I think this is aimed at the drag queen story hour type of thing. So it targets cabaret performances performed anywhere except in an adult cabaret, by, among others, male or female impersonators.
It doesn’t look like it is specifically written to target everyone wearing the “wrong” clothes, but it does look to me like it could be used that way. Regardless, it’s an extremely broad law, which will at the very least have a chilling effect on the actions of anyone who is trans or gender-nonconforming in the state. Like, will a trans person and their partner feel free to dance at a concert in the park?
Absolutely, and I worry that this is just the start of the persecution they want to bring. I can imagine that they’ll consider just being trans to be “disruptive” or “indecent” or “provocative” and won’t someone think of the children?!
These are people pining for the simpler times of the 1800s.
I’m extremely gender nonconforming, and I would have to research these new laws if I were, for example, asked to travel to one of these states for work. (And if it was an opportunity rather than an assignment, I’d miss out because I’d decline the offer.)
Another concern I would have is not a change in the law, but a worry about discretion and enforcement – if I travel to one of these states, and I go to fly out, what happens if someone decides my ID doesn’t match my sex, based on my gender presentation? Am I going to wind up getting strip searched to prove my anatomy?
I actually have plans to travel to Florida in a few months, and I’m pretty worried about the laws and the hostility level, both for myself and my kids, one of whom is also gender nonconforming.
I am also gender non-conforming, but masculine women get less flack than feminine men, so i haven’t given serious thought to whether I’d run into trouble with these laws. But maybe I should.
Originally “Transgender Day of Remembrance” for honoring the trans/gender-nonconforming folk murdered in the prior year. Recently revamped as “Transgender Day of Visibility” because people wanted to focus on those of us still around and fighting rather than get fixated on martyrs. “Trans Day of Vengeance” is another attempt at revamping in the face of, well. See thread title.
More clearly, the SC voted not to overturn an injunction preventing the West Virginia law from being enforced, until the case plays out. The SC upheld the lower court’s ruling.
Transgender teen has to correct her mother about the lies she gives in an interview to an anti-LGBTQ media outlet.
Here’s a link to the teen’s twitter. I don’t know if I want to link to the article the mother was involved in, as I don’t know if they deserve the clicks, but if anyone asks, I can provide it. (I think you can get there through the thread as well)
The teen finds that she has to out herself in order to correct her mother’s lies.
Emily Yoffe, a current contributing editor at the Atlantic and Slate’s former advice columnist, has a specialty, of sorts: as I wrote in the prehistoric days of 2015, she has a tendency to write pieces about sexual assault that “tend to conclude that the accuser was wrong, lying, or drunk.” But she’s updated the formula somewhat
I read her once or twice when she was an advice columnist. I didn’t think she gave very good advice,
Yes, good grief indeed. Rather than lay it out in legislation, they pass the buck on to the athletic associations to determine how to enforce this legislation. But they do require that this legislation is enforced.
What one legislature said was, "that would happen during a student athlete’s “sports physical.” so apparently the doctor is the one that needs to affirm the state of one’s genitals.
While it is hyperbole (and sometimes amusing hyperbole at that) that the Republicans want to personally check the genitials of young female athletes, it is not hyperbole that their genitals will need to be checked.
And it will not be part of the “normal” physical. A physical reports if an athlete is healthy or has any health problems that would preclude them from participating in a sport. Anything not relevant to whether the athlete is healthy enough to participate is private information. It has never before reported whether someone has a penis or vagina.
BTW, from the cite that you chose to use:
So all of this is over nothing other than pure transphobia.
