Denied access
Section 1. Policy. Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love. Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports.
Wait a second. What do we mean by “whether they will be denied access to the restroom”? Everybody is denied access to one of the two multi-user restrooms, because they are sorted by sex, because there are some men and boys who just will use opportunities like public restrooms with incomplete partitions to peer at or photograph or assault women. Women don’t want to share multi-user toilets with men. The same set of facts applies to locker rooms. A different but related set of facts applies to school sports. Sports and toilets are sex-sorted for various (but well known and obvious) reasons, and keeping it that way doesn’t result in children who don’t have access, it results in male children who still are not allowed to intrude on female children. The female children have rights too.
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.
That reads more like Twitter than adult legal reasoning.
It’s odd, because Biden is a very conservative Democrat. There’s none of this going way out on a limb over the wealth gap, or a genuine publicly funded national health system, or lobbying, or public housing – but somehow letting men play on women’s soccer teams is red-hot urgent?
It’s nuts.
Exactly. This is completely out of character for a centrist Democrat. Often people take inexplicable activist stances because of something that personally affects them. Is there some trans person we don’t know about in his family or the family of one of his close advisors? Is someone close to him a member of the trans cult? Does he actually support this or is it something that was included by a member of his staff and he went along with it because he doesn’t know any better?
There is a lot of chatter on Twitter now so maybe someone will come out with a statement about why he did this.
It does seem like a good question for the new spokesperson.
An easy way to placate the woke progressive wing of the party that doesn’t require any increase in the defecit? A fast, simple sop that gets some of the Democrats who don’t like him back onside, at least for a while? In the short term, he gets some breathing space fromcritics within, but he’s just kicked the can down the road. in the long term, once more women wake up, this will cost more support than it gains. But where are truly progressive women who oppose this move going to go? As they’re not in actuality the evil, religiously bigotted TERFs that they’re going to be made out to be, they’re not likely to vote Republican. By then it’s going to be much harder to walk back, if Biden et al even bother to try.
It’s a hot-button social issue that polishes his lefty cred without challenging anything structural. I’m not surprised.
Not a good start…
Wellllllllll yes and no, he did do a bunch of actual good things along with this dud.
Yes, he did, and I still vastly prefer him to the Florida Exile, for a list of reasons it would take days to enumerate, but all the same – this one sucks.
Too early for this, it could have waited until after Trump’s senate conviction. Elsewhere there is a push to remove “alien” in favor of “noncitizen” on the immigration bill, so maybe they can also replace “transwomen” with “nonfemales.” Are these really first hundred days concerns, or what. As a fan of sci-fi, I don’t find anything wrong with the word alien, but I suppose it sounds more inclusive or somefuckingthing. How about “protocitizen” ffs.
Funny how presidents never see women’s rights as something that needs to be ordered the first day of an administration. I’m glad I’m planning to retire soon; our school has already drunk the trans Kool-Aid (juice that thinks it’s Kool-Aid?). Our bathroom policy has been a free-for-all for several years, and I suspect because we have a gay staff member who is pushing for more inclusiveness . He’s a friend, but this…
Well it’s not like the Dems haven’t taken their black members for granted for years and years; as has been said, where else are women going to go? Nevermind that the party is about 60% women…
I guess this is just where he thinks the center of the party is now.
From what I’ve read it seems that this is an instruction to federal agencies to implement the ‘Bostock’ Supreme Court decision that Trump refused to do. Unfortunately these days you can’t say LGBQ, you have to put the T in there. One day it will be accepted that there is no scientific evidence for a ‘gender indenniny’ and a lot of laws will then be out of whack with reality. But what’s new?
Well, the laws are already out of whack with reality, but not enough people realize that. I have for a long time watched the erosion of women’s rights, but never thought I would see them snatched so completely away by the left in a move considered so ‘progressive’ we mere GC feminists can’t understand it with our fuzzy lady brains.
Biden tends toward the center of the Democratic Party. Perhaps the Democrats are moving this way on the issue.
I’m tempted to change my registration but perhaps women are best served by sensible people voting in primaries.
“Biden tends toward the center of the Democratic Party. Perhaps the Democrats are moving this way on the issue.”
Yes, I think that that’s an accurate assessment. Not that I’m going to leave the party over this, because, what, I’m going to join the other major party? Not happening. But I should write to my Senators and Representative (all Democrats) about the trans issue.
I think that for a lot of these people, it’s well intentioned. The idea is simply: It’s important to support gay rights, but “gay” isn’t a thing anymore, now we say LGBTQIA (pronounced ledge bit kyooea, so we need to sign off on all that.
I’m reserving judgment on this.
What matters in an executive order is what is actually being, you know, ordered. And what is being ordered here is a review of existing agency actions that may be inconsistent with the stated policy, and development of a plan for further action that may be appropriate to advance the policy.
The devil is going to be in the details. What do the agencies come up with, do they have the actual authority to implement it without legislation, and will the administration actually push forward with any of it? It could lead to significant policy changes, it could lead to nothing (it’s an age-old trick of governing to order a “study” of something you don’t ever intend to do), it could simply be a way of preserving the status quo (kill off Trump Admin proposed changes but do nothing new).
See The Post’s response where they talk to Strangio and insist that all opposition is from “conservatives”.
Of course, some “conservatives” are pretending to care about women’s rights, so no one is acting in good faith.
Yep, definitely a ploy to offer to the left something that doesn’t matter to him so that he can more easily get away with being himself on issues like healthcare, social security, etc. Transparently so. And yet, people won’t see it, and I’ll have to listen my dad parrot MSNBC and CNN talking points about how Biden is actually super forward-looking and how the “radical” left are just whiny, unrealistic idealists who need to learn how to compromise for the greater good. How we can’t risk fighting for X because there are political opponents.