You’re relying on a very narrow definition of the word “woman”. I don’t have a problem with a trans woman calling herself a woman.
You can be a gamer with any body type. The good ones are often referred to as professional athletes these days too, even though that doesn’t fit the previous definition.
Let’s get back to the case of Phillips, the baker in Colorado. What Phillips was refusing to do was to create a custom cake for the homosexuals’ wedding. He was not discriminating against the homosexual customer. He offered to sell them one of his premade cakes. But the homosexuals insisted that he had to use his God-given creative energy to produce a cake for them. The Colorado courts agreed with the homosexuals but the narrowly crafted Anthony Kennedy decision reversed the state court’s decision.
Edit. so now a transgender lawyer has taken Phillips to court to force him to create a cake celebrating his gender transition. He has declined and again a Colorado court has held against him.
I am not asking about my feelings. I am asking how society must operate around my feelings. Don’t dodge the question. You are still speaking in the abstract. I am speaking of concrete real world scenarios.
Also, what if it doesn’t make me a more productive member of society? Is that a requirement too? Can I petition the court when I find a transgender person that has changed their sex on their license to change it back if they have become a less productive member of society?
-Not a real question. Just pointing out how you putting in these “feel good” abstractions aren’t necessary. I’m trying to have a real discussion, not a talk show chat.
Because the business owner (Jack Phillips for example) that serves gay customers, but has a sincerely held religious objection to participating in a ceremony that his religion disapproves of can be taken at his word. That’s why he would.
There is some nuance to this. I’m surprised you can’t recognize it. Have you ever considered something called a compromise? Something along the lines of:
Can you explain, if there were a state that actually adopted that law, how it would actually harm gay people? Keep in mind that everytime a gay couple’s request for wedding services is declined, several dozen, it not more, gay friendly businesses step up and offer them FREE services.
A man can call himself a gerbil for all I care. It’s all about expecting, and forcing, everyone else to do so as well. And a red car is a red car, no matter how much you want everyone to agree that it is blue.
So you’re just bein intentionally ignorant of the point. Got it.
No you are not speaking of real world scenarios and I haven’t drawn any lines yet. I will start drawing lines when men claiming to be women for shits and giggles actually start causing problems for other women. Until then, it’s all theoretical hot air.
It’s not a “feel good” abstraction. If the dysmorphia or dysphoria is consuming the person’s thoughts (as it often does based on my understanding) and a treatment alleviates it, then it has the potential to free this person’s time and make them more productive.
Replace “gay” with “black”, “geriatric”, “Jewish”, “pagan”, “brunette”. Do all of those sound like good compromises to you? Not to me. The baker was not being “forced to participate”, he was being asked to make a product he’d make for anybody else.
Do you think he’d refuse to bake the exact same cake if the reasons given to him were different? I don’t think he would. He’d be happy to.
That is incorrect. He offered to sell the homosexuals a premade cake from the shop. Those are the cakes he makes for everyone. they refused. They wanted him to create a custom cake. Phillips only makes custom cakes for special occasions based on an agreement between him and the customer.
He bakes regular cakes and custom cakes for everyone else.
I wonder how often he refused to make a custom cake for a straight cis customer.
That is incorrect and as far as I know no evidence supporting your claim that he bakes custom cakes for everyone else was entered into the Colorado case.
I wonder how often he refused to make a custom cake for a straight cis customer.
Would you expect him to create a custom cake for a radical Muslim to celebrate the genital mutilation of a teenage girl? The Muslim is undoubtedly a “straight cis customer.”
He’s a baker, right? He makes custom cakes, right? I’m interpolating.
About as much as I would expect him to create a custom cake for an alien from Omicron Persei 8 for conquering another planet.
If the alien was a “straight cis customer”, should Phillips be forced to create a custom cake for him?
He’s a baker, right? He makes custom cakes, right? I’m interpolating.
As Hamilton Burger used to say on Perry Mason, counsel is assuming facts not in evidence,
You aren’t paying attention.
https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1108399/anna-vanbellinghen-hubbard
Start drawing lines please. This isn’t abstract anymore. Biological females are mostly the ones paying the price for your “inclusivity.”
But we’re not talking about their feelings. We’re talking about how the society has to reshape itself around their feelings. Besides, there are clinicians that believe the opposite - that doctors that affirm trans people, especially youth, doom them to a life long dependence on drugs and never ending risky surgeries with no guarantee of improvement in their mental condition. There is lots of evidence out there that transitioning is not the “cure” for gender dysphoria for huge swaths of patients.
You would be incorrect. Phillips has refused to bake custom cakes for divorce parties and halloween parties but has no issue selling cakes to people that are divorced or people that celebrate halloween. It’s not the person he is discriminating against, it is the event that he has a sincerely held religious belief against.
Language matters too. People these days seem to think their weird pronouns are something they have a dictatorial right to force on everyone else. You wouldn’t read dumb stuff like this in the past where the author is trying super hard to avoid saying the word “women” lest someone get too offended.
“ Earlier this year, a number of women and menstruators took to Facebook groups and Reddit threads to share their accounts of their post-vaccination periods…”
Guess I shouldn’t have been surprised given the author.
I’m a freelance journalist reporting and writing mainly through the lens of gender. I have reported on how gender, race, and class intersect with politics and policy, arts and culture, health and science, technology, history, and sports. My work has been published by The New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC News, and The Guardian, among other outlets. I recently earned a Masters degree in Multi-disciplinary Gender Studies at the University of Cambridge, and a B.A. in Global Liberal Studies…
Yes sir. I will think on this for a while.
Now let’s all get back on topic.
As a professional doing custom projects, I assume the inference is that he only agrees to do custom cakes where he feels a creative inspiration. Regardless of who it’s for, he turns down any proposals that he feels he cannot do justice. He’s not going to sell anyone a custom cake that he knows is going to look like all the generic ones, even if the lack of creativity is simply due to his disagreement with what’s being celebrated.
I think the implication is that he does wedding cakes, but not for gay weddings. Thus the decision is based on the prospective customer being gay.
In those terms, the criticism has a little merit. But that isn’t the core of the issue.
Not necessarily. The customer could be a straight person ordering a custom cake for a homosexual friend. Philips will sell premade cakes to anyone. It is having to create a cake and the implied endorsement of “marriage” between homosexuals that he objects to. As I understand it, Phillips’ religious belief is that marriage is between a man and a woman and that to create something to celebrate a homosexual ceremony is counter to his religion.
Really, or mental conditions?
Well, you probably should, just in case their are any hillbilly politicians reading this thread. 
As opposed to an abstract definition? Thanks, Picasso.
Can you be obtuse with any body type?
You did mix that up. He must be forced to make cakes for everyone…unless they’re unvaccinated…then he’s encouraged to tell them to pound sand. Because everyone has the right to be treated equally regardless of who you are, except for the unvaccinated, who are the scourge of the earth and absolutely must be beaten down for who they are.
I’m on your side, dammit!
That’s not true - only for white and probably Trump supporting unvaccinated who might vote against Our Betters in the next election.
For non-Asian minorities, who are disproportionately unvaccinated, you see very sympathetic news pieces about how big a loss it was for them and their community when they died with nary a mention of their unvaccinated status or chastising the dead for their dumb choices. I mean, it is a loss and this Coleman teacher sounded like a great guy, but very likely he’d still be a great guy if he’d been vaccinated. Odd that NBC chose to overlook that.
Must be that systemic racism in healthcare I keep hearing about when I accidentally read something from AMA telling me that racism is the single biggest barrier to health care today.
“Systemic racism in medicine is the most serious barrier to the advancement of health equity and appropriate medical care”… Members of the AMA’s House of Delegates representing their peers from all corners of medicine voted to adopt guidelines addressing systemic racism in medicine, including discrimination, bias and abuse, including expressions of prejudice known as microaggressions
Funny, I thought the biggest barrier was money, because I keep hearing how everything will be better with more Obamacare insurance so everyone can afford healthcare.
I have nothing against the study. On the contrary, it could reveal important stuff to know about how vaccines interact with hormonal levels, etc… And $1.6M is not a whole lot for checking into it.
But speaking of language, I’m a bit confused. How many of these menstruators were not women that the distinction had to be made? Also how many who reported impacts on their post-vaccination periods were neither menstruators nor women? Maybe I’m missing why the “women and menstruators” part was required but again I don’t have a BS in Multi-disciplinary Gender Studies… 