About the HIV Law: The sentence max was downgraded because California believed HIV is a public health problem and therefore intentional transfer is therefore in line with all life long communicable diseases. It has no negative effect on the LGBT community. In fact by many in the community the penalty was seen as discriminatory upon it's enactment. There is an argument saying that HIV tolerability is gonna bring death sentences to people that contract it, but modern medicine has shown that is not the case and those statements are pretty ignorant as a whole to medical progress regarding the virus. You're much more likely to die from hep C intentional transfer which is also a misdemeanor.
that's kinda dumb, though, because arguably one of the reasons HIV leads to fewer deaths is that there was an aggressive campaign to promote prevention, which this law was a part of
maybe it wasn't an effective part of it but those facts alone don't really support the idea that the change in the law is sensible
to be fair, I assume they mean "more people die of hep c than HIV" which is true, rather than "if you contract hep c you are more likely to die than if you contract HIV" which I do not know enough about either thing to know if its true
Perhaps the law did play a role in reducing the spread. What I'm understanding from the lawmakers in Cali about this is that advances in medicine and treatment are what did it, therefore they changed the law to suit that circumstance. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this, but there are some underlining points that do make sense.
There is no circumstances that make it okay for misgendering to be more criminal than knowingly giving someone HIV.
They are both misdemeanors.
So? Misgendering has the harsher sentence. ---
'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBen