The anti-gay right’s new target: Transgender kids

Most of us who’ve been involved in the fight for gay marriage equality are familiar with the National Organization for Marriage (sic).

Founded in 2007 by Maggie Gallagher and Brian S. Brown, their first attempt to deny civil rights to LGBT Americans was for a Massachusetts constitutional amendment to stop and ban gay marriage in that state. Same sex marriage in Massachusetts had been legal for several years by then. The attempt failed, thankfully.

But that didn’t stop them. In state after state, they’ve fought either to pass gay marriage bans or to rescind marriage rights already granted. In fact, in California in 2008, they spent $1.8m to help pass Prop 8, and lobbied intensively ever since then to keep it from being overturned by the courts.

Maggie Gallagher of NOM, speaking at the Cato Institute

Maggie Gallagher of NOM, speaking at the Cato Institute

Time after time, NOM’s leaders and spokes-haters claim all they care about is marriage, and keeping marriage limited to heterosexuals. However, they’ve been accused on numerous occasions of simply being an anti-gay hate group, pure and simple, and even were identified as such by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2010.

This past summer, California passed an education bill, the School Success and Opportunity Act (SSOA)

(M)aking it clear that California public schools have a responsibility to ensure that all of their students—regardless of their gender identity—can access school-based resources. While several of California’s largest school districts had already adopted gender-inclusive policies prior to the bill’s passage, many of the state’s nearly 1,000 school districts unfairly separated transgender students from their peers or required them to enroll in and attend classes that conflicted with their gender identity. The SSOA clarifies the state’s existing nondiscrimination law and protects some of the most vulnerable members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, or LGBT, community.

Guess who has decided this must not be allowed to stand? Why, the National Organization for Marriage, of course!

// //


An effort to overturn a new law allowing transgender students to choose which school restrooms they use and whether to play boys or girls sports got a boost Friday when a major player in the passage of California’s now-defunct same-sex marriage ban threw its support behind the campaign.

The National Organization for Marriage announced it was working with another conservative group, the Capitol Resource Institute, to repeal the law at the ballot box. The marriage group provided early fundraising and organizing for the 2008 ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriages, known as Proposition 8.

Last I checked, you could not possibly get further away from the idea of “marriage” — nor offer more proof of being nothing more or less than an anti-LGBT hate group. I mean, really — what’s the harm in letting a kid use a restroom appropriate to his or her presented gender? Or, for example, ensuring that a transgender boy or girl has a chance to compete on sports teams with the rest of the boys or girls?

I mean, really, the one thing opposition to gay marriage equality rights and seeking to overturn a transgender rights law have in common is obvious: Animus for LGBT folks, period.

Published professional writer and poet, Becca had a three decade career in technical writing and consulting before selling off most of her possessions in 2006 to go live at an ashram in India for 3 years. She loves literature (especially science fiction), technology and science, progressive politics, cool electronic gadgets, and perfecting Hatch green chile recipes. Fortunately for this last, Becca and her wife currently live in New Mexico. @BeccaMorn

Share This Post

70 Responses to “The anti-gay right’s new target: Transgender kids”

  1. Toni says:

    Unfortunately, neroden, the fact is that your argument is garbage. If I really followed my biology research through (rather than, say, going the argumentum ad hominem route) I’d have come to a similar conclusion: no absolute definition of biological sex. Unfortunately for you, qualitative and quantitative analysis indicate that sex segregation may or may not be completely arbitrary due to (wait for it) sex characteristics. Segregation (as in football in PE for boys and yoga in PE for girls): arbitrary. Segregation (as in males vs. females in professional sports): not arbitrary. This is the reason for Title IX, as only having one ballpark, one league, one sport means that people with testosterone eclipse people without testosterone

    The latter of the above examples is sexism in name only, because there is a valid justification but it gets glossed over as generalization between men and women.

    Really…? It sounds like you just described modern bathrooms, except that stalls are more cost efficient than completely separate rooms. This is why I am not averse to people occasionally breaking the safety guideline. As there are individual locking stalls, I don’t care if a noticeably trans person uses either facilities, or if a drag performer or genderqueer person uses either facilities, or even if anyone decides to use the opposite bathroom to avoid a long line. The separation is a social norm for comfort and safety purposes. But by all means, break it if you have a good reason.

    Your method for sports would automatically see men predominant in the upper ability classes and/or height classes (see point about one ballpark, etc.).

    Or, for the many things in which sex matters, just be open minded about the exceptions and actually analyze the potential inequities, consequences, motives, etc….

  2. Toni says:

    Not really, because all you did was change the metric for the percentage, i.e. me saying that human sex steroids affect male or female gene expression in 45/46 (97.83%) of chromosomes holds true provided that there is at least one gene on each chromosome that differentiates between the two slightly modified cholesterol molecules.

    We can go from percentage chromosomes down to percentage relevant genes, but it doesn’t distract from the overall point…

  3. Arawra says:

    Because “bogus crap.” That is a highly intellectual and valid reason. You should publish that.

    17% difference, with an 83% match. NO WAY is that a correlation.

    “But men and women don’t always fit neatly into their respective groups. A
    University of Cambridge study found that 17% of men have a ‘female’
    empathising brain and 17% of women have a ‘male’ systemising brain”

  4. neroden says:

    I don’t change in public. I never did, not for the entire time I went to gym classes.

  5. neroden says:

    Unfortunately, Toni, the fact is that sex segregation is garbage. If you really followed your biology research through, rather than putting on blinders, you’d find that there is no solid definition of biological “sex”. Which means, no method of sex segregation which isn’t completely arbitrary.

    We segregate by sex due to sexism. Period.

    If we cared about safety, we would provide a very different system. One with private, one-person, lockable bathrooms, for instance. This is, in fact, the new trend in more recently-constructed retail stores.

    For sports, we would segregate by ability class, such as is done with weight classes in wrestling and boxing. (Basketball should have height classes.)

    For things where “sex” really matters, pay attention to what *specifically* matters. As in, “people who can get pregnant need to worry about getting pregnant”.

  6. neroden says:

    Actually, you have your chemical biology badly wrong. The majority of genes on the majority of chromosomes express *exactly the same way* when affected by testosterone, estrone, estriol, estradiol, or any of the other sex hormones: and those hormones are *interconverted* in a number of the important systems.

    In very fundamental ways, testosterone and estrogen are *the same*.

    Only a small number of genes care which they recieve.

  7. neroden says:

    A hell of a lot of boys who are straight and cis are targets of violent attacks by other boys. Vulnerable population which nobody is bothering to protect. Shared locker rooms and shared bathrooms suck.

  8. neroden says:

    There’s no meaningful link between “sex” and brain function. Every study which has claimed to find such a link has been bogus crap, and I’ve read a lot of them. There’s no meaningful link to brain structure, either (same reason).

    One of the core problems with people who read these bogus studies is a failure to understand statistics. It is common for there to be some small difference in these brain-related studies between the “average man” and the “average women”. However, the difference *among different men* on any given measurement is practically always much larger than the difference between the “average man” and the “average women”. Similarly, the difference *among different women* on any given measurement is practically always much larger than the difference between the “average man” and the “average women”.

    As a result, it NEVER EVER makes ANY sense to discriminate on the basis of sex when it comes to mental “differences”. If you do, almost half of the people assigned to the “girls” class would have been better off in the “boys” class, and almost half of the people assigned to the “boys” class would have been better off in the “girls” class, and that’s a *best case scenario*.

  9. neroden says:

    This isn’t really a surprise, is it?

    The core philosophy of these bigots is “Men and women are fundamentally different, and men should do one list of things (men’s things), and women should do a completely different list of things (women’s things), and everyone has to be assigned a role as male or female, and nobody gets to choose.”

    This is deeply, deeply wrong. But this is where the bigots coming from. Anyone who disagrees with their Stepford version of gender conformity is a threat to their image of the world and they will lash out.

  10. Noah says:

    Where there’s people that would like to commit sexual assaults, we’re all vulnerable. Being trans doesn’t make the cis population suddenly more vulnerable, we aren’t going to go and rape everyone because our bodies aren’t built the same way. I’m a transguy in highschool, and I don’t pass all the time. Do I still use the mens bathroom at school? Hell yes I do. Why? Because I’m a man, regardless of my biological sex. I may not be on hormones, nor have SRS, but that does not make me any less of a man. Not all trans people want to take hormones, have SRS or can afford either. I don’t know what you think everyone does in the bathroom, but I use it wash my hands and leave.

    People like you are why trans teens have the highest suicide rate as a minority, high school is bad enough without being able to use the bathroom from being assumed as a pervert.

  11. Kim says:

    As someone who was severely bullied in high school- I refused to change my clothes in gym. Why because even though there were individual stalls, it was with a shower curtain. I couldn’t be guaranteed of any safety!

    Furthermore, for sports teams, my school would send the opposing team into the “other” locker room to change. Which meant if it was a boys team the opposing team used the female locker room and vice versa.

    Here’s the problem with any student being bullied/harassed in high school (whether for being trans, poor, or who cares what the excuse is), the way that gym locker rooms are designed- they are traps for students who are vulnerable. I’ve seen bathrooms that weren’t much better.

    Middle and High School can be a pretty scary place for someone who is an outcast. The safety and security for *all* students should be paramount! A lot of schools cannot offer protection to students who are vulnerable. Public schools often have to deal with 30 students in a classrooms to 1 teacher. That one teacher will miss things that can be happening in a classroom and it is a shame but a truth. Smaller classroom size will help students to feel more welcomed and accepted (because you can build effective mini communities which stop bullying) and here’s a shocker actual learning can take place. Here’s another thing to think of with those mini communities, they will help all students become accepted beyond the small classroom.

  12. Toni says:

    Yep. Kes is proudly transphobic, and it only becomes more and more obvious as we see her objecting to every facet of trans female anatomy. After having the vulva and vagina explained in detail, “NO! SRS only APPROXIMATES a vagina.” Funny because vaginas come in all shapes and sizes and we can see trans women’s vaginas right along side cis women’s vaginas on such feminist projects as The Great Wall of Vaginas — and they fit right right in.

  13. Arawra says:

    After reading the first article, it is simply discouraging using different teaching methods due to male and female brains being very similar. However similar they are, there are still differences which are attributed to different physical structure, as provided in the second video. Whether the differences are strong enough to merit different teaching techniques I believe will be more heavily influenced based on what type of learner the person is (visual, auditory, or kinesthetic, reading-writing).

    In the second video, when Professor Joel says that the sex of the person with the brain is meaningless due to neuroplasticity (the changing physical characteristics of the brain), she doesn’t fully cover why that change is meaningless. She implies it is due to the changing shape of the brain without taking into consideration the dormant state and active state of the brain, or how the environment further contributes to the brains natural state. She leaves more questions than she answers, and while it may be correct, she still doesn’t evaluate the changes on a male’s or female’s brain and what happens post-event to each.

    She has her theory, but still lacks evidence where as brain scans today do have correlation between sex and brain structure.

  14. UncleBucky says:

    Why don’t these bigots mind their own business? Dammit.

  15. Sami Hawkins says:

    “You seem to think I’m ignorant of the trans community. I’m not. I’ve agitated on behalf of trans causes, read things from Whipping Girl to popular trans blogs to unpopular ones, helped two of my friends through transition including working on their documentation for one of them to get her name changed, and I’m engaging with you right now. Maybe you should do the same with respect to sexism against female people. Educate yourself.”

    ‘I’m not bigoted against _____s! I have tons of _____ friends who see nothing wrong with me supporting discrimination against them.’

    Gee, never heard that one before.

  16. Toni Huttman says:

    An explanation of terms may help you:

    Qualitative; Does it qualify for the situation at hand? Does a given trans person qualify to play a given sport? In K-8, always. In 9-12, probably. In collegiate, if they meet certain criteria. In professional, if they meet certain stricter criteria. Does a given trans person qualify to use a given bathroom. Most often, yes, especially if they’ve undergone “appropriate clinical treatment” which is the qualifier for legal recognition of present sex. Is a 16 year old mature enough (qualified) to see an R-rated movie?

    Quantitative: Does it quantify as, or does the whole belong in a classification. Does a given trans person have mostly male sex characteristics or mostly female sex characteristics. If mostly male sex characteristics, then male. If mostly female characteristics, then female. How much blue and how much red resulted a particular blue-ish or red-ish or deep shade of purple, in ml volume?

    All dichotomies are false dichotomies (even male and female). The sooner you learn this, the better off you’ll be in every stance you take on an issue.

  17. Toni Huttman says:

    Exactly Ms. Misdirection. The policies don’t protect transgender people, they protect people on the basis of gender identity. You’re arguing that since a) all people of gender identity opposite their assigned sex are transgender, then b) all transgender people have gender identity opposite their assigned sex. False. The fact that all squares are rectangles does not make all rectangles squares. In other words, there has to a case for gender identity, specifically.

    No, gender identity refers to internal sense of self, which is not merely a feeling, but a persistent and verifiable identity. How can it be verified? Counseling, therapy, lived experience, medical records, etc.

    When I mean to say children, I say children. When I mean to say adolescents, I say adolescents. Children are not frequently murderers and rapists. As for adolescents, perhaps I should rephrase? Adolescents do not frequently identify as the opposite sex and jump through all of the hoops necessary hoops to do so in order to victimize the opposite sex. In fact, there’s never been a case of it, ever.

    I call both men and women sweetheart. It’s not sexism, sweetheart. It’s equal opportunity condescension. ;)

  18. Toni Huttman says:

    Fallacy of dismissed evidence, but what more can I expect from a blind ideologue. The fact of the matter is that we can indeed measure difference between average male brains and average female brains. And we can clearly see through nuclear magnetic resonance imaging and dissection that the brains of trans men frequently fall more on the male ends of the spectra and that the brains of trans women fall more on the female ends of the spectral This IS NOT sexist because it DOES NOT support any notion that one must be a certain kind of man or women, or do certain things as a man or a woman, only that one is a man or a woman. This is reasonable, too, because trans people exist across culture and time, regardless of the gender stereotypes of the day.

    No, the problem here is that you don’t follow medical science, and you hold a narrow-minded view of biology. Do you even know what it means when I say “Sex is to be determined by a holistic observation of sex characteristics. And that whereas the majority of biological sex characteristics can be changed, biological sex can be changed, because an individual can be both qualified and quantified as their present sex.” You keep trying to draw lines in the sand based on single characteristics — it’s kind of amusing, really.

    Ex] No, gonads alone do not determine sex because there exist males lacking testicles and females lacking ovaries. No, chromosomes alone do not determine sex because there exist naturally XX men and naturally XY women.

    No, what really determines sex is a HOLISTIC biological observation of ALL sex characteristics. From endocrinology to histology to neurobiology. From the curvature of the ocular lenses to the vaginal mucosa. It’s called inductive reasoning. You should look it up some time. :)

  19. Toni Huttman says:

    No, it is not, because given that all of these things are already illegal, it falls upon whether or not you can justify a given measure of harm prevention. You CAN justify segregating men and women. You CAN NOT justify segregating cisgender women and transgender women.

    Sorry, but I get my facts from human anatomy and physiology, and scholarly articles, and lectures by (let’s say) Ben Barre professor of neurobiology at Harvard University, and biochemistry, and from organizations like the American Psychological Association, American Medical Association, etc. You’ve none of that: no facts, no logic, no sources. Just blind ideology.

    Your question is silly. Lacking a uterus is just one medical problem by which women don’t menstruate. Part of the medical problem implicit for trans Females is that they don’t have a uterus. Again, the fact of the matter is that you can’t draw a biological line between cisgender Females and transgender Females without invalidating the womanhood of other women with atypical conditions.

  20. Toni Huttman says:

    No, you have not. You have fear-mongered about the bathroom use of a minority group like so many other bigots before you.

    Oh dear… I’m afraid it’s us saying something uncontroversial. Uncontroversial to the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American College of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the World Health Organization, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, and to Federal and State governments. Biological SEX characteristics can be changed, therefore biological SEX can be changed, FACT. You mean in exchange for being bigoted and ignorant and resorting to fallacies of misrepresentation and fear-mongering. Want to know why no one is interested in how this will turn out for other Females? Because we ALREADY KNOW how this will turn out for other Females: the SAME WAY it turned out in the LA Unified School District, the SAME WAY it turned out in the San Francisco School District, the SAME WAY it turned out in Heuston, Texas: Trans children included and protected, ZERO incidences of trans on cis crime.

    EVERYONE’S interests can be met by going to a bathroom, doing your business, and washing your hands. Pretty simple. And most cis women actually have no interest in keeping trans women out of the bathroom. Why? Because it doesn’t even register, because most trans women do their best to blend in and not cause a disturbance. It’s only after blind ideologues like you begin fear-mongering that trans people become something less than human, something different and scary.

    Actually, the vast majority of people can recognize and respect medical science. Bigotry is on it’s way out and it doesn’t need me to show it the door, mmkay?

    Oh, I’ve been a strong supporter of many a Feminist cause, but NO you are factually wrong: Gender Identity protections ARE NOT sexist. They’re bi-lateral affording legal protection to both trans males and trans females, and you’ve absolutely no evidence that trans women are a threat to you. What you’ve got is fallacy of misrepresentation; fear mongering on the basis that trans women are (in your narrow-minded view) male.

    Sorry, but I prefer qualitative and quantitative analysis, by which trans men are most often Male and trans women are most often Female. Facts, logic: Get educated.

  21. Kes says:

    Your logic is recursive. You said above that we have spaces set aside for “women and/or females” because that group is vulnerable to attack. But now you’re saying that females (and by this I mean people actually are female sexed) shouldn’t worry about being attacked because these things are already crimes. So….?

    You’re making your facts up to suit your case. I’m pretty sure most people who aren’t strongly seeped in your extremist form of transactivism will read your comments about how sex is determined by minute and poorly understood aspects of brain chemistry over undefined overlapping ranges, and is irrelevant, and “is informed by” internal feelings, will probably laugh at you.

    Tell me, how is it that some people are, absent certain medical problems, going to menstruate and others aren’t? How do we determine who, absent certain medical problems, is able to become pregnant and who isn’t? Is it a mystery? I’m really wondering what word you would use to define such people. Do they exist as a discernible class? Or do you just say “people who may, absent certain medical problems, menstruate”?

    EDIT: And if you acknowledge that these trans girls don’t have to be on HRT, why do you say it’s unproblematic for them to be on sports teams with female students? If that’s your position – that sex is irrelevant – then we should desegregate all sports teams. Again, while there’s a reason to distinguish on the basis of sex, there’s no justifiable basis for discriminating on the basis of gender identity. So get rid of “girls” teams and “boys” teams altogether.

  22. Kes says:

    What? My definition was basically straight from the APA:

    “Transgender is an umbrella term for persons whose gender identity,
    gender expression, or behavior does not conform to that typically
    associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth. Gender
    identity refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female, or
    something else”

    Actually, the definition I gave was probably even MORE restrictive, as it didn’t include “deviant” gender expression or behavior as possible ways someone could be transgendered. Yes, gender identity refers to internal feelings.

    Children are not frequently rapists? What on earth are you talking about. Teenagers under the age of 18 are FREQUENTLY brought up on charges of rape and sexual assault.

    And no, I don’t think people have a “right to their own identity.” That doesn’t even mean anything.

    Calling me “sweetheart” is really cute, by the way. It’s very sad how you’re using tactics designed to disparage and demean in a sexist way while we’re having this discussion.

  23. Toni Huttman says:

    Get a clue: Gender Identity protections DO NOT nullify existing laws against sexual harassment, sexual assault, assault, rape, murder, etc. and you’re likelihood of being attacked by a trans Female is currently at zero percent (cities, states, etc. with similar policies reporting zero incidences of criminal bathroom use), far less than that of any trans people using any bathroom.

    Sorry, but yes, yes and yes. You can dismiss law, medicine and science until you’re blue in the face, but it won’t change the facts.

    Yes, and California law does not require HRT because we’re talking about CHILDREN. But, just for your information, having a gender identity contrary to one’s birth sex is followed by HRT. Deny facts all you like, but you just come off as a blind ideologue.

  24. Kes says:

    Your links don’t really demonstrate what you claim they’re demonstrating. They’re weak. They don’t take into account brain plasticity. They’re talking about wide ranges. They’re assuming long-standing sex differentiation which hasn’t been reliably measured. And they’re working with minute brain differences in arenas where we aren’t really sure what functions are even being performed. I know people really want to find “the link” between sex and gender identity, but this doesn’t do it by a long shot. This is the contemporary equivalent of measuring skull sizes to demonstrate racial differences. What you disparage as “a YouTube” video, by the way, was a link to a TED talk discussing the problems with the kinds of studies on which your position depends.

    The problem here is that you’re an ideologue. You WANT biological sex to be irrelevant, so you’re twisting and contorting to try to make it be that way. It’s actually kind of amusing, really – you’re saying that reproductive gonads don’t determine sex, sex chromosomes don’t determine sex, that these things are irrelevant. No, what REALLY determines sex is where one falls within overlapping ranges of neuron numbers in one’s nimbic nucleus.

  25. Toni Huttman says:

    Transgender is an umbrella term, sweetheart. A better inquisitive statement would be “Define Gender Identity.” because THAT is the basis of protection in policies.

    In logic, we call this a fallacy of misrepresentation and red herring. You are misrepresenting “gender identity” and applying it to all transgender people. For actual definitions on gender identity, see the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American College of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the World Health Organization, or the World Professional Organization for Transgender Health. The term is fairly well-defined, and is not as simple as a “feeling.” As for who gender identity protects, that would be Male-identified trans people, Female-identified trans people, and queer people.

    I can, because the California law recognizes that CHILDREN ARE NOT frequent murderers and rapists. Ergo, a trans girl who has been living as a girl for some time and who is presented as a girl by her parents will be accepted as a girl, even if her parents haven’t taken particular steps at THEIR discretion because of THEIR circumstances, which YOU and I cannot possibly know.

    Finally, stop living in willful ignorance of law, medicine and science. Both are true, and you’re incredibly hypocritical and misogynist (defining/denying women their right to their own identity because they aren’t woman-enough for you. Sound like patriarchy?) and transphobic (afraid of and fear-mongering about trans people).

  26. Toni Huttman says:

    There’s more to biology than chromosomes, oh narrow-minded one. In fact, there exists NO biological line to be drawn in the sand to invalidate trans women that won’t also invalidate the womanhood of a number of atypical cis women. Oh, an Australian ABC article and a YouTube video. How cute…

    Behold! Sholarly articles… Read.

    Saying that Sex Reassignment Surgery creates a clitoris and a vagina is “patently absurd” TO YOU, a blind, uneducated ideologue. Those of us with a little background in human anatomy and physiology know that male and female genital tissues are homologous, and that the tip of a penis is in fact a clitoris to begin with and remains a clitoris (glans clitoris) after differentiation in utero. You can deny the facts all you want, it won’t make them any less true.

    Oh dear… Did I invoke only segregation? No, selective reader, I invoked FOUR incidences of tired, old bathroom fear-mongers: for racial segregation (by racists), against housing, employment and public accommodations for gays and lesbians (by homophobes), against military service for gays and lesbians (by homophobes) and against housing, employment and public accommodations for trans people (by transphobes). Sorry, but like it or not, we aren’t talking about Male people. We’re talking about legally, medically, psychologically Female people. You can call them males all you like, but you’re factually WRONG.

    We segregate by sex for the safety of women and/or females, ALL women and/or Females. Get educated.

  27. Kes says:

    Again, we’re talking about hormone blockers being provided to children to prevent puberty; nobody practicing ethical medicine uses an “informed consent” model with children. A trans girl would need to be given these at a young age if she was not going to have physical strength, height, and reach benefits of her male sex. It’s not common for children to receive hormone blockers. Indeed, while the numbers are growing, it isn’t common for clinically significant gender dysphoria to even be diagnosed when somebody is a child, as children who are -not- trans often display many of the same criteria. One of the major criticisms of the DSM-V’s definition among doctors (including those who treat trans patients) is the number of non-trans
    patients who meet the diagnostic criteria and may be given inappropriate
    treatment as a result. Some doctors adamantly refuse to give hormone blockers to children under the age of 16 who fit the diagnostic criteria, because many children who meet the criteria end up being perfectly well adjusted lesbians and gay men. Since there’s a concern that hormone blockers taken for an extended period can result in sterility, it’s understandable why some people are cautious (perhaps overly so). For these reasons, it can be difficult in a lot of areas for children who have sex dysphoria to get blockers.

    And again, stop posting the “brain sex” canard. I’ve posted some links in a response to somebody else, one of which discusses in part the study you’ve linked above. Brains are plastic, and we don’t know how hormones affect them. We don’t know what most areas of the brains do. Taking scans of men, trans women, and female women, and comparing certain regions, does not demonstrate ether immutable sex difference OR a brain-use or brain-chemistry basis for sex dysphoria. You can’t scan somebody’s brain and determine their sex, and you can’t scan their brain and tell if they’re trans.

  28. Kes says:

    Okay, let’s start here. Define what it means to be transgendered.

    You keep talking about people who have undergone HRT, SRS, etc. Under MOST definitions of people who are transgendered, there is no requirement for that kind of thing whatsoever. You only need to “feel” you should be identified with another gender in order to qualify under the standard definition. A number of people fit this definition who in their day-to-day lives “live as” members of the gender considered in accordance with their sex.

    And can you please relate this back to the California law? Because that law doesn’t require that the children be considered “legally” female.

    Finally, stop saying that there is such a thing as being “psychologically” female, or that surgery can make some “medically” male or female. Neither is true, and the former is incredibly misogynistic. Please consider the implications of your statements.

  29. Kes says:

    I think it really says something that I have been responsive to every argument, polite, respectful, and not made assumptions or nasty comments towards anybody. I’ve pointed out legitimate ways this legislation will unintentionally harm female people, and I’ve proposed compromise solutions.

    In exchange for saying something as uncontroversial (to scientists, to medical doctors, to every person not seeped in certain niche segments of a vocal minority of the trans community) as the fact that biological sex exists and cannot be “changed” (merely ones appearance altered)…. In exchange for saying something as uncontroversial as “males commit disproportionate number of sexual attacks against all targets, females are one of the groups at disproportionate risk for these attacks, females are uniquely vulnerable in that females are the only population which can face forcible pregnancy,” I’m called a “bigot.” What’s the word for somebody that hand-waves away any concern for the well-being of female students? I mean really, nobody’s even responded other than to say I’m a bigot for bringing it up, hand-waved all of it away as “debunked,” or made irrelevant comments or hypotheticals like “well if that girl had been on hormone blockers since she was 10….” Seriously, nobody has expressed ANY interest in asking how this will play out for female girls.

    I am asking how EVERYBODY’S interests can be met, and you and your cohort are essentially saying that in this case females have NO legitimate interests whatsoever.

    And a TERF? I looked this one up. You know, the vast majority of people are aware that biological sex is a real thing. I guess they’re “radical feminists” now? Somebody should call up Catharine MacKinnon and tell her they’ve won.

    You seem to think I’m ignorant of the trans community. I’m not. I’ve agitated on behalf of trans causes, read things from Whipping Girl to popular trans blogs to unpopular ones, helped two of my friends through transition including working on their documentation for one of them to get her name changed, and I’m engaging with you right now. Maybe you should do the same with respect to sexism against female people. Educate yourself.

  30. Kes says:

    I’m not talking about people getting frightened by seeing other people’s genitals. I’m talking about being in a private space, partially naked, in areas without security or cameras, and being vulnerable to attack. People are attacked in bathrooms. Trans women are attacked in bathrooms by men. Heck, that’s often why they want to use the women’s room, not just because using a bathroom with a pink door rather than a blue door makes them feel batter. Attacks in bathrooms are a thing.

    Being “legally” female doesn’t mean anything. That’s totally irrelevant. And “psychologically” female? That’s laughably sexist. “Medically” female? No.

    Finally, do you understand that we are talking about a specific California law? That the California law does not require HRT? Did you not read where I said that if the trans girl had been on hormone replacement therapy for a “period of time” then that’d be a different matter? Attack your strawman all you like, but you’re not responding to any of my points.

  31. Arawra says:

    First and most important, there are standards for constituting what determines Gender Dysphoria, formerly Gender Identity Disorder. The standards date back to the DSM-II and DSM-III, while continuing to be addressed in the DSM-V. There is biological evidence for Gender Dysphoria as well, see below.

    As others have said, access to HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) is available, and there is not a fight for it. If you’re referring to the “Gatekeeper System,” its being phased out and many practitioners are using the more common informed consent model. Hormones are also available without a prescription, albeit maybe not 100% legal.

    Hormones do affect muscle systems, and in some patients as early as 6 months. Data is limited as patients and studies are.

    Screening for Gender Dysphoria (DSM-V) may become more common. As brains of those affected with GD are of the same structure as the gender in which the patient identifies with, their brains can be scanned to see exactly how GD manifests itself.

    Team discrimination due to transpeople will be virtually non-existant, as the prevalence may be as low as 1:2000. In my school, there are only two known people who identify as trans in a population slightly above 2000, with a three-year educational difference between them.

  32. Kes says:

    No, identity doesn’t “inform” your biological sex. And no, there are really no consistent and appreciable differences between “male” and “female” brains, sexist propaganda notwithstanding. Here are a couple of explanations readily accessible to lay folk on how the “brain sex” myth is incorrect.

    Frankly, saying that what SRS creates is a “clitoris” and a “vagina” which is equivalent to those female organs is incredibly offensive and patently absurd. It APPROXIMATES those things to the point where, with modern surgery, a person can pass in most sexual situations. They aren’t by any stretch the same thing, though. Saying so doesn’t make it so.

    Comparing the situation to that of segregation against non-whites is absurd. Whites have never been an oppressed group, whites were not being targeted for systemic and systematic violence by non-whites. Yet females have been and continue to be an oppressed group, and females are at disproportionate, systemic, and systematic violence by male people.

    If there is no point to segregating by sex in this contexts, okay. Let’s just have open-use bathrooms, open use shower areas, open use locker rooms. Let everybody use the same facility. Why segregate based on gender identity at all?

  33. Toni Huttman says:

    No. If your interest is in discrimination, then it will not be met. You continue to claim that cisgender Females are vulnerable to transgender Females. Please prove it.

    Otherwise, yes we will continue treating legally, medically and psychologically Female trans women like they are sexed Female… because they are sexed Female… by law, medicine and psychology in accordance with their majority Female sex characteristics.

  34. Toni Huttman says:

    For starters, STALLS. Bathrooms, fitting rooms and locker rooms generally have STALLS. That mean’s you don’t get to see another person’s genitalia, unless YOU are the pervert peeking around the curtains or over the stalls. Or do you want to make a baseless assertion that all or most trans people brazenly strut their genitalia around to intentionally cause a disturbance?

    By rolling out the bathroom issue, you ARE making a historic pearl-clutch. This issue was brought out by bigots against desegregation, bigots against protections for sexual orientation, bigots against ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and now bigots against protections for gender identity. It’s old and it’s tired and it’s been a historically proven failure.

    Again, we’re not talking about male people. We’re talking about legally, medically, psychologically Female people. Additionally, in the event that a trans woman attacks another Female, she can’t get her pregnant. Did you perhaps willingly omit the fact that trans people (both men and women) on HRT (HRT being a minimum for legal recognition by DMV or Department of State) or who’ve had their ovaries/testicles removed are infertile? Apples and apples, you intellectually dishonest fear-monger. Fact: cis people ATTACK trans people far more than trans people attack anyone.

    Here’s a comment on sports: the NCAA, WTA, PGA, WPGA, IOC, ABC and other competitive ethics organizations have consistently ruled that after a period of hormone replacement theory, there is NO significant advantage or disadvantage to being transgender. That’s in professional sports. I don’t think we need to be freaking out girls on GnRH antagonists or androgen blockers at school, mmkay?

  35. Toni Huttman says:

    Kes, do you not understand that identity informs your legal and medical SEX? And no, SEX is TYPICALLY determined by chromosomes which determine genitals which determine hormones, which determine all meaningful difference between the sexes for day-to-day function. I’ll present the list for trans girls again, just in case you missed it last time. In fact, I have a mind to copy/paste it all over the page to counter the bigotry and ignorance you proliferate:

    amygdala, thalamus, hypothalamus, bed nucleus of stria terminalis, INAH
    nuclei, overall brain shape, overall brain size, integumentary texture,
    integumentary thickness, apocrine and exocrine glandular activity, body
    odor, vellus body hair, pubic hair (triangular), breasts (nipples,
    areolae, glands of Mongomery, mammary glands), muscle to fat ratios,
    muscle propensity, adipose tissue distribution, libido, metabolism, hot
    and cold tolerance, pain tolerance and bladder size; and in combination
    with sex reassignment surgery, homologous: vulva (mon veneris, clitoral
    column, clitoral hood, clitoris, clitoral frenulum, labia minora, labia
    majora, upper and lower vestibule), and a vagina (complete with
    stratified squamous epithelial vaginal mucosa by way of metaplasia, and
    glycogen-rich excretions which feed lactobacillus which releases lactic
    acid which raises vaginal pH which accommodates for infection by other
    benign acid-loving bacteria which serves as the vagina’s natural defense
    against malign infection)

    Here, we have ACTUAL sex differences which place trans women and trans girls squarely in the FEMALE sex classification. I doubt you know any trans people or have any trans friends. If I were to meet you in person, you’d be on the “never ever a friend, and never to be forgiven for willful ignorance” list.

    No. You’re fear-mongering and hate-propagating against a vulnerable subgroup of Females and against a vulnerable subgroup of males. Here’s an idea: people get to define themselves and use the bathrooms based on BOTH gender AND sex, which are most appropriate for THEM.

    You have no more “right” to “feel comfortable” by discriminating against trans people than did white people had a “right” to “feel comfortable” by discriminating against people of color. What you do have rights to is a REASONABLE expectation of safety. As has been proven by the myriad of cities, counties, districts, states, companies, schools and universities who have instituted inclusive policies for trans people without incident, trans people do not constitute a threat to REASONABLE expectation of safety.

  36. Toni says:

    Oh dear… ignorance and transphobia are so annoying. The fact of the matter is that lipid-soluble human sex steroids readily diffuse across cell membranes affecting male and female gene switches and bringing about male or female gene expression in at least 45/46 (97.83%) of chromosomes in target cells located in every area of the body. For a trans girl, this means Female:

    amygdala, thalamus, hypothalamus, bed nucleus of stria terminalis, INAH nuclei, overall brain shape, overall brain size, integumentary texture, integumentary thickness, apocrine and exocrine glandular activity, body odor, vellus body hair, pubic hair (triangular), breasts (nipples, areolae, glands of Mongomery, mammary glands), muscle to fat ratios, muscle propensity, adipose tissue distribution, libido, metabolism, hot and cold tolerance, pain tolerance and bladder size; and in combination with sex reassignment surgery, homologous: vulva (mon veneris, clitoral column, clitoral hood, clitoris, clitoral frenulum, labia minora, labia majora, upper and lower vestibule), and a vagina (complete with stratified squamous epithelial vaginal mucosa by way of metaplasia, and glycogen-rich excretions which feed lactobacillus which releases lactic acid which raises vaginal pH which accommodates for infection by other benign acid-loving bacteria which serves as the vagina’s natural defense against malign infection)

    The above changes to her human sexual dimorphism make a trans girl qualitatively and quantitatively FEMALE. This is not controversial, if one is EDUCATED.

    And Kes, you’re the one asserting that children who are legally, medically, psychologically Female be endangered by using the men’s room because YOU claim that they are a dangerous threat to other women. YOUR claim, YOUR burden of proof.

    Also, yes there IS a great deal of overlap between male and female ability, and the averages ARE different. But we aren’t talking about “average males.” We’re talking about atypical Females. And contrary to your bigoted ideology, it is quite common for trans girls to be treated with either GnRH antagonist, spironolactone or cyperonone acetate (outside of the United States), resulting in LOWER testosterone levels than cisgender Females, because there is either no gonadal testosterone (as released in small amounts by the ovaries) or all androgens (both gonadal and adrenal) are competitively inhibited.

    You seem to be hell-bent on a NARROW and IGNORANT view of biological sex. This being the case, why not get an education? Why not read books? Why not read scholarly articles?

    As for your question. The answer is that SEX segregation is there to mitigate SEX differences — SEX differences which place trans girls (for all intents and purposes relevant to day-to-day life) in the FEMALE category, and trans boys (for all intents and purposes relevant to day-to-day life) in the MALE category. Now, take off, TERF. ;)

  37. Sami says:

    “That changed me a lot, playing with the boys. It lowered my self-esteem and made me feel like I was a boy all over again. I really just didn’t like that.”

    If Kes had their way Jazz would have been forced to play on the boys team. I think that adequately sums up why Kes is an awful person.

  38. Sami says:

    You’re a bigot who wants to out every single trans student in America because you aren’t comfortable with them.
    I wish their was an afterlife so you could spend it in the pit with Maggie Gallagher and Tony Perkins where you belong.

  39. Kes says:

    No, they weren’t cases of sexual abuse in prison. You misunderstood. These women were in jail ON CHARGES OF RAPE. They raped women BEFORE going to jail. That was why they were in jail, that was why the payments for their SRS were before the courts.

    You should have googled the cases I mentioned before hand-waving my post away out of hand.

  40. Kes says:

    Trans people are not the only vulnerable population. They are ONE. The question is how we can set this up so that everyone’s interests are met, without doing it at the expense of other vulnerable populations.

    Right now in a lot of places, trans girls have to go into the boys/men’s locker rooms and bathrooms, where they aren’t safe. That’s a problem, and it’s not acceptable.
    But saying, “Well, we’ll just treat trans girls as if they are sexed female in all respects,” creates problems for FEMALE students, another vulnerable population.

  41. Kes says:

    She only will have a body similar to a females if she’s been on hormone blockers for a -long- time, since around 12 or 13. You can’t start taking hormones when you’re 15 or 16 and avoid the effects of male maturation in puberty. You’re right that I should’ve been more clear in my original post.

    And that portion wasn’t talking about bathroom or locker usage, but sports teams. There, it’s very relevant.

  42. Badgerite says:

    The ‘trans’ people are the vulnerable population.

  43. Badgerite says:

    So the cases of sexual abuse you mention are in prison. I thought so. That would be highly unusual, wouldn’t it. Sexual abuse in prisons. Absolutely having to do with transgenders in the prison population. And nothing else. What a load of crap. I think my last comment stands. Peace. Out.

  44. Curtis says:

    To be fair, I live in a part of the US where trans-related care is readily available to those who pursue it and am remiss in forgetting that the rest of the country isn’t nearly up to speed. Still, your “even if she’s been taking hormones” hypothetical girl would, given her age, likely have taken blockers before and/or alongside hormones.

    And even if not, what’s the relevance here when we’re talking about bathroom/locker room usage? How do her height, reach, and muscle advantages come into play when she’s taking a piss or changing her clothes?

  45. Kes says:

    It is not “patently false.” Few doctors in the US give hormone blockers to children under the age of 16, and very few transgendered teenagers received them in a way that prevents “masculinization” as you describe it. In fact, the question of whether children can GET hormone blockers is one of the major fights right now for transactivists.
    This would probably be a very different discussion if hormone blockers were as common, or as consistently prescribed, as you claim. OR it would be different if the law required something like documented, ongoing medical treatment and hormone changes. But neither is true.

  46. Curtis says:

    “A 16-year-old trans girl is still male, and will still have height, reach, and muscle advantages over the majority of similarly aged female students, even if the trans girl has been taking hormones.”

    This is patently false. A trans child/teen would very likely be taking blockers to arrest puberty. The sex differentiation as you describe occurs as a result of puberty, and pre-pubescent boy and girl children are pretty evenly matched. A 16-year-old trans girl who’s on blockers would not have undergone male puberty or the masculinization that comes along with it.

    Double-check your developmental biology.

  47. Kes says:

    Badgerite, do you not understand the difference between gender and sex? Gender identity is an internal feeling that one is a “man” or a “woman” or something else. Sex, by contrast, is physical, and in 99%+ of the population is clear based on chromosomes and genitalia. The relatively few number of people who are intersex don’t change that biological sex is binary for the majority of the population (and issues of people who are intersex don’t really have THAT much to do with people who are transgendered). Concepts of “brain sex” have been thoroughly debunked. There is no such thing as a “male” brain or a “female” brain, and arguments to the contrary are regressive and sexist. Quoting Dr. Ruth, good gravy.

    While there’s a lot of sloppiness about this in language in the trans community, mostly to help people who are dealing with sex dysphoria and don’t like being reminded of their actual sex, at the end of the day biological sex is what it is. You can’t change your sex. You can only alter your physical appearance to approximate the stereotypical appearance of another sex.

    I know quite a bit about people who are transgendered and/or transsexual. Since you bring up the “I have a trans friend” thing (as if that’s an argument? sounds like “I know somebody who’s black”), yes, I have trans friends, too. Plural.

    Do you not know that a lot of people who are transGENDERED actually don’t have meaningful levels of sex dysphoria? That the amount of dysphoria people have with their primary and secondary sex characteristics is gradated, and may change through one’s life?

    I’m arguing on behalf of a very vulnerable population – females. This includes trans boys who, under this policy, will be expected to go into the “boys” (not “males”) locker room because the rooms will be GENDERED spaces rather than sex-segregated ones. I don’t know why people keep assuming I’m talking about the “girls” bathrooms and lockerrooms only; I guess nobody here but me has bothered to consider the idea of what happens to trans boys and men who don’t pass in lockerrooms with cis men.

    And for pointing out this very real, very concerning problem, I’m told I’m “not fit to breathe the same air.” Really. I know I’m going against the conventional wisdom here, by suggesting that sometimes sex does matter more than gender identity, but frankly I’m RIGHT.

    And you’ve never heard of Sherri Masbruch? Sandy Jo Battista? Michelle Kosilek? These were majorly publicized cases, watched in the trans community a number of years ago, because they tested whether trans women would be able to get SRS and hormones while in prison. All these individuals had sexually assaulted and/or raped female women. It’s one thing to say it’s not as common as right-wing nutjobs might make it out to be – I definitely think it’s a relatively small percentage of trans women who would do this kind of thing – but suggesting it has never happened is simply ludicrous. Similarly, it’s a relatively small population of males in general who are rapists, but I challenge anybody who thinks that females, or trans women, or gay men, aren’t reasonable when they’re afraid to be naked around males they don’t know or haven’t vetted.

    And if sex doesn’t matter, then why do anything on the basis of gender identity? Nobody can answer that. Gender identity is a meaningless way to separate out bathrooms, locker-rooms, sports teams, and so forth.

    And besides, what about students who are agendered? Have some third gender not listed? Are gender queer? What provisions will be made for them? And anyone suggesting this is a teeny, tiny, miniscule percentage of the population hasn’t had a lot of dealings with teenagers recently; the more awareness of being trans and/or gender queer has increased, the more people who identify that way.

  48. Kes says:

    I already suggested satisfactory arrangements – having all bathrooms be unisex, single-use and lockable; having all showers be single-use and lockable; having lockable changing rooms. This would protect ALL vulnerable populations – females whether trans or not, trans girls, lesbians and gays, kids who are disabled, or other minorities in the school who are subjected to targeted violence or hazing.

  49. samiinh says:

    And that’s what is all about. It’s a job. A well paying job.

  50. Badgerite says:

    If you don’t know that a transgender person only identifies with the gender that they feel they are and not with whatever anatomy they have then you don’t know any transgender people. What is it Dr. Ruth always said? The greatest sex organ is the brain. And frankly I have never heard of rapes or abuse perpetrated by anyone that was or is transgender. I think you are just raising the specter of this in order to have some argument against a law that is in reality a humane accommodation and nothing more. You want to somehow raise an issue of fear or unfairness where none really exists. I happen to know someone in that community and you are not fit to breathe the same air.

  51. Badgerite says:

    You make some good points, but really, the transgender population has to be even more of a minority than homosexual in terms of the percentage of overall population. We are not talking about a lot of people that have to be accommodated. I would think satisfactory arrangements could be made.

  52. karmanot says:

    Rolls eyes as troll drones on and on and on with immutable sophistry.

  53. karmanot says:

    Since you insist: ppppfffffttttt

  54. Guest says:

    Well, the haters are making 3x what I am as a teacher!!

  55. What is wrong with allowing the law to work out the bugs? I remember the first time in gym class when I went naked into a showerroom. I had to push myself to get comfortable. Any close contact will be a problem, so the answer is to conduct oneself maturely.

  56. crazymonkeylady says:

    NOM is for Bullies.

  57. benb says:

    According to NOM’s 2011 IRS 990, Maggy Gallagher pays herself $160K/year direct compensation and Brian Brown gets $230K/year.

    Hate: it’s a living.

  58. Naja pallida says:

    Maybe one left in the sun too long…

  59. BeccaM says:

    If you don’t think that there’s such a thing as biological sex which is
    an immutable characteristic, we probably shouldn’t bother having a
    conversation at all

    You’re right, we shouldn’t have this conversation. Good day to you.

  60. Kes says:

    Becca, you can’t be “once” male or be “still…anatomically” male. Male, female, and intersex are biological realities. Surgeries can change stereotyped sex appearances, but they can’t actually CHANGE one’s sex. This is not controversial, or it shouldn’t be. If you don’t think that there’s such a thing as biological sex which is an immutable characteristic, we probably shouldn’t bother having a conversation at all, as we obviously operate in two very different realities.

    I said repeatedly that the issue is one of arenas where SEX segregation is appropriate. Obviously, yes, that would involve trans boys being in the female restrooms, locker rooms, and whatnot. They are female. I should have thought that was obvious.

    And Becca, honestly, you’re the one supporting legislation in which female teenagers will be forced to share space with male teenagers regardless of whether the female teenagers feel safe or comfortable. I think the burden is on you to demonstrate the continued safety of female students in their school settings. But regardless, all you need to do is look at the number of late transitioners who have histories of sexual violence against female people and younger trans girls and trans women, something complained about in a lot of trans circles.

    “Girls and young women have proven repeatedly that it isn’t the lack of
    physical ability that keeps us from competing equally with boys in
    sports, since that seems to be your particular focus, but rather the
    prejudice of those who want to label us as less physically able and more

    There’s a great deal of overlap in potential between the sexes, but on average male teenagers will be taller, have longer reach, have stronger upper body musculature, and be faster than similarly aged female classmates. That is not a result of societal concepts of female fragility.

    While some female students are perfectly capable of competing on a field with predominately male students, MOST will not. That is part of why we have things like Title IX, so female students can have equal access to sports.

    You seem to be very hell-bent on the idea that biological sex isn’t a real thing, or is in any event not terribly relevant. If that’s the case, why not just get rid of all sex OR gender segregation whatsoever? Completely co-ed bathrooms and lockers, completely open-access sports teams? Why doesn’t the legislation push for that? Why do you support ANY form of segregation at all?

    If sex segregation isn’t there to mitigate for sex differences, but only to reflect “gender” differences based on some internal sensation of being “girl” or “boy,” why have it at all?

  61. BeccaM says:

    Essentially, my objection was you appeared to be buying into the single most common anti-T stereotype: That they’re not actually transgendered, that they’re hetero pervert males who are looking for cheap sexual thrills and possible rape opportunities.

    Do you have statistics for assaults supposedly committed by MtF transgendered women? If I were to say “they commit almost no sexual assaults”, would you believe me?

    A transgendered woman who goes into a women’s restroom is looking merely to use the restroom, that’s it.

    All I was suggesting is that transphobia is as irrational as is fear of lesbians, despite the fact a MtF transwoman is as likely to be uninterested sexually in women as any other woman. I honestly think you’re focusing exclusively on one particular scenario that bothers you personally. What about the alternative: Is a young transman teen supposed to use the girls restrooms and locker room, even though he’s sporting a beard? I notice that particular situation doesn’t enter your narrative at all. Just MtF. And an apparent belief they’re potential sexual predators simply because they were once male, or might still be anatomically.

    Girls and young women have proven repeatedly that it isn’t the lack of physical ability that keeps us from competing equally with boys in sports, since that seems to be your particular focus, but rather the prejudice of those who want to label us as less physically able and more ‘delicate.’

  62. Kes says:

    Becca, what exactly are you saying has been “debunked”? If simple accommodations can be made, what are they?

    I’m not making a “hairy male pervert in a dress” argument. Give me a break. This is a legitimate issue of concern to female people, and acting as if I’m making a histrionic pearl-clutch is bullshit.
    Male people in general commit well over 90% of sexual assaults against both males and females. The few statistics for trans women hew closer to those of other male-bodied people than for female-bodied people. Lesbians, on the other hand, commit practically no sexual assaults. Additionally, in the event a lesbian attacks another female, she cannot get her pregnant. Apples and oranges. This isn’t about who is attracted to whom, this is about who ATTACKS whom and what the risks are of those attacks.

    (And frankly, it’s not helping lesbian causes to act as if a woman should be equally afraid of a lesbian than she is of a male, regardless of his gender identity. Most women, regardless of whether we’re trans or not, know enough to be reasonably cautious being naked around males. All your argument suggests is that lesbophobia is likewise a rational response, which it isn’t.)

    I also noticed you totally avoided my comment about sports. So, do you not have any comment on that?

  63. lilyannerose says:

    The encouragement is that despite their best efforts of hate they are failing.

  64. BeccaM says:

    The “OMG! Bathrooms!” argument has been pretty much debunked, though, and simple accommodations can be made. Unfortunately, the “hairy male pervert in a dress” canard is constantly being thrown at T* folks.

    There are sure to be lesbians using girls’ locker rooms and restrooms. Should they be banned, too?

    Transgendered people should never be presumed to be more prone to be sexual predators than anybody else.

  65. cole3244 says:

    the right and homophobes hate lgbt individuals for loving someone while at the same time loving other bigots for hating someone, go figure.

  66. Kes says:

    “what’s the harm in letting a kid use a restroom appropriate to his or
    her presented gender? Or, for example, ensuring that a transgendered boy
    or girl has a chance to compete on sports teams with the rest of the
    boys or girls?”

    Frankly, because in certain cases actual biological sex matters more than gender identity or presentation. A 16-year-old trans girl is still male, and will still have height, reach, and muscle advantages over the majority of similarly aged female students, even if the trans girl has been taking hormones. Most transgendered children are still going to have perfectly functioning genitals, so you will have 13 and 14 and 15 year old males sharing locker rooms with 13, 14, and 15 year old females. And like it or not, that situation is going to make the female students (whether trans students in the boy’s locker room, or non-trans students in the girl’s locker room) more vulnerable to rape and other forms of sexual exploitation.

    This is particularly worrisome since there aren’t really any standards for what constitutes being transgendered. It’s an internal descriptor, which isn’t really subject to external policing unless we want to get into gender and sex-based stereotypes (“I guess you’re a girl, you dress like one. No, you can’t be a girl, you still have short hair and your legs aren’t shaved.”)

    I have agitated for the rights of people who are trans, but I’m not really sure what to do about this situation so that everyone’s interests are being protected. I can’t support any legislation which rolls back protections and guarantees for female students. It seems the proponents of this legislation don’t genuinely think that female students are subjected to harm, don’t understand that sex-segregated sports teams were set up in part so that female students could play without having to risk a higher chance of injury or being booted off the team because of stronger or faster male teammates, and genuinely seem to think that sexism isn’t a thing.

    NOM can go fuck themselves, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. This legislation is the wrong direction. We should instead be pushing for single-occupancy bathrooms, single-occupancy and lockable shower areas, and an allowance of greater gender identities on sex-segregated sports teams.

  67. BeccaM says:

    Thanks for that particular image… pass the brain bleach, please?

  68. karmanot says:

    Mz thumb head has been here! Go away Maggie.

  69. Thom Allen says:

    Is it only me or do you think that if you shaved off all of her hair she’d look like a butt plug?

  70. judybrowni says:

    Oh, Maggie please.
    Just because your baby daddy didn’t want to marry you, or your current husband won’t fuck you, doesn’t mean your hobby should be fucking with the rest of our lives.
    Find a new hobby, bitch.

© 2019 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS