3 ms·

Texas just unveiled a law that proposes putting parents who support their children's gender transition in jail for child abuse. That means one side thinks the

by Pxtl 5y ago

Texas just unveiled a law that proposes putting parents who support their children's gender transition in jail for child abuse. That means one side thinks the other side is a child abuser, and the other side thinks that bigots are going to throw them in prison for being a supportive parent. This is not something you can be "polite" about.

vorpalhex 5y ago
1. It was an order, not a law 2. It was a clarification of existing rules 3. It does not make "supporting your child's gender transition" a jailable offense. The order says subjecting a child to invasive medical procedure can be abuse, and that doctors and teachers have a legal requirement to report abuse. Here is the order for your reading pleasure: https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-dfps-to-investigate-gender-transitioning-procedures-as-child-abuse https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-dfps...
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  "As OAG Opinion No. KP-0401 makes clear, it is already against the law to subject Texas children to a wide variety of elective procedures for gender transitioning, including reassignment surgeries that can cause sterilization, mastectomies, removals of otherwise healthy body parts, and administration of puberty-blocking drugs or supraphysiologic doses of testosterone or estrogen." Where "subject" appears to be the most general form possible, as far as I can tell from context. Even puberty blockers are on this list! You're not supporting a gender transition if you can't touch hormones at all.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    > "As OAG Opinion No. KP-0401 makes clear, it is already against the law to subject Texas children to ... removals of otherwise healthy body parts" Wow, finally a law against infant male circumcision! In Texas, of all places; whodathunkit.
pasquinelli 5y ago
neither side decided anything though, the governer did. so all the talk aboit it online is just moving air around.
blindmute 5y ago
I don't think gender transition for kids is compatible with child sex laws. If a kid can't consent to sex, even if they're verbally willing and consenting, how on earth can they consent to cutting off their penis? Seems a bit absurd to me
- Pxtl 5y ago
  The problem is that the order extends to puberty blockers, which are a safe and reversible treatment for kids to keep them from maturing into their undesired gender until they're old enough to opt into more drastic treatments like hormones and surgeries... or not, as they choose. Edit: also wtf does that have to do with sex? Do you mean the larger subject of child consent in general? Because contract law would be a less extreme example of children not having power of informed consent.

by Pxtl 5y ago

vorpalhex 5y ago

1. It was an order, not a law 2. It was a clarification of existing rules 3. It does not make "supporting your child's gender transition" a jailable offense. The order says subjecting a child to invasive medical procedure can be abuse, and that doctors and teachers have a legal requirement to report abuse. Here is the order for your reading pleasure: https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-dfps-to-investigate-gender-transitioning-procedures-as-child-abuse https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-dfps...

Dylan16807 5y ago
"As OAG Opinion No. KP-0401 makes clear, it is already against the law to subject Texas children to a wide variety of elective procedures for gender transitioning, including reassignment surgeries that can cause sterilization, mastectomies, removals of otherwise healthy body parts, and administration of puberty-blocking drugs or supraphysiologic doses of testosterone or estrogen." Where "subject" appears to be the most general form possible, as far as I can tell from context. Even puberty blockers are on this list! You're not supporting a gender transition if you can't touch hormones at all.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > "As OAG Opinion No. KP-0401 makes clear, it is already against the law to subject Texas children to ... removals of otherwise healthy body parts" Wow, finally a law against infant male circumcision! In Texas, of all places; whodathunkit.

pasquinelli 5y ago

neither side decided anything though, the governer did. so all the talk aboit it online is just moving air around.

blindmute 5y ago

I don't think gender transition for kids is compatible with child sex laws. If a kid can't consent to sex, even if they're verbally willing and consenting, how on earth can they consent to cutting off their penis? Seems a bit absurd to me

Pxtl 5y ago
The problem is that the order extends to puberty blockers, which are a safe and reversible treatment for kids to keep them from maturing into their undesired gender until they're old enough to opt into more drastic treatments like hormones and surgeries... or not, as they choose. Edit: also wtf does that have to do with sex? Do you mean the larger subject of child consent in general? Because contract law would be a less extreme example of children not having power of informed consent.