Right, AFAICT there are “open” competitions and “women’s” competitions. The idea seems to be, as in women’s poker tournaments and similar, that the massive underrepresentation of female players at competitive levels makes it more attractive for female players to have women-only events.
But I still don’t quite get the pre-transition-titles asymmetry. Are they reasoning that if you’re an AMAB transgender woman who previously competed in the open category then your previous titles are still valid because anybody’s allowed to compete there? But if you’re an AFAB transgender man who previously competed in the women’s category, then identifying as a man retroactively nullifies your previous victories?
I guess that would be sort of logical, come to think of it; the assumption is apparently that one’s transgender identity is considered to apply retroactively, and thus a transgender man shouldn’t have been competing in women’s events in the first place.
Which is also completely out-of-sync with how the rest of international sport deals with trans athletes’ titles. Nobody revoked Bruce Jenner’s medals when he became Caitlyn.
Because they were seeking a Temporary Restraining Order to prohibit the enforcement of the new law everywhere, not just in this plaintiff’s case. Also, the TRO was very clear that it did not, in any way, reach the merits of the case.
The NC legislature took advantage of their supermajority to override the governor’s veto of two bills. One of them, the Parents Bill of Rights, requires among other things that teachers are required to inform parents if their children request the use of other pronouns or names for them. The expressed reasoning is that parents have the right to control all decisions regatfding the care of their children. The other prohibits parents and doctors from providing any sort of medical care such as puberty blocking drugs or cross sex hormones to minor children.
So which is it? Are parents responsible for any decisions regarding the raising of their children or not?
That’s certainly the case when an accommodation is as easy as handing the kid a key to the elevator. It’s not always that easy. For example, at my school, the elevator was broken for the entire spring semester. During that time, multiple students and at least one teacher needed special accommodations, and without a working elevator, those accommodations were a real mess. In that case, I’m pretty sure that the school did get medical opinions on what would be necessary and appropriate for different patients.
And even in schools that are supportive of students, there can still be a lot of bureaucratic inertia. I’ve been in schools where the principals themselves told me “That student’s name is X, and their preferred pronouns are A, and they’ll be highly offended if called Y, and their custodial parent is aware and supportive of this”, but yet, the school’s official rostering system will still have the student listed as Y and gender as B. Even though all of the individual people are supportive, The System as a whole somehow isn’t. And that can leak through, when someone (such as a substitute teacher) doesn’t know the student personally and deals with them based on what the official roster says.
This. My students were deadnamed constantly by admin and there really wasn’t anything we could do about it. I’m thankful none of them had gym because that would have been another huge fight.
Not sure what you have in mind. But, without the law, there would be no restrictions: kids could still tell their parents if they want to, and the parents then could still talk to their doctor about any medical care.
The actual result of the first law isn’t that parents would be told if their kid is trans (or experimenting to see if they are) who otherwise wouldn’t. It’s that their kids will not tell the teachers. And that teachers who might be able to help them won’t be able to.
I predict a backlash when certain parents start getting calls from every single one of their kid’s teachers to let them know they insist on being addressed as “Jim” instead of “James”.
First day of class and the teacher says, “This class may be more formal than you’re used to. We’ll start off by learning everybody’s name. You, the boy in the first row, what’s your name?”
“Julie!”
“Like I said, we’re formal here so, no nicknames. You are Julius. And you, next to him. What is your name?”
Yeah, unless he was trying to sign a parents’ bill of rights that allowed them to give their children medical care while opposing, uh, what? I’m not even sure – a bill forcing teachers to tell the parents about names?
Anyway, I disagree with TOWP that going the other way on these issues is hypocritical in the same way. I mean, one of the bills that the anti-trans bigots passed is literally called a bill of rights, while the other bill took away really important parental rights regarding medical care for their children.
I thought the whole point of the ‘hypocritical’ charge was that, on one issue, the parents are to be informed, and on the other, the parents aren’t to be involved in the decision-making process — and the reverse is taking the stand that, no, parents aren’t to be informed, but are to be involved in the decision-making process.
Part of the issue with the “Parent’s Rights” bill is that requiring teachers to inform parent that their child wants to be called “Jane” instead of “Bill” or that their child has said that they think of themselves of the opposite sex could put the child at risk. What if the parents are ultra-conservative Christians who, upon being given this information, proceed to punish the child (“We need to beat the ‘the gay’ out of them”). Not all parents are understanding of their children’s feelings about who they are, and the parents’ reaction could easily drive the child to suicide. This also removes a possible source of assistance for the child to deal with their feelings, particularly if they know that their parents will not respond in a positive manner.
A man walks up to a woman at a bus stop to chat her up, then pulls a gun and fires when he realizes she’s trans. That’s not “mistaken identity,” it’s a hate crime. Republicans are whipping people into such a frenzy that just existing as trans in public is a crime punishable by death.
It would be absolutely no different than if a person walked up to another person at a bus stop, started up a conversation, then realized they were Black and shot them. Absolutely no different.
“Once I realized their skin was dark and it wasn’t just a shadow of the bus stop awning I was in genuine fear of my life!”