💬 Off-Topic Transgender Legislation and Litigation

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
But there is no credible evidence thaat troonery actually does any of those things Michael.

Every single on point study had found this to be false.

This assertion is even more retarded considering that depression is rarely terminal or even life threatening.

Screenshot 2025-06-30 183059.webp

Screenshot 2025-06-30 183457.webp
Screenshot 2025-06-30 183421.webp
 
Izdaja Slika said:
I feel like Jackson, Sotomayor, and Kagan eat at a different table from the other Justices in the Supreme Court canteen.
Click to expand...
It's starting to feel like they are the Special Ed. kids on the Supreme Court. How can Sotomayor be that dumb? Thomas feels the adult trying to wrangle a bunch of retards in judge robes.
 
Not Dr. Evil said:
This assertion is even more retarded considering that depression is rarely terminal or even life threatening.
Click to expand...
The treatment to save my life is receiving a million dollars, and if I don't get it I'll also fall into a deep depression. Its critical to my mental health and well being for that million dollars to be handed over to me in unmarked, non-sequential bills, and if this does not take place then the government is committing genocide against me. :)

Real talk if they want to reduce depression, suicidal ideation, and self harm I'm pretty sure there's some studies about how touching grass helps with that, and its a lot cheaper too.
 
Not Dr. Evil said:
Houston Unified School District trooned out a kid behind their parents backs and over the parent's objections.

Osborn-v.-HISD-Complaint-06232025
Click to expand...
All schools that do this should have their funding stripped and a full investigation into all teachers should occur. Isn't illegal for schools to make medical decisions for a child without the parent's explicit permission? I swear that was a law.
 
Stabby_Pencil said:
All schools that do this should have their funding stripped and a full investigation into all teachers should occur. Isn't illegal for schools to make medical decisions for a child without the parent's explicit permission? I swear that was a law.
Click to expand...
full transparency, I only skimmed the PDF, but there was no medical/physical transition. Teachers and school employees kept using a male name and pronouns for a female student despite objections from her parents, and continued to do so over multiple school years.

Because the female student was seeing a non-affirming therapist who explicitly said “do not use male pronouns for her as it interferes with our treatment of her gender dysphoria”, maybe that is technically a medical decision?
 
Kerry Benton said:
full transparency, I only skimmed the PDF, but there was no medical/physical transition. Teachers and school employees kept using a male name and pronouns for a female student despite objections from her parents, and continued to do so over multiple school years.
Click to expand...
The transition doesn't seem to be anything more than her wanting people to refer to her as a "him".

Problem is that the parents found out and explicitly told them not to entertain the delusions but the teachers kept doing it. They asked to know which teachers were doing it and the school refused to give out names.

At what point does it become "ok, this shit is not worth it" for the school? Worst part is that they knew who was doing it and refused to do anything about it. I hope it was worth it to them.
 
Not Dr. Evil said:
Houston Unified School District trooned out a kid behind their parents backs and over the parent's objections.

Osborn-v.-HISD-Complaint-06232025
Click to expand...
Hoping a legal kiwi can chime in....So if they win and the court confirms these policies of affirming and concealing social transitions violate the parents constitutional rights, does that mean all the other school districts across the nation that have adopted these policies have to ditch them? How far reaching would the precedence be?
 
Kerry Benton said:
Because the female student was seeing a non-affirming therapist who explicitly said “do not use male pronouns for her as it interferes with our treatment of her gender dysphoria”, maybe that is technically a medical decision?
Click to expand...
The suit addresses this pretty well on pages 25-26, but basically the problem is that affirming a social transition is not a neutral act.

From the pdf: "... some evidence shows that social transition “locks” the
child into discomfort with his or her biological sex (that is, entrenches rather than cures gender dysphoria), and greatly increases the likelihood that the child will continue on to puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or both."

So even if the school wasn't explicitly going against the student's therapist, you can still strongly argue that this counts as a psychological intervention that they have no business doing.
 
broken chiron said:
Hoping a legal kiwi can chime in....So if they win and the court confirms these policies of affirming and concealing social transitions violate the parents constitutional rights, does that mean all the other school districts across the nation that have adopted these policies have to ditch them? How far reaching would the precedence be?
Click to expand...

It if filed in Federal Court so if it went up on appeal it would go to the Fifth Circuit so it would cover Texaas, Louisiana, and Mississppi.
 
broken chiron said:
The suit addresses this pretty well on pages 25-26, but basically the problem is that affirming a social transition is not a neutral act.

From the pdf: "... some evidence shows that social transition “locks” the
child into discomfort with his or her biological sex (that is, entrenches rather than cures gender dysphoria), and greatly increases the likelihood that the child will continue on to puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or both."

So even if the school wasn't explicitly going against the student's therapist, you can still strongly argue that this counts as a psychological intervention that they have no business doing.
Click to expand...
The teachers don’t know the damage they create with social transition, nor do they have a view of the consequences past the adolescent short stay in school.

This is frustrating.
 
Écho Öwl said:
The teachers don’t know the damage they create with social transition, nor do they have a view of the consequences past the adolescent short stay in school.

This is frustrating.
Click to expand...
True.
However, these are educators of children and there's a realistic parental expectation for teachers not to allow themselves to be ideologically captured,

Hopefully there will be serious professional consequences for all the staff involved in this and the shockwave from that will make other teachers consider their position before repeating this parody of pastoral care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom