Pres. Biden EO Preventing Gender Identification Discrimination

1. 82

   GA Andersonposted 3 years ago

   I heard a news interview where a woman spokesman was going ballistic over this EO., She said it equated personal gender identification with biological sex. For the purposes of non-discrimination, gender identity now has the same protection as biological sex non-discrimination protection. She said it practically nullified all recent efforts of women to end discriminatory practices against them
   
   Sounds horrible, so off I went. Took a crash course at Google University.
   
   Here is the EO summary, from the EO:
   "Section 1.  Policy.  Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love.  Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports.  Adults should be able to earn a living and pursue a vocation knowing that they will not be fired, demoted, or mistreated because of whom they go home to or because how they dress does not conform to sex-based stereotypes.  People should be able to access healthcare and secure a roof over their heads without being subjected to sex discrimination.  All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation."
   
   . . .
   
   "It is the policy of my Administration to prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation and to fully enforce Title VII and other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.  It is also the policy of my Administration to address overlapping forms of discrimination."
   Source: Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation
   
   Sounds reasonable to me. I don't think gender identity should be a discriminatory matter either.
   
   Then I stumbled across an article speaking to this EO's effect on educational institutions and their title IX responsibilities. Here is just a blurb of what they may be facing:
   
   "Implementing President Biden’s Executive Order for schools requires a more comprehensive, yet nuanced evaluation than what may be expected for schools. Schools treating students consistent with the student’s gender identity seems pretty straightforward. If a biological male identifies as a female, then the school would treat that student as a female in all circumstances, and if a biological female identifies as a male, then the school would treat that student as a male in all circumstances. This all-encompassing, categorical summary is likely how the bulk of schools interprets the requirements.
   
   However, treating students consistent with that student’s gender identity may not be so cut and dry. “Gender identity” commonly refers to a person’s internal sense of gender or sense of self. There are over 100 genders, and the variety of gender identities continues to evolve, i.e. a person who has no sense of gender (agender), a gender that shares qualities with water (hydrogender); a person who is combined male and female (androgyne); a person who switches between two genders or experience genders simultaneously (bigender), etc. For the part of the “gender identity” definition that covers a person’s “sense of self,” there are individuals who “identify” as animals and fictional characters. Due to the wide range of possibilities for students’ subjective sense of themselves, it will be difficult for schools to avoid discrimination because of the wide-ranging, ever-evolving nature of gender identity."
   Source: President Biden’s Executive Order on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation: Implications for Schools
   
   I think the bottom line is that now the material fact of biological gender is being equated with gender identity. What do you think, molehill or mountain?
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I think the whole proposition is a very creative and mind-expanding contribution to humanity and society.
      
      And a very cool trip. In fact, unicorns are coming to carry us to higher realms of enlightenment and spiritual opportunity. I would like to go!
      
      I wish these one-horned horses would hurry up and get here. I got my pink satin saddle all ready to go. Also dying my hair the colors of the rainbow. Hope my unicorn's mane is rainbow colored too!
      
      I think I will choose to be asexual and don men's clothes which are better made and more comfortable than women's. I will look so cool on my white unicorn with its flowing multicolor mane in my khaki shorts and oversized pocketed T shirt.
      
      
      But, why identify with a gender at all?
      I am genderless and have no biological gender. I am neutral.
      I am spirit
      I am not human
      I am invisible
      I am etheric.
      I am not attracted to anyone and I will not produce offspring because I did not choose to have a human body, let alone my biological sex.
      ... or did I ?

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Live to Learnposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      From the viewpoint of a woman, this is misogyny, it will artificially create a world where women lose all hope of excelling in women's sports, our female children will be in jeopardy of sexual molestation from those who might choose to use the designation for perverted reasons and it is unreasonable, beyond the pale.
      
      Nothing seems more ignorant to me than ignoring biological markers. What is the only thing that all biological women have in common? I'll give you a hint. It's what it looks like between their legs.
      
      That is all. If someone claims they feel like a woman, they are confused. There is no defining characteristic of a woman other than the biological markers. What they feel doesn't make them a woman. It makes them human, since we are all unique and we all, at times, feel uncomfortable in our own skin.
      
      They have no right to infringe on the rights of others. They have a right to the pursuit of happiness, just like others. If they are being discriminated against because they don't fit the assumed norm of those who share their biological markers, we need to ensure they gain equal opportunity and are not subject to discrimination, but they have no right to push agendas which cause others to be discriminated against. To do so, in my mind, is the definition of toxic masculinity.

      replyreport
      1. 82

         GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Your reply sounds like the spokeswoman in the interview. She also thought it was misogynist. I don't get it. Why do you think that?
         
         I can see your point about sports activities, but I think it would be such a rare occurrence as to be almost a non-issue on a national basis. Although I suppose that if one were the victim of that rare occurrence it would be a very important issue. Hmm . . .
         
         I completely agree with your "ignoring biological markers" thought. I stand firmly on the belief that there are only two sexes, (shhh. . .  don't bother pointing out the anomaly of a hermaphrodite as a third sex). However, I don't think that is the real debate. I think it is a drive to make personal gender identification equitable with biological sex identification—and I think that is screwy.
         
         I can support this EO for its non-discrimination goal, but the obvious implications of where it might be taken, (as illustrated by the possible Title IX consequences), is worrying.
         
         Anyway, that was just rambling. Why is this a matter of misogyny to you?
         
         GA

         replyreport
      2. 69

         Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         I consider that an almost barbaric outlook, those are the very types of "fears" and concerns voiced by racists, sexists... I am sure you don't realize how it comes across, filled with bigotry, but I assure you those who consider themselves transgender or bigender would certainly feel so.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Live to Learnposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I know that was said tongue in cheek. I don't care. I'd be perfectly happy to discuss with a transgender. People of good will should be able to openly discuss. Anyone who feels they have been discriminated against certainly wouldn't want to be the cause of discrimination.

            replyreport
   3. 85

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I don't appreciate the Federal Government using Google psychology on America's children.  Not that I did not expect this EO, Joe has all bases covered. And ultimately this EO has no teeth. 
      
      Homeschooling and private schools can keep your kids safe from this form of Socialism.  So far those choices are still available.

      replyreport
      1. 82

         GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         I think you might be wrong about this EO not having any teeth. I think it will be directly applicable to Title IX requirements. And that has been shown to have a lot of teeth.
         
         Some schools have eliminated certain sports because they could not, note that is "could not," comply and the legal and monetary consequences were too severe to chance.
         
         GA

         replyreport
   4. 69

      Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I think from a variety of perspectives, from the more militant members of the Fifth Wave Feminist movement to upper tier Agenda 2030 protagonists this viewpoint is correct.
      
      When one considers the tier of "victimhood" that has been cultivated over the past decades and injected into American mainstream society, there have been frictions building for a while, but this just blows them apart.
      
      You had two primary groups long oppressed, minorities and women.
      
      As Social Justice and EO became more and more prominent in our culture, this became more inclusive, and eventually it developed tiers.
      
      An example of a tier would be, tier one is Minority or Woman, tier two would be Minority Woman, tier three (the absolute best option for any hire in any corporation) would be a Disabled Minority Woman.
      
      Now, being inclusive of a bigender or agender person, blows this all to heck.  Any white male with half a brain will put in a little effort to ensure he is classified by a psychiatrist as agender or bigender or whatever works.
      
      Wala!!!  You have leaped to the top of the tier of victimhood and can now be afforded full benefits of EO and Sex Discrimination, etc. etc.

      replyreport
      1. 82

         GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Good explanation Ken. I hadn't carried the thought that far, but it does agree with what the spokeswoman was saying. Such as being a woman is now pushed further down the ladder for discriminatory protections.
         
         I am going to have to develop that thought for a better understanding.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 69

            Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            You will have two types of men in America in the decades ahead, the stubborn and stupid, and the smart ones that learn to play the game.
            
            Taking Metrosexual to a whole new level.

            replyreport
            1. 82

               GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               oh gawddd . . . Metrosexual was bad enough in its old phase.
               
               Now here is an old dinosaur's thought; Which would one rather have if you can't have both; money or integrity? Unfortunately, I would end up in the stubborn and stupid group.
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  You and I are part of the past...
                  
                  We are products of another age, another era, that is passing away with haste.

                  replyreport
2. 70

   abwilliamsposted 3 years ago

   My response is short; homeschool.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Common sense must be instilled.

      replyreport
   2. 80

      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      better yet, birth control

      replyreport
   3. 82

      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Why? Would your reason be to teach children your thoughts and values regarding this subject, or to shield them from exposure to it?
      
      I think homeschooling is a legitimate choice—in general, but I think private or charter schools are a better one. I think they provide socialization opportunities that homeschooling can't, (or at least not as well). But, that is not a knowledge-backed thought, it is just my perception.
      
      I am also a school uniform advocate. Which I think fits in with my thoughts on homeschooling and charter schools.
      
      But, back to my question, as it relates to this particular topic, what is your reasoning?
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 70

         abwilliamsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         I agree homeschool or private/charter schools. My grandchildren are young, only one is in school so far, she is in a rural area public school. For now she is learning, for now, they live in a county that isn’t in the business of indoctrinating young minds with a bunch of bs.
         
         The times are changing so quickly, Parents/Guardians must stay a step ahead and {in many cases and places} the only way they can do that is by homeschooling or finding the right private or charter school, if the latter, that doesn’t mean they can let their guard down, not for a second.

         replyreport
3. 76

   Valeantposted 3 years ago

   I have a nephew who is trans.  I seriously doubt many people at all will live trans to gain an advantage or endure the social stigmas that come with transitioning to be abusers - although I agree that trans athletes have unfair advantages in sport when going from male to female.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Live to Learnposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      One's heart does go out to anyone grappling with feeling different. I think compassion and an attempt at understanding is in order. However, compassion and an attempt to understand should not be unilateral but should extend across the table.
      
      Using a restroom is one thing. We've got stalls. We all have privacy inside them. Locker rooms are different. A transgender needs to accept that the discomfort they feel which is forcing them to find it abhorrent to change with one sex does not take precedent over the discomfort caused by exposing alien body parts in the presence of others. We are trying to be compassionate to 2% of the population at the expense of an entire generation of children. I don't see the upside, when it comes to minors.
      
      Adults can easily adjust. Children in school must comply to the full extent of the policy, with little ability to improvise, nor do they have the maturity to understand how to.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         Valeantposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Agree on the bathroom stance.  I think the locker room issue is the tricky one and agree that there is no cookie cutter solution there.

         replyreport