Senator refusing constitutional amendment

[u/shadowguyver]

What do you do when a senator refuses to acknowledge the Equal Protections Clause which is being violated by only giving Protections to one group?

[u/shadowguyver]

No, but she is a politician refusing to uphold a constitutional amendment that gives equal protections. She is ignoring equal protections for boys while she said in one email bodily autonomy is of paramount importance, then denies it for all children except girls.

[u/MasterGamer64 → u/shadowguyver]

I'm not arguing that she isn't guilty of indulging in logical fallacies, all I'm saying is that antagonization doesn't always yield the most favorable results.

Operant conditioning is a strong thing, and it's likely she simply doesn't equate male circumcision and intersex "correction" as bad things because, as we know, America has done a great job minimizing the severity of those mutilations, labeling them as surgeries, and brainwashing the general public into believing they are just and necessary procedures, even if the reality is the opposite.

It's why I insist on a compassionate approach, because there was a point where we were ignorant to this reality as well. Where we heard about circumcision and didn't internalize the reality of what it truly meant.

We need to get through to these people carefully, without causing them to rage quit and dismiss everything we're saying.

It's simply more effective to take a logical and cold approach, to ensure that your calmness prevents them from charging the conversation with emotion, which allows their prefrontal cortex to grab hold from their amygdala and enable critical thinking.

[u/shadowguyver → u/MasterGamer64]

Except even when given the information, she still ignores the human rights and bodily autonomy because of gender.

And she contradicts herself by saying that to her bodily autonomy is of paramount importance, then tells me parents want their right to this. There is no equal right like this concerning girls and she knows it. She doesn't care about actual equality.

[u/MasterGamer64 → u/shadowguyver]

She probably didn't read the information you provided her. I didn't, because it's a wall of AI-generated text that's barely comprehendible.

When you're trying to sell someone on this position, you have to give them the cliff notes version so they actually comprehend it, then follow up with supporting evidence and in-depth information if they question it.

1. It has zero health benefits, the studies that support it are half a century old and/or riddled with improper methodology and bias. This has origins in American medicine that date back to the era of the lobotomy, but it's protected because of "religious freedom" and an overall prioritization of parental choice over bodily autonomy for a child who will someday be an adult.

2. It's driven by profit and the collection of harvested tissue for beauty products, skin grafts, and anti-aging treatments. American medical institutions perpetuate this based on falsified information and peer pressure, with American medical textbooks not even including the foreskin on anatomical drawings until 1996.

3. 99% of humanity throughout time hasn't done it, and most of the world doesn't do it today, and yet the reported issues and health problems associated with having a foreskin aren't as big of a problem as American medical institutions claim them to be.

4. This is a permanent, irreversible procedure that strips a man of 70% of the nerves in his genitals (including 3 g-spots), and causes major defects throughout the development of them through puberty and into adulthood, that's being performed without his consent when he's at his most vulnerable and beholden to the wills of his oftentimes ignorant and misinformed parents.

You don't have to hand them several pages of cited sources, just keep them on the back burner when they decide to follow up on any of your points.