this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
450 points (98.9% liked)

News

27230 readers
4468 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archived link

Yesterday, the West Virginia House of Delegates approved an amendment from Del. J.B. Akers (R) to allow a child’s “treating health care provider” to examine a child’s genitals without the consent of their parents.

The amendment was actually an improvement over a previous version of the bill, which, state Democrats argued, would have allowed teachers to perform the genital examinations.

Akers’ amendment was the Republican response to one proposed by Del. Kayla Young (D), which would have banned child and adult genital examinations altogether.

“It’s unconscionable that Republicans would support legislation that authorizes intrusive visual inspections of minors without parental approval,” Young said. “West Virginians should be alarmed and disgusted by this invasion of privacy.”

It also says that all intersex people are “either male or female” but does not give a basis for assigning a sex to them.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 6 points 1 hour ago

And here comes the decades of child abuse from abusers who found the glaring loop hole.

[–] thingAmaBob@lemmy.world 8 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

So wait… Couldn’t they just simply request a copy of a child’s yearly physical from their physician? For example, in the 90s/2000s, if we wanted to join a sport we had to get a physical from our GP of choice so the doctor can confirm it was safe for us to play the sport in question. It was a form the doctor and parent filled out, then gave to the school. I would think something like that was already a thing?? I also remember my parents having to submit certain medical records to my schools for other reasons… Why would anyone else need to examine these children???

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 41 minutes ago

Ideally, if the politicians actually believed what they told their votes, then yes, they would do it that way. But... Trump was best friends with Jeffry Epstein. Nearly all the Maga billionaires visited Epstein's island. The Republican party is full of pedos, sex traffickers and Nazis.

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 32 points 13 hours ago

That's called pedophilia

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 21 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

We found the real freaks. I wonder if the Pizzagate/Qanon dipshits have figured it out yet: everything the qons do is about projection.

[–] Gloomy@mander.xyz 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

What actually happend to the Qanon movement? Is that still a thing? Is it dead?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago

Likely just mainstream Republicans now, along with the teabaggers (often the same people).

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

If anything to go by their Hungarian counterparts, their only problem is "homosexual pedophilia", while celebrate old guys who manage to hook up with actual teens as "real studs", then blame the victims for the pedophilia, because "14 year olds back then played with dolls, not dressed like sluts". And I was the one who felt bad for posting Railgun memes with "You know what are the number one causes of pedophilia? Sexy children" text onto my anime shitposting page...

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 11 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

This is stupid as fuck, right, but who doesn't accompany their child into the doctor's office?

Like there are no circumstances under which I'm leaving my child alone with an adult who may examine their genitals and having had child safety training myself just being alone with a child that isn't yours is a terrible idea altogether.

[–] Bilaketari@reddthat.com 9 points 6 hours ago

I think part if the motivation here would be to allow the doctor present at a school to determine whether a child is participating in the correct sex-appropriate placement. Like using the correct locker rooms or bathrooms in case teachers or other students bring up an issue (for example if a boy were to go into a girl's locker room and claim to really be a girl). Since appearance doesn't line up with sex in many cases nowadays, the inspection would be to determine the real sex of the individual. Some school activities will involve nudity (changing before entering a swimming pool, communal showering after a sports match or gym class, etc.) so the authors of this were initially pushing for any teacher (such as the supervisor in a locker room or the teacher of the associated class) to be able to inspect/determine the sex of the individual.

[–] NotLemming@lemm.ee 11 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

So... under no circumstances are they going to bring doctors into schools to perform these inspections?

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 12 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

'Doctors' like someone who passed med school, flunked out of residency and couldn't land a practicing job anywhere they were so god awful.

But they are a doctor!

[–] NotLemming@lemm.ee 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe not even a doctor of medicine at all, or they were disbarred.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago

I got my doctorate in smelling shit at this online university!

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 9 points 13 hours ago

I suppose that hadn't occurred to me because I live in a country where, if that were to happen, I couldn't imagine the level of social unrest it would cause.

It's just beyond reason.

[–] renrenPDX@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

So republican parents are ok with strangers inspecting their child’s genitals without their consent?

[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 8 points 13 hours ago

Well that law will never on MY KIDS.

[–] ragepaw@lemmy.ca 18 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Only a fucking piece of trash thinks it's ok for a teacher to look at a kid's junk, regardless of if the parents give consent.

[–] xorollo@leminal.space 16 points 15 hours ago

Former teacher here. Any teacher that would comply with such an order to inspect is also a fucking piece of trash.

Once our assistant principal went on a witch hunt about enforcing uniform compliance. He wanted us all to inspect socks to ensure they were the right color. Turns out the color of my kids' socks doesn't impact the learning environment, so no, we aren't wasting class time on this.

So no, I'm not inspecting genitals. And if there is a move to do such a thing at school, I'd spend the entire class time calling parents letting them know what's going on.

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

I'm so damn glad I'm not a parent. There's no fucking way I wouldn't pulverize someone's limbs into paste if they touched my child.

[–] NotLemming@lemm.ee 5 points 13 hours ago

Cops already do it to black kids. One girl was on her period and they made her bend over and cough and everything.

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago

Parent here. You sound like parent material.

[–] meangreenbeans@lemmy.world 37 points 20 hours ago

Keep republicans away from my children

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 111 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What level are they allowed to view? If the child says no are they able to force their way into their pants? At what point does it become rape?

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 134 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A child cannot consent.

So, immediately. It becomes sexual assault, at least, immediately.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 hours ago

Unless...we can come up with some sort of legislation...totally important and necessary legislation, of course!

[–] Deello@lemm.ee 18 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

You're looking at this problem all wrong, it's not that children cannot consent. Nobody is arguing that. The change here is that now those that would be doing the tests are no longer considered child predators because they didn't do anything illegal. So now it would be totally fine for priests, doctors, senators, neighbors, etc to look at random kids genitals to verify sexuality without any resistance from their parents/guardians. Is this how we finally do away with rapists, by redefining sexual assault.

[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 7 points 16 hours ago

So now it would be totally fine for priests, doctors, senators, neighbors, etc

"treating health care provider"

Some of these things are not like the others.

[–] miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com 96 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 25 points 1 day ago

Oh, come on, it's just a ChildS exAM

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 81 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Oh the irony that the shitheads that couldn't wear a mask, and want to ban books because of "parent rights", now want to ice parents out of the decision of a rando looking at their kids genitals.

It turns out that conservative people believe in specific people, not in ideology. So any claims about reasons for specific policies are basically just pretext.

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 33 points 23 hours ago

But drag queens reading books are the real threat.

[–] EX1T@literature.cafe 28 points 20 hours ago

So much for Parents Rights.

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 95 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's the pedo enabling act!

It's like they learned the wrong lessons from the US gymnastics team incidents.

[–] JPAKx4@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

WHAT DO YOU MEAN THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT

[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca 23 points 21 hours ago

Well, you see before it was a random stranger, but NOW it's a random stranger in a lab coat.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

Before it was allowing a republican to be in the room.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tempus_Fugit@midwest.social 50 points 1 day ago

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Most pedophiles are Republicans. Now they get to visually molest your kids legally, neat.

[–] superkret@feddit.org 42 points 1 day ago

A government so small it fits into a child's pants

[–] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 32 points 1 day ago

Can we retrospectively inspect the law makers, just so they can have a lived experience before they next get together to make more crazy laws?

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 12 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Here's the text of the bill that was passed: https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Bill_Text_HTML/2025_SESSIONS/RS/bills/sb456%20sub1%20enr.pdf

Can someone please point out where this language is because I'm not finding it and it tracking the history of this bill, found here, it appears to me that it was removed.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Fingolfinz@lemmy.world 12 points 22 hours ago

Of course they did, it’s all they think about

[–] toxicbubble@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

traditional family values 😂

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] whydudothatdrcrane@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 day ago

Bloody mfers.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 15 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

CORRECTION: Bill passed by WV lawmakers will not allow doctors to inspect child’s genitals to confirm gender

An amendment introduced by House Judiciary Chair J.B. Akers on March 6 would have allowed medical professionals to “to visually or physically examine a minor child for purposes of verifying the biological sex of the child without the consent of the child’s parent, guardian, or custodian.”

That amendment was adopted into the bill.

Before officially passing the Senate, Senator Patrick Martin (R - Lewis, 12) proposed two further amendments, one of which clarifies “that the article does not authorize certain examinations of minor children.”

Senator Martin’s amendment nullified Delegate Akers’ amendment, thereby excluding it from the final bill.

SB 456 was passed by the Senate Tuesday 32-1 with one Senator absent for the vote. In the House, 90 delegates voted in favor, eight opposed, and two were absent.

[–] astutemural@midwest.social 24 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That amendment doesn't nullify shit. It's waffle language. When the court cases eventually come up over this, judges will shrug and say that it doesn't clearly forbid it, so it's fine. Mark my words.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 hours ago

Try reading again. The amendment was removed from the bill and it was specifically clarified that it is illegal to examine someone after birth to determine their sex. If a court case comes up where a doctor is being sued for examining someone after their birth to determine their sex, they would point to this law that says it is clearly forbidden.

load more comments
view more: next ›