Posted on 07/18/2021 7:25:33 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
A California appeals court struck down as unconstitutional a state law that penalized elder-care workers for using pronouns inconsistent with elderly long-term care patients’ claimed gender identity.
Gender identity is a disputed concept. A lack of linguistic clarity has clouded the issue in recent years as the concepts of sex and sexual identity, or gender, a politically and scientifically contentious concept whose definition isn’t universally agreed upon, have become difficult to separate. Despite the distinct meanings of the two words, many institutions and individuals use “gender” to mean biological sex, especially on fillable forms and documents.
Failing to use gender in its new meaning can be costly nowadays.
A New York human rights law banning gender identity discrimination imposes fines of up to $250,000 for failing to use a person’s preferred personal pronouns.
Social media giant Twitter bans users for “misgendering” or “deadnaming” transgender people, categorizing it as harassment and abuse. Deadnaming is referring to people by names they used before they changed their gender identity—for example, calling Caitlyn Jenner by that person’s birth name, Bruce Jenner.
Facebook reportedly recognizes at least 58 genders, allowing users to select which gender to use in their profile self-descriptions. Among them are Androgynous, Bigender, Cisgender, Gender Fluid, Genderqueer, Non-binary, Pangender, Trans, and Two-Spirit.
But in a rare legal defeat for the transgenderism movement, a ruling by the Court of Appeal of the State of California, 3rd Appellate District, sided with First Amendment speech protections over activists. The ruling by the three-judge panel was unanimous.
The court decision in Taking Offense v. State of California, came on July 16. Taking Offense is an informal group of state taxpayers.
(Excerpt) Read more at theepochtimes.com ...
I wonder how many elderly long-term care patients suffer from confusion over the ‘gender’ they were born into...
“A New York human rights law banning gender identity discrimination imposes fines of up to $250,000 for failing to use a person’s preferred personal pronouns.”
I wonder what would actually happen if the government ever attempted to collect on this. It would be “interesting”.
Is it just me? To me this whole nonsense is so utterly silly that I find it mind-boggling that it even finds it’s way into a courtroom. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve had to deal with enough silly, idiotic people to know they exist. BUT, we used to have systems that could recognize silly idiotic people and not waste time on them! NOT ANYMORE!
Insanity has become a business
And brother,
Business is boomin !
I wonder how many elderly long-term care patients suffer from confusion over the ‘gender’ they were born into...
That could be a bumper sticker.
“ Is it just me? ”
No, it’s not.
What about minorities?
Especially poor Hispanic immigrants?
They can have language problems and not understand the language nuances.
The gender law could be used to unfairly racially persecute them!
Did anybody ever consider racial impacts of this law?
Obviously Gov. Newson and his cohorts are racists!
Except in Joe Bidens case, he thinks he is a TRANSEXUAL SQUIRREL!
bookmark
Calling a person by their biological sex may be misgendering, but the person is still human and is not "dehumanized" by a perception of their apparent birth sex. It's like calling a fourth-generation Polish-descended American "Polish", even though they are American, and everyone knows it.
Our government was formed by farmer businessmen. Now it's being run by lawyers. They know a money-maker when they see one. The only cows they take care of are "cash cows."
Just call ‘em “it”
A lack of linguistic clarity has clouded the issue in recent years.
Liberal lingo gets a$$ kicking logic ensues.
I actually think the California courts are more sane than the federal ones that covers the state. After all, the Cali Supreme Court upheld the Marriage Amendment passed by the citizens, but which was overturned by a compromised fag judge on a federal bench.
I don’t think I could find one.
Even the elderly gay men I’ve known have known that they were men.
Glad to know I’m not alone!
Aint it though!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.