What to call this thread?

Shiftless2 said:
"women hold topless demonstrations" #1,700
Click to expand...
I vaguely recall a New York State precedent set based upon gender equality, establishing in New York State law that if men can be seen in public topless, so can women.
I'm no boob. I've been a New York State resident ever since.

also note:
I have short patience for hypocrisy, and therefore appreciate the strategy.
 
BREAKING: Trump’s DOJ just tried to get their hands on private medical records from transgender patients — and a federal judge STOPPED them cold.

No cameras.

No public warning.

No debate.

Just federal lawyers quietly demanding hospitals in Rhode Island turn over deeply personal files tied to gender-affirming care.

Names.

Mental health records.

Private conversations with doctors.

Entire medical histories.

And for a moment, many people feared the government was about to cross a line America can never uncross.

Because this was never only about one hospital.

Critics say this looked like a test run — a terrifying attempt to see how far the federal government could go in treating transgender Americans like “cases” to investigate instead of human beings to protect.
Imagine being a trans teenager finally feeling safe enough to trust a doctor… then waking up and hearing politicians may want access to every private detail about your body, your identity, your fears, and your future.

The judge said NO.

That single word could now change everything.

Not because the attacks are over — they aren’t.

Not because anti-trans political campaigns are stopping — they’re not.

But because this ruling tells hospitals, doctors, and families something powerful:

You can fight back.

You do not have to surrender your patients out of fear.

And somewhere in America, at least one courtroom still believes transgender people deserve privacy, dignity, and protection under the law.

The administration could still appeal.

They could try again somewhere else.

They could come back with a different strategy.

But today, in one Rhode Island courtroom, the government lost — and millions of people noticed.

Story below

704716096_1528503042403171_2861413906491042521_n.jpg


 
Shiftless2 said:
" federal lawyers quietly demanding hospitals in Rhode Island turn over deeply personal files tied to gender-affirming care." S2 #1,702
Click to expand...
Under whose order?
For what purpose?

If the order is legal, what's the problem?
If the order is NOT legal, what's the problem? Aren't federal lawyers licensed to practice federal law? Suspend the licenses until the matter is satisfactorily resolved.
 
Shiftless2 said:
"And who gives the DOJ orders?" S2 #1,708
Click to expand...
It is a unique mistake to apply conventions that applied to non-Trump administrations, to the Trump administration.
CERTAINLY it is possible Trump ordered this. BUT !

Is it not also possible Trump's empowered minions (remember Jan 6?) have demonstrated initiative, perhaps in hope of recognition / promotion?

Please do not misinterpret my position as offering answers here. What I've provided at this point is questions.
 
1779709419373.png

Europe’s parliament agreeing to a resolution declaring that trans women are women has become a major symbolic moment in the wider fight over recognition and dignity. For supporters, the message is simple: trans people deserve to be seen, respected, and protected in public life.
 
A federal judge in Washington, DC has blocked the Trump administration from transferring transgender women in federal custody into men’s prisons, extending emergency protections for several incarcerated trans women who reported facing assault, harassment, and abuse.

Advocates say the ruling highlights the ongoing dangers transgender inmates face in facilities that do not align with their gender identity. Access to safe housing and protection from violence is a critical human rights issue within the correctional system.

The case underscores how legal interventions can provide necessary protections while broader policies and reforms remain contested. For incarcerated trans people, safety, dignity, and respect are not optional, they are essential.

This decision is being praised by LGBTQ advocates as a meaningful step toward ensuring federal facilities uphold the rights and wellbeing of transgender inmates.


1779793412069.png

SOURCE
 
707448670_122290029428070796_5058913475815279486_n.jpg


Connecticut became the first state to pass a “safe state” law protecting people seeking gender-affirming care or abortion care from certain out-of-state legal actions.

Supporters say the legislation ensures that patients, families, and providers are protected when receiving care legally within Connecticut, safeguarding access against harassment or lawsuits from other jurisdictions.

For LGBTQ and reproductive rights advocates, the law represents an important step toward preserving autonomy, privacy, and medical safety for vulnerable communities.

The measure also highlights growing efforts to protect healthcare access amid national debates over trans rights and reproductive care, reinforcing that legality in one state should not create fear or risk.

Safe access to essential care is critical for dignity, wellbeing, and the protection of families.

SOURCE with comments
 

Bentley Hudgins Is Poised to Become Georgia’s First Trans State Lawmaker​

In the middle of America’s intensifying backlash against trans rights, voters are set to send Bentley Hudgins to the state Capitol.
By Christopher Wiggins / May 26, 2026
Now, after winning a Democratic primary in one of Georgia’s safest blue legislative districts, Hudgins is positioned to become the first out transgender lawmaker elected in Georgia history and among the first openly trans and nonbinary state legislators in the Deep South.
www.them.us

Bentley Hudgins Is Poised to Become Georgia’s First Trans State Lawmaker

In the middle of America’s intensifying backlash against trans rights, voters are set to send Bentley Hudgins to the state Capitol.
www.them.us www.them.us
 
·
I don't get the people who are against SSM. It's basically this scenario:

PM: We like donuts.

LGBT: Hey, we would like donuts too.

PM: No! If you have donuts then we won't enjoy our donuts.

LGBT: But there's lots of donut shops, and you can get your donuts everywhere. Why can't we have donuts in our home? The main bakery says it's ok.

PM: Only we deserve donuts. So what if we throw half of them away.

LGBT: But that's just it, you aren't losing anything, and we should be able to have some. And some of you don't even like donuts. And some of you have many donuts that you don't even eat.

PM: Only we can have the donuts. Even if we don't like them and you do, you can't have any.

LGBT: That seems a bit silly. What harm could it do if we had donuts?

PM: Our kids need to know that donuts are only for special people.

LGBT: Kids are going to be LGBT too.

PM: Only because they think they'll also get donuts if we let you have any now. They need to know that being LGBT means no donuts, ever.

LGBT: But why? Why should we never have donuts?

PM: It says right here in the original Krispy Kreme cookbook that only certain people can have donuts.

LGBT: You know that predates the health and safety code?Doesn't it also say that you can't wear certain clothes? That you can't go certain places? That you can't have different flour for your donuts?

PM: That's old and outdated, we ignore that.

LGBT: So is the no donuts rule.

PM: We like that, it makes us feel special. And we don't have to see you eat donuts.

LGBT: Why are you looking in our windows to watch us eat?

PM: Umm. No donuts for you!

LGBT: Doesn't the old Krispy Kreme cookbook say the rules are for Klub members only?

PM: We ignore that too.

LGBT: Okay. We can live without Krispy Kreme donuts. Dunkin' Donuts will make donuts for us.

PM: They're not allowed.

LGBT: They make donuts for you already.

PM: We won't let them make donuts for you.

LGBT: They don't even have the Krispy Kreme cookbook, they have their own. They can make donuts for anyone who's a grown up and a couple. How can you stop them?

PM: Krispy Kreme says we can!

LGBT: Actually it doesn't.

PM: No donuts for you! Not from us, not from anyone!

LGBT:
🤦🏻‍♂️
 
Shiftless2 said:
·
I don't get the people who are against SSM. It's basically this scenario:

PM: We like donuts.

LGBT: Hey, we would like donuts too.

PM: No! If you have donuts then we won't enjoy our donuts.

LGBT: But there's lots of donut shops, and you can get your donuts everywhere. Why can't we have donuts in our home? The main bakery says it's ok.

PM: Only we deserve donuts. So what if we throw half of them away.

LGBT: But that's just it, you aren't losing anything, and we should be able to have some. And some of you don't even like donuts. And some of you have many donuts that you don't even eat.

PM: Only we can have the donuts. Even if we don't like them and you do, you can't have any.

LGBT: That seems a bit silly. What harm could it do if we had donuts?

PM: Our kids need to know that donuts are only for special people.

LGBT: Kids are going to be LGBT too.

PM: Only because they think they'll also get donuts if we let you have any now. They need to know that being LGBT means no donuts, ever.

LGBT: But why? Why should we never have donuts?

PM: It says right here in the original Krispy Kreme cookbook that only certain people can have donuts.

LGBT: You know that predates the health and safety code?Doesn't it also say that you can't wear certain clothes? That you can't go certain places? That you can't have different flour for your donuts?

PM: That's old and outdated, we ignore that.

LGBT: So is the no donuts rule.

PM: We like that, it makes us feel special. And we don't have to see you eat donuts.

LGBT: Why are you looking in our windows to watch us eat?

PM: Umm. No donuts for you!

LGBT: Doesn't the old Krispy Kreme cookbook say the rules are for Klub members only?

PM: We ignore that too.

LGBT: Okay. We can live without Krispy Kreme donuts. Dunkin' Donuts will make donuts for us.

PM: They're not allowed.

LGBT: They make donuts for you already.

PM: We won't let them make donuts for you.

LGBT: They don't even have the Krispy Kreme cookbook, they have their own. They can make donuts for anyone who's a grown up and a couple. How can you stop them?

PM: Krispy Kreme says we can!

LGBT: Actually it doesn't.

PM: No donuts for you! Not from us, not from anyone!

LGBT:
🤦🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...

Good point in that there is no reason for anyone else to care about gender or sexual issues that effect no one else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top