#incidentally this case isn't about the legality of the gender EO

[aibidil]

This is a great point. Judges and lawyers are trained to think in a way that carries logic to its conclusions—what are the possible outcomes of allowing that argument to stand? What holes does that argument leave? If we find an extreme case, does the argument fall apart?

That isn't how regular people tend to argue. So this mode of arguing, bringing up the existence of intersex people to show that defining gender as being only male or female is incorrect, isn't going to convince your random uncle.

But it IS what should convince any judge, because their job is to think about it in that way. If your job as judge is to examine whether a law/EO can stand, and you know that intersex people exist and the EO denies that, that's enough! You considered the extreme case and the extreme case shows that the law/EO can't stand. (Unless you're a lawyer trying to cobble together legal arguments that can somehow justify the batshittery. But that's not most judges!!)

Literally sobbing. A judge, a US judge defended us. A judge brought up intersex people, uaing the term intersex, to *defend* us by not allowing our erasure. I'm having a lot of feelings right now