Desi Lydic

They understand that trans people are the solution, really.

That if a trans person can exist and be assigned a certain gender and be born a certain way, but choose themselves and choose to live authentically beyond other people's gender expectations, if I can do it, you can do it.

Everybody here can do it, whether you're trans or not.

And that threatens the patriarchal structure, right?

So getting trans people in line gets everybody else in line.

And then, like, on a legal level, it actually undermines all gender protection rights, right?

When we, this is a little in the weeds, but the Bostock case.

Take us there.

Take us there.

The Vostok case in 2020 that declared six to three, by the way, in 2020 that said it is illegal to fire a trans or a gay person from their job for being trans or gay, which they said is a violation of Title VII.

This is indeed discrimination because of sex, on the basis of sex.

That was a miracle that we got that ruling in 2020.

That same court is now saying that

there is no discrimination on the basis of sex when it comes to transgender kids their their logic is well we're discriminating against both trans girls and trans boys

when the issue is that the medication that a non-trans kid can get, like puberty blockers, if they have precocious puberty, which puberty blockers have been around since the late 70s, early 80s, if they need hormones for whatever reason, a non-transgender kid can get those.

But if you're trans and you're getting hormones or puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria, you can't.

But the Supreme Court said that's not discrimination.

But what happens there is that

Ultimately, like so much of the precedent that allowed us to win in 2020 was about sex stereotypes.

There's a case called Pricewaterhouse versus somebody.