Ofc it did. 🙄

Fucking Moe.

I’m not surprised at all.

Alt right Christofascists dredge up the single person dissenting against the consensus view in their field, then suggest this single expert should be given equal weight in a manufactured “debate” centered around the false equivalence of their view.

The Tom Mulcair line from like a decade ago hits the nail on the head. They’re engaged in decision-based evidence making instead of evidence-based decision making.

We must have no tolerance for intolerance.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

In court documents, the UR Pride Centre’s legal counsel noted Dr. Anderson had not addressed the “rather potentially severe mental health and physical abuse which may be suffered by a gender-diverse youth in a home without supportive parents.”

The legal counsel also noted that the expert relied on by the province did not address extensive research and data on the risks faced by gender-diverse youth who cannot express themselves through the use of a chosen name or pronoun.

Members of the Regina Civic Awareness and Action Network are among those who have confirmed they wrote to the government to come up with a policy regarding sexual and gender diversity in classrooms.

“Children who present with gender dysphoria or some type of body discomfort will almost invariably have some co-occurring situations, disability in their lives, comorbidity, or they are vulnerable in some way,” he said.

j wallace skelton (who uses lowercase spelling) is an assistant professor of queer studies and education at the University of Regina who identifies as LGBTQ+ and has been paying close attention to the debate on this issue.

skelton said there isn’t any irreversible harm to taking an affirming approach by using someone’s chosen name and pronouns and that gender-affirming care has the best health outcomes for gender-diverse people.

The original article contains 981 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!