[elbows]

They mostly sound reasonable at a bullet-point level, but reading closer turns up details such as:

> Signatories must commit to “defining and otherwise interpreting ‘male,’ ‘female,’ ‘woman,’ and ‘man’ according to reproductive function and biological processes.”

Which is not exactly ideological neutral.

[AnimalMuppet]

But interpreting male and female according to some other criteria would also not be ideologically neutral.

If your point is that the standards are not neutral, I guess on at least this point I have to agree. If your point is that the status quo is neutral, I disagree.

[twixfel]

The status quo is that the universities themselves decide. That is clearly more neutral than the government dictating to them.

[AnimalMuppet]

Was that true? Did the universities themselves decide? Or was at least some of the support for trans "ideology" (I don't know what better word to use, but I'm not happy with this one either) due to pressure from the government? [Edit: Maybe trans "movement" is what I wanted to say.]

True, it was less pressure and more subtle than Trump's pressure. And it was in the direction that the universities were more willing to move in, due to the personnel of universities leaning left. But was it really "the universities themselves decide"? I'm not sure that it was.

But I will agree to this at least: Left to themselves, the universities were not likely to wind up where Trump is trying to push them to be.

[IAmBroom]

You insinuate that the federal government exerted pressure on colleges to conform to pro-trans-rights ideologies, with "less pressure and more subtle".

Cite any pressure from the federal government.

You're engaging in a version of BSABSVR argumentation.

[sidle_arount]

That sounds reasonable too, certainly when compared to the very controversial alternative.

[nickpsecurity]

Biology is ideologically neutral. People who disagree with that position are anti-biology (anti-science) on this topic. It certainly makes sense to begin with how to treat men and women by noting they're biologically different instead of whatever they imagine themselves to be.

We certainly don't issue degrees based only on what expertise they identify as. We don't allow them in office based on whether they identify as President or Principal. We should likewise not use their feelings or unsubstantiated beliefs to determine if they're a man or a woman when biology has the answer almost every time. Intersex, the exceptions, we'll handle on a case by case basis.

[patagurbon]

What parts of the biology of sex mandates different treatment? Do you mean that medicine should be tailored to biology? Yes obviously, and even very progressive research hospitals take great pains to ensure the treatment is tailored to biology. Perhaps more so than conservative hospitals. You would know this if you engaged with the research outside of the news.

Outside of medicine? What different treatment does “biology” merit?

[IAmBroom]

> Biology is ideologically neutral. People who disagree with that position are anti-biology (anti-science) on this topic.

So you agree there are seven human sexes?

[sidle_arount]

Who is making such an preposterous claim?