Friday, July 26, 2024

Fake News Friday: Olive Oyl files Gender-Affirming Care lawsuit

A group of former waitresses who used to work at Hooters recently filed a class-action suit against the State of Michigan.

The lawsuit states that the State's refusal to enforce laws that requires insurance companies to pay for "gender affirming care" resulted in their claims for reimbursement for breast enlargement surgeries being denied.

"I was a large-breasted woman trapped in the body of an IBTC girl" Dolly Bomshellicious, lead-plaintiff told the press. "Not only was the denial of gender-affirming care a violation of Federal laws prohibiting discrimination based on sex, but it was also a violation of the American Disabilities Act which considers mental illness to be on par with physical illnesses."

Ken Aarons, the lead attorney in the suit told the press "We are not going after the insurance companies because we understand they have to stay solvent and because they dance to the tune played by State Regulators and the State Attorney General."

Aarons continued "The pressure-points are at the Regulator and State Attorney General level. The actual language of the Michigan law does not specify that Quote -- Gender-affirming care is only available to the opposite gender -- Unquote because that would be nonsensical. How can changing something to its opposite be affirming?"

"And what could be more affirming of a woman's femininity than to bless a women with an Olive Oyl endowment with Rubensque bosoms?" Aarons concluded.

The ERJ blog reached out to Attorney General Dana Nessel and to the Michigan Insurance Commission but did not received a reply.

3 comments:

  1. Your article perfectly highlights the absurdity that is everything gender-related today.
    Talk about a slippery slope... Genitals do not define a gender, but removing them affirms it. GOT IT! The absurdity...

    ReplyDelete
  2. The ERJ blog reached out to Attorney General Dana Nessel and to the Michigan Insurance Commission but did not received a reply.

    Ohhh,, I'm sure there Was a reply. Muttered quietly.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Isn't gender not sex/sex not gender. Isn't that what they wanted?

    ReplyDelete

Readers who are willing to comment make this a better blog. Civil dialog is a valuable thing.