• Snapz@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    These charades will be consistently overturned because they are obviously unconstitutional, but passing these broken laws isn’t their point - they just want the LGBTQIA+ community to live in constant fear.

    People are also simple though, so the longer they can repeat the lie, the more people start to accept it as the status quo. They make a lot of noise in “passing” initially and then the reality follow-up (like this) gets a fraction of the attention typically - that makes it a “win” for the bad guys overall.

  • projectazar@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the right outcome for this court case. There is no conceivable way to interpret the equal protection clause that supports a ban on gender affirming care, especially in light of analysis that targeting trans people is specifically gender discrimination. If the care is available for a person, but for their gender, it seems plainly obvious that the discrimination is based on gender and doesn’t, in my view, even meet a rational basis analysis, let alone the slightly heightened analysis for gender discrimination.

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think I can confidently say that every single modern procedure in the umbrella of “gender-affirming care” was developed for use on non-trans people. Most of them, for cis people, or for intersex people in order to make them present cis according to their assigned-at-birth gender.

      And it isn’t HRT that is the most common medical gender-affirming care. It’s breast augmentation. Which regularly gets done to cis women as young as 16.

      When you ban these procedures ONLY for trans kids, you are 100% banning the procedure on the basis of sex. It’s without question a violation of US law.

  • Chloyster [she/her]@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Obviously, wish we were in a reality where this never got passed. But still, a great outcome for this!!! So thrilled to see it 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🎉🎉🎉💖💖💖

  • notUboiii@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Non-westerner here so I’m very much out of the loop. I’m a bit confused when I read headlines like this one. Does “allowing gender-affirming treatment” mean that transgender minors are allowed to have HRT or surgeries? to me it seems like a bad idea giving a minor (trans or cis) access to surgeries and/or hormone therapy. Does the ban have other ramifications that I don’t understand? Can someone explain please

    • noodlejetski@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      trans youth gender-affirming treatment doesn’t use hormones. it uses puberty blockers, so that the child doesn’t go through puberty, and when they turn 18 they can state HRT with a better outcome. the therapy is reversible, so when the child stops taking puberty blockers, they undergo normal puberty process, and it’s a recommended treatment for trans youth by multiple pediatrician and psychiatrist societies and associations.

      • BlueSharkEnjoyer@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Trans youth can access HRT, and in some cases surgeries. The only age-related requirement in WPATH v8 is that puberty has started, there’s no need to wait until 18.

        For reference cis people typically start puberty around age 11, though 8-14 is the starting range.

        • iso@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Never heard of anyone who had a gender dysphoria related surgery before the age of 18 ever. Nor did I ever hear from any endocrinologist who started HRT before the age of 16.

          The gatekeeping from medical professionals is massive, there isn’t a single professional who doesn’t question ones identity 20 times during the course of months just to be sure.

    • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why should you be consulted on the question of what should be permitted? Are you a doctor, parent, or transgender child?

      If they agree it is necessary, what do the ramifications matter?