It's happening. It is as bad as it looks and no one should be in any doubt. All that Janice Raymond had aforementioned in 1979 it came true. Everything you see publiche 11th Hour blog is a reality. It is not at all a question of plotting.
On the first day that he came into office the President Biden signed the executive order 13988 on preventing and combating discrimination on the grounds of gender identity or sexual orientation. Many of us, including myself, naively assumed that this would mean that within 100 days federal agencies would submit rules for public notification and debate, such as requested by the Administrative Procedure Act. None of this happened. The administration has meticulously erased sex as a significant category throughout federal administrative law, without notice or opportunity to discuss it.
In February, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has issued a reminder announcing that would reinterpret the word sex to include 'gender identity' in US housing legislation. This means the end of all women-only accommodation, including domestic violence shelters and university dormitories, because the memorandum covers "almost all housing, including private housing, public housing and housing receiving federal funding", according to the website of the HUD .
In March, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced that the prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of sex in Title IX will be interpreted as also prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of "gender identity". This means the end of women's and girls' sports in all federally funded institutions.
In recent days the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has announced of submitted a final rule to the Federal Register explaining that interpreted the word sex to include 'gender identity' when assessing complaints of discrimination related to the provision of health care under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This means that women will not be allowed to seek gynaecological care at any health facility that receives federal dollars.
All this without notice or opportunity for public discussion.
Meanwhile, the Department of Health and Human Services is openly lying to the American people. Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act is codified (i.e. written in the official code of the United States) at 42 USC 18116. On its website, the Department says Section 1557 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, colour, national origin, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), age, or disability in covered health care programs or activities. 42 USC § 18116(a)." This is patently false. 42 USC 18116 (a) makes no mention of 'gender identity'.
All these agencies are referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County which stated that people cannot be discriminated against on the basis of 'transgender status' in employment (Title VII), to justify the complete deletion of sex as a meaningful category throughout the law of the United Statesi, despite the Supreme Court's express insistence that its ruling was limited to the employment context. In its decision, the Court stated:
"Employers are concerned that our decision goes beyond Title VII to other federal or state laws that prohibit sex discrimination. And, based on Title VII itself, they say that sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms etc will no longer be acceptable after our decision today. But we do not set ourselves these legislative goals; we have not gone into the controversy over the meaning of their terms, and we do not prejudge any gender issues today. Even in Title VII we do not pretend to talk about bathrooms, changing rooms or anything else of that kind. The only question we have asked is whether an employer who fires someone simply because he is homosexual or transgender has discriminated against that individual "because of his sex"..
Bostock is was a bad judgment for women and girls, and many US feminists have said since when it was published in June 2020. One of the reasons why Bostock is negative for women and girls is the fact that they have ensured that the "transgender status' is equated with gender in legal protection (without ever explaining what 'transgender status' means). Another reason is that many of us (quite rightly, as we are seeing) had predicted that it would be used to justify the cancellation of sex through federal law.
In April, the US branch of the Women's Human Rights Campaign (WHRC USA) sent a letter signed by nearly 1,500 women worldwide, at the White House. In this letter we stated:
"We, the undersigned women of the world, are horrified and disgusted by the vicious assault on the rights, privacy and safety of women and girls carried out by the "Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation" and subsequent developments as outlined below. This injustice will have global consequences.
Anyone, anywhere, is invited to send that letter to the White House using their page of contact at any time (no need to be a US resident)... Feel free to tell my President that you oppose the annulment of women and girls throughout the United States and the impact its actions will have on women and girls globally"
Previously, on 8 March, WHRC USA presented this same letter to Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer, also signed by some 1500 women worldwide, imploring him not to bring the so-called Equality Act to the Senate floor. On 16 March, WHRC USA presented this testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, explaining why we opposed the Equality Act as written. We received written confirmation that the testimony was provided to all members of the Committee. We were pleased to learn that the Senate did not act on the Equality Act. But now it is clear that the Administration is doing by executive fiat what the Senate did not do by legislation. All without any input from the American people.
The Women's Liberation Front led surveys proving that the majority of the American people support the protection of same-sex spaces. Our administration knows this, but doesn't care.
Again, I really hope I am wrong about all this, and if I am, let someone tell me. In the meantime I will just reiterate: "Mr. President, how much longer will women have to wait for their freedom? ". I'm still waiting.
Kara Dansky
original article here
