Coach Under Investigation for Informing Boys’ Team That Wrestler Is Girl, Requiring Her to Use Girls’ Locker Room

WILMINGTON, Ohio — An Ohio high school wrestling coach is under investigation after he allegedly informed his boys’ wrestling team that one of its members who identifies as a boy is really a girl, and for requiring that she use the girls’ locker room.

The mother of Aubry Pogue-Krabacher, who now goes by the name Aiden, recently went to the Wilmington School Board to lodge a complaint about Wilmington High School Coach Kelly Tolliver.

“Not only did Coach Tolliver announce to the entire team that Aiden is transgender, he publicly humiliated him in front of his classmates with privileged, medical information he had no business sharing,” she said, according to Cincinnati.com.

Pogue-Krabacher was also allegedly told that she could not use the boys’ locker room to change since she is a girl. The student says that she told Tolliver that she was not a girl, but Tolliver wouldn’t buy it. He insisted that she use the boys’ locker room.

“He made it very clear that he didn’t want me in there, and that I shouldn’t be in there because I’m a girl,” Pogue-Krabacher told Fox19 News. “And I told him I was not [a girl], and he still proceeded to say, ‘Yes, you are,’ and kicked me out.”

She then went to the athletic director about the matter, who advised that they would try to work out a changing arrangement—which turned out to be a guest girls’ locker room.

Pogue-Krabacher further told the outlet that one male team member did not want to wrestle her because she has female reproductive organs. The television station had to bleep out the vulgar word that was repeated.

  • Connect with Christian News

Pogue-Krabacher has now consequently quit the team due to the various circumstances.

According to Fox19 News, Pogue-Krabacher has been wrestling boys since the sixth grade, but as a girl. She was one of the top ten school-age wrestlers in the state. Now, as a high school freshman, Pogue-Krabacher joined the boys’ wrestling team in presenting herself as a boy.

She says she still would like to wrestle, but just not under the current coach.

Tolliver is not commenting on the matter at this time due to the investigation. The Wilmington School Board has not commented on specifics either, other than stating, “If it happened, it’s not right.”

“I can’t say anything because we’re still investigating everything, so we’ll find out later what happens,” President Marty Beaugard told Fox19.

As previously reported, Scripture states that those who turn God’s creation “upside down” are like the clay telling the potter that he doesn’t know what he’s doing.

Romans 9:20 says, “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, ‘Why hast thou made me thus?’”

Isaiah 29:16 also declares, “Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay, for shall the work say of Him that made it, ‘He made me not?’ Or shall the thing framed say of Him that framed it, ‘He had no understanding?’”

Deuteronomy 22:5 further outlines, “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.”

Cincinnati News, Weather, Sports from FOX19 NOW-WXIX

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Amos Moses – He>i

    “In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

    and a CRIME apparently …………..

  • Polish Bear

    Nothing like a locker room for discerning the facts.

  • Michael Russell

    You self proclaimed Christians freak me out! You claim that the Torah is no longer relevant until it backs up one of your bigoted circumstances. Deuteronomy 22:5 is Torah, Old covenant, so make up your mind, Old covenant or new covenant, you can’t have both.

    • Mr. Chips

      They also have no problem using the OT to condemn gay people but any verses that implicate them they don’t apply because Christians follow the NT.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        see above …………

      • John O

        i haven’t seen any thing about Christians condemning anybody. its a matter of who’s law u are going to obey. at 1 time I thought I was going to hell so I had a lot of freedom. I called on Jesus and now I have a master. u don’t have the same master, but I get that. I was there.

        • Mr. Chips

          Re: “i haven’t seen any thing about Christians condemning anybody” Then you haven’t been paying attention. I used to be a Christian, but them I actually read the bible and studied it in its cultural and historical context. If it gives you comfort, that’s great. I’m happy for you.

          • John O

            thank u for your honesty. now if any young people happen to read these posts, they can understand why u endorse the abominations to God and criticize amos moses for endorsing God’s law. u can post anti-Christian on a Christian website but a Christian can’t post in a library. u gotta love that

          • Mr. Chips

            If young people read these posts they’ll see how some christians blindly follow what they’ve been told about their faith while others, like myself, took the time and effort to understand the bible in its cultural and historical context.

            Re: “u can post anti-Christian on a Christian website but a Christian can’t post in a library. u gotta love that” They’re not analogous situations as one is a website and the other is a government building. I’m not anti-Christian, I’m pro-Truth.

          • Charles

            “””If young people read these posts they’ll see how some christians blindly
            follow what they’ve been told about their faith while others, like
            myself, took the time and effort to understand the bible in its cultural
            and historical context.”””

            That’s hilarious. I have studied those same things you claim, and have come to a completely different conclusion than you.. How is that? It’s pretty pretentious to be assuming Christians haven’t studied their history.

          • Mr. Chips

            If you studied the bible in its cultural and historical context and came to a completely different conclusion then you need to go back and do a better job of it next time.

          • Charles

            (1Jn 2:18) Little children, it is the last time. And just as you have heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have risen up, from which we know that it is the last hour.
            (1Jn 2:19) They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they were of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out so that it might be revealed that they were not all of us.
            (1Jn 2:20) But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.
            (1Jn 2:21) I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth.
            (1Jn 2:22) Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He who denies the Father and the Son is antichrist.
            (1Jn 2:23) Everyone who denies the Son neither has the Father. The one confessing the Son also has the Father.
            (1Jn 2:24) Therefore what you heard from the beginning, let it abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, you will abide in both the Son and in the Father.
            (1Jn 2:25) And this is the promise that He has promised us: everlasting life.
            (1Jn 2:26) These things I have written to you concerning those leading you astray.
            (1Jn 2:27) But the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as His anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true and no lie, and as He has taught you, abide in Him.

          • Mr. Chips

            Thanks for proving my point.

          • Charles

            Truth is you hate truth. That’s why you’ve come to your conclusions.

          • Mr. Chips

            People who hate truth don’t search for the truth. Thanks yet again for proving my point. You’re on a roll.

          • Charles

            So tell me “Mr. Truth Seeker”.. What is it that “Changed” your mind when you researched.

          • Mr. Chips

            Nothing you’d be interested in, “Charles.”

          • Charles

            Sure I would. Certainly something had to change your mind..

          • Mr. Chips

            Allow me to remind you:

            (1Jn 2:18) Little children, it is the last time. And just as you have heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have risen up, from which we know that it is the last hour.
            (1Jn 2:19) They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they were of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out so that it might be revealed that they were not all of us.
            (1Jn 2:20) But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.
            (1Jn 2:21) I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth.
            (1Jn 2:22) Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He who denies the Father and the Son is antichrist.
            (1Jn 2:23) Everyone who denies the Son neither has the Father. The one confessing the Son also has the Father.
            (1Jn 2:24) Therefore what you heard from the beginning, let it abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, you will abide in both the Son and in the Father.
            (1Jn 2:25) And this is the promise that He has promised us: everlasting life.
            (1Jn 2:26) These things I have written to you concerning those leading you astray.
            (1Jn 2:27) But the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as His anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true and no lie, and as He has taught you, abide in Him.

          • Charles

            Is it possible that you never actually believed in Jesus in the first place? Is that possible? So what you discovered just confirmed your belief at the time?

          • Mr. Chips

            No, that’s not possible. I was a devout believer for the first few decades of my life. Then I saw the light. I’m going to spend time with kids. Have a great day!

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            LOLOLOLOLOLOL ……………..you saw the dark light ….. and you liked it …. it covered your inadequacies better …………

          • Charles

            That fact that you wrote that you were a “Devout” believer for thirty years and suddenly had an epiphany tells me you really didn’t believe in Jesus to begin with. Maybe you thought you genuinely did, but your separation from God tells otherwise. There is no evidence that would shake the foundation of a decades believing Christian who had belief and knowledge of God, especially with all the information available on Christian history. Your unwillingness to share what affected your “Belief” also indicates to me deception on your part as you are on a Christian website. Why would you even be on Christian website? Unless you were attempting to divide the faithful flock of Jesus Christ. I find that devious at best.

          • Mr. Chips

            The fact that you spammed me, yet again, with bible quotes tells me all I need to know about you. This isn’t my first rideo. I’ve encountered many like yourself over the years. People who say I was never a “true” believer, who can’t stand the fact that I did the work and finally saw the bible for what it is — a book of stories, written down by men, that can be found in cultures that pre-date Christianity. There’s nothing devious about challenging the beliefs of believers. It’s more of a character building exercise. The only reason you’re so incesnsed is because you question your faith, and you don’t like it when people challenge you.

          • Charles

            Spamming you? incensed? ha ha.. Seriously? The fact you are on a CHRISTIAN website is what’s devious. You believe they’re simply “Stories”. Why are you here? You don’t believe in any of this. Why would you feel the need to challenge believers? Because you never believed? As far doing your “Homework”? Sorry, many have and come to a completely different conclusion. I was never raised around any religion sans no religion. You still refuse to elaborate on your so called “Epiphany” of what changed your mind which you seem to refuse to address. There’s no reason for you to be here, other than to subvert, and yes that’s devious.

          • LynnRH

            I’ve been wondering why there has been so many just like Mr. Chips. That they just want to be here on a Christian website to see if they can make Christians feel stupid because they believe in a Creator God. Talk about haters!

          • Charles

            I have a sneaky suspicion (Whether the detractors are aware of it or not) they are picking out who will conform to their “New” religion. They are sussing out who the “Fundamentalist” are because they won’t be a part of the new system. Hence the furious push towards ecumenism. True believers in Jesus Christ won’t fit in their upcoming plans. Most if not all other religions could work in the new system. I’m sure the creation of Facebook also plays a part in this.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            you are not searching for the truth …… you are searching for yourself ….. and you have found it …….

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. you brought YOUR idolatry of self to the scriptures ….. and that is all you found ………… YOURSELF ……………

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            “If young people read these posts they’ll see how some christians blindly follow what they’ve been told about their faith while others”

            that sounds like the description OF YOU that YOU just gave us …… and that is not the description of a christian …… that is just your own foolishness ……

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            NOPE … you NEVER WAS a christian ……….. and if you never READ the bible and then called yourself a christian …. but then read it and were not ….. then you were only christian in name only ….. and that is no christian at all …………..

    • Amos Moses – He>i

      those laws of the OT are no longer in force …. EXCEPT where the NT says they still are …… and when fools cherry pick from scripture …… they prove they do not know what they are talking about …. as they USUALLY are not christians to begin with and are speaking with ZERO knowledge ………..

  • Mr. Chips

    Quoting Deuteronomy 22:5 is a bit of a stretch unless you believe that women should be forbidden from wearing pants.

    • John O

      what it means is we are all sinners. salvation only comes thru the blood of Jesus Christ. when we are born of the Spirit , God’s will becomes more important than ours. unless u are born again, nothing makes sense.Matthew 24:24 (ESV)

      24
      For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

      • Mr. Chips

        I know what it means. I stand by my comment.

        • Amos Moses – He>i

          “I know what it means.”

          seems not …………..

    • Sten_Mk_2

      I think they should wear pants, maybe not trousers.

  • John O

    its only a matter of time to have a rape case. we have chosen to become a nation of self interest and lawlessness

    • Michael C

      Heterosexual male students can’t help themselves but rape their transgender male wrestling teammates?

      Are you being serious right now?

      Even if that actually happens, you’d have the gall to blame the trans guy?

      • John O

        in the human race u are either male or female. if u read the article, a girl wanted access to the boys locker room and the coach stopped it.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        YUP ….. if some fool walks into traffic on a highway expecting the traffic to automatically stop for him …. and they get maimed or killed ……… they are still no less a fool …………….

      • Recognizing_Truth

        The girl who thinks acting like a guy makes her a guy and somehow protects her from the guys – is a fool three times over. For that she would be guilty.

        The rapist is still a criminal (whether they rape a girl, a guy, a girl pretending to be a guy, or a guy pretending to be a girl -it’s still rape) and should be dealt with accordingly.

    • Recognizing_Truth

      It will be blamed on the “rape culture” in the schools. It will be solved by telling the boys that masculinity is toxic, and by having the boys wear pink uniforms.

  • Nidalap

    An institution of learning has no difficulty with its members imparting truth.
    An institution of indoctrination most assuredly does…

    • Amos Moses – He>i

      OUCH ……………

  • Amos Moses – He>i

    What The Federal Courts Are Getting Wrong About Transgender Discrimination In The Workplace
    A brief primer on federal employment law exposes the error sweeping the judicial system.
    By Margot Cleveland
    MARCH 12, 2018
    Refusing to pretend that a man is a woman is not sex stereotyping. It is not invidious discrimination. And it is not cruel bigotry. It is defending reality from a cultural onslaught destined to destroy parental rights, religious liberty, and freedom of speech if left unchecked.

    Yet, rather than rein in the transgender hysteria overtaking society, courts have wrongly concluded that refusing to affirm a transgender individual’s false claim that “I am a woman,” or “I am a man,” is illegal sex discrimination under Title VII and Title IX — the federal anti-discrimination laws.

    Most recently, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals joined the frenzy, holding last week in EEOC v. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. that transgender individuals are protected by Title VII’s prohibition of “sex” discrimination and concluding, in effect, that an employer violates the federal anti-discrimination statute by refusing to affirm a transgender employee’s false sex.

    A brief primer on federal employment law exposes the error sweeping the judicial system.

    Both Title VII and Title IX prohibit sex discrimination. Title VII prohibits discrimination in employment “because of such individual’s sex,” while Title IX prohibits discrimination “on the basis of sex,” in educational programs or activities receiving federal funding. Given the similar statutory language, courts treat claims brought by employees under Title VII, and by students under Title IX, analogously.

    The plain language of Title VII and Title IX prohibits sex discrimination — not discrimination on the basis of transgender status or gender identity. In contrast, several states’ anti-discrimination statutes include both sex and gender identity in their list of protected classes. For instance, in California it is an “unlawful employment practice” for employers to discriminate against their employees because of their “race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status …”

    Like California, Congress could, if it desired, amend the statutory language of the federal anti-discrimination statutes to similarly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity or transgender status. But it hasn’t.

    Nonetheless, in the last few years several courts have held that discrimination against transgendered individuals violates Title VII and Title IX. The courts have done so, even while recognizing that the term “sex,” as used in Title VII and Title IX, “should be given a narrow, traditional interpretation” — which would exclude transsexuals — by misinterpreting and misapplying the Supreme Court’s 1989 decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins.

    The Federalist

    • Michael C

      If I’m reading your copy/paste article correctly, Ms. Cleveland believes that “sex” as a protected class couldn’t possibly include gender expression/identity because some places specifically and unambiguously protect people from discrimination on the basis of their gender identity? That’s her argument? That makes no sense. There’s often some overlap in protected classes. For example, national origin, race, and color are all protected classes.

      Further, she quotes a Supreme Court decision that expanded the definition of “sex” to include how a person expresses their sex.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        “That makes no sense.”

        considering who and what you profess to be ….. no one is surprised ………….

        • Michael C

          Let’s imagine for a moment that “color” wasn’t one of the protected characteristics in civil rights laws. If this was the case, do you think it would be legal for a business to discriminate against a dark skinned person?

          Honest question.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            deleted

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            here is the thing ….. if we truly study history ……. the civil rights act did nothing to change anybodys mind about race ….. the ONLY thing that changes hearts and minds is God ….. there is nothing in scripture about race being the deciding factor in anything except mans darkened heart ……….. even if the civil rights act had not been passed …. we would still be right where we are now ….. and all you have to do is look at the headlines of the last few years as well as months to know that ….. dont want my money …. someone else will ….. it is still, in the US anyway, GREEN …… and if that color is a problem then people have far greater issues …….

            but the thing is ….. depravity and color are not conflate-able ….. a person does not choose a race anymore than they choose which sex they are …… BUT they can choose whom they COPULATE with ….. or at all ….. and it is that same exact darkened heart that is at issue …… only difference is WHOM we COPULATE with can have devastating and far reaching effects on everyone involved …… the person, their “partner”, and society in general …… and there are no two ways about it …… it is lawlessness and it destroys any civilized society …… and it is partly due to the DEMAND that depravity be accepted ……..

          • Michael C

            I don’t understand what any of that had to do with my question.

            I’m gonna ask again.

            National origin and race are characteristics that are considered protected from discrimination.

            Imagining for a moment that color wasn’t also considered a protected characteristic, do you think it would be legal for a business to discriminate against someone because they’re dark-skinned?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            i see you have trouble reading …. so to cut and paste it for you ….. “dont want my money …. someone else will ….. it is still, in the US anyway, GREEN …… and if that color is a problem then people have far greater issues …….”

            and AGAIN …… race is not a determinate of societal success …… WHOM YOU COPULATE with ….. DOES ………..

            did you get it that time …………..

          • Michael C

            Cool buddy. You’re not interested in understanding how the argument you’ve presented is flawed. I get it. Have a nice night.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope …. i am not going to agree with DEPRAVITY by ARGUMENTATION …….. try your witchcraft elsewhere ………..

          • Recognizing_Truth

            You create a false comparison.
            Color is inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable. That’s why it’s protected. You can’t discriminate against a person just because you don’t like the inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable color of their skin.
            Similarly sex/gender is inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable. That’s why it is protected. You can’t discriminate against a person just because you don’t like their inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable sex/gender.

            Delusion is continuing to claim something in opposition to reality. “Identifying” as a sex/gender that you – inherently, obviously, identifiable, and unchangeably – are NOT is delusion. Delusion is not a protected status, nor can it be as it flies in the face of reason: how can one be prejudiced against something that is not true?

            Honest answer.

          • Michael C

            You create a false comparison.

            I was making no comparison. I was attempting to illustrate an argument.

            Color is inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable. That’s why it’s protected. You can’t discriminate against a person just because you don’t like the inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable color of their skin.
            Similarly sex/gender is inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable. That’s why it is protected. You can’t discriminate against a person just because you don’t like their inherent, obvious, verifiable, and unchangeable sex/gender.

            A characteristic needn’t be inherent or immutable in order to be considered protected from discrimination. Who told you it did?

            Delusion is continuing to claim something in opposition to reality. “Identifying” as a sex/gender that you – inherently, obviously, identifiable, and unchangeably – are NOT is delusion. Delusion is not a protected status, nor can it be as it flies in the face of reason: how can one be prejudiced against something that is not true?

            Delusions can have protected status. You and I might agree that Scientology (the religion created by a scifi novelist) is delusion yet Scientologists are protected from discrimination on the basis of their religion.

            Honest answer.

            You may be honest and sincere in your beliefs but you have answered questions not posed by me. The original question to Amos Moses has yet to be answered.

          • Recognizing_Truth

            You posited a question: “how would you like it if they applied your reasoning to discrimination of color”, with the intent and claim that this was the same issue as a law saying that the delusion of gender identity (a psychological delusional disorder known as body/gender dysmorphic disorder) should be protected the same as a person’s color. This is a false comparison and the issues are unrelated as I logically proved to you in the rest of the post.

          • Michael C

            You posited a question: “how would you like it if they applied your reasoning to discrimination of color”, with the intent and claim that this was the same issue as a law saying that the delusion of gender identity (a psychological delusional disorder known as body/gender dysmorphic disorder) should be protected the same as a person’s color.

            A) Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.
            B) You don’t seem to understand how quotation marks work.

          • Michael C

            You posited a question: “how would you like it if they applied your reasoning to discrimination of color”

            No. That isn’t the question I asked “Amos Moses.”

            I wasn’t arguing “Amos Moses'” position on transgender rights, I was challenging the faulty logic of an argument they presented.

            “Amos Moses” copy/pasted an argument that stated that the characteristic of “sex” couldn’t possibly include “gender identity” because some places have explicit protections for both of these characteristics, ergo they’re separate, distinct, and unrelated.

            Regardless of my position on nondiscrimination laws, this is just a bad argument.

            Imagining for a moment that skin color was not one of the characteristic specifically considered protected from discrimination, it would still be illegal for a business to discriminate on the basis of a person’s skin color because that characteristic is a subset of both national origin and race.

            Now let’s imagine that the city of Billings decided to add the characteristic of “color” to their local nondiscrimination laws. Being that “color” is not explicitly protected by law in other places and the city of Billings has determined that it’s a separate characteristic requiring of distinct protections, would it be legal for businesses elsewhere to discriminate on the basis of a person’s skin color or would the classes of national origin and race still cover it?

          • Recognizing_Truth

            I am honest and sincere in my facts, and in my logical proofs – as opposed to the fallacies that you rely on to support a flawed and untenable position that “thinking makes it so” and not only should such a delusion be protected, but that society must, under penalty of law, ASSERT THAT THE LIE IS TRUE.

      • Recognizing_Truth

        Reality is that sex = gender. A male is a male. A female is a female.

        You can’t “identify” as something you’re not. Others cannot be legally coerced to admit that your false identification is true.

        A male cannot “identify” (claim to be)as a female nor a female “identify” as a male, any more than you can identify as J Edgar Hoover. If you go around and start telling everyone you are J Edgar Hoover, signing his name to checks, claiming you are the head of the FBI, it still doesn’t make you J Edgar Hoover and we are not, and we cannot be obligated personally or legally to give in to your delusion or be prevented from telling you that you are deluded by stating the truth to you.
        And the same is true for a person of one gender/sex who refuses to accept the truth of their gender/sex. We are not and cannot be obligated personally or legally to give in to your delusion or be prevented from telling you that you are deluded and treating you in concert with your actual sex/gender.

  • HOW is that Christians and other Americans are being held hostage by sodomites, lesbians, and transgenders?

    Could it have something to do with the constitutional framers replacing Yahweh’s immutable moral law (including Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, and Deuteronomy 22:5) with their own capricious man-made Enlightenment and Masonic traditions?

    See Chapter 4 “Article 1: Legislative Usurpation” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page, click on the top entry, and scroll down to Chapter 4.

    Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”

  • Celia4855

    Coach Tolliver is right…Aiden is a girl!

  • Recognizing_Truth

    Coach Tolliver is under investigation for calling out the obvious:
    A girl who dresses like a boy is still a girl.

    Congratulations Coach! Good job.
    Thank your for upholding truth in the face of strong opposition and protecting both this girl and the boys.