I am one of those 19-26 year olds getting permanent sterilization. In a couple of weeks I am getting my tubes removed at the age of 22. It is exciting and empowering, but at the same time it's horrifying I even have to consider it.
My mouth dropped open reading the Vermont lawsuit. It's inexplicable that DCF would take the actions they have - unless something is hidden. Does the DCF have an arrangement with Lund to procure adoptable infants? This reads like the accounts of Chilean or Argentinian women who had their babies stolen from them under the military dictatorships. I hope AV is recompensed millions of dollars.
1) At conception, sex does not exist. Some say that we are all conceived as female and that developing down a male pathway requires intervention in that development. This isn't technically correct. No one is female at conception either, and without specific developmental cues the traits we associate with femaleness never come into being. (No embryo has vulva or ovaries, for instance.) So when you mention that the ExO declares sex final at conception, it's important to remember that that isn't just a nod toward the anti-abortion crowd. They're willing to say entirely bullshit things that sabotage Trump's own anti-trans actions just to put their anti-abortion activism on slightly firmer ground. I'm trans, and I'm not trying to downplay how much they hate me, but I think this says something about their priorities, that they're more willing to fuck up their anti-trans efforts to more effectively attack reproductive rights than they are willing to compromise RR to enhance their anti-trans attacks.
2) Virginia doesn't require the approval of an amendment to the state constitution in consecutive YEARS. It requires such approval in different legislative sessions separated by an intervening general election. If they had passed this for the first time last year, they would still have had to wait until 2026 to pass it again. (Virginia elects their lege members in odd years, not even, so the entire Virginia House of Delegates is up for re/election this November.) This might be a silly little point to make, given that you're still correct about 2026 being the earliest this could go before voters, but I think it's good to have the right info out there. For instance, if it took the Virginia General Assembly (its House and Senate combined) until 2027 to pass the amendment again, it would not matter that 2026 passed with no action since it's not successive years that's the requirement, but successive legislatures, and the 2027 Virginia Lege will be the same one as the 2026 Virginia Lege.
I feel like even this SCOTUS would balk at a law that lets the state take a child without a warrant or a very prompt hearing. Surprised it hasn’t been challenged.
I cannot find the removal of reproductiverights.gov being removed in any news channel. The media is just as guilty in all of this. They don't do a goddamn thing.
To reinforce your criticism of the media, though it's a different issue you also won't find discussion of Trump cancelling all licenses for offshore wind power development.
That's a huge deal that appears to impact even just-completed projects if they haven't started selling their energy to the grid yet. It certainly impacts developments that are in the process of construction but not completed. And, of course, it's complicated, because it's possible to build one turbine and connect it to the grid and start selling its energy while you're still building the next one. There's confusion as to how this will affect developments that are selling electricity but also not yet completed. There's so much to cover there -- as much as with reproductive rights -- and yet the media is nowhere to be found.
They are forever sneakin. I’m preparing for endless distractions. Whenever there is one, look a little deeper to see what’s being signed late at night when everyone’s asleep.
Jesus, Jessica….I don’t know how you continue to do this work! But I am so grateful to you…we would never know about these awful things until it is too late (and it still might be). Thank you.
Exactly! A young person dear to me is intersex, having a 46XY genome (a condition called Swyer's syndrome). They were assigned female at birth, but when their puberty was seriously delayed, endocrinologists discovered their differences. This is *exactly* what happened. The "trigger" that turns a fetus male didn't go off, so the baby was born with female parts.
I am one of those 19-26 year olds getting permanent sterilization. In a couple of weeks I am getting my tubes removed at the age of 22. It is exciting and empowering, but at the same time it's horrifying I even have to consider it.
My mouth dropped open reading the Vermont lawsuit. It's inexplicable that DCF would take the actions they have - unless something is hidden. Does the DCF have an arrangement with Lund to procure adoptable infants? This reads like the accounts of Chilean or Argentinian women who had their babies stolen from them under the military dictatorships. I hope AV is recompensed millions of dollars.
Thank you for this.
A couple quick notes, though:
1) At conception, sex does not exist. Some say that we are all conceived as female and that developing down a male pathway requires intervention in that development. This isn't technically correct. No one is female at conception either, and without specific developmental cues the traits we associate with femaleness never come into being. (No embryo has vulva or ovaries, for instance.) So when you mention that the ExO declares sex final at conception, it's important to remember that that isn't just a nod toward the anti-abortion crowd. They're willing to say entirely bullshit things that sabotage Trump's own anti-trans actions just to put their anti-abortion activism on slightly firmer ground. I'm trans, and I'm not trying to downplay how much they hate me, but I think this says something about their priorities, that they're more willing to fuck up their anti-trans efforts to more effectively attack reproductive rights than they are willing to compromise RR to enhance their anti-trans attacks.
2) Virginia doesn't require the approval of an amendment to the state constitution in consecutive YEARS. It requires such approval in different legislative sessions separated by an intervening general election. If they had passed this for the first time last year, they would still have had to wait until 2026 to pass it again. (Virginia elects their lege members in odd years, not even, so the entire Virginia House of Delegates is up for re/election this November.) This might be a silly little point to make, given that you're still correct about 2026 being the earliest this could go before voters, but I think it's good to have the right info out there. For instance, if it took the Virginia General Assembly (its House and Senate combined) until 2027 to pass the amendment again, it would not matter that 2026 passed with no action since it's not successive years that's the requirement, but successive legislatures, and the 2027 Virginia Lege will be the same one as the 2026 Virginia Lege.
Thanks again for everything you do.
I feel like even this SCOTUS would balk at a law that lets the state take a child without a warrant or a very prompt hearing. Surprised it hasn’t been challenged.
I cannot find the removal of reproductiverights.gov being removed in any news channel. The media is just as guilty in all of this. They don't do a goddamn thing.
To reinforce your criticism of the media, though it's a different issue you also won't find discussion of Trump cancelling all licenses for offshore wind power development.
That's a huge deal that appears to impact even just-completed projects if they haven't started selling their energy to the grid yet. It certainly impacts developments that are in the process of construction but not completed. And, of course, it's complicated, because it's possible to build one turbine and connect it to the grid and start selling its energy while you're still building the next one. There's confusion as to how this will affect developments that are selling electricity but also not yet completed. There's so much to cover there -- as much as with reproductive rights -- and yet the media is nowhere to be found.
NY Times just posted front page lead story on it.
Ooh, they did? That's excellent. 12 hours ago I couldn't find anything.
They are forever sneakin. I’m preparing for endless distractions. Whenever there is one, look a little deeper to see what’s being signed late at night when everyone’s asleep.
Dropped a polite email to the Texas Trib reporter highlighting your observations re:his interview. Hoping for polite response. No snark intended!
Thank you for keeping at your reporting. 🤯🧘♀️Though you deserve self care too.
Jesus, Jessica….I don’t know how you continue to do this work! But I am so grateful to you…we would never know about these awful things until it is too late (and it still might be). Thank you.
OMG this is too horribly funny - as in, it's funny but also extremely horrible "...belonging AT CONCEPTION to the sex..." Because EVERYONE starts off as FEMALE at conception! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222286/#:~:text=During%20early%20development%20the%20gonads,the%20later%20stages%20of%20life.
I was going to post that as well! Their ignorance is astounding!
Exactly! A young person dear to me is intersex, having a 46XY genome (a condition called Swyer's syndrome). They were assigned female at birth, but when their puberty was seriously delayed, endocrinologists discovered their differences. This is *exactly* what happened. The "trigger" that turns a fetus male didn't go off, so the baby was born with female parts.
I was going to say, nobody is making sex cells at conception
I had forgotten about this!