I for one am shocked by this entirely forseeable shocking revelation!
I’m confused. The statement from the school board is about “Stephen Hanna”. The Daily Fail article, though, says that the teacher is named “Kayla Lemieux”.
But everybody wants prosthetic foreheads on their real heads.
I am confused too. I have not heard of this name in any reports. This is weird.
My read is that some sites have identified the teacher in question as one “Stephen Hanna.” But the school is confirming that the individual is not Stephen Hanna. However, they “…cannot confirm the identity of the individual in the photos/videos/radio segments.” So they have left it ambiguous as to whether they know who the person in the video is, whether it is “Kayla Lemieux”, or whether it is or isn’t a teacher in their district…
So, possibly someone mentioned that name on Facebook or whatever, but not anything we’ve been talking about. 
Yeah…its really odd. They are really doing a terrible job of communicating!
The initial reports (the same ones which provided the initial photos) claimed that Stephen Hanna is the teacher who transitioned to Kayla Lemieux. It turns out Mr. Hanna is a teacher at the school and has not transitioned.
Very helpful. Thanks.
You can find several “news” sources equating the two by searching for “Kayla Lemieux” “Stephen Hanna”. I’m not going to link to any of them.
Let’s say that it is. Why would that be a reason to be outraged? I mean, sure, if you think it’s fake, you could get mad about that. Or if you think it’s someone attacking trans people, that would be a reason to get upset.
But that doesn’t seem to be chela’s position. It seems possibly the point was to mock trans people or poke at the trans supporters here. That would be chela’s usual MO.
(Sorry to LHOD. I originally also replied to you, but removed it. But I’m not sure how to remove the notification.)
Aha. That explains why, when I first heard of this, I thought they were saying it was a teacher mocking trans women.
Based on the school district’s response it seems reasonable to conclude that the video is of a teacher working in that school, but that the teacher is not and has never been “Stephen Hanna.” Furthermore, they characterize this as a “personal matter” and I wholeheartedly agree. Whoever the teacher is, the way they express themselves and their gender is between them and the school, and it should be addressed equitably and at the lowest level possible. It’s not worth anyone who isn’t involved getting performatively outraged over it.
And a rock to wind a string around.
Why is that teacher wearing a mask that doesn’t count her nose? That’s the real question.
They characterize it as a “personnel matter” which is a little different.
I think that’s on purpose. They are complying with the Ontario Human Rights Code by not discussing anything about this publicly. Because it is a personnel matter, and thereby (probably) protected to some extent at least by legal restrictions on public communications. My reaction to that is, good for them.
The interwebs are also for looking at kitty pics, but of course you already know that.
Appropriate since they might be giants.
When I first saw that picture, I saw it as a misogynistic act by the man themselves, that he was dressing in a way to deliberately make female characteristics look disgusting by exaggerating them. Basically mocking women.
And I felt sorry for any girls subjected to viewing his performance. Actually, that might be the reason behind it: has there been an influx of girls into the sacred male precincts of shop classes, and this guy is trying to shame them by making it look ludicrous for them to be there?
If that were the true motive, couldn’t his appearance fall under hate crimes? Suppose a white teacher decided to dress up in full-on minstrel show black face? With protruding lips and a ludicrously large afro wig? Would that be allowed as acceptable professional attire, even if he claimed he felt internally that he was actually black and was just transitioning races?