Egregoros

@feld @georgia I'm not trying to attac trans people but its just obviously also true that you literally can't know without talking to a person, and then you can't derive intent why someone says they are, why they transitioned, or why they detransitioned. if you can frame this as an immutable characteristic that would be insanely weird

バツ子（犬育てマニア

@sun @feld @georgia
"religion" is deemed a protected characteristic

Blurry Moon

@ageha @feld @georgia no one claims it is immutable, religion is considered an extremely strong social concept that has to be accommodated, which was definitely true at least when the country was founded.

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

バツ子（犬育てマニア

@sun @feld @georgia
point was that "immutable" ought to be irrelevant to the discussion. of the things considered protected characteristics in the states, the majority change over time (religion, age, pregnancy, familial status, disability, veteran status). even "race" (socially derived categorisation dependent on zeitgeist) and "genetic information" (subject to chromosomal loss, other mutations, donor or other foreign cells proliferating, etc) are things that change with time. the only one on the list that doesn't is "national origin"

Replies

Replying to @ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu

バツ子（犬育てマニア

@sun @feld @georgia
※ strike that first "national origin", sorry

Replying to @ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu

バツ子（犬育てマニア

@feld @georgia @sun
what the actual ruling turns on is the fantasy of a "biological sex", which it asserts is not a cultural invention of the past 5 years or so (in it's current terminological form, bit over a hundred in spirit) but a fact of the universe across cultures throughout history, and one so powerful that "the benefit 'that natural testosterone provides to male athletes is not diminished
through the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones' "

Replying to @ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu

Blurry Moon

@ageha @feld @georgia I tried to, in a different place, make an appeal to that that I knew you would appreciate, but I think your position on it is way further toward unclassification than any reasonable society or government at this scale could adopt

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

バツ子（犬育てマニア

@sun @feld @georgia
don't even mean actual reality here but the historically perceived reality, which, even in the legal context, disagrees with them

Replying to @ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu

Blurry Moon

@ageha @feld @georgia I don't think even the 1919 USA can come back, though. please believe, I would like a world where a woman acts and dresses like a man, there's no law that says she can't and her sheer force of will makes people accept her as one.

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Blurry Moon

@ageha @feld @georgia lets be real though, the libertarian impulse has no actual support in the government even among radicals who almost 100% are really "libertarian but only for gender, but also I need laws enforcing my trans-affirming gender views"

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Q.U.I.N.N.

@sun @feld @georgia @ageha
> libertarian
that's because AIPAC politically assassinates them all

Replying to @icedquinn@blob.cat

Blurry Moon

@icedquinn @feld @georgia @ageha the problem with libertarians and anarchists is they are outcompeted by better organizers, who tend to be evil, even if the elaborate crystaline structure they create eventually shatters 100-300 years later

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Q.U.I.N.N.

@nicholas@aklp.club remote

@sun @feld @georgia @ageha it is indeed hard to coordinate against foreign adversaries who have deeply infected your state already, yes.

they literally set spending records to dump a milquetoast republican for saying war bad actually.

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Nicholas Conrad

@sun @icedquinn @feld @georgia @ageha

In a democracy, wise men are condemned to be ruled by their lessers.

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

バツ子（犬育てマニア

@sun @feld @georgia
what i mean is that, going back hundreds of years ago, there were legal debates over what a person's sex is (because that mattered in the context of marriage and inheritence and such). and those decisions were made looking at physical layouts and social contexts, not mystical essences, and sometimes by necessity came to fuzzy conclusions. that was both common and legal understanding historically, and this ruling is a retcon

Replying to @ageha@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu

Blurry Moon

@ageha @feld @georgia for the record I am not defending or accusing the ruling, this is an incredibly muddy topic though and you can expect the supreme court to flip a lot on it and I don't think you can even take all that precedent and make a coherent legal theory anyway

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Q.U.I.N.N.

@sun @feld @georgia @ageha > the courts mirror the politics of the party that installed them

absolutely gobsmacked

Replying to @icedquinn@blob.cat

Blurry Moon

@icedquinn @feld @georgia @ageha generally but not absolutely. but they at least do make arguments you can test

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Q.U.I.N.N.

@sun @feld @georgia @ageha whom can test them?

thomas et all can literally write "pee pee poo poo goo goo gaga" as the ruling and literally nothing changes compared to writing 500 pages of pseudo english drivel.

Replying to @icedquinn@blob.cat

Blurry Moon

@icedquinn @feld @georgia @ageha I mean you can evaluate if they're a good argument, you can't do anything bout it lol

Replying to @sun@shitposter.world

Q.U.I.N.N.