This corporate virtue-signaling is needed in reaction to a New York Times report that the Department of Health and Human Services is proposing to "establish a legal definition of sex under Title IX." The proposed definition, "[s]ex means a person's status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth," has become necessary to undo the legal havoc caused by former president Obama's decision to reinterpret "the legal concept of gender in federal programs ... [to recognize] gender largely as an individual's choice and not determined by the sex assigned at birth."
To no one's surprise, any attempt at clarifying that Title IX's exact language prohibiting discrimination "on the basis of sex" refers to "protections to women and girls" has been met with wails that transgenders and "non-binaries" are being "erased." Catherine E. Lhamon, one of the people who helped Obama formulate his sex-as-choice expansion of Title IX, says "the proposed definition 'quite simply negates the humanity of people.'"
But that's quite simply nonsense. It's nonsense not least because Trump's interpretation of Title IX can no more negate transgenders' humanity than it was Barack Obama's muddying up of Title IX that beneficently bestowed humanity on them. Their humanity is not in question.
(Right. It's only their sanity we need to worry about - Jenny Greenteeth)
READ MORE AT AMERICAN THINKER
RELATED POSTS
13-year-old fights school policy allowing ‘trans girls’ into girls’ changing room
February 7, 2020 (Paul Smeaton, LifeSiteNews) – A 13-year-old UK girl is taking her local council to court after it issued guidance that would allow boys who identify as “transgender girls” to access girls’ bathrooms, changing rooms, and dormitory rooms on student trips.
The guidance was issued last year as part of the Oxfordshire County Council’s “Trans Inclusion Toolkit for School 2019” project.
