BROADview in Brief
All tickle, no giggle
Sisters aren’t doing it for themselves, at least not in Australia. Roxanne Tickle, a male who identifies as a woman, won a discrimination case, claiming the female-only app Giggle must include non-females. Begs the question: What is a woman? Our Supreme Court justices can’t tell you, but, hey, Matt Walsh can!
Listen, if you’re a male and you really want to “feel like a woman,” get used to being told what you can and can’t do, especially with your body. My suggestion is you start your gender journey in Afghanistan, where the Taliban will impose a dress code (oh, and no education for you!), and then head on to Iran.
The Washington Post allowed an op-ed about why it’s important to allow for sex-based elite sports. Writes Doriane Lambelet Coleman, author of “On Sex and Gender — A Commonsense Approach”:
Because of biological sex differences in strength, power and endurance, depending on the sport and event there’s a performance gap of 10 to 50 percent between the best males and the best females. Separating athletes in competition on the basis of sex is the only way to account for the female half of the population. No other sorting tool works to achieve this inclusion goal — not height, weight or any other physical characteristic.
I have her book but haven’t read it yet. Anyone else want to read and discuss?
Missouri is among several states rolling back laws that allowed for gender-identity-based markers on drivers’ licenses, instead requiring sex-based markers. This is framed as anti-trans, but you could also frame it as pro-reality. These are official documents; they’re not a social media profile. The argument that they shouldn’t be agents of legal fictions need not be interpreted as some kind of hate. That said, they might be interpreted as “We let this go too far, and we’re taking back the whole mile, short of the original inch.”
The biggest news? SCOTUS struck down…wait…what was the decision? A lower court said some states could block Biden’s changes to Title IX, that privileged gender identity over sex, and the Supreme Court said, yes, that’s fine, the lower courts got it right, you guys handle it there.
Depending on what media outlet you read, here’s how you’ll understand it:
If only we had some kind of news outlet between The New York Times and Fox. If only we had some political party between Dems and Reps. If only…Oh, wait, sorry, I was dreaming I was in Europe for a minute.
I’ve always thought I could be a gender refugee in the UK if need be, but not with the no-free-speech situation there, those that might land you in jail for tweeting angrily about the very issues Doriane Lambelet Coleman wrote about in The Washington Post.
Meanwhile, Texas AG Ken Paxton is going after Title VII, too. “According to a report from the Texas Attorney General's office, the suit aims to block recently issued EEOC enforcement guidance — guidance that Texas officials argue expands the definition of "discrimination" under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include gender identity,” reports Hoodline Austin. These good ole boys want sex to mean sex—and not the fun kind!
That sounds pretty terrifying, allowing people to discriminate based on gender identity, but I think we’re having a hard time with what that word can mean. We can be discriminating by being choosy. Or by setting boundaries. Or creating categories—like, you know, maybe a sex-specific dating app. Discriminating taste was once a good thing. Now we have to be inclusive or it’s illegal, even if it means that women get screwed—again, not the fun kind.
While the Dems are having a big party, and Republicans are being absolutely horrible about Tim Walz’s emotionally overcome son, Kara Dansky has a few questions for Walz about gender identity and kids. In The Hill, she writes:
Did Walz simply not know in 2023 that there is an emerging global consensus that so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors is unsafe? And regardless of why Walz signed the bill, does he still stand by that decision, given the now-incontrovertible evidence that “gender-affirming care” harms children?
Inquiring minds want to know the answer!
A few more headlines, from multiple sides of these issues, for your perusal. What have you been reading or listening to this week?
What Is Bisexual Erasure—and How Does It Affect Health? (Health.com)
Commentary: LGBTQ+ students may face hostile environment as they go back to school (Orlando Sentinel)
New LDS Church policies relegate trans members to ‘second-class’ status, scholars warn (Salt Lake Tribune)
Queer Reads: Lee Wind’s new YA nonfiction book ‘The Gender Binary Is a Big Lie’ out this month (Dallas Voice)
So many excellent quips in this post! Here is a favorite: “Listen, if you’re a male and you really want to “feel like a woman,” get used to being told what you can and can’t do, especially with your body. My suggestion is you start your gender journey in Afghanistan, where the Taliban will impose a dress code (oh, and no education for you!), and then head on to Iran.” 💕💕💕
I noticed that Michelle Obama said that people should not be discriminated against for who they are or who they love. That’s the rhetorical move that keeps Democrats believing that trans rights are civil rights, rather than something else altogether.
I watched parts of the DNC but didn’t hear “protect trans kids” spoken—did anyone else hear someone say that at the DNC?