skirtcafe.org

While about gender identity, it's also a bit worrying, that judges may be ruling on stuff even for boys who want to wear skirts or dresses for reasons that don't have to do with gender identity....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/m ... -1.3816829

And there's a satirical take on this whole Medecine Hat case (yup, that's the name of the city this is happening in)...

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2016/10/bo ... ring-gown/

I suspect there is more to this than meets the eye, and the child is quite likely being used as a pawn in a heated custody dispute.

The court ruling on what's "acceptable attire" is a bit disturbing and smacks of something that might issue from North Carolina rather than in a country like Canada; however there are throwbacks and rednecks worldwide, I suppose, but that judge really should go back to cattle-herding instead of pontificating from the bench.

Alberta, it should be noted, is kind of the "Texas of Canada".....they have oil, they have cattle, lots of it (your comment was spot-on), they have a strong cowboy tradition (Calgary Stampede, most notably), and....they were the only province that, during the last Iraq War, was mostly in favor of it. Some of those "Jesusland and Canada" maps even attached Alberta to the "red country" of Jesusland. Part of southern Alberta, however, rather than being like Texas is more like Utah (significant LDS population)

Funny thing though is that the current provincial government is ordering public schools to be more inclusive, including allowing greater freedom in what children wear, where they go to the bathroom, even what they wish to be identifed as pronoun-wise (but the political party in power there is, quite atypically for there, the left-leaning New Democratic Party.)

Raakone wrote:...And there's a satirical take on this whole Medecine Hat case (yup, that's the name of the city this is happening in)...

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2016/10/bo ... ring-gown/

"Boy who identifies as female told not to dress as a girl by male judge wearing a gown."

"The child’s mother has said she will fight this decision, even if she needs to take it all the way to the Supreme Court, where the judges wear red velvet Mrs. Claus dresses."

Luvin' it!

crfriend wrote:I suspect there is more to this than meets the eye, and the child is quite likely being used as a pawn in a heated custody dispute.

That's my take on it. I feel for the poor kid. He's going to grow up conflicted and confused as hell.

In the second article the judge says, “But as a judge, It is my sworn duty to decide what the nation’s children should wear.” To me that is NOT the duty of a judge. Gender identity has been added to the list of protections and it should be his duty to uphold that not to say what a person can or cannot wear irrespective of the age of the person. Carl, as you say there is probably more to this than is reported but the Neanderthal verdict is, on the face of it, disturbing.

Sinned wrote:In the second article the judge says, “But as a judge, It is my sworn duty to decide what the nation’s children should wear.” To me that is NOT the duty of a judge. Gender identity has been added to the list of protections and it should be his duty to uphold that not to say what a person can or cannot wear irrespective of the age of the person. Carl, as you say there is probably more to this than is reported but the Neanderthal verdict is, on the face of it, disturbing.

Well, since that article was in "The Beaverton", I had some suspicions! The Beaverton is a satirical publication; is it likely they have put "certain" words into the mouths of the judiciary to point up the inconsistencies between the justices?


Edit
Just seen the OP. Sorry, I missed that the publication's satirical credentials had already been pointed out; it seems others may have missed them, too, but what do I know!

Disaffected.citizen wrote:Just seen the OP. Sorry, I missed that the publication's satirical credentials had already been pointed out; it seems others may have missed them, too, but what do I know!

I initially glossed the call-out of the second article being satirical. However, I "smelled a rat" in the second one, thought about it for a split second, and made the connection. That's a problem with well-done satire -- sometimes it's indistinguishable from the entirely porked world we live in these days. Satire back in the 1950s and '60s was frequently hilarious because it was obvious (see the assorted corpus of Tom Lehrer), but today it hits entirely too close to home. (Lehrer's comment upon retirement from song-writing: "In a world where Henry Kissinger can win the Nobel Peace Prize there is no room for satire.")

I still laughed my backside off over the Beaverton article, though. "... where the justices wear red Ms. Claus dresses."

If the boy wants to wear a skirt or dress, let him & stuff the courts.

Clothing is immaterial at this point !

Just BEWARE that the kid doesn't actually cut his penis off - and God forbid the outcome - the blame - the shame - the I told you so -
and all the rest of the court officials idiots no matter what color their roby dresses are who missed this in the making !

In any event this kid needs to be watched closely if the penis removal becomes more evident !
Better to have immediate consoling and future compliance with his wishes than have a botched job rest on everyone's conscious !

If this is faux news it sure has stirred up my ire - this is disgusting !

This thread has gone seriously "QUIET" !
The Court proceedings after Oct 24-5-6 may have been sealed due to a juvenile being the center of action also a primary parent custody issue !
But in the mean time back at the Medicine Hat Canada ranch am curious as to what is happening - Hope the kid has proper conseling and is not
contemplating irreparable damage to himself !

All this needs for satire is a Judge named Roy Bean - Law west of the Pecos (Oil country) !

Indeed, it would be interesting to get an update on this.

The judge's decision was certainly against the flow, and I presume it could be overturned on appeal.

And of course the custody battle adds to the complexity. On the one hand, the father could claim his ex-wife is a pervert who gets off on dressing her son in girl's clothes. (I know that's not the case, but he could still claim it.) On the other, the mother could claim that the boy's preference is part of his natural personality, that it wasn't caused by anything either parent did (or continues to do), that the boy needs the freedom to express himself, and that the father wouldn't permit that freedom.

Any possibility of self-mutilation certainly needs to be addressed, and I presume making the boy wear pants wouldn't do that. Quite the opposite, most likely. This is surely a case for counseling.

Nowhere is the father's approach to the gender identity issue described. That would be interesting.