[maz]

President Trump is allegedly going to revoke this Obama nonsense, not that his guideline was any kind of binding policy in the first place. I'm not even sure what the hell a federal guideline is anyways.

Official: Trump to revoke transgender bathroom guidance

Republican President Donald Trump's administration was expected to revoke landmark guidelines issued to public schools in defense of transgender student rights, according to a draft document seen on Wednesday by Reuters.

The draft reverses former Democratic President Barack Obama's signature initiative on transgender rights, which instructed public schools to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms matching their gender identity. (Read the draft here: tmsnrt.rs/2kMAGAS)

The draft document, a joint effort of the Justice and Education departments, could be subject to change before it is sent to schools across the country. It may be released as early as Wednesday, according to advocacy groups which have been in contact with administration officials.

"We are hearing that it will be rescinded today," said Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality.

The document states that its purpose is to withdraw the guidance of May 13, 2016, while Trump's Justice and Education departments "further consider the legal issues involved."

Last year's guidance, issued by Obama's Justice and Education departments, threatened to withhold federal funding if schools forced transgender students to use bathrooms corresponding to their gender assigned at birth against their will.

Conservatives have raised fears about men or boys claiming to be transgender in order to spy or prey on women or girls in public restrooms.

Under the new guidelines, public schools could set their own rules without fear of losing federal funds or a lawsuit from the Justice Department.

During the election campaign, Trump at first said transgender people should be able to use the bathroom they feel is appropriate, but changed tack after coming under criticism from fellow Republicans, saying it should be a matter for states to decide.

On Tuesday, that position was repeated by White House spokesman Sean Spicer. His comments were immediately criticized by transgender legal advocates, who say federal law and civil rights are matters for the federal government to enforce, not the states.

The federal law in question, known as Title IX, bans sex discrimination in education. But it remains unsettled whether Title IX protections extend to a person's gender identity. The U.S. Supreme Court could settle the issue in a case due to be argued in March.

The draft document challenges the Obama interpretation that Title IX protects gender identity, saying it has "given rise to significant litigation" and has confused educators who have "struggled to understand and apply" the previous guidance.

"In these circumstances, OCR (the Education Department's civil rights office) and DOJ have decided to withdraw and rescind the above-referenced guidance documents in order to further consider the legal issues involved," the document said.

Thirteen states led by Texas used a states' rights defense in a lawsuit against the Obama administration over its transgender bathroom guidance. That lawsuit would be rendered moot by the new policy.

The withdrawal is also certain to inflame passions in the latest conflict in America between believers in traditional values and the socially progressive, and is likely to generate more of the street protests that followed Trump's Nov. 8 election.

WASHINGTON U.S. President Donald Trump delivered his first public condemnation of anti-Semitic incidents in the United States on Tuesday after a new spate of bomb threats to Jewish community centers around the country and vandalism in a Jewish cemetery.

WASHINGTON The new head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said on Tuesday that America need not choose between jobs and the environment, in a nod to the energy

[Frollein]

Oh no, 0,0003% of the male population will be unable to use the women's bathroom? What happened to this country?

[Decky]

Good to see Trump focusing on the important issues. MAGA! Remember in British English trump is slang for a fart.

[Frollein]

I bet it didn't take him more than 5 minutes, but it will piss off the SJWs for months. That's what I call efficient.

[maz]

Good to see Trump focusing on the important issues.

The order came from the former president who thought that it was an important issue.

But apparently this is indeed an important issue. The entire society and culture needs to be changed to accomodate a few children are confused about what gender they are supposed to be.

Corporations are even punishing those who don't want to be forced to tolerate this transgender nonsense by withholding bread and circuses. That sounds like it is pretty important to me.

[Decky]

I hate Obama, the dude was a right wing cunt. Just George Bush in blackface.

Edit: Nice edit to make my post look out of context there Maz.

[Beren]

Good to see Trump focusing on the important issues. MAGA! Remember in British English trump is slang for a fart.

He's just warming up before reforming the whole world order.

[maz]

Good to see Trump focusing on the important issues.

How dare you belittle transgender toilet issues. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on what bathroom a person suffering from gender identity disorder should use, so it is obviously an important issue.

The biggest LGBT rights case since marriage equality just got bigger

On Wednesday, Trump administration officials in the Departments of Justice and Education are expected to officially withdraw an Obama era guidance providing that “a school generally must treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity.”

It’s a blow to trans rights that casts a cloud of uncertainty over several pending lawsuits involving the rights of trans students. In the long term, however, it means that a reckoning on the status of trans students under the law is likely to come much sooner than it otherwise would have.

The Obama administration’s guidance gave courts an “out” that they could have used to protect trans rights in the short term while leaving many crucial legal questions on the table. Without that guidance, the stakes are now much higher both for trans students and for the people who want to deny them equal rights.

Last April, the United States for the Fourth Circuit held, in G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, that schools risk their federal funding if they prevent trans people from using bathrooms that align with their gender identity. Yet, while this decision was a victory for trans rights, it rested on a fairly fragile reed — the Obama administration guidance that Trump officials just walked back.

The G.G. case is currently pending before the Supreme Court.

Should a trans man like Gavin Grimm, the plaintiff in G.G., use the men’s room or the women’s room? The men and women who drafted the Education Department’s regulation did not appear to be aware that this question would come up. And, indeed, the Fourth Circuit concluded in G.G. that the regulation “is silent as to how a school should determine whether a transgender individual is a male or female for the purpose of access to sex-segregated restrooms.”

Which brings us to the Obama administration’s guidance. That guidance resolved the ambiguity in the bathroom regulation by clarifying that a trans student’s gender is determined by their gender identity, not by the gender they were assigned at birth. The Fourth Circuit’s opinion, moreover, relied heavily on that guidance in resolving G.G.

A 1997 Supreme Court decision, Judge Henry Floyd explained in the Fourth Circuit’s opinion, “requires that an agency’s interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation be given controlling weight unless the interpretation is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation or statute.”

Now that the guidance has been withdrawn, however, courts no longer need to defer to it.

In the short term, it is fairly likely that the Supreme Court will kick this case back down to the lower courts to consider how the regulation should be interpreted now that there’s no longer an official agency interpretation of the regulation to defer to. Such a decision, however, will only delay the inevitable. Courts will now need to resolve whether existing law protects trans students or not.

They will need to resolve [b[whether, under current civil rights law, a trans man counts as a man or a woman.[/b]

Here's the pseudo-science gobbledygook.

So what happens now?

The school district in G.G. offers up a fairly simplistic understanding of the concept of “sex” or “gender.” Its policy provides that men’s and women’s rooms “shall be limited to the corresponding biological genders.” And, indeed, opponents of trans rights often use the term “biological” to refer to the gender that a person is assigned at birth. If someone was born with female genitals, then they are “biologically” female, in this locution.

This concept of what it means to be “biologically” female, however, ignores considerable scientific evidence indicating that the physiological indicia of a person’s gender stretch well beyond the question of what they have between their legs. One study, for example, found that trans people’s brains are “more similar in some respects to the brains of their experienced gender than those of their natal gender.”

Another exposed “adolescent boys and girls with gender dysphoria” to a steroid that is known to cause a different brain response in men and women. It found that “the adolescent boys and girls with gender dysphoria responded much like peers of their experienced gender.”

It is a misnomer, in other words, to label Grimm a “biological woman” because these studies suggest that he shares many biological traits with cisgender men.

Yet, while Grimm may have science on his side, the question of whether he will have five justices on his side is much more uncertain. Though Grimm prevailed in the Fourth Circuit, he has not enjoyed the fruits of that victory because the Supreme Court stayed the lower court’s decision last August.

[Nonsense]

[quote="maz"]How dare you belittle transgender toilet issues. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on what bathroom a person suffering from gender identity disorder should use, so it is obviously an important issue.

I don't know about you lot, but when I get out of bed in the morning, I have no doubt what sex I am, as I see it, if anyone is 'confused' about what sex they are, they ought to go to 'Specsavers'.
If they are still 'confused', then perhaps a trip to the local 'shrink' is in order.

There's only one question to ask & if you cannot answer that, maybe a bit of 'education' is required.

Talking of which, in America, the gender 'benders' have invented 28 'variations on a theme' relating to people's 'sexuality', ONLY 2 in reality are the real McCoy.

In Brighton, a school\college there, has invented some 25 descriptions, apart from 4(which are boy, male,-girl, female)the rest are plain stupidity, more so, since they arise within an 'educational' establishment.

I blame the Labour Party for this, as I do for most of this country's problems, which arise out of their administration in this country.
In this measure, the Tories are equally to blame, as they have relinquished the trust of 'normal' people & this will surely be reflected in the next general election.

[Donna]

Good to see Trump focusing on the important issues. MAGA! Remember in British English trump is slang for a fart.

Cultural issues are more important than political issues.

[Pants-of-dog]

Why is it important to stop trans people from using the bathroom of their choice?

[Donna]

Why is it important to stop trans people from using the bathroom of their choice?

To remind the public that God doesn't make mistakes when He creates us.

[Pants-of-dog]

Sorry, I should have specificed that I was looking for a reason that can be supported with verifiable evidence or logic, not religious beliefs.

Also, since freedom of religion is a right almost anywhere in the west, this is not an argument for forcing anyone to do anything.

[Donna]

Sorry, I should have specificed that I was looking for a reason that can be supported with verifiable evidence or logic, not religious beliefs.

Policy shouldn't be driven by objectively verifiable evidence. It should be shaped by the unconscious consensus of Tradition, no matter how many tears are shed. The polity should prepare incarnate souls for physical death instead of "managing" society.

Also, since freedom of religion is a right almost anywhere in the west, this is not an argument for forcing anyone to do anything.

I'm not sure what you mean.

[Pants-of-dog]

Policy shouldn't be driven by objectively verifiable evidence. It should be shaped by the unconscious consensus of Tradition, no matter how many tears are shed. The polity should prepare incarnate souls for physical death instead of "managing" society.

.........

I'm not sure what you mean.

Your religious beliefs are not relevant to a discussion on policy because of the right to freedom of religion.

-----------------

If no other reasons are given, I will assume that there is actually no good reason to stop trans people from using the bathroom of their choice.

[Donna]

Your religious beliefs are not relevant to a discussion on policy because of the right to freedom of religion.

This is false though. The right to freedom of religion is a contingent development. It can still be overthrown.

[Ter]

If no other reasons are given, I will assume that there is actually no good reason to stop trans people from using the bathroom of their choice.

I agree with this.
For bathrooms.
Not for prisons.

[Frollein]

Why is it important to stop trans people from using the bathroom of their choice?

Because pandering to a mentally ill person's delusions tends to reinforce those delusions. That's why we don't pander to anorexics' delusions that they are fat, either.

[Pants-of-dog]

This is false though. The right to freedom of religion is a contingent development. It can still be overthrown.

Yes, I guess you can overthrow the existing order just to be mean to trans people. I will not help.

Now, it seems you cannot provide a reason. Have a good evening.

Because pandering to a mentally ill person's delusions tends to reinforce those delusions. That's why we don't pander to anorexics' delusions that they are fat, either.

That would harm anorexics, to tell them they are fat. How would it harm trans people to allow them to use the bathroom of their choice?

[Frollein]

That would harm anorexics, to tell them they are fat. How would it harm trans people to allow them to use the bathroom of their choice?

There exist other considerations than the individual's comfort level - for example social cohesion, and the comfort level of the community, which is greatly enhanced if members can confidently identify and assess each other.

Gender, age, ethnicity are broad markers of identification and blurring them deliberately introduces a measure of uncertainty that erodes easy social interaction. To wit: the many snowflake outrages on the Asocial Media over "misgendering," the black community's upheaval over Dolezal's blackface, sorry, "trans-black" identification, etc.