Last week Trump signed an executive order declaring there only two sexes:

It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female.

These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.

Under my direction, the Executive Branch will enforce all sex-protective laws to promote this reality, and the following definitions shall govern all Executive interpretation of and application of Federal law and administration policy:

(a) “Sex” shall refer to an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female. “Sex” is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of “gender identity.”

(b) “Women” or “woman” and “girls” or “girl” shall mean adult and juvenile human females, respectively.

(c) “Men” or “man” and “boys” or “boy” shall mean adult and juvenile human males, respectively.

(d) “Female” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.

(e) “Male” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.

(f) “Gender ideology” replaces the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity, permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa, and requiring all institutions of society to regard this false claim as true. Gender ideology includes the idea that there is a vast spectrum of genders that are disconnected from one’s sex.
Gender ideology is internally inconsistent, in that it diminishes sex as an identifiable or useful category but nevertheless maintains that it is possible for a person to be born in the wrong sexed body.

g) “Gender identity” reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.

ABC News reported:

Employees at multiple federal agencies were ordered to remove pronouns from their email signatures by Friday afternoon, according to internal memos obtained by ABC News that cited two executive orders signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office seeking to curb diversity and equity programs in the federal government.

“Pronouns and any other information not permitted in the policy must be removed from CDC/ATSDR employee signatures by 5.p.m. ET on Friday,” according to one such message sent Friday morning from Jason Bonander, the CDC’s Chief Information Officer. “Staff are being asked to alter signature blocks by 5.p.m. ET today (Friday, January 31, 2025) to follow the revised policy.”

👏

SerialBrain9 wrote on Feb 1^st, 2025 at 7:56am:



Does dickhead still mean dickhead ?

so it should still be ok to say cerealbrain is a dickhead, correct?

This is one of those hilarious examples where all the people who complain the left is so easily offended are still, even in victory, so visibly and easily offended to the point of meltdown that some people may choose to specify their preferred pronouns.

What precious snowflakes you turned out to be.

aquascoot wrote on Feb 1^st, 2025 at 9:52am:


I think that was what Sadkangaroo was stating.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 1^st, 2025 at 10:08am:



no one gives a poo ... except those that are determined to use it as a political football

SerialBrain9 wrote on Feb 1^st, 2025 at 7:53am:


That's terrible. How are people going to know what gender employees identify as?

I could call up an important federal employee and say excuse me, Sir, I just received your email. They would then be required to pause me right there, issue a correction and instruct one to call them ma'am.

I would have to deeply apologize for my mistake and for any offence caused. They would be required to use an I statement to express how they feel. I would have to promise to undertake my gender inclusion training, which I've been meaning to do but lost access to the app after the last Russian hack. They would explain that the training is mandatory for all employees and there is no excuse for getting behind on one's PPR.

Best case scenario and I get out with a formal complaint and a couple of extra training modules.

Worse, they don't take it well and their mental health spirals.They may face months or even years off work in recovery. I'd have to face the Tribunal.

But I didn't do anything wrong! I'd say.

Oh? They'll say. State for the record which pronoun you used to describe the victim.

Well, I addressed them as Sir, out of respect.

Out of respect, was it? I see. And you were aware, I take it, that the victim preferred at that time to be addressed as ma'am.

No!

No? Was the victim not forced to correct your offensive term and stipulate a preference to be addressed as ma'am in all future communications?

Yes, but I didn't know at the time.

You didn't know at the time, I see. Are you aware that "not knowing", as you put it, does not excuse you from being subject to the law, federal policies, procedures, codes of conduct, executive orders and presidential decrees?

I know that, but I didn't know about their preference for being called ma'am. I just assumed.

You assumed, did you? Strange. Why did you "just assume"? Was it a certain "tone" perhaps? The victim's use of gendered syntax? Anything to suggest that the victim in this matter was, in fact, and I only repeat the offensive pronoun to paraphrase the defendant's own assertion, him?

It would have been in their email signature. You know, he/him.

I see. Let the record show the Office of Personnel Management Memorandum banning the use of gendered pronouns in the email signatures of all federal employees. No further questions.

Leroy wrote on Feb 1^st, 2025 at 11:19am:


Serious question

Which person is misgendering?