I always wondered about this with the blind or deaf communities. The deaf community has a very strong culture, identity and language. If we eliminate deafness in children, is that a genocide?

Give evidence for girl has robust features and girl is identical twin to other girl mean the same thing. And you just told me to sit. Now walk? Why are you obsessed with my activity and position?

No, because I am also referencing girls sports. And those who don't identify as "trans" such as "non-binary" etc. And "biological males" refers to males-by-biology, which now has to be specified as there is no other word that correlates to biological sex.

For all those defending burquas, here is a list of direct health issue they cause (never mind the restricted vision, limited daily activities, etc.) https://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2001/02/niqabs-and-burqas-as-impediments-to-health

Then you require masks that don't impede your vision, cause you to overheat, etc.

How in the world is restricting a dangerous and compromising item that oppresses women a "crackdown on women"?

Willingly? How is it that only women are choosing them "willingly"? How is it that only women from oppressive countries are choosing them "willingly?" Burquas are the public oppression and dehumanization of women. They compromise basic human activities and are dangerous. They have no place in a society.

People will accept anything as long as it is only women who are the victims.

Imagine discounting child health when talking about breastfeeding, lol. But again, if you could calm down enough to read what I wrote, and not assume what I was saying, you could probably reply appropriately. Your linked article again, doesn't say anything about "nutritionally identical". It is adequate for co-feeding. And like all of these articles, says the benefit is primarily for the trans woman to feel psychologically satisfied. And if you are in such a rush, maybe you don't need to capitalize every other letter. So, again, please provide a source on "nUtRiTiOnAlLy IdEnTiCaL"

I just said this in another post. But most people, including on the left, have reservations about biological males in women's sports. And it is not an issue that isn't "statistically relevant," but even offering that as a reason why it is okay means it is only okay because just a few women and girls are impacted.

And the issue isn't even thought through. It makes as much sense to divide sports by gender identity as it would by dividing sports by sexual orientation. What do either of these "internal states" have to do with sports performance?

Right, stocks mean that instead of a company benefiting the employees or clients, it has to solely prioritize this third party who is completely detached from the business at all. No good can come from that.

This is why I can't get behind a lot of the "get the olds out of politics". I would choose Bernie every time.