Tag: gender

UPDATE: Hasbro Keeps ‘Mr.’ Potato Head, The ‘Modern Makeover’ Of ‘Gender-Neutral’ Name Will Not Happen

Hasbro revealed Thursday that it was renaming Mr. Potato head toy a ‘gender-neutral’ name and the Mr./Mrs. ‘pronouns’ will be dropped from the toy’s characters. This change was set to appear in the fall and Hasbro thought after 70 years it needed a ‘modern makeover’

Now Hasbro has decided to announce again that the ‘Mr. Potato Head’ will not be going anywhere as well as Mr. and Mrs. will remain as their own characters. It is more obvious now when the first announcement happened, the company wanted to test the waters as to how the internet would react.

Keep reading

California Bill Requires ‘Gender Neutral’ Stores, Fines Retailers $1000 For Having Separate ‘Boy’ And ‘Girl’ Toy Departments

California’s Assembly is slated to consider a new bill requiring department store childrens’ sections to be largely “gender-neutral” in order to combat “prejudice” and “judgment” against gender non-conforming children.

“Large retailers that sell toys, clothes, and other children’s items in California would have to devote floor space to merchandise marketed to both boys and girls under a new bill,” Politico reported earlier this week. “Stores would be able to sell the same products they do now as long as they maintain some areas where shoppers can find all toys or clothes, regardless of gender-based marketing, under CA AB2826 (19R) from Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell). It would apply to department stores with 500 or more employees beginning in 2023.”

Lowe told Politico that the idea for the bill, which he also introduced last year to little effect, came from one of his staffers, who claims her daughter wanted an item in the “boys” section but felt slighted because she felt the toy was designated for a male child.

“This is an issue of children being able to express themselves without bias,” Lowe told the outlet.

Keep reading

Twitter mocks Jen Psaki for nonsensical gender identity answer to question about stock market chaos

Social media erupted after a scheme from users on a Reddit stock market thread threatened to damage Wall Street hedge funds by driving up the price of the stocks from GameStop, a company many had heavily bet against.

When White House press secretary Jen Psaki was questioned about the incident, she offered a bizarre response.

“Well, I’m also happy to repeat that we have the first female Treasury secretary and a team that’s surrounding her,” Psaki said.

Keep reading

PRESIDENT BIDEN MOVES TO END FEMALE-ONLY SPORTS AND SERVICES ON HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE

One of the first acts of Joe Biden’s presidency was to gut sex anti-discrimination laws and eliminate critical protections for women in the federal government. On Wednesday afternoon, only hours after being sworn into office, Biden signed an executive order that “builds on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) and ensures that the federal government interprets Title VII of the the [sic] Civil Rights Act of 1964 as prohibiting workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity,” according to the Biden transition team website. 

The order also ensures “that federal anti-discrimination statutes that cover sex discrimination prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.” Federal civil rights offices will also be required to enforce this interpretation in any matter that comes before them, likely including siding against women’s rights in court cases.

With this action, Biden is bypassing the legislative process to implement the most controversial provisions of the Equality Act—changing the definition of sex in federal anti-discrimination regulations so that female people are no longer a discrete class with protected status under the law. As we predicted, the new administration is relying on the Bostock decision to do so.

This executive order directs federal agencies to do two things. First, federal agencies are now required to interpret “sex” as also including “sexual orientation and gender identity” in their own internal regulations and workplace policies.  Second, agencies are directed to perform a comprehensive assessment of all regulations under their purview, and create a plan with 100 days to “revise, suspend, or rescind such agency actions, or promulgate [propose] new agency actions”  that will impose this interpretation onto all American employers, institutions, and individuals, with no exceptions. 

The Supreme Court was clear at the time of the Bostock decision that the ruling was only meant to be applied to hiring and firing discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, in advancing their novel reasoning that “transgender status” meant that a male employee should be allowed to identify into the otherwise lawful sex-based rules for female employees. While we strongly support protections from discrimination based on sexual orientation, the Biden administration has grossly expanded the application of the decision with far-reaching implications for women’s rights in nearly every aspect of public life, including Title IX.

Keep reading