In his tentative ruling, issued in August 2017, Keosian stated that being misidentified as transgender does not inherently expose someone to "hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy," and therefore does not rise to the level of defamation."While, as a practical matter, the characteristic may be held in contempt by a portion of the population, the court will not validate those prejudices by legally recognizing them," Keosian ruled.
Wow.
But wait! What about the tranny’s “rights” to be identified according to the feelings du jour? If Simmons, feeling manly, doesn’t have that right, why do they?
That’s about what I figured. Being labeled trans-gender may even be a compliment these days.
Yeah, some logic, right? The judge essentially ruled it was bigotry if someone objects to front page stories being run about them saying they had themselves castrated (among other things) when they didn’t and the publication knew that they didn’t...and now rules they, the victim of the intentional lies, should have to pay the publication that ran the knowingly false story.