Pidge to a trans woman

This is Pidge, from the Netflix reboot of Voltron.  Pidge is special to me, and here’s why.  Putting the body behind a cut because it’s not a first minute reveal, though it is S1.

pidge

Read more of this post

Advertisements

To The FDA, Everyone Transgender Is a Gay Man | Advocate.com

I could see an argument for trans women being treated as AMAB men for this policy for sexual history when they were living as men, or perhaps while they still have a penis should be the determinant- the risks under those circumstances would be comparable .  But for activity after SRS?  The risks at that point are comparable to those of AFAB women, and their sexual history from that point should be judged by those standards.

Though I don’t think the MSM donation ban should exist anyway. Screening for HIV has improved dramatically- the reliability of the tests is much better, and the detection window is much shorter. It’s not 100%, very few medical tests are, but it’s quite good these days. And on the small chance it slips through?  Treatment options are far superior. An HIV+ person who is treated by current standards can expect to live pretty much a normal life. It’s not ideal(especially when considering issues of access to treatment), but the consequences of HIV positive blood slipping into the supply are far less severe than they used to be.

I do think the ban was justified in the early days- little was known about how the disease spread except that it was spreading faster among gay men(at the time).  But science marches on, and policy should change to reflect that. With the reduction in the chance for HIV+ blood to get into the supply, and the reduction in severity in the event it does, the importance of ensuring we have enough blood supply becomes more significant in the risk-benefit analysis.

It’s time to drop the ban.

 

To The FDA, Everyone Transgender Is a Gay Man | Advocate.com.

Bathroom objections to transgender rights are bullshit

Thinking about the bathroom access objections to transgender rights- the idea that men would suddenly dress as women to access womens bathrooms and commit sexual assault.

One, there’s precious little evidence this happens often. I wouldn’t be shocked if it has, somewhere, but it’s clearly not remotely common.  If it was, I’d expect long lists of incidents to at least occasionally accompany said complaints.  It would be the most obvious piece of supporting evidence ever, but where is it?  No idea.

Two- If a man is such a crappy person that they would impersonate a woman for the purposes of sexual assault of actual women*… Would “You’re not allowed to use this bathroom” really stop them?  Maybe they’d spend a few more minutes on their makeup so they pass more easily, but that’s about it.  You cost them a couple bucks and five minutes of time but don’t actually protect women.  And, oh, you encourage them to work harder on passing, and I really fail to see how making rapists harder to spot could ever possibly help in stopping them**.

If the time and money you cost them is that big a deal, why don’t you, oh, I don’t know, actually prosecute rapists and send them to prison for a decent amount of time?  That actually stands a chance of helping.

Making this argument insincerely makes you a bigot.  Making it sincerely makes you a moron(and probably a bigot too).

 

*- “Actual women” should be read as inclusive of transwomen.
**- This does sound iffy to me on reading it back, that I’m sort of throwing transwomen under the bus with the hypothetical asshole impersonating a woman, that they should make it easy for others to identify them.  This is not my intent, my intent is to show the fractal wrongness of the bathroom argument by countering it from somewhat different angles, even some that start from a problematic spot.  I hope the surrounding context actually renders this footnote unnecessary, if not, I apologize.