Physical Causes: A Path to Liberation or a Trap?

PBS was bountiful last night.  Show about Machu Picchu, the wonders of the planet and a an Independent Lens film.

The film was part of Black History Month and pointed out how prior to World War II there was a fetishization of defining races based on physical traits and purity.

This film also showed the American Nazis goose stepping down the streets and the KKK with their crosses.  Hand in hand.

In The Shock Doctrine Naomi Klein points out how manipulated events are used to created oppressive economic conditions which are in turned used to justify Fascism and political oppression.

Severely stressed economic conditions in Germany prior to WW II gave rise to Nazism.  This out of a nation that was considered a model of progressive thinking during the 1920s, a center of science and culture.

I am watching some very frightening developments world wide.  The rise of faith based right wing extremism that is fueled by hatred of LGBT/T people.

Currently they are using the ideology of LGBT/T as a lifestyle choice and the idea that reparative therapy can cure us.  But the Pope has already used the label of intrinsically disordered.  Code words for “born evil”.

Between the idea that mere exposure to us is enough to corrupt “innocent” children into our “corrupt lifestyle” and “intrinsically disordered” there are the makings of a genocidal cleansing.  Which by the way Christo-Fascist organizations like “The Family” et. al. are test marketing in Uganda.

Under Hitler there was a variation of the one drop of blood rule so I doubt scientific evidence is as strong a defense against people willing to commit the genocide as say a Kalashnikov and plenty of ammunition.

Of course they have private armies run by ultra right wing extremists and filled with both racist Aryan Nation types and Christian Identity fucks like Black Water now called Xe.

The late Utah Phillips, a folk singer and agitator, was an anarchist and a Wobblie (IWW) said “Freedom is something you are born with and then they try to take it away.”

Human rights and equality are something we are born with.  But as soon as we found ourselves growing up different they started to take away our human rights and equality.

I’ve taken shit from some peddlers of the “Classic Transsexual” party line because I don’t hate transgender people based on our differences and defend their human rights and equality based on their humanity the same way I do not have to be a person of color to defend the principles of human rights and equality of people of color.

I let the issue of being born this way and intersex conditions just lay there as something too irrelevant for me to get worked up about.  The I’m really intersex and not transsexual game has turned into a festering sore of I am better than that person over there who had the same adult sex reassignment I had.

That is a waste of time.  The fanatics don’t think twice about sticking us all in the same box cars over that argument.  And if they did is the saving your own skin so important that you would join them in persecuting others who had the same operation you had?

It is the white skin privilege matter I faced back in the 1960.  Being born white the matter of equality for people of color was not a personal issue.  I could have just gone out and done things for my ow benefit instead of joining in the demonstrations for equality by people of color.

Even though I was too young for the  marches of the early 1960s I was part of them by the later portion of the 1960s.

Some times instead of looking out for number one we are faced with ethical questions.  Even being able to pass does not free us from the ethical question:  Do you support human rights and equality or do you not?  Which side are you on?

Highest Tax Court Ruling Today On SRS Tax Deductions

Here is the AP The Associated Press writing on the tax court ruling for SRS tax deductions

http://hosted.AP.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SEX_CHANGE_TAXES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2010-02-02-18-19-55

Great news just came out today from the US Tax Court . See link http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpTodays/ODonnabhain.TC.WPD.pdf

This girl took her deductions for her SRS and related stuff on her IRS taxs She over the last few years has been fighting with the IRS and finally took the case all the way to the US Tax Court. Highest tax court in the land and finally they had a ruling today and she won the case. Now you can do the same on your next tax filing.

Wow this is wonderful that more and more it is being recognized as a medical necessity then cosmetic. Great news

p.s forward this tax ruling to all people you know that are TS and are going to have there SRS. We must pass this around to all.

US – Tax Court: Gender Reassignment Surgery Is a Deductible Medical Expense (But Not Breast Augmentation…) [2010-02-02 TaxProf Blog]

From Tax Prof.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/02/tax-court-gender.html

TaxProf Blog
A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Blog Editor

Paul L. Caron

February 02, 2010

Tax Court: Gender Reassignment Surgery Is a Deductible Medical Expense (But Not Breast Augmentation)

In a long-awaited decision, a fractured (8-5-3) Tax Court today ruled in O’Donnabhain v. Commissioner < http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpTodays/ODonnabhain.TC.WPD.pdf >, 134 T.C. No. 4 (Feb. 2, 2010), that male-to-female gender reassignment surgery qualifies as a deductible medical expense under § 213, reversing the IRS’s position in Chief Counsel Advice 200603025< http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/0603025.pdf >. The 8-judge majority held that:

• TP’s gender identity disorder is a “disease” within the meaning of § 213(d)(1)(A) & (9)(B).
• TP’s hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery were for the treatment of disease within the meaning of § 213(d)(1)(A) & (9)(B), and thus not “cosmetic surgery” excluded from the definition of deductible “medical care” by § 213(d)(9)(A).
• TP’s breast augmentation surgery was directed at improving her appearance did not meaningfully promote the proper function of her body or treat disease within the meaning of § 213(d)(9)(B), and thus was “cosmetic surgery” excluded from the definition of deductible “medical care” by § 213(d)(9)(A).

Judge Gale wrote the 69-page majority opinion, joined by Judges Cohen, Colvin. Marvel, Morrison, Paris, Thornton, and Wherry. Judge Halperin (12 pages), Judge Holmes (joined by Judge Goeke) (23 pages), and Judge Goeke (joined by Judge Holmes) (6 pages) wrote separate concurring opinions. Judge Foley (joined by Judges Gustafson, Kroupa, Vasquez, and Wells) (8 pages) and Judge Gustafson (joined by Judges Foley, Kroupa, Vasquez, and Wells) (21 pages) wrote separate opinions concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:

• IRS Denies Medical Expense Deduction for Costs of Gender-Reassignment Surgery < http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/01/irs_no_medical_.html > (Jan. 23, 2006)
• Tax Court to Decide Deductibility of Sex-Change Operation < http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/07/deductibility-o.html > (July 18, 2007)
• IRS: Why Cost of Gender Reassignment Surgery Is Not a Deductible Medical Expense < http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/10/irs-why-expense.html > (Oct. 02, 2007)
• Tax Court to Decide Deductibility of Sex-Change Operation < http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/10/wapo-tax-court-.html > (Oct. 02, 2007)
• NPR on Deductibility of Sex-Change Operation < http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/10/npr-on-deductib.html > (Oct. 17, 2007)

Update:

• ABC News < http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9731645 >
• Bloomberg < http://www.idahostatesman.com/usnews/story/1065573.html >
• Feminist Law Professors < http://feministlawprofessors.com/?p=14803 >
• Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders Press Release < http://www.glad.org/work/cases/in-re-rhiannon-odonnabhain/ >
• ProfessorBainbridge.com < http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/02/tax-law-is-crazy.html >
• USA Today < http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/tax-court-mass-woman-can-deduct-sex-change/1 >
• Wikipedia < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Donnabhain_v._Commissioner >

© Copyright 2004-2009 by Law Professor Blogs, LLC.

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on US – Tax Court: Gender Reassignment Surgery Is a Deductible Medical Expense (But Not Breast Augmentation…) [2010-02-02 TaxProf Blog]