Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Help U.S. Sisters: Comments Allowed to Protect Sex Rights for Women for Proposed Title IX Changes

15 replies

Delphinium20 · 15/07/2022 21:57

If any of you women would like to help some US women and girls, please go to the government site below and comment on changes being introduced into Title IX that would allow men who have a "women" gender identity to be considered discriminated against if not allowed rights to women and girls' federally funded spaces (primarily sporting competitions, changing rooms and bathrooms). This gives men access to these formally protected spaces under our federal law Title IX, one of the only federal laws that currently grant us the very few sex rights we have.

www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/07/12/2022-13734/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal

Act fast. Comments are unlimited and only open until Sept. 12, 2022.

I've been told by some UK women that their comments went through, so no matter where you are, you might be able to help.

THANK YOU!

OP posts:
pink85 · 16/07/2022 17:06

Will definitely try and help and leave a comment because this cannot be allowed to happen

Delphinium20 · 16/07/2022 21:12

pink85 · 16/07/2022 17:06

Will definitely try and help and leave a comment because this cannot be allowed to happen

Thank you so much!

OP posts:
Vagablond · 17/07/2022 22:07

Thank you so much for this! I live in the US and did not know we were able to leave comments about this proposed legislation. I'm going to try to write a form letter for people to use if they don't have the time or energy to compose one of their own. Hopefully I'll have it ready by tomorrow or the next day. Will post it here.

Floisme · 18/07/2022 09:10

That would be helpful Vagablond, thanks. I've had a look at the site and there's a lot of legal terminology which was quite daunting, but the comments I read stuck to simple, straightforward points about fair competition, dignity and privacy, which is how I thought I'd play it. For what it's worth, the comments were also 100% against the changes so good luck.

Pallisers · 18/07/2022 16:02

I am in the US and would like to respond but am struggling where to start. I would really appreciate a form letter or some guidance

Delphinium20 · 18/07/2022 17:44

Pallisers · 18/07/2022 16:02

I am in the US and would like to respond but am struggling where to start. I would really appreciate a form letter or some guidance

I think you could keep it simple. I've seen comments that say, "Women and girls' sex-based rights are vital in ensuring they have equitable opportunities to sports, competitions, same-sex dressing/changing/rest rooms. Girls and women do not consent to having male-bodied individuals in their sex-protected spaces or sports."

Title IX is one of the few federal laws that have protected women as a sex class. We don't have the ERA ratified, so we will lose so much w/ these changes.

THANK YOU ALL AGAIN!!!!

OP posts:
Delphinium20 · 18/07/2022 17:47

More standardized language below

www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/07/12/2022-13734/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal

From u/Lipsy in another post:

This attorney on Twitter discusses the proposal at length and has some sample comments on her timeline: twitter.com/CEJacksonLaw

The comments on this tweet contain a variety of other Women's comment submissions twitter.com/CEJacksonLaw/status/1546792529894313984

Other aspects discussed by the same attorney twitter.com/CEJacksonLaw/status/1547709902700683265 twitter.com/CEJacksonLaw/status/1547700652838494210

Connection to Women's prisons/jails/carceral facilities twitter.com/NoXY_USA/status/1547698702638358528

Unique messages are more likely to be read by your officials. Write your own message or edit the template before sending.

Politico article with some background: archive.ph/ESJGH

The judge's injunction on that litigation mentioned in the Politico article does NOT cancel the need to comment on these TitleIX regs. The two are separate!

Read this Ovarit post and check out the biography of a fierce champion for Title IX, Patsy Takemoto Mink.

OP posts:
Floisme · 18/07/2022 17:47

I think Delphinium is correct. I was a bit concerned I might not know enough about US legislation to say anything helpful but all the comments I saw were simple and very straightforward.

Pallisers · 18/07/2022 20:21

Thank you Delphinium.

Vagablond · 21/07/2022 23:27

OK. I have completed a comment that I think is pretty clear in explaining the issues and following the "Commenter's Checklist" guide on the site.

Sorry this took so long! It was really hard to explain everything in under 5000 characters. While you can submit a longer comment as a document attachment (which I also plan to do, simply in the name of being thorough), I really wanted the type-in comment to be exactly the same as the attachment, just in case they have some issue with downloading/viewing the attachment.

I haven't actually submitted the comment yet (though I pasted it into the comment box to make sure it fits and doesn't have any "invalid characters" or any such issues). So if anyone has any notes or suggestions, please feel free to share them.

Oh, also, the comment is just a few characters under the limit, so if you copy-paste this comment, make sure there are no extra lines or spaces. Sometimes the site tells you you have "invalid characters" when actually you are just over the character limit. It's weird.

Here is the comment (docket number must be included in the comment text):

Docket ID ED-2021-OCR-0166
I am concerned about some of the proposed changes to Title IX. Specifically, the provision forbidding recipients from “adopting a policy or engaging in a practice that prevents a person from participating in an education program or activity consistent with their gender identity” means that women will no longer be afforded sex-specific provisions, as these provisions can be claimed by members of the opposite sex. Preventing discrimination against trans/nonbinary people shouldn’t come at the expense of women, and yet that is precisely what will happen if the proposed changes go through. Effectively, Title IX will be nullified.

The most glaring example is in the area of athletics. Women’s sports exist because biological males have a significant physiological advantage over women in almost all areas of athletics. Segregating sports on the basis of sex ensures that women are able to meaningfully compete in sports.

If biological males can identify as women and compete in women’s sports, then by definition, sex-segregated sports no longer exist. Since males have such a significant physiological advantage, women will no longer have an equal opportunity to compete in sports. Since the entire point of Title IX is to ensure that women have equal opportunities in education (including sports), the proposed changes to Title IX are (ironically) in direct violation of Title IX.

Please keep in mind that “transgender” means something very different today than it did just a decade ago. Previously, a “transgender woman” was a biological male with a condition known as gender dysphoria, who used surgery and/or female hormones to “transition” into appearing female.

Today, however, the definition of a “transwoman” has expanded to include males who do not have gender dysphoria and do not have surgery or take female hormones. Often their transition consists of nothing more than a wig and a change of pronouns. In fact there is NOTHING a person is required to do, beyond a simple self-declaration, in order to identify as trans. This means it is entirely feasible for men to fraudulently identify as transwomen.

This loophole goes unrecognized under the proposed changes. There’s no requirement for a person to undergo any kind of transition or provide any kind of medical documentation, so it will be possible for literally any male to identify as female.

Sports isn’t the only area in which women will lose the right to equal opportunities. Virtually all aspects of education will be affected. Scholarships earmarked for women could be claimed by biological males, thus defeating the purpose of female-specific scholarships.

Or (to give a more specific example) let’s say the student government has a Women’s Committee to specifically address women’s needs on campus. Theoretically up to 100% of the committee members could be transwomen, ensuring that biological women’s needs are underrepresented or perhaps entirely unrepresented.

Say a certain campus club or organization has come under fire for excluding females from joining. One or more of the members could simply declare themselves female (without undergoing any sort of transition, or even a name change). The club can declare that things have changed and they now have female members, even though literally nothing has changed. Similar scenarios could play out in any aspect of education where women are underrepresented or discriminated against.

As if the loss of equal opportunities wasn’t enough, the proposed changes also threaten women’s safety and privacy. Any women’s dormitory or locker room would be open to any male who claims to have a female gender identity. It is foolish to think this loophole won’t be seized upon by sexual predators/voyeurs. Women have the right to feel safe when they are sleeping, showering, and changing clothes. They shouldn’t have to deal with the prospect of being forced to shower or sleep next to biological males who have a male physique/genitalia.

The bottom line is that gender identity and biological sex are discrete concepts. The very fact that trans people’s gender identity is at odds with their biological sex should make it self-evident that these are discrete concepts. Yet the proposed changes conflate the two by defining gender identity discrimination as a form of sex discrimination. A better strategy would be to leave Title IX unchanged, and pass new, separate legislation that guarantees freedom from discrimination based on gender identity.

Furthermore, if the law declares that a male person’s female gender identity overrides or takes precedence over his biological sex, then by definition women no longer have sex-specific provisions. Therefore, any new gender identity legislation should specify that excluding biological males from female-specific provisions does not constitute gender identity discrimination. This is unavoidably necessary to preserve women's rights.

Pallisers · 21/07/2022 23:38

Vagablond, that is an excellent submission. Mine was far more along the lines of "you know why Title IX was enacted. considering what women in the US are facing at the moment, why would you also rob us of places on women's sports teams.

I particularly liked this and plan on leaving another comment incorporating it:

A better strategy would be to leave Title IX unchanged, and pass new, separate legislation that guarantees freedom from discrimination based on gender identity.

Vagablond · 21/07/2022 23:49

Pallisers · 21/07/2022 23:38

Vagablond, that is an excellent submission. Mine was far more along the lines of "you know why Title IX was enacted. considering what women in the US are facing at the moment, why would you also rob us of places on women's sports teams.

I particularly liked this and plan on leaving another comment incorporating it:

A better strategy would be to leave Title IX unchanged, and pass new, separate legislation that guarantees freedom from discrimination based on gender identity.

Thank you! I included that bit because #7 on the Commenter's Checklist says, "If you disagree with a proposed action, suggest an alternative (including not regulating at all) and include an explanation and/or analysis of how the alternative might meet the same objective or be more effective."

I found it impossible to include everything on the checklist without running out of space, but #7 seemed pretty important. I didn't have enough space for an "explanation/analysis of how the alternative might meet the same objective or be more effective" but hopefully what I wrote will be enough.

Delphinium20 · 22/07/2022 04:54

@Vagablond Oh, thank you, thank you so very much!!!!

this line is perfect: Since the entire point of Title IX is to ensure that women have equal opportunities in education (including sports), the proposed changes to Title IX are (ironically) in direct violation of Title IX.

Thank you @Pallisers !!!

💐

OP posts:
Delphinium20 · 22/07/2022 04:54

pink85 · 16/07/2022 17:06

Will definitely try and help and leave a comment because this cannot be allowed to happen

💐Thank you!

OP posts:
Delphinium20 · 25/07/2022 20:46

In case anyone is still following (and we have until Sept. 12), here's an excellent set of guidelines for writing clear and actionable comments:

katherinemacosta.substack.com/p/write-an-effective-public-comment

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page