@georgetakei

I like ya george, but this just is disinformation, we are better than this.

Perfect? I guess except for the fact that this literally never happened...

reason.com/2023/12/01/texas-ne

@freemo @georgetakei uh huh. The "Safeguarding Honest Speech Act," introduced by Cruz and Rep. Andy Ogles (R–Tenn.) in November, states that "No Federal funds may be used for the purpose of implementing, administering, or enforcing any rule…requiring an employee or contractor of any Federal agency or Department to use—(1) another person's preferred pronouns if they are incompatible with such person's sex; or (2) a name other than a person's legal name when referring to such person."

@condalmo

Exactly and thus proving me rcorrect, thank you.

As you describe it this does **not** limit the use of preferred names and pronouns.

In fact the opposite, it ensures that an employees speech can not be limited and compelled with regard to pronouns and names.

It also provides a **protection** for transpeople as it does allow someone to force an employee (or through a law) to use a persons legal name, meaning if a transperson has changed their name the employee is forced to address them properly.

@georgetakei

Follow

@condalmo

You may need to read it again carefully.. it specifically states a law can not **force** a federal employee (limit speech) to use specific pronouns or names.. its literally the opposite of limiting speech since an employee retains the **option** to use alternative pronouns but cant be legally forced to do so.

@georgetakei

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.