­
Trump Signing Executive Orders – Part 2 in The AnswerBank: Society & Culture
Donate SIGN UP

Trump Signing Executive Orders – Part 2

Avatar Image
Hymie | 23:27 Sun 26th Jan 2025 | Society & Culture
11 Answers

In my first post on this topic, I pointed out that president Trump did not have clue what he was signing – many ABers claimed that he has a host of advisers (who probably read the executive orders and understood them).

 

Well here’s one of the executive orders Trump’s signed, which declares everyone in the USA to be a woman.

 

Gravatar
Rich Text Editor, the_answer

Answers

1 to 11 of 11rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Hymie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

What you might call a Daffy Definition.   

But if Donny signed it, then it must be true 🤣.

True, although even if he had read every word of the document several times would he have picked up on it. Although you and I know what the principle is it's better to get the details right. It'll be interesting to seeif it gets quietly  amended.

Desperate 

At least he's consistent!

Hymie, What a load of tripe - and you still don't understand what was explained to you at great length yesterday.  Utterly pathetic.

trump's team were obviously keen to put out as many executive orders as they could manage in the first few days in order to create an image of the Leader as decisive and wise... only if you rush them out like that then they are vulnerable to awful mistakes like this which would technically define everyone in the USA as biologically female. 

actually, no.

at worst, it implies every human is non binary.

explanation here - 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/25/trump-executive-order-sex

This reminds me of a British PM  who wouldn't attend any meetings but just sign the papers afterwards without reading them.

Straight from his injecting disinfectant playbook.

I suppose somebody will get fired and we'll be subject to a blizzard of bluster until this is all forgotten.

Looking at (the start of) the Gruniad article, this seems to be a nonsense. If it is about conception then that isn't an issue since we are informed sex/gender is determined by the sperm that fertilises the egg. So it is determined at conception, as stated, and everyone is not female.

 

Is this a case of clutching at any (nonexistent) straw in an attempt to mock ?

“Is this a case of clutching at any (nonexistent) straw in an attempt to mock ?”

Almost certainly.

I have to say that the wording of the EO is a little strange. But the point made by the cove on YouTube is incorrect. Biological sex is determined at conception as it depends absolutely on the presence (or not) of a Y chromosome in the embryo. The male is the only one of he couple who can provide a Y chromosome and his  contribution occurs at conception. That is absolutely immutable. I’ll add, for the pedants, that there may be some extremely rare genetic disorders which may make that statement not 100% accurate, but it’s near enough for this discussion.

It is quite true that the SRY gene, which the YouTuber explains goes on to trigger the development of male characteristics in sexual differentiation, does not begin its work unil a few weeks after conception. But that gene is only present on the Y chromosome and by the time it begins its work, biological sex is already irreversibly determined. 

He goes on to say that all embryos follow a female development path until then and is somehow only when the SRY gene kicks in that the embryo can be considered “male”. That is nonsense. From conception the embryo has a Y chromosome and the SRY gene and it will, with no exceptions, develop as a male. The YouTuber’s contention that the President has declared all people in the USA to be women is unadulterated bilge.

So, back to the question. If Mr Trump (or anybody else) had read this particular EO in its entirety before signing it, would it have made him pause and perhaps reject it? Would he have considered that biological sex is not determined at conception (which is generally accepted as a fact)? Possibly not.

1 to 11 of 11rss feed

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.

Complete your gift to make an impact