Opponents say [Washington state] voters were persuaded at least partly because the initiative and its boosters exploited deep-seated prejudices and misunderstandings about transgender people to erode their rights.
Opponents say [Washington state] voters were persuaded at least partly because the initiative and its boosters exploited deep-seated prejudices and misunderstandings about transgender people to erode their rights.
If it was so obvious, why did you choose to ignore it in your original comment?
Because it isn’t related to the topic at hand
You used “common sense” as evidence that your view was correct, yet you don’t think showing that common sense has historically been used as a means of oppression is relevant? Ok, sure
I didn’t say my view was correct. I explained why I think blue WA voted this way. To most people it IS common sense that men are physically more capable than women on average. Because for one, men hold the world records in every single sport, and by quite a lot.
Like I said, be mad at mother nature.
Which group of people most strongly support this ban? Female athletes lmao.
That no longer holds when comparing people actually receiving hrt for a period of time.
Be mad at science.
So how do you determine the “period of time” in which the line is drawn?
[1][2][3][4][5][6]