Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Barb's avatar

From the article: Under the MHRA, “gender identity” is protected under the broader category of sexual orientation, which is defined as “having or being perceived as having a self-image or identity not traditionally associated with one’s biological maleness or femaleness.”

The Minnesota Human Rights Act has tied “gender identity” —which I’ve never seen defined in a way that was not circular or based on subjective perception and self proclamation —to sexual orientation, which is a completely different concept. “Gender identity” has never been able to stand on its own like other protected categories, because it has no coherent, objective definition. It must attach itself like a parasite to other protected categories to achieve the appearance of legitimacy.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts

Ready for more?