cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/17202407
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) introduced a bill this week to legally erase transgender people, entitled the “Defining Male and Female Act of 2024.” He claimed that the bill will stop what he called the Biden administration’s attempt to “replace biological sex with dangerous radical gender ideology.”
The bill is a long list of terms and definitions, where words like “father” and “girl” are defined with the words “male” and “female.” Those two words are then defined as “an individual who naturally has, had, will have, or would have, but for a congenital anomaly or intentional or unintentional disruption, the reproductive system that at some point produces, transports and utilizes [sperm or eggs for male or female, respectively] for fertilization.”
Making everything sexual for children while not even acknowledging the sickness of it.
Same shit said about gay people.
Being gay isn’t sexual. Being straight isn’t sexual. Being trans isn’t sexual. Someone saying they are a girl is not sexual. Someone saying they are a boy is not sexual.
You see how none of this relates to sex?
The real answer is that a lot of people don’t really understand being trans. A lot of people used to the same way about gay and lesbian people. Conservatives tried to rally hard against gay and lesbian people, but that proved unpopular. Trans people don’t have that same protection. So, they’ll go after it until people finally get it.
Conservatives only have identity politics.
I’ll agree someone saying they are are a girl/boy or trans isn’t sexual. Gender isn’t inherently sexual. Someone being gay/straight feels like it’s absolutely sexual. Implied with the"sexual" in homo or heterosexual. You could have nonsexual gay/straight thoughts/feelings I guess, but those are just feelings. Like, ANYONE is allowed to have them regardless of orientation, and honestly sounds like it’s bordering on asexual. Do you have a learning example for that line of thought? Before any angry blowback: I’m not trying to be a dick about this. As far as my understanding of this goes, I don’t follow that comment.
I’m referring to nudity and expressing sexuality in front of children. Drag and children. Parades of expression with children involved. Seeing essentially naked men and women and children being encouraged to interact in it.
Nudity is also not inherently sexual. You can be naked for reasons outside of having sex, such as cleaning yourself, using the bathroom, changing outfits, sunbathing, relaxing, etc. None of those are inherently sexual.
Wearing drag is not sexual either. It’s been a thing for centuries, and that’s just the easily identifiable stuff.
Wearing kink gear is not inherently sexual, though I can understand that you don’t recognize that because it has connotations. But you can wear it without it being a sexual act.
“Expressing” sexuality is purposefully vague. Is kissing expressing sexuality? Is holding hands? Children do those. That would be an expression of your sexual orientation. You aren’t really making any sense.
You really think I’m talking about locker rooms? And do I need to point out that these have been male/female seperated?
