Writes Justice Jackson, in West Virginia v. B.P.J.
But what is "gender identity" if it stands apart from gender stereotypes? What is being identified with?
June 30, 2026
"A transgender woman penalized for being perceived as aggressive has experienced discrimination 'on the basis of sex' just as much as a cis-gender woman has, no matter that the transgender woman’s behavior matches expectations of her sex assigned at birth."
"Either way, the institution has imposed its gender-based expectations upon her. And either way, the institution may have violated Title IX. In short, the majority is wrong to suggest that the term 'sex' in Title IX ' cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex.' Title IX makes room for individuals to live in the gender they choose; it cares not just about sex assigned at birth but also about individuals’ ability to match (or not) their gender presentation to their gender identity."
Posts
82 comments:
"Sex" has never meant anything other than biological.
When she said she couldn't define "woman" she meant it.
When you state your conclusion as the "persuasive" argument, you have missed the bus.
Do not seek logic from KBJ. You'll not find much there.
A million bio-female 'tomboys' and 'effeminate' bio-male people are rolling over in their graves. They did not match the nominal gender presentations of their eras either. Some were gay, some were not gay, some wore stereotypical cross-sex clothing too. Yet, Title IX was passed when everyone knew about this and lived with it.
The biological limits of an XX female body in sports (where it matters) zooms right over KBJ's head. Anything requiring a balance between two complex-yet-divergent concepts zooms over her head.
So if the WNBA lesbians would identify as transmen it would be ok for them to cold-cock Caitlin Clark?
Jackson has entered the Twilight Zone. A traitor to girl's and women's sports.
That’s some of the goofiest gobbledygook in legal history.
In 2022 a young teenaged female suffered a concussion and brain bleed thanks to being spiked in the face by a trans opponent, who laughed as she lay unconscious on the floor. But Payton McNabb is a blonde white girl do it isn’t as though Justice Jackson gives a damn about her.
serious Question:
IF i am a 16 year old, with XY chromosomes, and raised as a male..
With Testicles and Testosterone..
BUT!
i decide that i identify as someone that wants to beat women
(maybe on the playing field.. maybe in the bathroom)..
who ALSO identifies as someone that wants to walk around naked (with my dick hanging out), around young naked girls...
do *i* have a legal right to do so? if so.. WHY? HOW? WHEN?
If you can't define what a woman is, you don't have a valid argument in a Title IX case.
"Either way, the institution has imposed its gender-based expectations upon her."
The "institution" being a society. The justice envisions a society where the "society" can make no determinations or demands on the individual. (Except, of course, for taxes. The society can demand your material goods.)
I suppose that what the IRS calls capital gains, I can call a capital loss. How can the institution say otherwise? I don't have to pay taxes because I declare that what they call a capital gain, is in my view a capital loss.
Quite curious, her response. If at the time of enactment, one has asked the sponsors of the act if Title IX was to be for the benefit of biological women exclusively or to include biological males who wanted to identify as women, what do you think that their response would have been?
EuroNole, good question. If the legislative history of Title IX showed Congress meant to "include biological males who wanted to identify as women", I think we would have been made well aware of it by our friends in the media.
Gender refers to sex-correlated attributes. Biological, not social (e.g. liberal) , not political (e.g. congruence) , not religious (e g. Pro-Choice).
Four legs good, two legs bad.
blackburn to Jackson: Can you define 'the word leg'?
Title IX was passed in 1972. The APA declared homosexuality to not be mental illness in 1973.
In 1972 both gay and transgendered would have been considered an "invert" and not normal, natural, or sane.
I find her writing needlessly dense and overstuffed with jargon that renders her meaning impenetrable. Or she’s just dumb. One really can’t tell from close reading which affliction is worse, her mental capacity or her vocabulary.
Why does Jackson think there is such a thing as women’s sports to begin with?
"Sex assigned at birth".
The minute the sperm penetrates the egg, the sex of the person is already decided. Trying to "transition" over to the opposite sex is an exercise in futility and can only end in failure.
Homos and sims are both trans. But, while they may be "=" but socially distanced iin some faiths, they are not equal in nature or juxtaposition.
Jackson should work an Auntie Anne's since she so good at twisting things into knots.
But what is "gender identity" if it stands apart from gender stereotypes?
Not just stereotypes but anachronistic and/or performative exaggerations of gender stereotypes.
Mad Soprano: dittos.
"Perception of aggression" has nothing to do with it - biological males are objectively able to outperform females in athletics. That is what we have separate male and female sports - which is indeed a form of discrimination on the basis of sex. Justice Jackson can't really believe some of the arguments she makes, can she?
Any supposed intellectual that makes rules for us and uses terms such as “sex assigned at birth” needs to be categorically ignored. They have demonstrated their ignorance.
"Perception of aggression" is residual crud from the Unconscious Bias / Implicit Bias "research" of 20 years ago. This led to the equally fluffy "microaggressions" concept -- whereby fragmentary and ambiguous actions make some people fearful/sad/paranoid and must be confronted or banned.
All of this is pseudoscientific nonsense -- just academic fads from KBJ's formative years. For a take on the actual science, see Steven Pinker and Jonathan Haidt.
"cis-gender"
"sex assigned at birth"
"to live in the gender they choose"
Justice Libtard-Brown-Jackson belongs on The View, not the Supreme Court.
Ambrose said ""Perception of aggression" has nothing to do with it ...." and is correct. Aggression that is inappropriate to the situation you are in, overly used and is against the rules of the group you are with is perceived as being ...duh....aggressive.
Has nothing to do with "sex" or Gender. Yelling at and slapping the cashier in a grocery store is inappropriate aggression no matter who or what you are. Punching your volleyball opponent in the nose....aggression. Trying to crush the windpipe of your basketball opponent....Ditto inappropriate.
Women can be aggressive and confrontational...as can men. Trying to make excuses for inappropriate behavior because a person is Trans...is ridiculous. They know the rules. Know how they should act. If not...then they need to be removed from the situation. If it is true that men and women have different hormonal responses and different ways of dealing with aggression....then biological man pretending to be a woman...is doing pretty shitty job of it.
Biology is bone deep...not in makeup, wigs, and artificial body parts........and I say that as someone who studied physical anthropology/paleontology in college. The bones almost always....tell the truth.
"What is being identified with?" A subjective sense of self. Sounds crazy, right?
Plenty of smart black women. KBJ isn’t one of them. She was chosen because she’s a reliable vote. She’s a House Negress.
Forget transgenderism, KBJ's argument implies that even boys who IDENTIFY as boys must be allowed to play on girls' teams if they aren't "aggressive."
Commenters here and elsewhere assume that KBJ actually wrote this or any of her dissents. Most likely one of her woke clerks wrote it and she reviewed and/or lightly edited it. She is not even bright enough to write this drivel.
Just popping in to say:
Trans people are real...
Not every homosexual is trans tho. Hth. Carry on with the hatefest all ye with gay sons who know it all...
You should run a poll, ann.
Vote on it.
Lolol
We are men and women. It almost always matters which we are. Men and women are aggressive. Their regard for each other is clouded by grudges, suspicions, fears, needs, desires, and narcissistic postures. There's no scrubbing them out. The best you can hope for is domestication, as in football, rock, humor, happy marriage, and a good prose style. - Wm Kerrigan
Title IX is about getting your own way.
It remains a mystery to me why some down-on-his (or her) luck college basketball coach doesn't recruit and field a team of "transgender women" to compete in major college womens basketball.
It would of course blow the lid off the entire premise, and would force those big-time universities to live up to the bullshit they force on their students.
“ Gender refers to sex-correlated attributes.”
If that is an attempt to answer the question I asked in my post then you need to do the hard work of excluding sex stereotypes before answering the question. So do “sex correlated attributes” mean something other than sex stereotypes? If not, you definitely haven’t answered the question
"....A transgender woman penalized for being perceived as aggressive has experienced discrimination 'on the basis of sex' ..."
Do I read this correctly? Nobody is allowed to perceive the tranny as 'aggressive', but the male is allowed to perceive himself as female, and we're told we all have to go along with it?
Who gets punched first? I think that would settle the confusion all the way 'round.
I'm not sure most folks here appreciate how trenchant Ann's question is.
I sometimes get these criminal court sessions where the perps try that sovereign citizen stuff on the judge. Somebody instructs them to respond to the judge's questions in gibberish- never answer any question, even about your identity. It never works but my point- Justice Jackson must have learned judging from the same place as those sovereign citizen perps. She's just as coherent...
@Mike Petrik, I do.
There was a man-on-the-street short video a while ago that had a 'change my mind' type interviewer, tangling with a young female who voiced that she supports gender ideology ideas.
They went back and forth a little, both pretty well-spoken, and then he asked her one question: What is gender identity? And she was completely stymied. Couldn't answer. Stood there, confused. It was brilliant.
Sex-correlated attributes. Group membership or privilege.
“The minute the sperm penetrates the egg, the sex of the person is already decided.”
@Mad Soprano, agreed. Moreover, the transgendering individuals can only ever achieve their impression of what the sex they are transitioning into is all about. For trans women, what was it like when your menses started? For trans males, how did your mother react the first time you had a nocturnal emission? For trans women, why do you still have your penis and testicles?
Shouting Thomas said...
That’s some of the goofiest gobbledygook in legal history.
6/30/26, 11:36 AM
------------
Exactly my thought.
"But what is "gender identity" if it stands apart from gender stereotypes? What is being identified with?"
Isn't that the question Justice Jackson couldn't answer.
"What is a woman?" It's simply the belief that one is a woman. It doesn't require a detailed description of what a woman is.
"Title IX makes room for individuals to live in the gender they choose; it cares not just about sex assigned at birth but also about individuals’ ability to match (or not) their gender presentation ...."
KBJ just made that up. Pure ipse dixit.
"But what is "gender identity" if it stands apart from gender stereotypes."
Gender identity is the classification of being either male or female. Like a species dog or cat. You are one or the other.
However, there is in humans and some other animals....a sliding scale of physical features and body types. Some men are more feminine in build...some women are more masculine in build. BUT...they are still either male or female. XX or XY genetically. There are rare genetic anomalies but those don't count in this larger question and context.
You can identify as anything you like....it doesn't change what you are. Identify as a table lamp or a kitten. You are never going to be either.
Gender stereotypes are a set of ideals or perceptions of what a female or a male should be. How they act. Dress. Generally what skills and characteristics should make of the stereotypical woman/man. As we know not everyone fits into the ideal stereotype....again the sliding scale. The Stereotypes vary by cultures across the world and from location to location. The ideal man in one culture or country..... is not the ideal in another.
Even cultures like the Trans community have their own (and often exaggerated) stereotypes. Drag Queen culture for instance.
@Aggie Yes, these people don't seem to understand that the concept of gender identity, which they accord great value, makes no sense absent the predicate of gender stereotypes, which they assign great contempt. No doubt Jackson would see this as some type of clever paradox, but in truth it is an embarrassing contradiction.
If sex is merely assigned at birth, then the frequency with which they get it right should entitle obstetricians to some respect in this area. Wouldn't you agree, Justice Jackson?
The Ivy Leagues will no doubt reject federal money now so that transgenders with dicks can join the “women’s teams.”
Who assigns birth? The Stork?
Congress needs to fix Title 9 with Title 10 or Die Harder.
Gorsuch’s concurrence is a joke. His Bostock opinion was an embarrassment and so is his concurrence.
Sex is indeed assigned... by the chromosomes that carry the genes that determine the sex of an individual and are in EVERY CELL in the body for the life of the individual. Even after "bottom" surgery.
Mike Petrik said..."Yes, these people don't seem to understand that the concept of gender identity, which they accord great value, makes no sense absent the predicate of gender stereotypes, which they assign great contempt. No doubt Jackson would see this as some type of clever paradox, but in truth it is an embarrassing contradiction."
Bingo.
Shorter KBJ: "When I use a word... it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
Who assigns the chromosomes? It’s turtles all the way down.
I’ll take Crazy Woke Nonsense for $500, Alex.
Or to put it another way, the Justice isn’t wearing any robes.
I, for one, am glad this SCOTUS term has concluded, before they do anymore damage to the republic. Hugely disappointed in Coney-Island-Barrett. She and Roberts must have a thing going. (Visualize Lisa Murkowski and McConnell)
Jackson is not only an embarrassment to the legal profession, she's an embarrassment to the human race.
Biden and Obama nominated idiots
Gateway Pundit headline: “President Trump Takes Major Dig at the Supreme Court, Congratulates China on Birthright Citizenship Win”
True and add Mexico. You almost think these SCOTUS judges want to destroy the U.S..
Sigh.
Kagan isn’t an idiot. But she’s not smart enough to disguise her results oriented approach. Neither is Roberts.
Just wow. This is what DEI has given us — a Supreme Court justice who’s dumb as a bag full of hammers.
I think that most people are missing the point when these kinds of arguments are trotted out. It's really not about gender at all, or about acceptance, or about tolerance. It's about putting an unreasonable, intractable argument on the table that is implicitly unresolvable within the bounds of decency, and making damned sure that it stays that way.
Stereotypes exist because they are reasonable approximations. If you object to stereotypes you need to show where they are inaccurate
In those progressive days a century ago you could be committed just for being a little odd or different. Now you'd have to be a threat to yourself or others and maybe not even then. To be mentally ill now you have to be deeply dysfunctional. Trans people may be wrong about who they are, but they do seem to be capable of holding down a job and functioning in society. I suppose a lot still depends on whether a society believes that they have successfully adapted to its norms.
That's varsity level mental gymnastics.
She's wrong. Transgender women (with penises) are no where near as scary or aggressive as bull-dykes.
XX and XY
I think KBJ's clerks are messing with her. I don't think it's possible to starighten out what she is saying or even what she thinks she is saying. As Althouse pointed out, gender is seen by KBJ's side as expectations yet this mess presents gender as both "identity" and expectation. It isn't both.
And then we get the comparison of an aggressive transgender woman to a cis gender woman but what is being compared? What was the discrimination the
cis gender woman experienced?
And what is meant by "Either way the institution has imposed its gender based expectations on her?" "Either way?" What are the two ways? And is the trans woman the "her" or the cis gender?
And what is meant by "the individuals' (sic) ability to match ... their ... presentation." Is this individual two or more people? Or is her singular pronoun "their/ them?"
I think the clerks are seeing how many errors they can stuff into the KBJ's dissents, knowing this individual Justice is not going to notice that her words don't match with any meaning, let alone a legal meaning. Either way.
IT'S MA'AM !!!
So a dress wearing XY is discriminated against when perceived as femme, and discriminated against when perceived as macho. It's universal victimization 24/7. The nice thing is that we will have achieved equal protection of the law when everyone is equally the owner of a victim card. The situation seems ripe for an Aesop's fable.
Gusty Winds said...
"... Transgender women (with penises) are no where near as scary or aggressive as bull-dykes.."
the truely dangerous ones are little girls pumped full of Testosterone
pervy fetish guys are dangerous, but NOT in the same ball park.
just look at the last several school shooters
Meh. Post-Bostock Title VII is where the real action is going to be. Just now, we see a gentle tumescence in its interpretation, but soon it will burst out like the proverbial boner in the (men’s?) locker-room and ravage HR women across the land
Yes, but the tranny-adjacent organizations fought long and hard to keep real (not the slur "cis") women from being counted as hate crime victims, from simple (sometimes just verbal) slurs to rape/mutilation serial murders. Unwritten policy, enforced everywhere through trainings and contrary to law. They consider themselves the only female victims, and so do most state Bureaus and federal trainers. Real females are officially second class humans before the law because of the HRC, the ADL, the SWC, and the NAACP, plus a pustule of Islamic FBI consultants.
So screw them and the gays and lesbians of HRC who piggybacked them in. We can't have real heterosexual women mussing up their precious lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Humperdink,
No, I absolutely do not *ALMOST* think that...
“Transgender woman” is not real. It is an illusion produced by a mental illness called gender dysphoria and fed by the suicidal empathy of nitwits like Jackson.
"A transgender woman penalized for being perceived as aggressive "
Translated from the social justice: "A violent man."
Justice Jackson is an oxymoron
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.