The view from the Federal Detention Center Miami: the pool at Downtown 5th “luxury apartment rentals” #BecauseMiami pic.twitter.com/bNjL5UqZNU
— Because Miami (@BecauseMiami) January 3, 2023
The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
16 comments:
Hey now!
The Miami Paradox.
good post on the 11th circuit travesty from last week
http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2023/01/whats-wrong-and-one-thing-thats-right.html
That is not a good post. It is technical and impossible to follow unless you are as smart as the author.
It also ignores the real issue - should women, including minor girls, be forced to share bathrooms with people who have a penis? If your answer is yes, the decision sucks. If your answer is no, then you have to ask whether the cis women’s rights should be subordinate to the person with the penis.
Don’t forget that 1 out of every 6 women have been sexually assaulted. The overwhelming majority by people with a penis: https://www.rainn.org/statistics/scope-problem
And, before you call me a transphobe, understand that this practical concern is one shared by many people like me who are concerned about equality and trans rights. But not everything is black or white, and this issue is one of the tougher ones around.
There is nothing "trans-phobic" about accepting objective facts and long held definitions of words. Absent extremely rare anomaly, if you were born with a penis you're a boy/man and if you were born with a vagina you're a girl/woman. I neither hate nor fear the poor unfortunate souls who look between their legs and deny the objective reality of what they see there. Rather, I pity them and wish that each of them finds love and happiness. But I will not call a short man tall, a thin man fat, or a white man black just because he "identifies" as such. The same is true for men and women.
These poor souls are plainly mentally ill and I am aware of no other context in which society has demanded that the rest of us play along with such mental illness. It would be like castigating and ostracizing people for refusing to acknowledge the hallucinations of a mental patient.
It was good and right that St. Johns provided single stall unisex bathrooms for privacy. There is no allegation that the transgender students did not have bathrooms to use. If a student born with a vagina (a girl) didn't want to use the girls' bathroom because of her mental condition, fine. The unisex bathroom is available. But, to use a word from Dorfon Law's post, it is ABSURD that the student should be permitted to use the boys' bathroom, over objection, when she is not a boy (i.e. she has a vagina).
Lagoa's concurrence in the Adam's case in 52 seconds, courtesy of Dave Chapelle: https://www.google.com/search?q=dave+chappelle+lebron+james+wnba&biw=1644&bih=854&tbm=vid&ei=35-0Y-fZCIDZwbkPpfmQ4Ak&oq=david+chappelle+lebron+&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LXZpZGVvEAMYATIFCAAQgAQyBggAEBYQHjIFCAAQhgMyBQgAEIYDMgUIABCGAzoHCAAQgAQQCjoICAAQFhAeEAo6CQgAEBYQHhDHA1CKBViXGWDOKWgAcAB4AYABlAGIAa4PkgEEMjcuMZgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-video#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:ee032f0b,vid:IeTyq-XvbNM
4:10 here. I don’t agree that it is a sign of a mental illness or that they are poor souls. Remember that homosexuality was considered a mental disorder previously, and we all know many very well adjusted gay people. In fact I am sure that mental health rates are probably on par between gay people and straight people.
People should not be forced by society to hide who they believe they are. Mental health likely suffers by repressing it.
I agree that there should be concern for young people making drastic and lasting physical changes to their bodies whether through surgery or chemicals, before they are certain. But I disagree greatly that there is something wrong or sick with a trans person.
None of this changes the issue of the bathroom and gender identity versus biology.
We as a society need to have these important discussions without resorting to tagging people as sick or demented, or as transphobic.
4:33 have you read the opinion. The issue you call the issue is not the issue.
Wow did the comments on this post take an unexpected turn.
I believe in science, I am Team Dissents.
@844 - science is the study of the objective. "Identifying" is about subjective feeling.
1:10 I know that is the culture war response but this case is not about "identifying."
Under the Majority’s rationale, the bathroom policy distinguishes between boys and girls on the basis of biological sex—
“which the School Board determines by reference to various documents, including birth certificates, that students submit when they first enroll in the School District.” Maj. Op. at 4. Because the policy uses these same indicia for all students, according to the Majority,
the policy is not discriminatory. See Maj. Op. at 31.
Underlying this sex-assigned-at-matriculation bathroom policy, however, is the presumption that biological sex is accurately determinable at birth
and that it is a static or permanent biological determination. In other words, the policy presumes it does not need to accept amended documentation because a student’s sex does not change.
This presumption is both medically and scientifically flawed. After considering a more scientific and medical perspective on biological sex, it is clear that the bathroom policy’s refusal to accept updated
medical documentation is discriminatory on the basis of sex.
Hmm. Seems circular.
I get that there is a very small percentage of people who are born with both sex traits. But that is not what this debate is about. I don’t believe that even right wing republicans would deny that a person born with both traits should be able at some point to identify as one or the other.
To me the question goes back to whether or not you want a person with a penis having access to women’s locker rooms and a bathrooms based upon that persons identification as female. It is a complex issue and a difficult one to resolve.
Cut the penis out of the equation and the answer is a little easier. Sure, people who have already fully transitioned should be able to use a female bathroom.
Okay - so your position on a person who has fully transitioned to female using a female bathroom is?
@806 and 227 - there is no such thing as "transitioning". If the person was born with a penis, and unless they are in the extraordinary minority of people born with both sets of genitals, that person is male/a man/a boy and will be until he dies no matter what he does. He does not belong in the women's bathroom.
Dude, people can always transition. For example, I have no doubt you could go from closed minded douche, to just douche, in no time at all.
Post a Comment