Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ZacPetkanas t1_jboadld wrote

I'm not even a reporter, like those people who work at WMUR are allegedly supposed to be, and I believe this is what they're talking about.

HB 417-FN would amend RSA 169-C:3, II(f) to include the following in the definition of what may define an Abused Child for the purposes of RSA 169-C: > (g) Subjected to drug treatments or surgery in an attempt to alter the sex of the child assigned at birth, except in rare cases of ambiguous genitalia. For purposes of this subparagraph, ambiguous genitalia refers to a medical condition in which a child's gender at birth is in question because the genitals do not appear clearly male or female.

Hopefully all those links work.

1

vexingsilence t1_jbosfdf wrote

Seems like the harder is to find the actual bills, the more the media is misrepresenting them.

1

philandere_scarlet t1_jbocmfg wrote

So as always with these bills, they're leaving in the nice little loophole where they have carte blanche to mutilate intersex kids for cosmetic purposes.

0

scarletuba t1_jbs61ft wrote

Ugghhhhhhhhh that is so damned infuriating.

I don't freaking get it. If the baby has a serious medical issue that needs surgical intervention - fine! We KNOW how dangerous/harmful it is for intersex to be forced into the wrong identity.

Information that "shockingly" aligns with data on trans populations.

2