282
Republican women are some of the most self-hating people in existence.
Oh don't worry. They have enough hate for everyone.
Hang on, doesn't that mean the law can be challenged even if it passes? You can't discriminate against individuals or specific US businesses with legislature.
It's called a Bill of Attainder.
I'm going to need to see the long form genetic tests that prove that Mace is a biological woman as well, then. It's only fair, right?
After some fear-mongering and a knee-jerk reaction from Speaker Johnson we can boast that no dicks will go anywhere near Nancy Mace. Mission Accomplished!!!
Bold move for a woman with that bone structure to be shitting on trans people.
What ARE Ryuk's pronouns?
"I don't care or understand, really, just whatever gets me the apple off of your desk."
"Humans are so strange."
Damn. Just, damn.
They be fucking their Lolita express deliveries in those bathrooms, no legit politicians allowed!
Someone should propose a house rule that bans sex offenders from the bathrooms. Looking at you Matt.
just get rid of seperate bathrooms. floor to ceiling stall doors and everyone uses the same stuff.
The GOP won’t do that. The point is to sow division.
yeah its just stuff like this is so stupid I want to take it out of the debate in favor of things that government should actually be doing. like. I dunno. healthcare.
That is the whole point: to keep your mind occupied with stuff like this, so they don't notice how the ruling class is raping the planet and stealing the fruits of your labour. Culture war so you forget the class war. We must still fight this battle, but it is important to remember what they are trying to cover up with this, and attack them for it, as well.
Why do that when you can fight about the one person in congress with a different pee pee hole?
Even better make every bathroom a “family” bathroom. Only 1 person at a time. Mandatory changing table and tampon dispenser by the sink
that would do. each typical bathroom could accomodate several. Likely as many as the stalls and sinks in it which is usually like 3-5 and since you have men/womens you would end up with half a dozen to a dozen bathrooms in the same footprint. Might have to put a small hall because of the depth of the bathrooms but it just needs to be wide enough for wheelchairs and for the doors to open.
That makes it illegal, right? You can't pass a law specifically designed to target individuals.
Makes it a hate crime.
That is my understanding, yes. However, I am not a lawyer, and even if I was, do laws/the Constitution even matter anymore?
It can be because of certain individuals, but it must apply equally to all.
You didn't usually see it applied to a real person, but there are countless examples of it being applied to large corporations. For example, Florida can (and has) passed laws that apply to (e.g.) all amusement parks that operate their own emergency services. It was pretty clear that it would only affect Disney World. But at least in theory, it would apply to any others that opened up.
It has been made clear that any attempt to tailor a law so that it would predominantly affect a specific person or specific group, as it would in this case because even if it applies to all trans-folk, it would specifically primarily impact this one individual and has been said to be for that purpose (particularly damning).
Not that precedent means anything, so any attempt to litigate that winds up in front of the Supreme Court could go either way. I would hope that even they would see the pettiness here and follow precedent.
I'm not sure of the specifics of the Florida/Disney cases. I do know that it probably could've at least been argued that the law was too narrowly tailored, but I'm not a lawyer or a multi-billion dollar company and maybe there are reasons.
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is going to get complicated. The only way to be sure that, for example, Nancy Mace is actually the "she" "she" says "she" is is to check. And if we do that, to be fair, we gotta check everyone which means were going to discover that so many allegedly "male" members (heh) of congress do not, in fact, have any balls. WHAT THEN NANCY?? WHAT THEN???
McBride is wrong. What's needed is not "respect and kindness," but instead contempt and ridicule for fascist bigots. Failing to properly ostracize them is part of how we got into this mess.
To all the people saying to put in gender neutral bathrooms, remember, the point is to sow division. The GOP doesn’t actually want solutions that make this issue go away.
A boogeyman and a boogeyman net for 99.95
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) stated Republicans are working on a resolution to address the unprecedented situation while ensuring dignity and respect for all members.
From a guy whose idea of dignity includes convincing his kid to monitor his whacking off habits.
tfw we still report what they say as if it ever mattered.
Mace is a Republican, so I can understand why she might assume all members of congress as sex predators. Think about the people she surrounds herself with. She must be terrified, poor thing.
Doesn't excuse bigotry at all. The bill is hatred on paper.
She's going to really hate it when masc presenting folks start using the women's room.
The goal is to make it illegal for trans folks to exist at all. Next, they'll come for the entire LGBTQ+ community. Then probably the atheists.
They are already talking about putting people on antidepressants and ADHD meds into work camps. Madness.
My only hope is that they're getting too excited and giddy about finally realizing the fruits of decades of preparation, and just go way too far, way too fast, to the point where anyone outside the ~30% or so who actually want fascism (not just temporarily convinced that they do) is abruptly hit with the reality of their decision and wake the fuck up.
They can (and will) silence as much dissent as possible, but if they're able to make the response so overwhelming that the ~70% or so can, for once, unite against these cancerous fucks...
Not gonna hold my breath but...
They're coming for immigrants first, because they're a target with few legal protections and it will cause economic chaos to deport them. Hitler rose to power during the depression, Trump is creating those conditions.
Next they'll go after everyone left of Trump. To solidify authoritarianism.
Us trans folk and other minorities are scapegoats along the way. The scapegoats that they will make suffer so that people are scared to organize.
And yes, I'm scared shitless. But I think we're a means to an end, not the goal itself.
But that's the general agenda. This specific politician is likely operating more out of raw disgust and hatred than Machiavellianism.
Then probably the atheists.
atheists are 10000% on the list. get ready to apply (and pay) for your photo ID membership card at a state-approved church, and mandatory volunteer service to "spread the good news" (root out heathens)
btw, if you currently go to a progressive or liberal church that accepts gays, get ready to have your tax exempt status erased
edit: on thinking about this more, i think it's more likely they'll just declare evangelism (or whatthefuckever) to be the "official" religion of the united states, and force every church to adopt whatever new doctrine they want, acknowledging that trump is the head of the church, otherwise have all church leadership replaced by people who will capitulate
She must be terrified, poor thing.
I have no doubt that's literally true.
Mark my words, this will pass, even if only to set the stage for what trans people will have to deal with for the next four years.
Part of me expects regular motions to have her expelled entirely. And there's a non-zero chance that they'll just drop the threshhold needed to expel a member to simple majority because fuck what the Constitution says, they have control now.
Saying it'll just be the next 4 years is very optimistic of you.
In any other job, this would be a slam dunk sexual harassment suit, right?
From my understanding, 14th amendment protections are still being battled over in the courts. Many have sided in favor or sexual orientation or gender being something that should be considered in equal protection of the laws, but some have not, so this will probably be coming to the Supreme Court, especially if the majority in charge of everything see it as an advantageous time to do so.
Agenda 47, the immediate plans for implementing Project 2025, has eliminating gender affirming care as a key priority. More money was spent on anti-trans campaigning than on many other topics combined this election cycle.
In theory, the laws of individual states protecting LGBT people would still apply, but other parts of Agenda 47 call for economically hammering states that try to go against expanded executive power, sounding similar to how the national drinking age was raised by withholding funding for highways.
I think there is a time bomb on these protections right now, and I would be hesitant to count on them for very long. I feel like writing all this makes me sound alarmist, but that is how I feel based on what they've been saying and running on these last 8+ years. My best friends are gay, but also public educators. They're Republican leaning centrists, and don't seem to be concerned, so I may be off base, but I tend to trust people when they come out in the open as bad people without shame.
One thing to remember about Republicans is that logical dissonance comes with the territory. They're not worried because they're "one of the good ones." Or because they're one issue voters who ignore everything else the Republicans say that they're going to do. I've seen many Republicans who live in Massachusetts and enjoy the benefits provided by the liberal politics of the state while at the same time complaining about those same politics. People complaining about Obama care despite having been on Romney care for years, that sort of thing.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Proposal: replace all bathrooms with gender neutral bathrooms
Alternative proposal: replace the offices of all Republicans with gender neutral bathrooms.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
282 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19107 readers
3195 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS