Kids are entitled to gender-fun

I can see why some medical practitioners have been backtracking recently having read that bill about medical care.

New Section 1. (a) An individual who had a childhood gender reassignment service performed on such individual as a child may bring a civil cause of action against the physician who performed the childhood gender reassignment service.

It goes on to clarify that "childhood gender reassignment service" includes the prescription or administration of puberty blockers as well as surgical procedures like mastectomy, which we know have been carried out on children.

d) (1) An individual who brings an action under this section may seek actual damages, exemplary or punitive damages, injunctive relief and other appropriate relief.
(2) In an action brought under this section, the court shall award a prevailing plaintiff the cost of the suit including reasonable attorney fees.

f) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Kansas child mutilation prevention act.

And at the end:

A physician's license shall be revoked upon a finding that the physician has performed a childhood gender reassignment service, as defined in section 1, and amendments thereto.

I wonder if we'll see a reduction in the number of doctors willing to carry out these procedures on children if this bill is passed. The risk of having to make a huge payout and also losing their licence to practise might be too much of a risk for many of them.

Thankyou nauticant, that looks completely reasonable to me. I don’t see any way that it prevents anyone being happy or expressing themselves, it just ensures that that expression doesn’t come at the expense of many other people (particularly regarding the safety etc of women and girls).

I am completely fed up with enbees wittering on about how their combination of ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ traits makes them so much more special than anyone else. Newsflash, as pp’s have said, that describes pretty much everyone, even their boring parents. Experimenting with how you see yourself, how you present to the world, and pushing against some societal expectations is an entirely normal part of being a teenager. Adults enforcing the rules so teenagers (who are inclined to be quite self-centred) don’t impinge on other people is also entirely normal, and is done for everyone’s benefit

What do you object to in this bill? @nauticant posted the link earlier. Here it is again for you:

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/sb180_enrolled.pdf

All it seems to be doing is saying that sexed nouns such as woman, man, mother, father should be used to refer to people of the appropriate sex, and that single sex spaces and sports should be allowed for reasons of safety and privacy.

It's only one page, so worth reading.

It's best not to take the word of The Guardian because we've know for a long time that in this issue they indulge in using misinformation to promote their narratives.

Read the bill yourself and make up your own mind. It's short:

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/sb180_enrolled.pdf

Here's the second half of it which states what the bill is intended to achieve:

(b) Laws and rules and regulations that distinguish between the sexes are subject to intermediate constitutional scrutiny. Intermediate constitutional scrutiny forbids unfair discrimination against similarly situated male and female individuals but allows the law to distinguish between the sexes where such distinctions are substantially related to important governmental objectives. Notwithstanding any provision of state law to the contrary, distinctions between the sexes with respect to athletics, prisons or other detention facilities, domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, locker rooms, restrooms and other areas where biology, safety or privacy are implicated that result in separate accommodations are substantially related to the important governmental objectives of protecting the health, safety and privacy of individuals in such circumstances.
(c) Any school district, or public school thereof, and any state agency, department or office or political subdivision that collects vital statistics for the purpose of complying with anti-discrimination laws or for the purpose of gathering accurate public health, crime, economic or other data shall identify each individual who is part of the collected data set as either male or female at birth.

This isn't a culture war. It's (regrettably) a battle to uphold facts, truth and the safeguarding of children and women.

Handwaving this away as a culture war ignores the damage being done to so many.

I think for a lot of these teenagers the whole thing is largely about "having fun" and belonging to a group, like being a goth or super into a particular fandom. Of course the Official Discourse can't admit that, so it all gets tied up with the "we're so oppressed!" stuff, meaning you get confused kids thinking that the government insisting on a particular letter on your driving licence is akin to making blue hair and glitter punishable by death.

It's the conflation of gender and sex AGAIN. No one cares if you feel more masculine or feminine - that's got nothing to do with sex.

I will say the quote by the 13 YO - “I am a human being and I deserve to be treated as such, and I deserve to be happy.” does sound like something they've outright copied from an adult...

its a shame, things do feel a bit wild with it all at the moment.

How does knowing you can't change sex 'erase trans people'?

I thought they were changing 'gender' not sex, and male/female aren't genders.

Carson Rapp, a Wichita-area 15-year-old who identifies as bigender or embracing “both more masculine and more feminine traits” said that expressing one’s gender identity does not harm others. “Why stop people from doing it if they’re just being themselves and having fun?

Again, expressing ones PERSONALITY is fine, perfectly normal, no one gives a shit.

The harm comes from people thinking their made up 'gender identity' entitles them to access things meant for those of the opposite sex.

Believing that your personality or feelings should decide what sex category you belong in is batshit.

Oh my gosh, I'm sure there was a thread recently where it was agreed a transboy would never choose the name "Ian" and yet here we are, America.

Sorry, not the point of the thread I know.

The 13 year old in the OP sounds a bit like my daughter. Why is it a 'trans thing' not to stick to rigid gender roles?

I'm sick to death of the culture wars. The left can do one with it's attempts to tar those who have concerns over impacts on women & children as right wing religious nut jobs.

Why doesn't the 'left' care about kids like my daughter who is autistic and vulnerable to this shit?

I "picked a side" long before the Republicans/right wingers were even discussing this because I believe gender ideology threatens women's rights and harms children. My position immediately put me on the opposite side to the radical left.

Do you think I should change my position now because some other people, whose politics I wouldn't ordinarily agree with, are on the same side as me but have very different motives?

Am I obliged to remain neutral to avoid being accused of "stoking the culture war' or guilt by association?

The correct position has to be firmly rooted in reality and I will not pretend that the binary nature of sex and the legal protections which arise from that fact are nuanced. Believers in gender ideology can live how they please but they cannot compel me to share their faith.

Usually the correct position in a culture war is neither side.

Which is exactly where the vast majority of GC feminists sit.

Not on the side of the anti-women left wing (who want to enforce gender sterotypes, remove sex-based rights and protections, and don't view women as people).

Not on the side of the anti-women right wing (who want to enforce gender stereotypes, remove abortion rights and bodily autonomy, and don't view women as people).

Politics and political alignment has long been shifting; looking at everything from a traditional left-right perspective is not very useful any more. And just because someone is a conservative, a Republican or a Tory it doesn't make them evil or essentially the enemy. All of us are a compex mix and there will be some people you agree with with on one issue but disagree with on another. Tribalism negates nuance and subtlety and demands everyone be on exactly the same page at all times.

Culture and values are now overall more important for many people than traditional bread and butter issues or the politics of social class.

Why have gender on a driving licence at all? What have internal feelings of masculinity or femininity got to do with either driving or identification? Gender should simply not be on a driving licence. It should be sex. If they are using the word ‘gender’ as a synonym for sex then this should be defined and then your diving licence should reflect your sex but really they should just change it to ‘sex’ to avoid confusion. And in either case, you should not be able to change it.

Changing name legislation should be the same for everyone, transgender status is irrelevant. If a boy wants to be called Sue…

Reading those children's views it sounds like they're just children with interests and they don't fall into a category based on rigid gender stereotypes, just like most people. Don't most people have a mix of 'masculine' and 'feminine' traits (as dictated by stereotypes)?

How is a bill going to stop someone being happy with their personality when it sounds like they're just like most other people with a personality?

bigender

Citizens of Blefuscu (big-enders) expressing their superiority over Lilliput (small-enders)

What do you think is wrong with the bill?

The Kansas legislature has been busy:

women's single sex sport: http://kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/hb2238_00_0000.pdf

gender reassignment medicine: http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/sb26_enrolled.pdf

Both of these are also on the short side.

That actually looks completely reasonable I think

it also doesn’t prevent anyone changing the name or gender on their driver’s licence

Are you saying it is the left's fault that you are cheering on the Kansas Republicans?

Usually the correct position in a culture war is neither side.

That looks pretty sensible? The sort of clarification we need for EQ10 basically.

Nothing to stop a person expressing their gender identity as long as they use gender words to self describe (eg transfeminine transmasculine) rather than sex based words (eg man & woman).

This tedious insistence on allying women and feminists with the American right is tedious and childish. It's also been done to death on here.

Stop the dodgy adults telling children they might be born in the wrong body and that drugs and surgery will fix them, get them out of schools and sort out the Equality Act. What America does is up to them and nothing to do with UK feminists - no matter how often some try to insist it is.

The bill sounds a mess

stop transgender people changing the name or gender on their driver’s licenses

I don’t object to either of those things being changed, particularly names. Why shouldn’t people be called what they like?

I object to sex being changed on identity documents of course

this is a perfect example of the famous Venn diagram and how superficially the views of GC feminists can kind of, almost look like those of social conservatives (if you’re determined to have a really bad take)

I believe this is the (very short) bill in question:

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/sb180_enrolled.pdf