where are you getting genital inspection from?

reproductive anatomy - (ovaries or testes), can be checked via ultrasound.

genetic makeup - (chromosomes, presence of the SR-Y gene), can be checked via cheek swab. (easiest, least invasive, and cheapest method. most likely to be used.)

or normal endogenously produced testosterone levels - can be checked via blood draw.

Initiative 638 is a 2026 ballot initiative proposing the amendment of Washington state law. The initiative would require students participating in K-12 sports to submit medical documentation that verifies their "biological sex" as female. This would prohibit transgender girls from competing in school athletic activities intended for females, and would require healthcare providers to verify a student's biological sex to determine eligibility. -Wikipedia

Does the text of Initiative 638 mention genital checks? It appears to be about making participation in sports based on sex, which may only involve a cheek swab to determine. there is enough fear going around without worrying about things the initiative doesn't say

they should add public transit then

they should add public transit then

you can not become a caterpillar but you can become trans though

The world needs more women with logical heads: strong, smart, and realistic, thoroughly convinced that magic isn't real.

enough with the sexist 'women should be soft and ignorant' bs

https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/09/california-child-marriage/

Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU are pro-child marriage and they spend big to keep it legal.

Children have a right to marry, the ACLU argues, and stripping them of that right would take away a pathway to their emancipation and independent healthcare decisions. For Planned Parenthood, the freedom for children to marry is about allowing people reproductive choice and bodily autonomy.

But their efforts have repeatedly failed in California, where Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have lobbied hard against restricting child marriage, although those groups have largely stayed silent on the issue in other Democratic-controlled states.

In a June opposition letter, the organization wrote, “Prohibiting minors from marrying in every case is a departure from California’s longstanding commitment to honoring minors’ ability to make important personal decisions for themselves, particularly in the realm of reproductive autonomy.”

These two organizations are entirely misled and spreading misleading information on this issue and are harming kids (vast majority are young girls) with that rhetoric above. Emancipation and reproductive autonomy should not be tied to marriage in the first place.

Imagine if Bruno Mars made "I wanna be a billionaire" in 2026

of what

thanks for the graphics, I wasn't accessing the study. i'm familiar with confidence intervals and p values but this is great for anyone who isn't.

the first year's plot looks within range, but the 72% point is a major change! something definitely happened with 13-24 year olds that year, but especially 13-17 year olds.

I see a definite occurrence that the suicide rates increased after those laws. and i'm wondering how we can be sure that it was because of the laws and not something else that happened around the same time?

i think that a reliable study reasonably isolates out other possible factors.

good for them for having such a large sample size. i admit i'm confused though, the results are an increase "by 7–72%."? i wonder what is up with this huge range. how can we have confidence in this?

i wish the abstract explained what types of anti-trans laws were passed, cause of course different laws end up having different effects. that could explain the uncertainty in the results range. in this case we're concerned with how a lack of gender affirming care would directly influence systematic suicide rates, so I'm still looking out for more evidence on that topic.