Welcome to the PITT weekly roundup where you’ll find a list of the week’s postings along with links to some of our favorite books, videos, social media, and podcasts.
Regarding the passage of the Iowa bill banning trans-identified men from women's sports, locker rooms, sororities, etc.: all the search results I've found so far say the bill removes every human right codified in Iowa law that is available to other groups (women, people of color, gays and lesbians, people with disabilities, etc.), simply by eliminating the trans category from the class of protected persons.
According to Governor Reynolds' announcement, trans-identified people will lose no rights, except that men and boys who identify as trans will no longer have access to women's and girls' sports and single-sex spaces. But because of the discrepancy between what Gov. Reynolds says and what every single news outlet is announcing, I've searched but have not been able to locate a copy of the bill itself. If the bill is as Gov. Reynolds describes it, I'm celebrating. If the media is lying, which wouldn't surprise me, I'm celebrating.
But, if the bill removes trans-identified people from the list of protected classes with respect to human rights in general, that would be an authoritarian gesture, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, to put it mildly, IMO.
UPDATE: I went back and reread the description provided by PITT. It says: "This law merely defines sex based on a person’s anatomy at birth and removes gender identity from a list of protected groups that employers, businesses and landlords may not discriminate against. The law does not remove any discrimination protections for gay and lesbian people..." (Mentioning gays and lesbians is gratuitous. Gays and lesbians are a distinct class that has nothing to do with transgender people.) If I'm reading it correctly, this means that transgender people can be legally discriminated against by landlords and business owners on the basis of their gender identity. Of course, landlords and business owners are under no obligation to rent to, or hire, anyone who applies for an apartment or a job. That type of discrimination can be subtle and impossible to prove.
Anyway, I understand why trans-identified people would be furious about being singled out and excised from a bill that otherwise would provide them basic human protections against unemployment or homelessness on the basis of their identity.
I don't believe in gender identity, and am adamant that men who claim a woman identity have no standing in women's single-sex spaces. As a lesbian and a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist), I feel it's essential to exclude men and boys from ALL women's and girls' spaces regardless of how they identify.
But otherwise, trans-identified adults should have the same rights and protections as anyone else, as long as they are not breaking the law. Bodily autonomy is a human right.
I'd still like to read the bill If someone has a link to it. It seems to me (I'm not an expert) that the bill as written is likely to be challenged in the courts. It's a shame, because the bill's original intent -- to protect women and girls -- is essential.
This is great news, and I applaud Governor Reynolds. I want to see this SCOURGE ended in every state, not just in red states. Beeswax, as a straight male whose understanding of this issue was clarified - and cemented - by the critique of gender-critical radical feminists, trust me when I say that I do not wish to argue with any lesbian, much less an avowed TERF! But where do you draw a line on bodily autonomy? Should dysphoric and delusional adult males be able to obtain penectomies and vaginoplasties, for example? Should surgeons be required to perform them? I'm 100% supportive of abortion rights for multiple reasons, including the issue of bodily autonomy. But I worry that if we continue to see it as a "human right" to self-mutilate, especially if the dysphoric patient is an adult, this scourge will not be eradicated. For the same reason, I would therefore object to any law that provides "transgender" individuals a unique, legally protected status.
Yes, I think that once an adult male has reached the age of majority, as long as he’s not hurting or violating the rights of others, he has the right to seek whatever medical intervention he likes. But is it a doctor’s obligation to oblige him? Of course not. A medical professional is not a slave to the whims of others. Unfortunately, there are plenty of mercenary surgeons who are happy to make a living castrating and mutilating the genitals of people of both sexes, especially young people who have no clue what they’re getting into. These ghoulish so-called doctors are the ones I would like to see banned from touching the bodies of minors, who are too young to give informed consent.
I share your hope that this toxic, pseudoscientific social contagion will burn itself out sooner than later, and I support with my dollars, time and energy the efforts of gender critical feminists, lesbians, gay men and other allies, such as detransitioners who risk harassment and death threats in order to tell the truth about what transgender surgeries, puberty blockers and cross sex hormones have done to their bodies.
However, I stand by my view that an adult of whatever persuasion has the right to modify his body as long as he is not violating the rights and privacy of others. I don’t have to like it, but as a woman over the age of 70 who has lived in the world as a lesbian for over 50 years, I don’t believe in passing laws that would prevent specific categories of adults from making personal choices that affect their bodies simply because other people are offended by them.
I’m vehemently opposed to the transitioning of minors, and consider it child abuse. Transgender ideology should not be taught in schools. But adults who are minding their own business should be left to live their lives in peace without harassment. This would not constitute a “unique” special carve-out in the law, simply an addition to the anti-discrimination laws that already exist.
That’s my opinion, which of course you have the right to disagree with.
I fear that medical professionals have become slaves to the whims of others. Your implication that financial corruption plays a role, sadly, is not without precedent. We remember the oxycodone crisis.
The newsletter is correct in observing that the trans cult is crumbling.
You're right that trans ideology has tainted the integrity of many surgeons, psychologists, endocrinologists, judges, teachers, and politicians. But I see them more as opportunists than slaves, since there are plenty of medical professionals who happily perform these surgeries without being pressured. Indeed, business is booming and they become celebrities in the process. It's not so much political pressure as it is status seeking and getting rich quick. Disgusting, isn't it?
I compare their behavior to that of the Front Line Covid Critical Care (FLCCC) physicians, e.g. Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Paul Marik, who were willing to lose major hospital appointments and their medical licenses in order to save their patients' lives rather than kowtow to the catastrophic policies of the CDC.
I hope you're right that the trans cult is crumbling, but it's not going quietly. The trans activists' strategy is to litigate everything, including Trump's entire policy shift, out of existence if they can.
Montana is currently considering a bill that would require insurance companies to pay for medical revisions of botched surgeries for detransitioners. A similar bill failed in Texas in 2023.
Regarding the passage of the Iowa bill banning trans-identified men from women's sports, locker rooms, sororities, etc.: all the search results I've found so far say the bill removes every human right codified in Iowa law that is available to other groups (women, people of color, gays and lesbians, people with disabilities, etc.), simply by eliminating the trans category from the class of protected persons.
According to Governor Reynolds' announcement, trans-identified people will lose no rights, except that men and boys who identify as trans will no longer have access to women's and girls' sports and single-sex spaces. But because of the discrepancy between what Gov. Reynolds says and what every single news outlet is announcing, I've searched but have not been able to locate a copy of the bill itself. If the bill is as Gov. Reynolds describes it, I'm celebrating. If the media is lying, which wouldn't surprise me, I'm celebrating.
But, if the bill removes trans-identified people from the list of protected classes with respect to human rights in general, that would be an authoritarian gesture, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, to put it mildly, IMO.
UPDATE: I went back and reread the description provided by PITT. It says: "This law merely defines sex based on a person’s anatomy at birth and removes gender identity from a list of protected groups that employers, businesses and landlords may not discriminate against. The law does not remove any discrimination protections for gay and lesbian people..." (Mentioning gays and lesbians is gratuitous. Gays and lesbians are a distinct class that has nothing to do with transgender people.) If I'm reading it correctly, this means that transgender people can be legally discriminated against by landlords and business owners on the basis of their gender identity. Of course, landlords and business owners are under no obligation to rent to, or hire, anyone who applies for an apartment or a job. That type of discrimination can be subtle and impossible to prove.
Anyway, I understand why trans-identified people would be furious about being singled out and excised from a bill that otherwise would provide them basic human protections against unemployment or homelessness on the basis of their identity.
I don't believe in gender identity, and am adamant that men who claim a woman identity have no standing in women's single-sex spaces. As a lesbian and a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist), I feel it's essential to exclude men and boys from ALL women's and girls' spaces regardless of how they identify.
But otherwise, trans-identified adults should have the same rights and protections as anyone else, as long as they are not breaking the law. Bodily autonomy is a human right.
I'd still like to read the bill If someone has a link to it. It seems to me (I'm not an expert) that the bill as written is likely to be challenged in the courts. It's a shame, because the bill's original intent -- to protect women and girls -- is essential.
This is great news, and I applaud Governor Reynolds. I want to see this SCOURGE ended in every state, not just in red states. Beeswax, as a straight male whose understanding of this issue was clarified - and cemented - by the critique of gender-critical radical feminists, trust me when I say that I do not wish to argue with any lesbian, much less an avowed TERF! But where do you draw a line on bodily autonomy? Should dysphoric and delusional adult males be able to obtain penectomies and vaginoplasties, for example? Should surgeons be required to perform them? I'm 100% supportive of abortion rights for multiple reasons, including the issue of bodily autonomy. But I worry that if we continue to see it as a "human right" to self-mutilate, especially if the dysphoric patient is an adult, this scourge will not be eradicated. For the same reason, I would therefore object to any law that provides "transgender" individuals a unique, legally protected status.
Yes, I think that once an adult male has reached the age of majority, as long as he’s not hurting or violating the rights of others, he has the right to seek whatever medical intervention he likes. But is it a doctor’s obligation to oblige him? Of course not. A medical professional is not a slave to the whims of others. Unfortunately, there are plenty of mercenary surgeons who are happy to make a living castrating and mutilating the genitals of people of both sexes, especially young people who have no clue what they’re getting into. These ghoulish so-called doctors are the ones I would like to see banned from touching the bodies of minors, who are too young to give informed consent.
I share your hope that this toxic, pseudoscientific social contagion will burn itself out sooner than later, and I support with my dollars, time and energy the efforts of gender critical feminists, lesbians, gay men and other allies, such as detransitioners who risk harassment and death threats in order to tell the truth about what transgender surgeries, puberty blockers and cross sex hormones have done to their bodies.
However, I stand by my view that an adult of whatever persuasion has the right to modify his body as long as he is not violating the rights and privacy of others. I don’t have to like it, but as a woman over the age of 70 who has lived in the world as a lesbian for over 50 years, I don’t believe in passing laws that would prevent specific categories of adults from making personal choices that affect their bodies simply because other people are offended by them.
I’m vehemently opposed to the transitioning of minors, and consider it child abuse. Transgender ideology should not be taught in schools. But adults who are minding their own business should be left to live their lives in peace without harassment. This would not constitute a “unique” special carve-out in the law, simply an addition to the anti-discrimination laws that already exist.
That’s my opinion, which of course you have the right to disagree with.
I fear that medical professionals have become slaves to the whims of others. Your implication that financial corruption plays a role, sadly, is not without precedent. We remember the oxycodone crisis.
The newsletter is correct in observing that the trans cult is crumbling.
Thanks for sharing your views.
Daniel Hoffman
You're right that trans ideology has tainted the integrity of many surgeons, psychologists, endocrinologists, judges, teachers, and politicians. But I see them more as opportunists than slaves, since there are plenty of medical professionals who happily perform these surgeries without being pressured. Indeed, business is booming and they become celebrities in the process. It's not so much political pressure as it is status seeking and getting rich quick. Disgusting, isn't it?
I compare their behavior to that of the Front Line Covid Critical Care (FLCCC) physicians, e.g. Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Paul Marik, who were willing to lose major hospital appointments and their medical licenses in order to save their patients' lives rather than kowtow to the catastrophic policies of the CDC.
I hope you're right that the trans cult is crumbling, but it's not going quietly. The trans activists' strategy is to litigate everything, including Trump's entire policy shift, out of existence if they can.
Montana is currently considering a bill that would require insurance companies to pay for medical revisions of botched surgeries for detransitioners. A similar bill failed in Texas in 2023.