Gender again. Sorry!

[CXRAndy]

Texas bringing in gender fraud legislation. Stealing anothers sex could bring a prison sentence and or fine

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Stealing anothers sex

?? Strange concept.

 

[Ian H]

?? Strange concept.

Perhaps that means a new generation of castrati and a golden age of American music.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Appears to be just mundane bigotry
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5189226-texas-bill-transgender-rights-trump/

 

[multitool]

Recycled homophobia to make the bigots happy.

Won't make any difference to anyone's lives except the victims.

 

[monkers]

The consequential harm to school girls now Trump is in the Whitehouse. The fears that girls now face.

As a retired head, I saw this coming, and I gave warning about this attack on rights, especially privacy.


View: https://www.facebook.com/reel/633013446145096

 

[CXRAndy]

It is much easier to say no trans in female sports.

Everyone knows who the trans are in their school. Job done.

So that's only 10 athletes now going to compete in male sports

 

[AndyRM]

That's called doxxing.

I'm not surprised some people are a fan.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Nobody is mandating genital inspections.
If athletes aren't prepared to be honest, a cheek swab suffices.

The woman in the video is a TikTok influencer nurse/photographer called Alexis Hinkley. Hinkley has a transgender sibling with a Go Fund Me for surgery and in 2023 was personally invited to the Whitehouse by Jill Biden. This isn't an objective commentator, which accounts for the hyperbole.

You do realise that when they get a urine sample for drug testing someone literally has to watch you pee in a bottle? They even test high school athletes in the US because school sports is a big deal there. A cheek swab is hardly as invasive.

Good to see World Rowing has taken steps to protect the fairness of women's rowing. Some news outlets are erroneously describing it as 'banning transwomen' of course, when it's simply requiring people to compete in the category appropriate to their sex.


View: https://x.com/WomensRightsNet/status/1900891846634561986

 

[multitool]

This isn't an objective commentator, which accounts for the hyperbole.

Neither are you.

Which accounts for the constant hyperbole.

 

[CXRAndy]

There was a former British Olympic male rower, who stood up publicly and said to allow males in female boats was absolutely ridiculous.

 

[monkers]

Trump has been threatening to deprive states of all federal funding if they do not comply with his edicts. This has caused some panic in schools and states.

Schools are now required to carry out checks. There is nothing explicitly in the Bill to prevent staff from carrying out genital checks. This has been raised as a real concern. Despite the concern, 50 Senators voted for the Bill without amendments to ensure the safety and dignity of girls.

I chose my words carefully enough ... ''the fear that girls now face'' ... is not an example of hyperbole.

 

[icowden]

The consequential harm to school girls now Trump is in the Whitehouse. The fears that girls now face.
As a retired head, I saw this coming, and I gave warning about this attack on rights, especially privacy.

The only slight spanner in the work is that the Senate specifically voted through an amendment which stated that the legislation could not be used to require an examination of childrens genitals.

The bill states only that sex shall be recognised based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth. It also states that males may train and play sport with females as long as no female is deprived of a roster spot on a team or sport or deprived of an opportunity to participate in practice of competition, scholarship, admission to educational institution or "any other benefit" (to be defined by a study as yet to be done).

So the bill doesn't do what this video says (any more) - which rather suggests that actually the senate system worked well on this one in that the bill protects women's sports but does not unduly affect women or girls.

There may also be confusion here as I think the whole "inspecting genitals" thing relates to a bill in the West Virginia Senate and not the legislation considered in the US Senate.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Biden did the same. He withheld funding for schools that would not comply with his edict that male athletes should be allowed to compete in the female category.

"States that fail to comply would risk legal action or the loss of federal education funding".

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jan/22/transgender-athletes-joe-biden-executive-order

Why would a school check genitals when many alternatives - like the athlete being honest, school records, note from a doctor, or a cheek swab test - are available?

The UK Olympic rower standing up for women was Alex Storey.


View: https://x.com/GBNEWS/status/1687066967260471298

 

[monkers]

The only slight spanner in the work is that the Senate specifically voted through an amendment which stated that the legislation could not be used to require an examination of childrens genitals.

The bill states only that sex shall be recognised based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth. It also states that males may train and play sport with females as long as no female is deprived of a roster spot on a team or sport or deprived of an opportunity to participate in practice of competition, scholarship, admission to educational institution or "any other benefit" (to be defined by a study as yet to be done).

So the bill doesn't do what this video says (any more) - which rather suggests that actually the senate system worked well on this one in that the bill protects women's sports but does not unduly affect women or girls.

I don't know so I've Googled and asked Co-Pilot. From what I have read so far, Alexis Rose has a point. It has been raised by critics that the Bill requires amendments to include safeguards. Fifty Senators did vote to pass the Bill without the safeguards that schools could carry out genital checks.

It has to be remembered that there is an inculcation of fear from Trump, that schools and states will be deprived of federal funding unless they ensure that trans girls are prevented from competing in female sport.

As far as the allegation that Alexis Rose is an influencer guilty of using hyperbole that does not seem to be her reputation. Her reputation is for telling the truth.

Alexis Rose's concerns are not baseless. While the "Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025" does not explicitly mandate genital checks, critics argue that its enforcement could lead to such invasive practices. This potential outcome has been a significant point of contention and fear among opponents of the bill. Her statements reflect genuine concerns about the implications of the legislation, rather than exaggeration.

Ah the phrase ''legitimate concerns'' is yet another one way street.