The court was also advised that A) she was in the window of a false negative test result, B) the tattoo owner himself says he doesn’t do tattoos on breast feeding mothers but that she didn’t tell him. Sounds to me like he took the evidence in front of him and had to make a judgement call: “Judge Myers said he weighed…

The evidence presented to the judge was that “The court heard that, although the mother has since tested negative to HIV, she is still in a “window period” during which a positive result may not yet show up.” What is a judge supposed to do in that case? They can only act on the evidence presented.

“If there was actually a risk of her passing HIV or Hepatitis to her child, this would be a valid argument.” Mayo Clinic says there is, but what do they know.

And do we know where this person got the tattoo? Do you have the court record in front of you? We don’t know what specific information was in front of the judge in this case.

Sounds like you are the one playing doctor but hey insults are better than reasoned rebuttal. The tests for Hep are not good especially in a short time frame.

Is it really about bodily autonomy when you are directly providing what is in your body to someone else? Nobody would care if she got a tattoo if she wasn’t breast feeding. How about taking drugs or prescription meds that pass through to breast milk. Is that simply an issue of her bodily autonomy or does she have a…

that’s why I always shoot a bunch of heroin before breastfeeding. My body, my baby, my choice. Period.

most blood centers in the US make you wait a year to donate after a tattoo because of Hep B/C risk.

From the Mayo Clinic “ If the equipment used to create your tattoo is contaminated with infected blood, you can contract various bloodborne diseases — including tetanus, hepatitis B and hepatitis C.”

The issue is hepatitis not HIV. The tests are not conclusive especially in that time frame.

you can get hepatitis from scraping your leg? Really?

or just do a reasonable analysis of the respective risks that activities have to others. I’m not sure what the level of risk is post tattoo (other than a suspicion that tattoo parlors are home to all sorts of blood born pathogens), but your examples are a little silly.

Jackson had huge impacts in a number of areas. His Indian and slave policies sucked but denying his other contributions is just historically inaccurate. There is a reason that he is always in the top ten presidents list by historians.

Yeah those poor people of color on the One and the Five. Gotta keep Washington and Lincoln in their place.

who is consistently ranked in the top ten presidents by historians.

The point is that biological arguments are insufficient to distinguish the cases. It has more to do with what has become culturally acceptable.

Note that while the studies are interesting they are far from conclusive. Many deal with small sample sizes or have not been replicated. I don’t think you can rest your entire argument on that. The science is way too young.

On the other hand, didn’t the transwoman benefit perhaps for many decades from the privilege of being male. Can she really speak to what the experience of being a woman is any more than a transracial person can speak to the experience of being black?

nicely put.

If you have a medical condition that affects your melanin production can you then change race?