Shit. Now I agree with Trump!

I imagine that this will be old news to you deepwatersolo, but just in case anyone else is interested there are people on Trump's said who believe that polarising the electorate over identity politics is the way for Trump to win again:

www.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/opinion/bannon-trump-polls-republican.html

The fact of the matter is that feminists sued the Obama administration on the matter, way before anyone knew what Trump thought on the matter and way before anyone but Ann Coulter thought Trump might become president.

www.feministcurrent.com/2016/08/01/womens-liberation-front-v-united-states-wolf-sues-restore-title-ix-rights-women-girls/

We all know that Trump does not act on this now, because he listened to feminists, but because he wants to appease his base with something, and like with the Democrats identity politics is the only 'mobilizing' policy that 'the powers that be' will allow to be challenged (as opposed to economics and wars), so he focuses on that.

And now they expect women to somehow oppose that Trump does what we tried to legally force Obama to do, because... it is Trump?
Someone is being irrational here, and it ain't women.

Vegilante - thanks for that informative post.

It's so depressing the way everything splits on party lines.

Now the Trump admin is simply rescinding Obama's executive orders/letters & re-asserting that federal discrimination laws as originally & currently written specifically speak of sex, not gender & gender ID.

There are significant legal cases which are relevent:
Women in a homeless project:
May 2018
'Shelter forced women to shower with person who identified as a transgender woman and sexually harassed them, lawsuit says
'It says the shelter requires them to shower in groups, and it opened its doors to a person who identified themself as a transgender woman who made lewd and sexually inappropriate comments, and leered at them while they were naked.'
(extract)
"This is the biggest fear they bring up, that you're going to have people who may not even be transgender in bathrooms and settings where people are naked and their privacy rights are being violated," said Peter Kapetan, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the women.

Poverello House administrators tell Action News federal law says they have to treat a person identifying as a woman as a woman -- and there's no way to test whether it's true.' (continues)
abc30.com/3514544/

School children:
(extract)
"The decision upheld a lower court ruling in August and joins a growing body of federal court decisions from across the country affirming the rights of transgender individuals.

But unlike many of those other cases – which involved transgender plaintiffs' challenging policies that excluded them – the matter decided by the court Thursday was brought by students seeking to strike down their district's trans-inclusive policies.

"We were not expecting a decision when we walked in the door today," said Ria Mar, an attorney with the ACLU of Pennsylvania, who had argued in favor of the district's stance. "The court got it that exclusion of transgender students is a serious issue, and it wanted to send a message that the school's policy of inclusion is the right thing to do. "

Still, Randall Wenger, a lawyer for the Harrisburg-based Independence Law Center who argued on behalf of the plaintiff students Thursday, vowed to continue their legal fight.

"We think that our claims are strong," Wenger said. "Even though the decision today was disappointing, we plan to continue this litigation to protect and ultimately vindicate the privacy rights of our clients." (continues)

www2.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/federal-appeals-court-oks-boyertown-schools-policy-letting-transgender-students-bathrooms-20180524.html

'Girls and boys shouldn't do everything together'
May 24 2018
Alexis Lightcap,
"The boy in the locker room did what I did — got out and found an adult to tell what happened. He soon learned what I had: that administrators at our school really didn't care about our concerns. The administrator he talked to just told him to "tolerate it" — to "make it as natural as possible." How do you make something as unnatural as that "natural?" How natural would you feel, having someone of the opposite sex standing next to you — or your child — while you change clothes or go to the bathroom?

If our administrators didn't have much to say after we told them, they had even less to say before. No one notified the students at our school — or our parents — of this sudden change of policy. No one prepared us, warned us, counseled us. Did they really think everyone would enjoy the surprise and just embrace this idea, right away?

Well, if that's what they were thinking, I guess they were surprised, too. The family of the boy who met the girl in the locker room decided to file a lawsuit for violation of his right to bodily privacy. When I learned about the lawsuit, I signed on as a co-plaintiff." (continues)
www2.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/boyertown-transgender-bathroom-lgbtq-gender-identiy-philadelphia-suburbs-20180524.html

In both cases the homeless charity and school had implemented policies as a consequence of federal law.

both cases discussed on previous thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3266198-No-True-Transwoman-transadvocates-question-whether-TW-is-genuine-after-said-TW-sexually-harasses-women-in-homeless-shelter?pg=4

If they don’t like what we say
Answer is not to lurk
Come in debate
Or would that be ......

As I keep on saying, if the TRAs are so comfortable in their view being right, why do they have to continually misrepresent what their opponents are saying?

Ol' Smooth Penis is tweeting about this thread.

Well, I suppose a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Strange times indeed.

Sorry, repost for misgendering.

And what do you know, Roz Kaveney now demands on Twitter that gender critical women denounce Trump for taking back those policies Obama implemented. Never mind gender critical women ostracized Obama for these policies that substituted gender for sex and wanted them repealed way before anyone dreamed (or should I say nightmared) about Trump becoming president.
Is Roz thick or is Roz oblivious to the actual policies repealed or is Roz deliberately misleading in order to vilify 'them evil TERFs'?

I quote: Has a single one of the 'moderate' 'gender critical' 'feminists' spoken out today against Trump's proposed anti-trans laws? Will we be accused of bullying if we ask them individually to do so like a decent human being?

And what do you know, Roz Kaveney now demands on Twitter that gender critical women denounce Trump for taking back those policies Obama implemented. Never mind gender critical women ostracized Obama for these policies that substituted gender for sex and wanted them repealed way before anyone dreamed (or should I say nightmared) about Trump becoming president.
Is Roz thick or is he oblivious to the actual policies repealed or is he deliberately misleading in order to vilify 'them evil TERFs'?

I quote: Has a single one of the 'moderate' 'gender critical' 'feminists' spoken out today against Trump's proposed anti-trans laws? Will we be accused of bullying if we ask them individually to do so like a decent human being?

Catbox, frankly, taking away our legal recognition as women is exactly what Obama did and what self-ID does (and what in fact the GRC did, just not on this scale).

This type of legislation takes away what woman means and how it is defined, over women's heads and with real life consequences like Karen Whites in our prisons and males as the natural champions in our sports.

And adding insult to injury your lot can't even be asked to come up with an alternative definition of woman (you know, definition: noncircular and objectifyable), rendering the term meaningless.

The gall.

I find this disingenuous. No one's taking legal recognition (or anything else for that matter) away from cis women.

Ironically you have just taken my right to define myself (the holiest of all rights in your religion) away from me by calling me 'cis'.

the fact is that males are in fact taking away sports titles and scholarship opportunities away from females right now, courtesy Obama's nonsensical edikt to treat gender as if it were sex.
Of course you would not notice, because you don't give a shit about 'women without penis'.

This isn't even in news, the NYT have just cooked up a story and stuck a spin on it. It's certainly not something that is unexpected or inconsistent with past pronouncements of the Trump administration.

In this case, I strongly suspect it is intended to rally the Democratic troops for the midterms. Given the Democratic party ist still beholden to Wall Street, BigPharma, the MIC, BigCorps and billionaire interests in general (just like the GOP, no dispute), that's probably the only thing they can offer that might mobilize people - particularly when using language as if transpeople were going to be put out of existence with firing squads by the Trump administration.

I find this disingenuous. No one's taking legal recognition (or anything else for that matter) away from cis women.

I don't understand why you're not all up in arms about the very real threats to women's rights and protections, rather than going after something on such a misinformed/badly formulated perspective. The rape clause on tax credits. Everyday harassment, in street, especially of school girls. Etc.

"So true-this is deflection about his lack of response to what the Saudis did to that journalist....."

Eh? This isn't even in news, the NYT have just cooked up a story and stuck a spin on it. It's certainly not something that is unexpected or inconsistent with past pronouncements of the Trump administration.

If people want to argue that Congress should pass a law expanding federal anti-discrimination laws to gender identity, they can do that. They can lobby for passage of ENDA. What’s not on is arbitrarily changing the definition of sex in legislation to mean gender identity, when the two mean very different things and when doing so subverts the very intent of the original legislation.

This.

Do you not see that failing to provide a way to have sex legally recognised IS a form of discrimination?

This makes no sense. Trump's proposition does have sex legally recognized. It simply holds that gender does not trump sex.

Outside a cult mentality, you judge policies by their effects and not by who proposes them.

Had Obama not ignored the economy, financial industry, inequality, and surveillance state to put all his money on identity politics, we would not be where we are. That Trump's Supreme Court threatens federal abortion rights is bad enough (maybe Obama should have pushed his candidate through when there was still time? Not his priority, apparently.) I do not think that having females compete against males in college sports does in any way ameliorate that.

Do you not see that failing to provide a way to have sex legally recognised IS a form of discrimination?

We absolutely do Catbox. The threat of this form of discrimination is what we are fighting against, on behalf of all women and girls.

We are fighting for our right to our own legal definition and to the sex-based rights and protections which enable us to engage in public life.

Do you not see that failing to provide a way to have sex legally recognised IS a form of discrimination?

The amount of energy and words here on the cognitive dissonance necessary to work out how to maintain your position on trans rights whilst not aligning to Trump's ideology is astounding.

If you think there's no link between rolling back trans rights, and restricting reproductive rights, separating asylum seeking families and putting their babies in cages, just to name a few nasty policies - think again. It is OK to change your minds!

So true-this is deflection about his lack of response to what the Saudis did to that journalist.....

Interesting. Statements that GRA reform is needed so that we can fall in line with Ireland and Malta seem to be a bit of a stretch. The UK would be a much bigger prize. And only two (on the right wing of the Tory party) MPs have spoken up.

It is all very weird. It feels like the start of a cold winter of misogyny.

Interesting, pacemats. Cause when you search Trump and trans on Twitter today, you get the impression that the whole world is up in arms about Trump trying to legislate trans people out of existence. As if they had not existed prior to Obama‘s advisory letters that apparently adviced to treat gender as if it were sex in all legal matters.
It is quite absurd, almost reaching Russiagate levels (no, I am not a Trump supporter, but that does not mean I accept the silly mc cartheysm that depicts anything short of Trump nuking Moscow as collusion.)

twitter.com/thetimes/status/1054156628872826882

The comments underneath this tweet from The Times are interesting.

Most of them along the lines of science matters and at last some common sense.