Trans Rights Will Not Protect Us: the Limits of Equal Rights Discourse, Antidiscrimination Laws, and Hate Crime Legislation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates how employing neoliberal discourses of equal rights, anti-discrimination laws, and hate crime legislation limits the advancement of equality and protection for trans persons under the law. The push for the legal recognition of trans persons, through the addition of "gender identity" and "gender expression" to anti-discrimination and hate crime laws relies on neoliberal discourses of biological determinism and medicalization. This approach ultimately pathologizes trans persons and precludes their self-determination. As the trans community continues to gain rights in Canada and the United States, a backlash of anti-trans âbathroom billsâ threaten to restrict trans persons from sex-segregated spaces that align with their gender identity. Moreover, hate crime legislation focuses on individual perpetrators, reinforcing systemic forms of transphobia and state-sanctioned violence against trans persons. In order to guarantee that trans persons have equal access to state services and are protected from discrimination and violence, systems of power must be dismantled and reimagined.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".