Trump's plans for day one: ending child sexual mutilation and having just male and female genders

[ResisterOfTwaddleRex]

He says "genders" but that has to mean "sex". Day one executive orders, apparently:

x.com/chooocole/status/1870920265330528324?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

There isn't, and states have their own regimes. There's no federal GRC. How federal and state laws interact is beyond my expertise unfortunately.

The nearest to a national standard is the Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v Clayton County, but there are two interesting things about that: firstly, it was a quite narrow ruling in terms of employment discrimination (you can't fire someone merely for being gay or trans-identified).

The other point is that Gorsuch J's reasoning leaned heavily on sex (in its original meaning), so he was taking aim at discrimination on the basis of homosexuality or transgender status that involved employers treating employees differently on the basis of sex. That might mean in terms of dress codes that you can't fire a man for wearing a skirt; if he's wearing fetish gear to work, that might be a different matter.

The judgment is here; the dissent from Alito J is also worth a read.

Executive orders are a thing that come and go with every president. Biden reversed a lot of Trump's EOs on day one, and I'm sure Trump is about to do the same. To bed down any position you need legislation to pass through Congress, or better yet a SC ruling. In terms of Congress, Nancy Mace seems to have the bit between her teeth.

He's saying it now. There are only two genders. Male and female.

Two sexes! Two SEXES, you senile orange chimp! Not fucking genders, sexes!

The point about Trump is what he does, not what he says.

I wouldn't have phrased it the same way - I like chimps, and senility is not an insult😠 but I agree with you that the key point is the number of sexes, which is a scientific fact, and not the number of 'genders', which is such a waffly concept that enumerating them is just an irritating piece of non-science.

It's always better to say sex, if only to avoid some overeducated dweeb telling us about that African language with 16 genders (no, it's noun classes you big pillock), but more important to see what he does.

If Riley Gaines is happy, I'll be happy.

'Dweebs' and 'pillocks' - now there are two insults I'd happily use😂

The party to defend womens rights.

Well, some rights. Not all. Not the ones which give women autonomy over their own bodies and reproduction.

Apparently over 80% of US men are circumcised, so far more than would have been expected if it was a practice condoned simply for religious reasons. There does seem to be a wider cultural acceptance of circumcision than we see in the UK, so I think a general ban would have wider opposition.

I do agree with you though, it is a hideous act.

I've always wondered about that; why is circumcision so popular in the US?
Googling, this gives some answers:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tre.742

Fascinating!

I feel it's a cultural thing, like how Americans have a much more aggressive vaccine schedule than Europeans. A lot of what Bobby Kennedy has been saying isn't anti-vax as such, it's posing questions like "Why do we need to give eight separate vaccinations to newborn babies? Why can't our approach be more like Germany or Sweden?"

There's no comparison between male circumcision and female genital mutilation. Apart from both being unnecessary.

The right to be recognised as a discrete category of people which is distinct from male people underpins all women's rights.

Of course. Tbc, I'm not suggesting that for a moment.

Apologies, I wasn't directing my comment at you. It was a pp.

Having read a lot of posters here and on TwiX predicting that Trump would do nothing to help against genderism (I remember during the US election, Julie Bindel was convinced Trump would be of no use to the fight), I'm happy to see this EO being put into action, as promised.

I think this promptness, as well as the wording, shows that the Trump campaign realised that their campaigning on the issue of genderism was a definite vote winner and that their voters want to see action taken.

As said above, now we wait to see if Nancy Mace can garner support for legislation to undo genderist changes to women's and gay rights, as well as to protect children from a medical industry that has lost the run of itself.

Ah yes those ‘vicious’ women talking about single sex spaces. Right up there with males who abuse, threaten and use violence against those women.

Which ‘regular forums’ are you referring to?

I see. It's just Mumsnet and everyone else is going to be horrified that men won't be locked up in women's prisons or permitted to ruin women's sports.

Thanks for clarifying.

Just as a matter of interest, has anyone on Mumsnet ever:

1. Told you to "suck their girld*ck'?

1. Told you to "die in a grease fire"?

1. Exhorted other people to decapitate you?

1. Described in graphic detail their fantasy of first raping and then murdering you?

I haven't read all the threads here, so this isn't a rhetorical question; I would like to know the answer.

If you want to see what regular people think

Mumsnet is populated by "regular people". Mostly women. It does however have a middle class bias. If you go out and chat to more working class "regular people" rather than hang around on Reddit or Bluesky or closed left leaning Facebook groups populated by TRAs and their hangers on, you'll see they don't subscribe to gender identity ideology any more than most of mumsnet does.

Mmm. Given the climate of fear and re-education that has been in place for years, I think all you can state with confidence is that people around you are careful to be seen to have the right opinions.

Most people know that humans don't change sex and think women's protections matter more than men's feelings, when they're not worried about their continued employment depending on the answer.

It's middle class women in comfortable circumstances who are happy to give away the rights and protections of all women, on the basis that they themselves won't need them.

So what you say tracks.

am a middle class woman in my early thirties and don't recognise the attitudes seen on Mumsnet amongst my peers. Most post graduate professionals in their thirties are very inclusive of and respectful to transgender people.

You're middle class, in your own bubble then. Most people in this country, or any country, don't support gender identity ideology. They would like to live and let live to a point, but they share most of our concerns.