Posted on 11/22/2019 7:43:31 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Which pic?
It reflects the desire of a faction of the ruling class to humiliate and demoralize the working class. And so far this has mostly been successful.
For example a "cis woman" means really a woman and not a mentally ill man. Using that expression allows the identification without admitting the mentally ill man is not really a woman.
In fact every item on that list maps to some real world condition (many to one). It's just that the real world conditions aren't really genders.
For example "Two-Spirit" means an indigenous Canadian male homosexual. This one happens to be official Canadian government terminology though it may have some indigenous origin.
"Trans*" formations (that is with an asterisk) are designed to defeat text searches using regular expression parsers.
No one actually thinks there are precisely 58 genders. The conceit is there are an infinite number and they just include the most popular but also "other".
There is all manner of crazy in that list, not just gender identity crazy.
Wow; didn’t realize all that. Thanks.
I noticed that, too. The author seems to buying in to the language manipulation of the left.
It’s not even assigned. It just is.
I believe Anthony Kennedy was the swing justice on all those awful pro-homosexual decisions. I believe he should be forced to wear assless chaps under his robes as a consequence.
Actually, there are exceptions: XXY (Klinefelders syndrome, also XXYY, XXXYY, XXXY, etc.), X (Turner’s Syndrome), XYY (males some say are more prone to violence and criminality), XY women (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) and XX males (in which a particular DNA sequence normally found on a Y chromosome is found on one or both of the X’s).
In other words, these people are true transgenders, who are ultimately being effectively mocked and belittled by the current trans fanaticism.
That’s a fine thing, but as far as I know, there is no provision in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that bars the states from making laws regarding sexual morality. The Supremes effectively pulled Lawrence v. Texas out of their collective ass, so to speak.
Where are the articles?
Gender is a vocabulary term. Using gender, instead of sex, declares you are using Newspeak, from 1984.
Some have been on FR. National Review also has reporting.
The situation of people with sex-chromosome defects is completely different from that of people with typical chromosomes. All the money and effort spent on drugs and surgery for people who are biologically normal but psychologically disturbed could be better used.
That’s what I’m saying. The current trans-fanaticism is marginalizing the true transgenders.
Not to mention normal women and normal men!
I don’t know what the best term would be - I understand “intersex” is in disfavor - but it’s probably not “transgender,” because gender is either a linguistic category or a social construct, while the issue for people with variant sex chromosomes is solidly biological.
Maybe trans-sex, or bring back intersex. With the odd chromosome combinations and abnormalities, you cannot really put them into the either-or category.
I don’t know what is wrong with “intersex.” It’s not fully detailed, but it conveys an accurate impression.
Supreme Court views homosexuals the same as straight people. And you can’t create laws that impact homosexuals differently than heterosexuals. (equal protection clause)
Yes the states can outlaw deviant sexual behaviors (ie: pedophilia, bestiality, etc). Children and animals cannot consent. But homosexuality is only considered “deviant” by religious texts. You are still dealing with two consenting adults performing sexual activities within their own private residences. You can’t outlaw that according to SCOTUS.
We can argue about it all we want. But that’s the court’s interpretation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.