A transgender candidate in Ohio was disqualified from the state ballot for omitting her former name

[bomberfox]

It's bigotry only if the same standard has not applied consistently to non-transgender candidates. Is there any reason to think that it hasn't been?

Seems to me that all these news articles are doing the right-wing echo-sphere thing and reporting this as if she was disqualified because of her gender and not because she didn't follow the rules. Why don't the articles just read: "Ohio candidate disqualified..." rather than "Ohio transgender candidate disqualified." You could just as easily write, "Ohio Libra candidate disqualified..."

No argument from me the law is poorly referenced on the candidate signup paperwork and that this fact can provide an unreasonable impediment to novice candidates. But the law was passed in the 90s and clearly is unrelated to opposition to transgenderism.

Actually the standard has not ever been specifically targeting, its been specifically targeting or the outcome of said law leads to significantly discriminatory results. I dont know where Americans get this standard as its completely ahistorical.

Its why we can bring gerrymandering cases to court.

 

[LostInSeattle]

Actually the standard has not ever been specifically targeting, its been specifically targeting or the outcome of said law leads to significantly discriminatory results. I dont know where Americans get this standard as its completely ahistorical.

I agree, but it still was premature of all these news outlets to imply either one, as no research was done to verify either way. Instead they chose to echo each other and foster a presumed grievance without actually investigating.

Its why we can bring gerrymandering cases to court.

Indeed. Although with gerrymandering, both the intent and outcome are usually present.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

This thread needs an update. I am working on it.