“ . . . this Court ought not want to be the Court that establishes such a classification for a group of people that, at least according to the ACLU, includes part-time cross-dressers.” Brava, team WDI, and may sanity prevail!
I'm glad we finally got some substantive terms to use, "the clinical term transsexual" and "part-time cross dressers." So... a "part time cross dresser" is allowed to benefit from women's rights to help with their mental disorder? I hope this is the beginning of the end of this hyper- misogynist movement.
The part time male cross dresser is allowed to benefit by destroying female spaces, using a female locker room to titillate himself, exposing himself and staring at females.
Of course! That demographic will benefit in substantial numbers from laws permitting their invasion of our spaces. They are undoubtedly already doing it in my state! I would rather have the aliens that Savi_heretic33 referenced.
Part time crossdressers are, as I'm sure you know, nearly always heterosexual men and usually married to women. The idea that guys of any type, but especially straight, married guys, are going into girls' and womens' locker rooms is treated for 5 seconds as a normal idea is crazy!
💯 the only good thing to come from this, is we never have to worry about an alien invasion happening here. There is no intelligent life on Earth. They will pass on us, and keep going. 😀
The amicus brief is so great! I felt taken aback, though, when I read the section about recognizing what female and male babies are. It has become normalized for people to have to question the realities that all adults and arguably children know about. None of this was happening just a few years ago. It is insane.
Impressively thought out. As noted, inclusion of “part-time cross dressers” (!) is an example of the extremes to which this thinking has been taken. Let’s hope the brief’s positive reasoning is considered, rather than the ACLU’s position that any opposition must be all-out hatred or fear.
I have now had a chance to red the entire brief. It is BRILLIANT. If you haven’t yet had a chance, I heartily recommend it. I also couldn’t help but be amused, on reading it, to think what kind of cognitive dislocations it might cause for such as Brett Kavanaugh to find, if he can be honest with himself, that he actually must agree with every line of it. Brava, Kara, and all involved in creating this masterpiece of eloquent logic.
Wish I could find that wonderful ruling in which a judge explains how "trans" are not a vulnerable persecuted group... I think I remember reading it somewhere on these pages...
A breakdown of "People whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth," brings the house of cards into focus. The two have no relationship. One could just as easily say "People whose gender identity is different from their first car."
“ . . . this Court ought not want to be the Court that establishes such a classification for a group of people that, at least according to the ACLU, includes part-time cross-dressers.” Brava, team WDI, and may sanity prevail!
Let us continue to hope !
I'm glad we finally got some substantive terms to use, "the clinical term transsexual" and "part-time cross dressers." So... a "part time cross dresser" is allowed to benefit from women's rights to help with their mental disorder? I hope this is the beginning of the end of this hyper- misogynist movement.
The part time male cross dresser is allowed to benefit by destroying female spaces, using a female locker room to titillate himself, exposing himself and staring at females.
Of course! That demographic will benefit in substantial numbers from laws permitting their invasion of our spaces. They are undoubtedly already doing it in my state! I would rather have the aliens that Savi_heretic33 referenced.
Part time crossdressers are, as I'm sure you know, nearly always heterosexual men and usually married to women. The idea that guys of any type, but especially straight, married guys, are going into girls' and womens' locker rooms is treated for 5 seconds as a normal idea is crazy!
💯 the only good thing to come from this, is we never have to worry about an alien invasion happening here. There is no intelligent life on Earth. They will pass on us, and keep going. 😀
Yeah, but maybe an alien invasion would improve the gene pool. You have me laughing.
LOL! That is an excellent sci fi movies plot that as far as I know has never been used!
You have me thinking...Maybe a movie short for youtube?
I love that! It am envisioning a hilarious, incredibly politically incorrect video. If well acted it would go viral!
Thank you Kara Dansky for continuing to oppose this regressive, woman-hating political agenda.
The amicus brief is so great! I felt taken aback, though, when I read the section about recognizing what female and male babies are. It has become normalized for people to have to question the realities that all adults and arguably children know about. None of this was happening just a few years ago. It is insane.
Impressively thought out. As noted, inclusion of “part-time cross dressers” (!) is an example of the extremes to which this thinking has been taken. Let’s hope the brief’s positive reasoning is considered, rather than the ACLU’s position that any opposition must be all-out hatred or fear.
I have now had a chance to red the entire brief. It is BRILLIANT. If you haven’t yet had a chance, I heartily recommend it. I also couldn’t help but be amused, on reading it, to think what kind of cognitive dislocations it might cause for such as Brett Kavanaugh to find, if he can be honest with himself, that he actually must agree with every line of it. Brava, Kara, and all involved in creating this masterpiece of eloquent logic.
Wish I could find that wonderful ruling in which a judge explains how "trans" are not a vulnerable persecuted group... I think I remember reading it somewhere on these pages...
Voila https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/23a0221p-06.pdf
A breakdown of "People whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth," brings the house of cards into focus. The two have no relationship. One could just as easily say "People whose gender identity is different from their first car."
Nice!