For traders who want a clear-cut N=1 case study, I made a market about my own passport because I'm a nervous bean.

I probably have to many markets about passports but running to manifold is my load-bearing coping mechanism, so /shrugs

Do I understand correctly that this requires a large amount of such passports to be affected? E.g. individual passports revoked wouldn't count, even if stated to be for this reason. A YES here would require at least an entire state to have a policy to do this (or something of similar scale), correct?

@VitorBosshard The execution of law has been wonky as of late. There may be a gray area where a governor or the president simply posts on twitter repeatedly and is obeyed. But it does require scale, yes.

@JessicaEvans clear enough for my purposes, thanks!

Doing this would be very mean. I don't think anyone in this administration has genuine ill will towards trans people.

@Shai I'd be fascinated to hear why you believe this.

@JessicaEvans

Most people you'd consider "transphobic" don't actively want to harm Trans people. This is different than say ethnic hatred where you do actually want to literally kill the outgroup.

@Shai No, they just don't believe trans people are ontologically possible and so feel justified in doing literally anything to affirm what they believe to be their true nature.

@JessicaEvans I don't think that say Elon or Vance believe that being Trans is ontologically impossible.

@Shai You think they share literally any popular trans model? (Gender as a spectrum, "trapped in wrong body", gender constructivism, or gender nihilism?)

@JessicaEvans I'm a die hard gender physicalist. I regard any attempt to treat my gender as malleable as an act of genocide.

@JessicaEvans I think their trans model is more like "some people suffer from gender dysphoria, others are just perverts". And I don't think they'll go out of their way to harm the first group (and hopefully not the second group either).

@Shai

1. There is no way for the law, or anyone for that matter, to reliably make this distinction

2. The distinction is likely unsound

3. The primary targets of legislation have been trans children and medical transitioners, who seem to be the logical negative space of perverts. IE, pre sexual beings and possible assimilating persons.

Your comment seems like insane wishful thinking against all evidence.

@JessicaEvans I'm just trying to point out there's distance between "There's a debate to be had regarding the treatment of gender dysphoria in children" and "I want to fuck [slur]s over in any way I can".

@Shai There is not a debate to be had. You are biologically incapable of truth. Recuse yourself or be dealt with as the monster you are.

@JessicaEvans What if you're wrong?

@Shai The penalty for being wrong is the same as the penalty for being right

@JessicaEvans Which is?

@Shai I am prepared to burn in literal hell forever to vouchsafe my actions against the endless torture of children

@Shai @JessicaEvans At least in principle, shouldn't the question of whether trans is ontologically possible be separate from any policy question? You could believe that trangenderism is a usual fiction and trans people are "really" their birth gender but have pro-trans policies, or you could believe that it makes no less sense to say that trans women are women than to say that biological parents are parents but believe gender dysphoria is harmful and contagious.

I agree most people are low decoupling though. So in practice it does not work like that.

@nathanwei I agree with the premise that one should not live by delusion, so for me it hinges on ontology. I understand that normative liberalism is more permissive and think it is pragmatic to allow people a certain degree of slack. I don't think making the giving of slack into a cornerstone of your ideology is good, because then you refrain from penalizing or even reward error, and this is bound to have negative consequences.

@JessicaEvans Some number of people don't have a strong ontological opinion on transgender people but are still opposed to the liberty of trans people. The average person in Nazi Germany probably did not have strong opinions on Jewish Ontology, likewise for apartheid south africa and the black population. Most people do not have well considered opinions. The driving force behind the anti trans social movement still seems to me to hinge on an Ontological premise.

@Shai I’m genuinely curious how you feel about today’s actions? Would you say Ill will has been sufficiently demonstrated?

(Granted, the EOs don’t specify implementation, timelines, enforcement yet… I imagine that framework will come in due time)

@KimberlyWilberLIgt We're just waiting on specifics of enforcement now

@KimberlyWilberLIgt Honestly it's worse than I thought, I didn't think the executive order would mention passports. That said, revoking existing passports is still a step farther in terms of meanness.

@Shai It could have been a token hand out to fundamentalists and fascists instead of a signal of things to come, but if it is a signal of things to come that is the very next obvious place to go, so it would be hard to see how it could be avoided.

@JessicaEvans The anti trans crowd is a very cheap date, they would have lapped up a much smaller token hand out.

In principle I'm not even opposed to the policy of passports only having chromosomal sex / assigned sex at birth. But I would be very opposed to tracking down people who changed their passport's sex and revoking their passport. I think people should be grandfathered in.

@Shai Most people would regard me as an extremist, which is unfortunate. I would have liked to have achieved my objectives by agreement.

@JessicaEvans

>I would have liked to achieved my objectives by agreement.

Respectfully, some of the things you said earlier in this thread game me the opposite impression.

@Shai Well, when I say that, what I mean is that I wish I lived in a different universe

see, just for context. jessica and i are feeling like shit today. we had held out hope that things wouldn't get this bad, but it's worse than even my expectations. If we're feeling testy, it's because this really complicates things for us at the airport. That's all.

there are tons of reasonable folks here, including on this thread. i asked you Shai specifically because you caught the sheer meanness of reaching over and revoking passports. Most people probably quietly feel similarly, but I appreciate that you recognized the cruelty, and I was genuinely curious how you felt about yesterday's EO.

Not trying to convince anyone, not mad, I'm just voicing where I'm coming from.

It's easy for people to be mislabeled as "belligerent trans activist" for just voicing how things affect them.

(I disagree and wish passports reflected gender identity, but my preference no longer matters.)

@KimberlyWilberLIgt I mean obviously you don't want the Canadian system where you just have to submit a request to switch your gender identity and that's it. The result of that is that a bunch of cis men with zero gender dysphoria and zero intentions of getting hormones or surgery or even of doing anything to present as female will switch their legal gender to female just because they want to be in a female prison rather than a male prison. This actually started happening in Canada.

@nathanwei This thread was about whether the current administration has ill will toward trans people specifically. I'm not here to argue whether Canada's legal framework is good or bad. (For the record I broadly think you're wrong, but that's all I have here)

@KimberlyWilberLIgt Yeah I know, I was reacting to your parenthetical comment at the end.

I think I mostly agree with Shai that there is not too much ill will towards trans people per se at least from the top of the administration. Trump did say Caitlyn Jenner can use whatever bathroom she wants. Of course the administration has a lot of people in it and I'm sure some of them have ill will toward trans people. Mostly I just think there is a big backlash against some of the excesses of the trans movement or "gender ideology" as it's called, like questions about sports and surgeries for minors, age-inappropriate discussions of transgenderism in public schools, and the general denial of the biological basis of sex. Perhaps this backlash will go too far and be anti-libertarian, preventing trans adults from living their lives as they see fit. This would be unfortunate and of course I oppose it, but still would not be conclusive evidence of genuine ill will toward trans people. Lots of laws have unintended consequences.

Of course, it's really hard to show dispositive evidence of genuine ill will toward trans people and to tell with certainty who has it and who does not. I'm sure that some people who have genuine ill will toward trans people are very good at hiding it and claiming that they only have a problem with the gender ideology.

@KimberlyWilberLIgt I should also point out that there is a big difference between "Canada's legal framework is less bad than Mississippi's" and "Canada's legal framework is the ideal framework". I also think even if you believe that Canada's self-ID framework is ideal in principle, something that has probably has 25% public support on a good day cannot survive in a democracy and is likely to lead to the kind of backlash we are seeing now. Trudeau is going to get absolutely destroyed for this, as well as for his mismanagement of the migration issue.