So why resort to hysterical headlines? Get the message across without hyperbole. BTW sports physicals don’t include pelvic exams on children.
It sounds like they will going forward, at least in Kansas.
Where did you read that?
HB 2238 did not categorically mention “genital inspections,” nor did it specifically spell out how athletic officials at schools would enforce the law — that is, how they would determine whether a student is trans or cisgender.
How do YOU think the law can be enforced?
I’m guessing that it ain’t gonna be through state wide pelvic and genital exams on hundreds of thousands of girls and boys who just want to participate in sports. As a parent would you allow your preteen kid to have their genitalia examined if an ambiguous or otherwise law suggested it? Hell no.
It’s not going to be a state panel, it will be pediatricians, who already certify kids are healthy enough to play school sports, who are going to have to verify that they have the right genitalia.
A similar law was overturned (or vetoed or something) in another state because the pediatricians protested that they didn’t want to have to do that.
You are guessing?
Care to actually do more than guess?
Tell us, specifically, how this law will be enforced.
No, but I also wouldn’t have voted for the transphobes that wrote the law.
I suppose there may be a number of hypocrites who did vote for the transphobes, and do support the law, but that would be upset that their child would need to be inspected. After all, they are good christian families, who never abuse their child in that way. (In many other ways, of course, but never by acknowledging their gender identity.)
And as you pointed out with your cite, it’s all purely for transphobia, catering to the most hateful parts of their constituency, and has no actual use as far as competitiveness is concerned.
How do you think they’ll check? A little peek in the undies, get undressed and bend over, or what? Likely it’ll be some guided questions for a cya checkbox.
So you think they will take the athlete at their word? Isn’t that the whole issue?
Yes I do and the parents too. I believe most care providers will muddle through this ambiguous law without having to submit their patients to gynecological exams.
It’s an idiotic vague law that only serves to make the sponsors look like they’ve accomplished something for their constituents.
Time will tell.
And yet, the sponsor of the bill assumes that there will be genital inspections.
So long as we are merely guessing, would anyone be surprised if it plays out as follows?
- Girls compete
- No one raises objections
- Nothing happens
-or-
- Girls compete
- Objections are raised about one girl
- She gets inspected
(Plus, uh, something something birth certificate?)
Ah, the infamous Shirley exceptions. It’s exactly how you get tyrannies, as people like yourself say, “Surely they won’t enforce it that way!”, when that way is exactly what the intent is.
It’s a law meant to oppress people. And sure, people think that it will only be used to oppress those people, but it’s quite often that they get surprised when it gets used against them as well.
The reasoning and the execution of this law is based on hate. You really think that there is anything reasonable to come from this?
Be better if they did it like race horse drug testing: the first three finishers are tested plus one at random. The girls on the medals platform are nude so everyone can see if they’re gen-u-wine.
Boys, too. If they get beat by a transgender ‘boy’ they deserve to be embarrassed.
Hey, that’s traditional! Didn’t the original Olympic games have the contesants nude?
That would never get used for bullying, right? No one would ever, you know, accuse someone of being trans for petty reasons.
What objections are you saying should be reasonable? That she won, or that she doesn’t look feminine enough. Is it other athletes or parents who can raise the objections?
This is a solution in search of a victim.
I don’t think I said anything about “reasonable”.
I think a more apt description is “This i s the Republicans fixing something until it is broken”.
So they should inspect girls for unreasonable objections?
I was responding to your post about “how this law will be enforced.” I’d give a different answer for what I think they “should” do.