Cont: [ED] Discussion: Trans Women are not Women (Part 5)

[Rolfe]

There's a lot of it about.

In related news a young idiot who calls himself Teddy has flounced off from the SNP with loud complaints about the party being riddled with transphobia. I see he's shaved off his beard recently but he still looks like a guy. This appears to be his reaction to the forces of rationality having managed to win some places in the governing body of the party at the last internal elections. The First Minister and Justice Secretary (and quite a few more of the inner circle) are still as woke as hell and hell-bent on railroading the self-ID and the "hate speech" legislation through. But that's not enough for Teddy, no gender critical voices should be heard at all or he'll throw a hissy fit. Good riddance I say.

But on his way out he announced that trans SNP members were being physically and sexually assaulted by other SNP members. I don't know if he can be held to account for these lies though.

 

[Elaedith]

That's one of the concerns I voiced a while back with respect to the Trans Agenda. Referring to criminals - especially in cases of sexual aggression and domestic violence - by their preferred gender provides cover for the continuation of crimes that disproportionately harm women and children, committed by males. It masks the pattern of male violence, and gives the false impression that females are committing more crimes of this sort.

Interesting thread on this from Prof Alice Sullivan

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Transphobes take another L, Biden issues executive order rolling back Trump-era trans discrimination and further plans to expand antidiscrimination policies through the legislature as part of his first 100 days.

https://www.advocate.com/politics/2021/1/20/day-one-biden-issues-order-against-anti-lgbtq-discrimination

 

[Rolfe]

We knew he was a woke idiot, but sometimes even that is the lesser of two evils.

 

[Butter!]

Transphobes take another L, Biden issues executive order rolling back Trump-era trans discrimination and further plans to expand antidiscrimination policies through the legislature as part of his first 100 days.

https://www.advocate.com/politics/2021/1/20/day-one-biden-issues-order-against-anti-lgbtq-discrimination

I skimmed it because I'm posting at work again, but this seems like a very good thing.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I skimmed it because I'm posting at work again, but this seems like a very good thing.

TERFs and transphobes on Twitter are not taking it well.

On day 1, Biden unilaterally eviscerates women's sports. Any educational institution that receives federal funding must admit biologically-male athletes to women's teams, women's scholarships, etc.

A new glass ceiling was just placed over girls.

https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier

 

[Butter!]

TERFs and transphobes on Twitter are not taking it well.



https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier

Oh, I didn't realize sports was included. I thought it was forbidding discrimination in areas like housing, hiring, school placement, military, stuff like that.

I don't think one has to be a transphobe to have concerns about sports, though, there are significant practical matters that need to be figured out so that everyone can be accommodated fairly. Do you disagree?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Oh, I didn't realize sports was included. I thought it was forbidding discrimination in areas like housing, hiring, school placement, military, stuff like that.

I don't think one has to be a transphobe to have concerns about sports, though, there are significant practical matters that need to be figured out so that everyone can be accommodated fairly. Do you disagree?

I wouldn't assume that this person's characterization is correct. TERFs love hyperbolic doomsaying in response to every tiny bit of dignity afforded to trans people.

I suppose guidance should be coming shortly from whatever admin is in charge of the respective departments impacted by this (Labor, education, etc).

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't think one has to be a transphobe to have concerns about sports

You will be called a transphobe nonetheless.

 

[Butter!]

Is it true that schools will lose federal funding if they don't admit trans women to women's sports teams? If so, is that just a unilateral decision, or is there some variability (for different sports, skill levels, hormones vs. no hormones, anything like that)?

Finding an article that just lays it out in a straightforward way is proving difficult.

 

[Ziggurat]

Is it true that schools will lose federal funding if they don't admit trans women to women's sports teams? If so, is that just a unilateral decision, or is there some variability (for different sports, skill levels, hormones vs. no hormones, anything like that)?

Finding an article that just lays it out in a straightforward way is proving difficult.

Aside from any ambiguity in the Biden admin's position, there are other complications as well.

The president cannot change the law on this. What he can do is declare how the Dept. of Ed. intends to interpret the law. Whether that interpretation holds up in court is another matter. But the problem for schools is that even if they go to court and win, that still hurts. So a lot of them will try to comply regardless. And in the case of any ambiguity, that means complying with the most expansive interpretation of it. So you're probably going to see a lot of inclusion of trans athletes in women's sports even where it doesn't make sense. Yay!

But hey, at least the White House contact submission form now asks for your pronouns. So they've got their priorities straight in order.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Is it true that schools will lose federal funding if they don't admit trans women to women's sports teams? If so, is that just a unilateral decision, or is there some variability (for different sports, skill levels, hormones vs. no hormones, anything like that)?

Finding an article that just lays it out in a straightforward way is proving difficult.

As far as I know, specific guidance has not been issued. The executive order is going to mean policy changes at various agencies, but those policies have not yet been clarified or disseminated.

The EO can initiate a change in policy, but it takes time and work to make it happen, and the details will matter. It's very telling that the transphobes have gone straight to declaring that the sky is falling.

 

[Butter!]

As far as I know, specific guidance has not been issued. The executive order is going to mean policy changes at various agencies, but those policies have yet been clarified or disseminated.

Ah, that would explain why I'm having trouble finding specifics.

 

[Meadmaker]

Oh, I didn't realize sports was included. I thought it was forbidding discrimination in areas like housing, hiring, school placement, military, stuff like that.

I don't think one has to be a transphobe to have concerns about sports, though, there are significant practical matters that need to be figured out so that everyone can be accommodated fairly. Do you disagree?

No, it's basically school locker rooms and sports.

 

[Meadmaker]

I confess I haven't read the executive order so I might be all wet, but here is what I think is going on with it. I might be all wet, but I'm sure someone will correct me, gently and kindly in a most respectful manner, if I'm wrong.

During the Obama administration, the Department of Education issued guidelines that said schools that receive federal funding would lose that funding unless they treated students according to their gender identity, as opposed to their biological sex. In practice, all US public schools receive and depend on that funding, so it is, for all practical purposes, a federal decree that it has to be that way.

In other words, if the student formerly known as Fred wants to use the girls' locker room and join the girls' volleyball team, then Fred gets to do it, or the school loses funding.

The Trump administration rescinded those guidelines.

I am guessing, but I haven't seen the story, that Biden has restored the Obama era guidelines.

 

[Meadmaker]

Here's the actual executive order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...sis-of-gender-identity-or-sexual-orientation/

As an exercise for the reader, compare the actual contents of the order with the contents as described in the previously linked article to The Advocate.


ETA: Or, compare the actual executive order to what the New York Times has to say about it:

Another executive order reinforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to require that the federal government does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, a policy that reverses action by Mr. Trump’s administration.

 

[theprestige]

Here's the actual executive order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...sis-of-gender-identity-or-sexual-orientation/

As an exercise for the reader, compare the actual contents of the order with the contents as described in the previously linked article to The Advocate.


ETA: Or, compare the actual executive order to what the New York Times has to say about it:

I haven't compared it to the executive order, but the NYT is wrong about Title VII requiring "that the federal government does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity". Sex is mentioned as a criteria. Sexual orientation and gender identity are not:

https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964

But now that I'm reading Title VII, it seems that any school that maintains separate men's and women's sports teams, dormitories, and restrooms must be ineligible for federal funding. They must also not comply with Title IX requirements to create and maintain separate teams for women's sports.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I haven't compared it to the executive order, but the NYT is wrong about Title VII requiring "that the federal government does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity". Sex is mentioned as a criteria. Sexual orientation and gender identity are not:

https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964

But now that I'm reading Title VII, it seems that any school that maintains separate men's and women's sports teams, dormitories, and restrooms must be ineligible for federal funding. They must also not comply with Title IX requirements to create and maintain separate teams for women's sports.

Title VII has been interpreted by the SCOTUS to cover sexual orientation and gender identity in Bostock v Clayton County.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bostock_v._Clayton_County

 

[Emily's Cat]

I wouldn't assume that this person's characterization is correct. TERFs love hyperbolic doomsaying in response to every tiny bit of dignity afforded to trans people.

I suppose guidance should be coming shortly from whatever admin is in charge of the respective departments impacted by this (Labor, education, etc).

You could, you know, read the link provided in that tweet... which happens to be the actual executive order.

The SECOND sentence is:

Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports.

Further down there's this bit:

Discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation manifests differently for different individuals, and it often overlaps with other forms of prohibited discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of race or disability. For example, transgender Black Americans face unconscionably high levels of workplace discrimination, homelessness, and violence, including fatal violence.

I find it interesting that it conveniently fails to mention discrimination on the basis of ACTUAL REAL BIOLOGICAL SEX in there.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You could, you know, read the link provided in that tweet... which happens to be the actual executive order.

The SECOND sentence is:


Further down there's this bit:

I find it interesting that it conveniently fails to mention discrimination on the basis of ACTUAL REAL BIOLOGICAL SEX in there.

Cool story.

How exactly the departments shape policy based on this order remains to be seen. Details matter, and how exactly trans inclusion and nondiscrimination policy will be enforced is an open question.

Sounds like they're leaning towards a policy that treats trans children with dignity and respect. Sorry for your loss.

It is my sincere hope that the transphobes rending their garments today are, in fact, correct. If they oppose it, it's probably good policy.