如何看待拜登签署反歧视行政令，允许跨性别男孩参加学校女子体育比赛，共用换衣间、洗手间等系列举措？

唉好吧，题目又改了。我这个回答忠实记录了这一晚上题目的修修改改。估计题主或其他人是看了我这回答一而再再而三的修正题目，因为我之前的回答全都是看都没看原文上来强行解读的。

这最后一次的修改倒是符合原文了，但是，【孩童在学习时不应该因为他们的性认同和身份担忧没有可用的卫生间，更衣室，或者被学校体育课排斥】，又变得毫无话题性了吧？如果一上来就是这个翻译，也钓不到这么多冷嘲热讽博人眼球的回答了吧？

好了，现在又有回答引申到了奥巴马时代的跨性别厕所法案，那么请各位参考这个回答吧，已经讲的很清楚了：

如何看待美国总统特朗普废除奥巴马「跨性别厕所令」？

全文如下⬇️

都是很简单的英文，大学四级足矣。

自己看吧，哪里写到【只要自己内心觉得是女性就可以参加女子体育竞赛】？？

等一下！难不成是提到了Bostock v. Clayton County这个案子？

这个案子说的是Bostock这个佐治亚克莱顿县的社工人员，因为业余时间为当地的【同性恋软式棒球联赛】做义工所以被解雇。

大法官根据1964年民权法第七章（Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964），禁止雇主基于性别、种族、肤色、国籍和宗教信仰歧视雇员，裁定同性恋者与跨性别者应该得到保护，雇主违法。

难道是因为“棒球”这个词（softball）？

这哪跟哪啊？也太离谱了！

看到题主又补充了………………原来不是因为Bostock v. Clayton County的案子。也是，没有点知识积累估计也想不到这层。

但是：

“Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports. ”

？？？你自己给我好好翻译翻译！

【只要自己内心觉得是女性就可以参加女子体育竞赛】？？

有人又在题目中加上了“过度”（引申）两个字。

不用那么客气，这压根儿就是莫须有，哪来的引申？

钓谁呢？

观察者网吗？

既然提到Bostock v. Clayton County案就再多说两句。

这个案子可以说是美国平权历程中一个里程碑事件。

前因很简单，上面已经说了，就是一个社区工作人员因为业余时间为当地的同性恋软式棒球联赛做义工并公开自己同性恋的身份所以被雇主解雇。

雇主认为自己不违反《1964年平权法》（The Civil Rights Act of 1964）中的第七条，也就是：雇主不能因为雇员的种族（race）、肤色（color）、宗教（religion）、性别（sex）、或国籍（national origin） 来雇佣、解佣、或歧视他们。

雇主的依据是，该条例中用的是“sex”（性别）而不是“gender”（性别），所以不应该包括性取向。也就是雇主不能以雇员的性别而解雇ta，但可以以ta的性取向比如同性恋或跨性别身份来解雇ta。

在对这个案子进行裁判中，最高法院5个大法官属于保守派，占多数。所以一开始很多人预计这次大概率是5:4裁定雇主无罪。

然而5个保守法官中的Roberts其实不止一次摇摆到自由派一方。这次也不例外。最后令很多人失望、也令很多人雀跃的裁定结果，是雇主违法。

比较有意思的是，除了Roberts，另一位保守派法官，川普亲自提名的Gorsuch，居然也站到了自由派一方。

并且Gorsuch亲自执笔书写了裁决书，陈述了裁决的法理论据。

Gorsuch对「因为雇员性别的歧视」进行的论述中，关键在于「因为」（because of）而非「性别」（sex）。

Gorsuch并没有否认sex的生物学含义，也就是承认sex指的是生理意义上的男女。

但接下来的重点在于「因为」。

Gorsuch在解释「因为」时，认为事件的发生与「如果没有的原因」相关。也就是说若不发生A，则不发生B。那么事件A就被视为事件B的可能原因。

「因为sex」就可以理解为如果雇员并非男，而是女的话，那么就不会发生解雇的情况。这样，「因为性别」的歧视必然涵盖「因为性认同」和「因为性倾向」的歧视，此为「必然涵盖论」（necessary entailment thesis）。基于此，《平权法》第七条「因为sex」条例就是适用于雇主解雇同性恋雇员的，因而判为违法。

这一解释及判例，对美国的平权运动影响巨大。

过去不必然被民权法保护的同性恋和跨性别人士，现在也被包含在法律的保护之下了。这就是Bostock v. Clayton County案的意义所在。

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love. Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports. Adults should be able to earn a living and pursue a vocation knowing that they will not be fired, demoted, or mistreated because of whom they go home to or because how they dress does not conform to sex-based stereotypes. People should be able to access healthcare and secure a roof over their heads without being subjected to sex discrimination. All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation.

These principles are reflected in the Constitution, which promises equal protection of the laws. These principles are also enshrined in our Nation’s anti-discrimination laws, among them Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.). In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of . . . sex” covers discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Under Bostock‘s reasoning, laws that prohibit sex discrimination — including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Fair Housing Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1522), along with their respective implementing regulations — prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, so long as the laws do not contain sufficient indications to the contrary.

Discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation manifests differently for different individuals, and it often overlaps with other forms of prohibited discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of race or disability. For example, transgender Black Americans face unconscionably high levels of workplace discrimination, homelessness, and violence, including fatal violence.

It is the policy of my Administration to prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, and to fully enforce Title VII and other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. It is also the policy of my Administration to address overlapping forms of discrimination.

Sec. 2. Enforcing Prohibitions on Sex Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation. (a) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and in consultation with the Attorney General, as appropriate, review all existing orders, regulations, guidance documents, policies, programs, or other agency actions (“agency actions”) that:

(i) were promulgated or are administered by the agency under Title VII or any other statute or regulation that prohibits sex discrimination, including any that relate to the agency’s own compliance with such statutes or regulations; and

(ii) are or may be inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(b) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), consider whether to revise, suspend, or rescind such agency actions, or promulgate new agency actions, as necessary to fully implement statutes that prohibit sex discrimination and the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(c) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable, also consider whether there are additional actions that the agency should take to ensure that it is fully implementing the policy set forth in section 1 of this order. If an agency takes an action described in this subsection or subsection (b) of this section, it shall seek to ensure that it is accounting for, and taking appropriate steps to combat, overlapping forms of discrimination, such as discrimination on the basis of race or disability.

(d) Within 100 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall develop, in consultation with the Attorney General, as appropriate, a plan to carry out actions that the agency has identified pursuant to subsections (b) and (c) of this section, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 3. Definition. “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

这件事情和国际体育比赛的关系不大，这事要是闹上国际比赛，这是肯定不行的。要脱裤子看东西，检查染色体。

至于国内比赛，这又不耽搁政治家运动，明明又可以多捞选票，这是“得民心”的善举。

然后反手给女权组织温柔的一巴掌，这么多人要当女人，可不是女权运动的一个伟大胜利。

你能反对吗？

反对就是政治不正确，就是保守主义，就是给女权运动扩大化制造障碍。假如说以后全美都是内心是女人的人类，这不就天下大同了吗？

这种事情都是末节，无关紧要，重要的是选票。

本来做女人就挺好的。

假如以后全美都是女人，彻底将男人都消灭了，那么所谓的女权运动也就偃旗息鼓了。

甚至于拜登在某天宣布自己已经不再自觉为男性，要成为美国历史上第一位“女性总统”也未可知。

就像那首歌曲里面唱到的：

鸳鸯双栖蝶双飞
满园春色惹人醉
悄悄问圣僧
女儿美不美
女儿美不美
说什么王权富贵
怕什么戒律清规
只愿天长地久
与我意中人儿紧相随

这美利坚女儿国，美不美啊？

美啦美啦美啦。

自此一鼓作气，干脆更名美女合众国。

怕是要羡煞旁人。