Middle School Girls Take a Stand: No Boys in the Girls’ Locker Room

TEMECULA, Calif. — Before the first bell had finished ringing this morning, dozens of James L. Day Middle School students stepped out of first period, joined by 15–20 adults, to make a simple point: middle school girls should not be required to undress next to an eighth-grade boy in their locker room.

The parent and student-led walkout formed quickly, with seventh and eighth-grade girls and boys standing together along the sidewalk outside campus. Many wore white bows and pink “Save Girls’ Sports” bracelets and held homemade signs emphasizing safety and privacy. A small counter-protest across the street chalked the sidewalk with pro-transgender slogans, while a sizable police presence monitored both sides to keep the peace.

California Family Council’s Outreach Director, Sophia Lorey, was on site to support families, document the event, and speak with any media who arrived. “The students were clear,” Lorey said afterward. “This wasn’t about attacking anyone. They want safe, private, female-only spaces to change for P.E. The boys who joined were there to stand with the girls, not to make trouble, just to say, ‘protect girls’ spaces.’”

What sparked the walkout?

Parents report that since the start of the new school year, a male student who identifies as female has been using the girls’ locker room during P.E. According to students Lorey spoke with, the concern is straightforward: girls deserve bodily privacy and shouldn’t be compelled to undress next to a male peer.

Rather than restoring sex-based privacy, the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) has advanced a policy, Board Policy 5145.31: “Religious or Mental Health-Related Accommodations,” that explicitly affirms access to bathrooms and locker rooms “consistent with a student’s gender identity,” then offers girls two “outs”:

1. file a religious-belief accommodation, or
2. file a mental-health accommodation (possibly listing anxiety, distress, etc.).
   

Parents at today’s protest said neither option is acceptable. They don’t want to stigmatize their daughters with a mental-health label simply for wanting privacy, nor do they want to be forced to claim a religious exemption to avoid mixed-sex changing areas. As one mom summarized to CFC staff on scene: My daughter’s not anxious or sick, she just deserves a girls’ locker room.

Attorney warns: the forms pathologize normal privacy and risk-sensitive disclosures

Attorney Erin Friday and President of Our Duty, an network supporting parents who resist gender ideology in schools, reviewed the proposal and flagged multiple concerns:

• Pathologizing privacy: Nothing in the DSM-5 treats a desire for single-sex privacy as a disorder, yet the policy nudges families toward a “mental health” box for ordinary modesty.
• Sensitive data pressure: Even though a diagnosis isn’t strictly required, the Mental Health Accommodation Request Form invites families to describe conditions and attach documentation, potentially creating records that follow a child and raise privacy risks.
• Target lists & counseling concerns: Because students 12+ can initiate requests, Friday warned forms could effectively create lists of dissenting families, prompting school counseling without meaningful parental control.
• Broad denial clause: Both tracks allow the district to refuse accommodations if it deems them “discriminatory,” unlawful, or an “undue hardship,” which could nullify most requests in practice.
  

Board member Dr. Joseph Komrosky weighs in

Dr. Joseph Komrosky, a TVUSD board member who visited the walkout as a concerned parent of the Temecula community, says the district’s “mental health and religious exemption accommodations” framework is the wrong tool, and that parents want privacy protected without labeling girls.

“I was elected to represent the values of the parents of my community, and the majority of our community in Temecula have traditional family values,” Komrosky explained.  “What’s happening at this middle school, when a biological boy enters the girls’ locker room, is anything but traditional. It’s social and political activism. I want every child to have a good and safe education. Parts of this aren’t safe, and students feel their innocence is being robbed. I will continue to fight this moral battle to defend the innocence of children and empower parents.” 

Komrosky’s key points 

How we got here: He says two separate policies (religious and mental health accommodations) were first brought forward in May and then eventually approved on June 10 over his and Trustee Jen Wiersma’s objections. A combined revision appeared on the August 26 agenda but was postponed after public outcry.

His alternative: Back on May 13, Komrosky and Wiersma agendized an “expectation of reasonable privacy” policy—essentially a preemptive privacy opt-out so students could avoid undressing in front of anyone at the start of the school year without targeting or labeling peers. The majority rejected it as “burdensome.”

What he hopes happens next: at the next regular board meeting on September 9, he wants to school board to rescind the accommodation policies and advance a privacy approach. He expressed cautious optimism that the board will now collaborate with each other and with administrators on privacy-preserving solutions and formally reverse course.

What parents and students are asking for

Parents repeatedly emphasized two goals:

1. Restore single-sex privacy as the default in girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms.
2. Provide voluntary alternatives for any student who requests them—without forcing girls to carry a mental-health diagnosis or a religious label to access basic privacy.
   

Two TVUSD board members, Jen Wiersma and Dr. Komrosky, visited the middle school walkout, gathering in support of girls’ safety and privacy. As Lorey explained, “Even those working on policy alternatives agree: California’s state mandates make it hard. But the district still has a responsibility to protect girls’ privacy and safety.”

Why this matters

From a Christian perspective, and frankly, from common sense, sex matters. Scripture calls us to honor the created differences between male and female and to protect the vulnerable (Genesis 1:27; Matthew 19:4). Expecting girls to undress next to a male classmate violates basic modesty and invites confusion and risk. You shouldn’t need a psychiatric label or a religion box checked to say, “Girls’ locker rooms are for girls.”

Key dates & action steps

• Board Meeting: Tuesday, September 9 — TVUSD is expected to address Board Policy 5145.31 and related privacy measures.
• Ask the Board to reject the “accommodations” scheme. Urge trustees to restore sex-based privacy by default and provide voluntary alternatives, without labeling girls or families.
• Parents & Students: Continue to speak respectfully and clearly. Emphasize privacy, safety, and fairness. Avoid naming or targeting individual students.
• Church & Community Leaders: Stand with families. Offer practical help and a calm moral witness: dignity for all students and sex-based privacy for girls.
  

“This is not about hostility,” Lorey said. “It’s about protecting girls’ spaces so our daughters can learn, play sports, and change for class with dignity and safety.”

Editor’s note: To protect minors, CFC did not publish student names from the walkout.