"In other misguidedness, some of these bans provide exceptions for intersex surgeries, when in fact many people with intersex conditions have lobbied for the right to not be medicated or operated on, and simply allowed to be different."
Your remark quoted above is puzzling. I would think that any ban on gender affirming therapy (where verbal assertion of an identity leads to social or medical intervention) would want at any cost to avoid all mention of disorders of sexual development, except to exempt them from the discussion. Taking a position on this topic would open a set of very complicated issues that have nothing to do with the ban.
Thank you, Bill. Wording that right was hard because it is indeed very complicated. Suffice it to say that for intersex activists who are trying to bring in blanket bans on surgeries on babies and children for DSDs, some of the medical transition ban wording inflames tensions. The bills no doubt were trying to avoid taking a position on intersex surgeries but that's not the way it's interpreted.
I appreciate the round-up of actions at the state level (as a personal preference, I would find it easier to read in a list or bullet format—but as I am not doing the work, feel free to ignore me on this😎).
My own thought, reading the bill itself, is that it is well-intentioned and actually reasonably well drafted, but as always, with plentiful room for interpretation, so a lot of litigation is likely to ensue. Unfortunately, here as elsewhere, the discussion about it is completely partisan which, as all know here at Broadview, only hampers getting a sensible resolution.
Aaannnd, here’s an example test, emblazoned on a t-shirt worn by a young woman at the book shop counter: “Don’t want to look at transsexuality? Gouge your eyes out.” Free speech or hate speech, what say you?
Mermaids vs The Alliance staged reading makes me so happy! Art steps in for good. And, great song choice. Thank you for sharing.
The song I think of when I read the pregnancy research stories is "Parents are People" from Free to Be You and Me. Marlo Thomas sings about all the things mommies can be, and Harry Belafonte reminds her: "they can't be grandpas...or daddies". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKqUltWaJJ0
People need to stop with the bans. Don’t ban gender transition for minors, some may benefit. Don’t ban gender conversion therapy, because you might accidentally ban therapy for detransitioners. Don’t ban drag queen story hour, because no one is forcing your kids to go. Don’t socially ban open-ended conversation on non-conformity, dysphoria, and all the possible resolutions, because you deny young (and older) people role models to follow.
It’s messy, but really ought to be worked out by the media, the psychiatric establishments, the schools... and the more local the better.
Power to the people. Just stop legislating on this.
I am generally wary of bans too. But, without a centralized health care system (as in England or Scandinavia), how do we get the systematic review of the evidence and at least a moratorium or restriction on procedures that are harming kids and that young adults regret?
You make a good point, and I do worry that the bodies that are capable of conducting a systematic review are able to be impartial and just follow the evidence. The way I am approaching this is to make the point to friends and neighbors when I can and to encourage people to push for this with elected representatives. It just seems to me (and of course I may be wrong!) that we are better off if we stay out of the weeds of arguing about the merits of individual studies and instead push for an unbiased, thoroughgoing systematic review, as the UK, Finland, and Sweden, in my understanding, have done.
Yes, Susan - we are on the same page! This week a friend and I hosted our first "women's reading circle", trying to get the word out. Intro and Ch 1 of Kathleen Stock's Material Girls. Women wanted to know by the end: what can they do?
Wow, that is spectacular! You are an inspiration, truly. This is what we need, and that they want to translate this into concrete action is brilliant. In that regard, I would say, just pick anything and push for it. Don’t worry if it feels small. Just keep at it! 👏👏👏
This might be of interest. Quotes from a Christian men's blog for crossdressing religious men who regard it as an undesirable addiction. They give us a window into the mindset of a man who says wearing his wife's little underthings "calms" him.
"In other misguidedness, some of these bans provide exceptions for intersex surgeries, when in fact many people with intersex conditions have lobbied for the right to not be medicated or operated on, and simply allowed to be different."
Your remark quoted above is puzzling. I would think that any ban on gender affirming therapy (where verbal assertion of an identity leads to social or medical intervention) would want at any cost to avoid all mention of disorders of sexual development, except to exempt them from the discussion. Taking a position on this topic would open a set of very complicated issues that have nothing to do with the ban.
Thank you, Bill. Wording that right was hard because it is indeed very complicated. Suffice it to say that for intersex activists who are trying to bring in blanket bans on surgeries on babies and children for DSDs, some of the medical transition ban wording inflames tensions. The bills no doubt were trying to avoid taking a position on intersex surgeries but that's not the way it's interpreted.
Not taking a position seems reasonable, since so few of us have a detailed understanding of DSDs.
My daughter was born with hernias; she was operated on for this almost immediately. Thank goodness that was such a simple matter.
I appreciate the round-up of actions at the state level (as a personal preference, I would find it easier to read in a list or bullet format—but as I am not doing the work, feel free to ignore me on this😎).
One thing I would be interested in seeing is developments in hate crime bills. There is one in Ireland (this may have passed?), and one in Michigan that is in process. The language of the bill as passed in the Michigan House is here: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billengrossed/House/pdf/2023-HEBH-4474.pdf
Very interesting to see various news reports on that. Here are three:
https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/hate-crimes-bill-passes-the-michigan-house-republicans-voice-concerns-over-speech/
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/michigan/2023/07/10/hate-crimes-bill-approved-by-michigan-house-wouldnt-criminalize-incorrect-pronoun-use/
https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/michigans-hate-crime-law-unconstitutional-full-stop#:~:text=identity
My own thought, reading the bill itself, is that it is well-intentioned and actually reasonably well drafted, but as always, with plentiful room for interpretation, so a lot of litigation is likely to ensue. Unfortunately, here as elsewhere, the discussion about it is completely partisan which, as all know here at Broadview, only hampers getting a sensible resolution.
Aaannnd, here’s an example test, emblazoned on a t-shirt worn by a young woman at the book shop counter: “Don’t want to look at transsexuality? Gouge your eyes out.” Free speech or hate speech, what say you?
Free!
I agree. So here’s the question: do you think the person wearing that T-shirt would say “free” with regard to someone who disagreed with its message?
Not likely
Exactly!
Thank you, Kate, as always! Super review. "Super" as in so comprehensive and also bloody hell, can it really get so awfully worse before it gets better? Here's a mention of some Dems who joined the LA override to vote in HB 648 (https://www.nola.com/news/politics/legislature/louisiana-legislature-overrides-vetoed-trans-health-care-ban/article_a522d2c0-25ad-11ee-ba33-8733e64ce135.html)
Mermaids vs The Alliance staged reading makes me so happy! Art steps in for good. And, great song choice. Thank you for sharing.
The song I think of when I read the pregnancy research stories is "Parents are People" from Free to Be You and Me. Marlo Thomas sings about all the things mommies can be, and Harry Belafonte reminds her: "they can't be grandpas...or daddies". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKqUltWaJJ0
People need to stop with the bans. Don’t ban gender transition for minors, some may benefit. Don’t ban gender conversion therapy, because you might accidentally ban therapy for detransitioners. Don’t ban drag queen story hour, because no one is forcing your kids to go. Don’t socially ban open-ended conversation on non-conformity, dysphoria, and all the possible resolutions, because you deny young (and older) people role models to follow.
It’s messy, but really ought to be worked out by the media, the psychiatric establishments, the schools... and the more local the better.
Power to the people. Just stop legislating on this.
I am generally wary of bans too. But, without a centralized health care system (as in England or Scandinavia), how do we get the systematic review of the evidence and at least a moratorium or restriction on procedures that are harming kids and that young adults regret?
Exactly this, and it IS possible to do this in the US. How about we all push for this, anyway we can? “The best way to do this would be for a major, trusted medical organization such as the National Institutes of Health or the National Academy of Medicine to commission a systematic review of the evidence underlying pediatric gender medicine.” https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pediatric-gender-care-the-cure-for-politicized-medicine-is-evidence-based-medicine/
Absolutely. I'm happy to direct my letter writing energies to the NIH - maybe somebody from this directory? (https://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/profiles). But didn't the NIH fund the recent study debunked by Jesse Singal? (https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/the-new-highly-touted-study-on-hormones). I have to assume it happens all the time: one part of the NIH looks into something funded by another part?
You make a good point, and I do worry that the bodies that are capable of conducting a systematic review are able to be impartial and just follow the evidence. The way I am approaching this is to make the point to friends and neighbors when I can and to encourage people to push for this with elected representatives. It just seems to me (and of course I may be wrong!) that we are better off if we stay out of the weeds of arguing about the merits of individual studies and instead push for an unbiased, thoroughgoing systematic review, as the UK, Finland, and Sweden, in my understanding, have done.
Yes, Susan - we are on the same page! This week a friend and I hosted our first "women's reading circle", trying to get the word out. Intro and Ch 1 of Kathleen Stock's Material Girls. Women wanted to know by the end: what can they do?
Wow, that is spectacular! You are an inspiration, truly. This is what we need, and that they want to translate this into concrete action is brilliant. In that regard, I would say, just pick anything and push for it. Don’t worry if it feels small. Just keep at it! 👏👏👏
This might be of interest. Quotes from a Christian men's blog for crossdressing religious men who regard it as an undesirable addiction. They give us a window into the mindset of a man who says wearing his wife's little underthings "calms" him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wkbeu8tqxi8&t=1s