A court of all cisgender people sitting around pondering whether or not trans people have faced historical discrimination, deciding no, then taking away their healthcare, is wild.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
But entirely in keeping with historical precedent (a court of men deciding women's reproductive rights, a court of white people deciding on racial discrimination, a court of the wealthy few deciding the fate of the marginalised poor, etc etc). All the same struggle.
This is so true from history books! Men sat down & pondered long and hard if women should have rights or be allowed to vote - thought it wasn’t a good idea too!
and ACB opining that discrimination only counts if it's "de jure" which is a bizarre and ahistorical standard and then going on to conclude that the 175 anti trans bills passed in the last two years somehow does not constitute de jure discrimination is "chef's kiss" 👩🍳
Cass Report (and other studies) show that there no evidence these treatments benefit trans children, but with demonstrated long term downsides. States have a clear right to step in and regulate here.
No they didn't. The evidence Cass looked at said it's beneficial, and then the report concluded it wasn't enough, because it was a political hack job with a pre-ordained result
These states and the SCOTUS are engaged in unconstitutional animus and imposing their religious beliefs on everyone else.
Do you realize how embarrassing it is for you to scream "Cass" while ignoring that France, Germany, and Australia have more recent reviews that recommended expanded trans healthcare? The motivated reasoning is so obvious.
The final version of the German report discouraged puberty blockers for children, rejected surgery, and required psych assessments in all cases. Australia was mixed - Queensland suspended puberty blockers for children. Sweden and Finland curtailed treatments pre-Cass due to lack of evidence.
Not doing a good job persuading me (1) you do not cherry pick evidence that supports your prior conclusion and (2) you do not subscribe to insane propaganda about assessment-free intervention and easily accessed surgery.
Statue PFP is a faux-intellectual bigot, how shocking
What about surgically castrating a 17 year old and then pretending the surgical wound is a vagina? Is that wild? Gonna be wild when you face your first bankrupting lawsuit.
People have been having GRS for 100 years, with huge success and satisfaction rates, and your End Is Nigh lawsuit wave hasn't happened yet. Does it just take 101 years for the clearly insanely transphobic courts to catch up? 👽
Comments
Its been constant since 3000BC!
These states and the SCOTUS are engaged in unconstitutional animus and imposing their religious beliefs on everyone else.
Statue PFP is a faux-intellectual bigot, how shocking