Ok…what was the reasoning for using the language they used.
In your opinion…of course
BREAKING: THE DREAM TEAM OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT: Administration - Trump, Musk, Kennedy, Gabbard
- Thread starter mcmurtry66
- Start date
In your opinion…of course
Beats me. Maybe to make it more flexible in case different school districts had different needs? Maybe to make it sound more inclusive (i.e., virtue signaling)? Whatever the reason, it doesn't change what the law does and doesn't actually say. And it doesn't actually say that any tampons need be place in boys' bathrooms.
How the law is being implemented in real life has nothing to do with what the text of the law says.
You guys are just wrong. Take it up with Minnesota. Take it up with Sandra Feist.
“While the vast majority of the period products will be used in the girls’ bathrooms, the decision was made to structure the bill as gender-inclusive in order to ensure that trans and nonbinary students who menstruate would have equal access to the products they need,” Feist said.
Yes, Tim Walz signed a law requiring Minnesota public schools to provide free tampons in school bathrooms
The bill’s sponsor said “the vast majority” of the period products will be used in girls’ bathrooms but the law’s text is gender-neutral to accommodate all students.www.wcnc.com
We know why the law was written the way it was. Goats opinion doesn’t matter.
“While the vast majority of the period products will be used in the girls’ bathrooms, the decision was made to structure the bill as gender-inclusive in order to ensure that trans and nonbinary students who menstruate would have equal access to the products they need,” Feist said.
Yes, Tim Walz signed a law requiring Minnesota public schools to provide free tampons in school bathrooms
The bill’s sponsor said “the vast majority” of the period products will be used in girls’ bathrooms but the law’s text is gender-neutral to accommodate all students.
www.wcnc.com
I don’t understand why it is difficult to admit?We know why the law was written the way it was. Goats opinion doesn’t matter.
“While the vast majority of the period products will be used in the girls’ bathrooms, the decision was made to structure the bill as gender-inclusive in order to ensure that trans and nonbinary students who menstruate would have equal access to the products they need,” Feist said.
Yes, Tim Walz signed a law requiring Minnesota public schools to provide free tampons in school bathrooms
The bill’s sponsor said “the vast majority” of the period products will be used in girls’ bathrooms but the law’s text is gender-neutral to accommodate all students.
With all due respect…your first statement is horseshit and you know it.
You and I both may have been born in the dark….but it wasn’t last night
Or why it’s so difficult to admit that in certain scenarios, the law would require schools to put tampons in boys bathrooms.
Thats just a fact.
You mean this?:
“I feel good about the gender-inclusive structure of the bill and did work with school stakeholders to provide some additional flexibility in implementation that they were comfortable with,” Feist explained.
It doesn't magically become true if you repeat it a certain number of times.
The fact that she worked with schools to provide additional flexibility doesn’t change the text or intent of the bill.
Exactly. So why are you doing that? You are inserting words that aren’t there - such as “all” restrooms. One of the cardinal rules of statutory interpretation is that you do not insert text that is not found in the statute.
And, if your interpretation were correct there would certainly be some schools complying with the law. Yet, no one has been able to come with even one school. Not a one. I guess Minnesota school district are just full of scofflaws.
Actually, I was going to avoid this, because this isn't really the topic at hand, but if you want the honest truth, your wording, while well-intentioned, could in theory lead to the outcome Hoops fears. Depends on how Minnesota legally defines the word "female," but under your wording, if a trans boy still legally qualifies as a "female" then the school would have to supply them in boys rooms if that student uses them.
I'll give you a freebie to make what you are trying to do even better:
The products must be available to all menstruating students in restrooms designated for use by female students, or designated for use by all students regardless of gender, if those restrooms are regularly used by students in grades 4 to 12, according to a plan developed by the school district.
You're welcome.
I know what it means to me, but I don't know what it means to a Minnesota court.
See my edit above. The fact remains, in the real world this isn't happening. This is all about Tampon Tim!
No brick wall, just liberals. They have parasitic minds and have been brainwashed.
It was true the first time I said it.
You guys are quibbling with minutiae in the wording and ignoring the stated intent of the bill, as articulated by the woman(person?) who wrote it.
Which is that ALL restrooms, not just female, would be supplied with menstrual products provided that restroom is being used by a person who is menstruating.
No, no, no, no, no. This is not minutiae. What you said right there, in my quote does not exist in the bill, anywhere. You invented it. The statute itself does not say it.
Actually, it might be. Because we took the terms for granted for so long, courts have long been very sloppy. There are SCOTUS opinions on discrimination, for example, that interchangeably use "females" and "women," or "sex" and "gender." Now that we have laws about gender identity, that can be a problem. To me, the terms female/male should be reserved solely to discussing biological sex. Other terms can be used for whatever complexities of gender and gender identity we are going to legislate for.
But, again, we have an entire body of law that hasn't bothered to make that distinction, because for so long, it wasn't necessary, and that actually can make it hard to predict how a court might apply the term in a particular case.
So…we do need a federal law defining male and female?
I think it is now needed but I thought you disagreed?
I didn't disagree entirely. I just said I wasn't willing to sign off on it sight unseen. It could be bad or good, depending on how it's written.
I thought we left it with you wanting to re-write Title IX as opposed to passing a law defining male and female.
Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot you were talking about a constitutional amendment. Yes, if the only thing that's wrong on a federal level is Title IX, then I'd rather just fix that. I'm not a fan of amending the constitution until we've put serious thought (read: years of thought) into it.
I can see it now - Bob the janitor will stock the first floor boy’s restroom based on whether Hannah is menstruating that week. And he only needs to stock the boy’s restroom in the gym during the semester Hannah has PE
😂😂😂
Taken directly from the bill-
“The products must be available to all menstruating students in restrooms regularly used by students in grades 4 to 12”
And you claim you’re NOT quibbling with the wording. 😂😂😂
You're literally proving me right by sharing that quote. I'm simply flabbergasted at what it is you are doing at this point.
This is what we were discussing and we were waiting on the lawyers to write the words. Or…I think. Hell…I’m probably confused at this point
Be careful what you ask for. A federal law defining gender, sex, etc. for all federal laws would likely lead to a myriad of unintended and absurd consequences - regardless of the definitions chosen.
Also, a federal law defining gender, sex, etc. would have no bearing on state or local laws, or private contracts.
Yeah, I can't get down with that. I know it's rare, but legally denying the existence of intersex people is wrong. And any law that completely conflates gender with sex is going to lead to a lot of problems.
121A.212 ACCESS TO MENSTRUAL PRODUCTS.
A school district or charter school must provide students with access to menstrual products at no charge. The products must be available to all menstruating students in restrooms regularly used by students in grades 4 to 12 according to a plan developed by the school district. For purposes of this section, “menstrual products” means pads, tampons, or other similar products used in connection with the menstrual cycle.
While not a model of clarity, the law appears to mean that menstrual products must be available without charge in restrooms “regularly used by students.”
Correct, but they purposefully left out the word "all" giving the school districts some discretion on how to implement it. As Mark and Noodle already showed, every school district we can get info on has used their discretion to offer the products in girls and unisex bathrooms only.
Of course it does. But it does not mean in ALL restrooms regularly used by students in grades 4-12. Only that all menstruating students must have access in a student restroom.
They purposefully left off “all” because they’re transphobic assholes. They should ashamed of themselves. #transphobicTim
Last edited:
Is Your position the district can designate only certain restrooms for trans kids?
Evidently in practice the provision of a unisex washroom is sufficient.
Harris just lying about what she will do just to win an election. Look who she picked as her running mate and you can see how she will rule.
Last edited:
