I'll say it again, there is no more triggered demographic than the trans community when just the slightest thing may not place them in the most perfect light. Funny the "big lie" is something most people have never really heard of or known about...until reading this.
The dad made it about more about the transgender than being assaulted in the school board meeting, he also seemed to use his "fame" as a pulpit and martyrdom. The attacker actions were bad, she also put herself in a risky situation. Having sex in school bathrooms isn't exactly high on the moral standards front. This isn't to be that I am demeaning her or condoning his behavior. More along the lines of nothing good happens after midnight- she took on risky behavior that led to a bad situation.

Hey I am all for having discussions and I also backed Chappelle and thought there was overreaction. However, your take on it is why they tend to get triggered. You want to blend this in with transgender when this has nothing to do with them or how they want to be expressed and their rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
The dad made it about more about the transgender than being assaulted in the school board meeting, he also seemed to use his "fame" as a pulpit and martyrdom. The attacker actions were bad, she also put herself in a risky situation. Having sex in school bathrooms isn't exactly high on the moral standards front. This isn't to be that I am demeaning her or condoning his behavior. More along the lines of nothing good happens after midnight- she took on risky behavior that led to a bad situation.

Hey I am all for having discussions and I also backed Chappelle and thought there was overreaction. However, your take on it is why they tend to get triggered. You want to blend this in with transgender when this has nothing to do with them or how they want to be expressed and their rights.
Meh...
 
You disagree TennNole- what exactly did I say wrong. I didn't condone the behavior, also said it wasn't to demean her.
That's why I was meh. I can't say I disagree, but it 'feels' like victim blaming also. So Meh is where I landed lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Sexually promiscuous girl asks boy whom she has already f*cked twice in a school bathroom to meet her in a bathroom of her choosing, boy comes to bathroom and sexually assaults her.

FAU: F*CKING TRANSGENDERS!!!!!!!!
 
Yes, that's the takeaway here. Not the rightwing media using the story to bash trans people for the last two months.
I don't think that there has to be just one takeaway. IMO, the other poster is correct that the author's characterization of it as "relationship violence" is ridiculous. To me, that acts to reduce the implied severity of what happened or to create an inference of some level of culpability of the victim. I cringed when I read it. It was rape, call it rape. We can argue the political issues here without losing site of the fact that a young girl was brutally raped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bunsen82
That's why I was meh. I can't say I disagree, but it 'feels' like victim blaming also. So Meh is where I landed lol
Not victim blaming, but what has often become a moral high ground of using Christianity and faith in regards to trans issues and vaccines - its more of a statement christianity shouldn't be used in any of these arguments or making this guy a martyr because he attacked a school board. There is also the fact with the risky behavior she was increasing the risk. Its not to say completely, because this guy had other issues. But we also have to acknowledge there are some things out of our control, and there are some things that occur that are within our control. Her behavior did not make this situation right far from it, however that this became a trans fight appears to be an argument way out in left field.
 
This writer left out a significant detail as to WHY this father was detained. He was speaking to the board - after being properly recognized - and a woman stood up and said he was lying and his daughter was not assaulted. He became angry
(Understandable, not advisable) so the police removed him.
How many of you have a daughter? You cannot acknowledge you might have a similar reaction? So, many of you are saying in so many words she was asking for it, aren't you? If she'd had sex with him before that was like this, why did she act like it was different THIS time? Maybe because she told him no? What ever happened to "No means No?"

The rush by the left to condemn a very young girl should be shocking, but it's sad all around that she seems to be a "political football".
 
So it's okay to minimize rape if you're otherwise down with the cause?
No one minimized rape, and for conservatives to try to play that card is comical.
The author pointed out that the girl wasn’t attacked by a stranger in the bathroom as conservative media has been screaming for months. She was raped by someone she knew in a place she agreed to meet and had met before. It’s context.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
This writer left out a significant detail as to WHY this father was detained. He was speaking to the board - after being properly recognized - and a woman stood up and said he was lying and his daughter was not assaulted. He became angry
(Understandable, not advisable) so the police removed him.
How many of you have a daughter? You cannot acknowledge you might have a similar reaction? So, many of you are saying in so many words she was asking for it, aren't you? If she'd had sex with him before that was like this, why did she act like it was different THIS time? Maybe because she told him no? What ever happened to "No means No?"

The rush by the left to condemn a very young girl should be shocking, but it's sad all around that she seems to be a "political football".
That's not happening. The condemnation is all about trying to make this into a transgender in the bathroom issue by those on the right.
 
This writer left out a significant detail as to WHY this father was detained. He was speaking to the board - after being properly recognized - and a woman stood up and said he was lying and his daughter was not assaulted. He became angry
(Understandable, not advisable) so the police removed him.
How many of you have a daughter? You cannot acknowledge you might have a similar reaction? So, many of you are saying in so many words she was asking for it, aren't you? If she'd had sex with him before that was like this, why did she act like it was different THIS time? Maybe because she told him no? What ever happened to "No means No?"

The rush by the left to condemn a very young girl should be shocking, but it's sad all around that she seems to be a "political football".
LOL get off your soapbox. No one is condemning the girl or minimizing rape.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT