I've seen other people saying the NYT made this up or something? I don't know what to make of it until I see it coming from the administration directly
Holy shit they favor banning breast reduction for boys and banning augmentation for girls? Or are they just jumping aboard trans discrimination during this wave of moral panic and hate and lies because they suck and lack spines?
(Yeah, I know it’s been very rare for anyone under 18 to receive GA care in the form of surgery. Not the point. When it’s needed m, it is, and the goalposts and context have sucked. Thank you to reporters and experts and trans people who have educated me so I know more than I did before.)
It doesn’t make me feel better that I suspect this was the position the day before the debate too. Biden should have better people than this, and better positions.
What precisely is the position? Removing age minimum would indicate there is no minimum, that's the plain English meaning. How would that be bad? (I am trans btw, not some rando dude in your mentions)
And Levine is herself transgender, so this makes even less sense.
To me, a cis person, this reads like "our position is that we agree with republicans again" but I know that nuance is supposed to make it sound different than that.
Again, I don't understand how *removing* age minimums = no surgery for kids. I hope the admin issues a very clear statement because I don't trust the NYT on trans issues at all.
And what would be Biden's motivation to do this while simultaneously taking TN to court over TN's ban on minor care?
